So, you are deflecting the picture truth with an attack on surveyors,
right?

????????????????????

Please read for content. I didn't "attack surveyors", I pointed out that a
photo submitted for evidence of poor construction techniques is actually a
photo showing a poorly executed repair. How is this an attack on surveyors? Do
you disagree that
the bright white material that joins abruptly to the grey material (with a
clearly visible and irregular margin) cannot be the same material? If so, say
so and state your reasoning. Don't accuse me of a general attack on
surveyors.....all I said was that not all surveyors will agree with Pascoe.


http://www.yachtsurvey.com/Fiberglass_Boats.htm

I call "bogus" on at least one photo in this batch. If one is obviously
something other than what it is reported to be, how much
credibility do the other photos have?

My case: Look at the photo on the right hand side of the page where a hand
with
a silver wris****ch is peeling the outer skin away. What do we see under the
skin? We see evidence of a *previous, botched, repair!* Notice how a big
chunk
of the material underneath is a much brighter white and far more roughly
finished than the area around it? (Bad repair work could be why the outer
layers are delaminating). No reasonable person would conclude that both
colors
of material were laid in at the same time, yet the article purports to be
exposing crappy OEM techniques, not botched repairs. Again I say, "bogus."

Get five surveyors to look at something, and at least one of them will
ordinarily disagree with the rest. Simply because a surveyor puts up a web
site, he's not suddenly infallible.