Fed up with windmills?

**Phill** · 08-Mar-13, 23:34

Originally Posted by secrets in symmetry

No it isn't.

Yes it is!

(yer just bein' childish now)

**Rheghead** · 08-Mar-13, 23:37

Originally Posted by ywindythesecond

"Persuade our elected representatives to listen" is more accurate.

Can you not see how the noisy tactic can be misreported in the news? Everyone already appreciates that you and your lot do not like the look of windymills but a rabble has never endeared itself to a TV audience.

**secrets in symmetry** · 08-Mar-13, 23:37

Originally Posted by Phill

Yes it is!

(yer just bein' childish now)

No it isn't!

**Phill** · 08-Mar-13, 23:39

Originally Posted by secrets in symmetry

No it isn't!

Yes it is!

**secrets in symmetry** · 08-Mar-13, 23:46

Originally Posted by Phill

Yes it is!

Oh no it isn't!

**Kodiak** · 08-Mar-13, 23:53

He's behind you !

**Rheghead** · 09-Mar-13, 00:02

Originally Posted by Kodiak

He's behind you !

Who? Trump?

**John Little** · 10-Mar-13, 00:10

Well I am ignorant in these matters but I would like to ask a question.

I am not fond of windmills wherever they are.

I think they look ugly and spoil the landscape.

On the other hand I have nothing against harvesting wind for power- it seems a good idea.

But surely the two things are not mutually exclusive, because surely there are other ways to get wind power than great sailed mills? Are there not wind tunnel type turbines under development, and given the feelings they arouse, can better and less intrusive methods not be researched?

You are speaking of different things it seems to me, and they are not necessarily in opposition.

Or do I fall down on technological ignorance?

**M Swanson** · 10-Mar-13, 00:19

I admit that I don't have any scientific qualification, but since joining the Org and reading threads dedicated to wind turbines, I've become extremely interested in the subject. So, if I may, I'd like to ask a few questions that may lead to a better understanding of this controversial debate.

Is it true, for instance, that bills have gone up by over a billion pounds a year, because we are being forced to subsidise the use of wind farms? And what is the return for such a crippling increase? Do they pay for themselves, ultimately?

Finally, what is the argument for the government filling the country with propellers, when we have billions of tons of coal which can be burnt safely?

**cptdodger** · 10-Mar-13, 00:28

Originally Posted by ywindythesecond

What a bunch of losers. You don't agree with what I find important and act like four year olds to distract attention from it. 27 posts and not one brain cell challenged. Tossers!

(Excluding EOS, M Swanson, and Phill who tried to have a conversation but couldn't be heard in the nursery!!)

We have a nuclear chemist and an alleged scientist starring in the foregoing crap. It beggars belief.

Signed

Disgusted in Dunnet!!

The problem with you is, if you do'nt get the answers, or the attention you think your "cause" deserves, you resort to name calling. Now, maybe you do find trying to stop wind farms being built important, that's fine (we have been through this on countless other threads) but you are not going to gain respect coming out with that.

It was you yourself said on the Baillie wind farm thread, that there are over 100 turbines and many more planned, personally, I think it is a bit late in the day to be complaining about them, should you not have thought about organising a march before the first lot were put in place ? And by the way, I am still waiting for an answer as to what kind of power you are going to use when the natural resources (coal, oil and gas) run out?

**golach** · 10-Mar-13, 00:34

Originally Posted by ywindythesecond

What a bunch of losers. You don't agree with what I find important and act like four year olds to distract attention from it. 27 posts and not one brain cell challenged. Tossers!

(Excluding EOS, M Swanson, and Phill who tried to have a conversation but couldn't be heard in the nursery!!)

We have a nuclear chemist and an alleged scientist starring in the foregoing crap. It beggars belief.

Signed

Disgusted in Dunnet!!

Oh dear that was a beeg dummy spitting effort. Maybe now you will realise many of us fellow Orgers do not think as you do, but calling us Tossers and brain dead does not help your cause

**M Swanson** · 10-Mar-13, 00:38

It does get a bit frustrating though Golach, when somebody raises a serious thread, only to find it trashed within a few posts. In fairness to Ywindy it's not something I've ever known him to do to others.

**ywindythesecond** · 10-Mar-13, 00:45

Originally Posted by ywindythesecond

What a bunch of losers. You don't agree with what I find important and act like four year olds to distract attention from it. 27 posts and not one brain cell challenged. Tossers!

(Excluding EOS, M Swanson, and Phill who tried to have a conversation but couldn't be heard in the nursery!!)

We have a nuclear chemist and an alleged scientist starring in the foregoing crap. It beggars belief.

Signed

Disgusted in Dunnet!!

Well that has certainly wakened you up.
I will reply in turn.

