General Discussions

[dodge]

My understanding is that younger trees 'suck in' more CO2 than older ones.  Obviously, younger trees and forests don't have as great an ecosystem.

There is a difference between French, US, Russian oak - just ask the winemakers and whiskey makers!

[DJC]

Not “old growth” Paul, old plantations that were established to provide timber for wooden warships.

I don’t believe “old growth” forests are a thing in much of Western Europe.

[Gointocarlton]

The information that is publicly available is not thorough, so it's hard to be definitive. But the best I can determine is as follows :

1. The trees are coming from old growth forests. The number of such forests is significantly less now than when the Cathedral was built, and together with obvious knowledge about climate change and the benefits of such forests, the French should be looking elsewhere.
2. Everything that needs to be achieved can be achieved by using materials that don't come from old growth forests. All the structural integrity, all the beauty, all the fireproofing, all the intricacy can be achieved by other means.
3. There's a lot more that goes on in forests other than trees. They are full blown ecosystems in every sense of the word.
4. There is no logic in the sustainable logging argument. We could also argue that the world is overcrowded, so therefore we should knock off all those over 80, because they'll be dead soon anyway. Sustainable sapien management.
5. This is simply a vote buying exercise by Emmanuel Macarone - he doesn't want to be seen as the cheapskate who shortchanged a national treasure.
6. There is a line of thinking from William Morris, through John Ruskin, Carlo Scarpa and others, that openly frowns upon slavish imitation / reconstruction of heritage items. From the manifesto of the SPAB (Society for the Preservation of Ancient Buildings), written in 1877 by Morris, Philip Webb and others, right through to own own Burra Charter, the very conditions of the time give materials and the working and usage of those materials a unique flavour that cannot be convincingly replicated later. Those of us who remember the faux convict bricks from the 80's will know exactly what I mean - they look empty and humbug because that's exactly what they are. We build for our time, with our knowledge, our materials, our skills and our circumstances.

At least that's how I see it.

Thanks for that Pauly.

[PaulP]

Not “old growth” Paul, old plantations that were established to provide timber for wooden warships.

I don’t believe “old growth” forests are a thing in much of Western Europe.

We can argue about what constitutes "old growth" but wikipedia still lists several old growth forests in France, a number of which include Oak species.

The flying buttresses were great structural innovations (there's debate about whether they started as that, or evolved into it). Instead of simply copying the massive walls and small openings of Romanesque architecture, the Gothic builders tried advancing the form. The walls were no longer load bearing, and thus not only became thinner, but also allowed for more glass, in larger openings. Part of the inspiration for this was indeed the forest - flying buttresses mimicking the trees, and the glass mimicking the light between the tree canopies.

The French should take a cue from those masons and builders.

[PaulP]

https://theconversation.com/5-ways-to-sp...nce-138814

Well worth reading IMO.

[PaulP]

https://theconversation.com/why-pope-fra...ics-156647

I like what i see from this guy, but I can't figure out if he's the real deal or simply the velvet glove over the iron fist.

[LP]

https://theconversation.com/5-ways-to-sp...nce-138814

Well worth reading IMO.

I'm afraid this article uses the very same tactics he criticises, there are a lot of good resources for scientists to use while framing outreach and public commentary, this article might not be one of them! Maybe the author is taking the piss!

He doesn't even match written commentary to the headlines, example;

---

4. Overly simplistic explanations
.........................
Conspiracy theories, such as the one suggesting 5G is the cause of COVID-19, take off because they offer a simple explanation for something frightening and complex. This particular claim also feeds into concerns some people may have about new technologies.

As a general rule, when something appears too good or too bad to be true, it usually is.

---

I'm particularly disturbed by 3. Reference to ‘the science not being settled’. Science is never settled, consensus based on current evidence and understanding can be achieved, but the science is never settled.

If science was settled we(humanity) would be able to predict the future of many events with near perfection, but good science always reports facts in terms of probabilities not certainties!

[capcom]

I'm afraid this article uses the very same tactics he criticises.

You can say that again.  Ridiculous hypocrisy and reeks of patronising condescension.

[Baggers]

https://theconversation.com/5-ways-to-sp...nce-138814

Well worth reading IMO.

The article's author, Hassan Vally, I believe, means well... but we have an epidemiologist attempting to unpack and explain narcissistic behaviour. He's better leaving that to someone/people well trained in the 'tactics' and 'strategies' of the narcissist or narcissistic behaviour. It's not something that can be simplistically bullet-pointed to 5 strategies.

[PaulP]

The Notre Dame spire that burned down in 2019 is not even the original spire. The original spire became so damaged over a few centuries that it was removed - the removal was completed in 1792. The Cathedral remained "spireless" for decades until a new spire was completed in 1859. I guess it wasn't a big deal back then to leave the Cathedral without a spire for ages.

I object on principle to what is in my view a needless destruction of beautiful old trees to replace a replica.