Message-Id: <199711181122.GAA22552@onlink4.onlink.net>
From: "John Winters" <jwinters@onlink.net>
To: <baidarka@lists.intelenet.net>
Subject: Re: Skin Boat and Hard-shell
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 14:33:02 -0500
>
> I disagree that there is no difference in performance between skin and
hard
> shell. One example : The first place a hard shell kayak shows any sign of
> wear is at the bulkhead point. This relates to the flexibility factor. I
> have paddled my skin boat right along with hard shell kayaks and of
course
> on flat water there is doubt of any difference but in 1 to 3 foot waves
my
> skin boat leaves the hard shells behind. The reason I attribute to is the
> overall flexibility. It literally absorbs the wave action, therefore an
> easier ride and better performance.
First let me make it abundantly clear that I did not say there was no
difference between hard shell and skin boats but that it had not been
proven there was nor had it been proven what it was.
The example given is anecdotal. That is, it is opinion not proof . There is
a lot we don't know and need to know before we can take it as fact. For
instance, Were the boats in question identical in shape? If they were not
we have no way of knowing if the difference in performance was do
differences in hull shape or to hull construction.
Were the paddlers identical in ability and putting forth identical output?
If not we have no way of knowing if the differences were due to the
paddlers or to the boats.
I can go on at great length with many more reasons why this kind of
evidence is not reliable but I am sure you get the point.
Long ago scientists learned to look skeptically upon opinion and anecdotal
evidence. There is ample anecdotal evidence to support almost any idea from
astrology to flying saucers. Unfortunately, no matter how much one believes
in them belief is not proof.
It is convenient to assume that hull flexibility is the reason why skin
boats sometime outperform hard shells but how does on explain when hard
shells outperform skin boats? Should we not apply the same standards of
evidence to both sides of the argument?
In the world of science every theory comes with a repeatable test that can
be used to prove the theory wrong. Opinion is not such a test. I have
paddled both types of boats and have not been able to say that one is
better than the other. It would be fatuous, however, for me to say there
was no difference because I know that personal opinion is a poor basis for
any such statement. No matter what I believe, I am obligated to point out
that it is only a belief and not proof or fact.
I would dearly like to prove one type of construction to be superior to the
other and have spent considerable effort to do just that in an objective
and methodical basis. To date no proof has emerged. Lots of opinion, but no
proof.
One can believer anything one wants. Those of us who are searching for
facts must adhere to a more rigorous standard.
Cheers
John Winters
Redwing Designs
Specialists in Human Powered Watercraft
http://www.onlink.net/~jwinters