**secrets in symmetry** · 10-Mar-13, 00:51

Originally Posted by cptdodger

The problem with you is, if you do'nt get the answers, or the attention you think your "cause" deserves, you resort to name calling. Now, maybe you do find trying to stop wind farms being built important, that's fine (we have been through this on countless other threads) but you are not going to gain respect coming out with that.

It was you yourself said on the Baillie wind farm thread, that there are over 100 turbines and many more planned, personally, I think it is a bit late in the day to be complaining about them, should you not have thought about organising a march before the first lot were put in place ? And by the way, I am still waiting for an answer as to what kind of power you are going to use when the natural resources (coal, oil and gas) run out?

Perhaps it's the usual schoolboy problem - raging hormones!

**ywindythesecond** · 10-Mar-13, 00:59

Originally Posted by John Little

Well I am ignorant in these matters but I would like to ask a question.

I am not fond of windmills wherever they are.

I think they look ugly and spoil the landscape.

On the other hand I have nothing against harvesting wind for power- it seems a good idea.

But surely the two things are not mutually exclusive, because surely there are other ways to get wind power than great sailed mills? Are there not wind tunnel type turbines under development, and given the feelings they arouse, can better and less intrusive methods not be researched?

You are speaking of different things it seems to me, and they are not necessarily in opposition.

Or do I fall down on technological ignorance?

Thanks John.
Wind power seems like a good idea and it is, within limits. What is bad is reliance on it, and what is worse is obliging us to pay for the costs of allowing it to be used for political rather than practical purposes. The damage to views is secondary, the damage to the quality of some people's lives is unforgiveable.
Invest in this, don't just heed what I say

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wind-Farm-Sc...2873400&sr=1-1

**ywindythesecond** · 10-Mar-13, 01:12

Originally Posted by M Swanson

I admit that I don't have any scientific qualification, but since joining the Org and reading threads dedicated to wind turbines, I've become extremely interested in the subject. So, if I may, I'd like to ask a few questions that may lead to a better understanding of this controversial debate.

Is it true, for instance, that bills have gone up by over a billion pounds a year, because we are being forced to subsidise the use of wind farms? And what is the return for such a crippling increase? Do they pay for themselves, ultimately?

Finally, what is the argument for the government filling the country with propellers, when we have billions of tons of coal which can be burnt safely?

Thanks M Swanson for your voice of reason.
Bills have not gone up by billions of pounds per year but the cost of renewables will cost us billions over the years. We are forced to subsidise the use of windfarms. There is no return to the consumer for such a crippling increase. Wind farms pay for themselves handsomely, but to the developers and shareholders, and we the consumers pay for them.

Coal. By safely, I guess you mean "cleanly". Burning coal has been safe for ages. " Clean" coal technology has still to be developed at least at large scale.

We can't ditch coal. I will leave others to make the case for filling the country with propellors.

**olivia** · 10-Mar-13, 01:24

Originally Posted by ywindythesecond

What a bunch of losers. You don't agree with what I find important and act like four year olds to distract attention from it. 27 posts and not one brain cell challenged. Tossers!

(Excluding EOS, M Swanson, and Phill who tried to have a conversation but couldn't be heard in the nursery!!)

We have a nuclear chemist and an alleged scientist starring in the foregoing crap. It beggars belief.

Signed

Disgusted in Dunnet!!

Phew! Calm down ywindy I don't want you giving yourself a heartattack over that lot, they're not worth it. Pour yerself another large dram, cheers.

As to the point of the thread, good luck to them all on the march in Inverness. I hope there is a great turnout.

**secrets in symmetry** · 10-Mar-13, 01:30

Originally Posted by olivia

Phew! Calm down ywindy I don't want you giving yourself a heartattack over that lot, they're not worth it. Pour yerself another large dram, cheers.

As to the point of the thread, good luck to them all on the march in Inverness. I hope there is a great turnout.

Poor ywindy. He's quite good at gathering data, he's not even bad at summarising it, but he always gets his conclusions wrong.

Are you his Mum?

Or his Missus?

**ywindythesecond** · 10-Mar-13, 01:44

Originally Posted by cptdodger

The problem with you is, if you do'nt get the answers, or the attention you think your "cause" deserves, you resort to name calling. Now, maybe you do find trying to stop wind farms being built important, that's fine (we have been through this on countless other threads) but you are not going to gain respect coming out with that.

It was you yourself said on the Baillie wind farm thread, that there are over 100 turbines and many more planned, personally, I think it is a bit late in the day to be complaining about them, should you not have thought about organising a march before the first lot were put in place ? And by the way, I am still waiting for an answer as to what kind of power you are going to use when the natural resources (coal, oil and gas) run out?

I really don't know where to start here. Where have I name-called? On which countless other threads have we "been through this"? As far as Baillie is concerned ask Reggie how long I have been trying to raise awareness. As to "when the natural resources (coal, oil and gas) run out?" I have no answer, but the answer my friend is definitely not blowing in the wind.