Anti-wind Rent-a-mob tactics to harrass the British Consulate!

[Rheghead]

You just couldn't make it up!

Someone is paying people $20/hr to harass the British Consulate in New York over our Energy policy.

http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/tfr/3566741544.html

[tonkatojo]

Good money for little effort LOL.

[Kodiak]

Trump that if you can, :Razz

[gleeber]

Trump that if you can, :Razz
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business-in-wales/business-news/2012/12/21/wind-farm-operators-pay-out-620-000-in-community-funds-91466-32470464/
:roll:

[golach]

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business-in-wales/business-news/2012/12/21/wind-farm-operators-pay-out-620-000-in-community-funds-91466-32470464/
:roll:

Well done gleeber [lol]

[divanp75]

You just couldn't make it up! Someone is paying people $20/hr to harass the British Consulate in New York over our Energy policy. http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/tfr/3566741544.htmlLink doesn't work :(

[Rheghead]

It works for me. :confused

[Aaldtimer]

This is what I get:- This posting has been deleted by its author

[Rheghead]

Still works for me.


Earn Quick and Easy $20 for an hour or less of work (Midtown East)
Our firm needs 100 volunteers to attend and participate in a rally in front of the British Consulate/Embassy in Midtown Manhattan on the East Side on Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 12 noon. The event is being held in order to protest wind turbines that are being built in Scotland and England. Your participation will be to ONLY stand next to or behind the speakers and elected officials/celebrities that will be speaking at the rally.

It is a really simple job and easy money for anyone who is around Manhattan at the time. We need all of our volunteers to RSVP for this event. It is VERY important that you RSVP because we have had people confirm spots and fill spots on the first day of the advertisement in the past. If you have participated in one of our events in the past (Ovation) please make a note of that in your RSVP email and we will email EVERYONE back to confirm your attendance.

We look forward to hearing from you all and again, the money is quick, the job is easy and we pay in CASH at the end of the event.

Looking forward to seeing you next Wednesday!

Compensation: $20 dollars cash
This is a part-time job.
Principals only. Recruiters, please don't contact this job poster.
Please, no phone calls about this job!
Please do not contact job poster about other services, products or commercial interests.

Posting ID: 3566741544

Posted: 2013-01-23, 4:55PM EST

email to a friend

[badger]

This is what I get:- This posting has been deleted by its author

So a moderator probably spotted it's likely to be a spoof, and not a very good one at that. They could take lessons from the YestoWind mob.

[Rheghead]

So a moderator probably spotted it's likely to be a spoof, and not a very good one at that. They could take lessons from the YestoWind mob.

It is still there.

[Bobinovich]

It is still there.

I've not been able to access it either ... my guess is that you still have it stored in the cache of your browser - if you clear your cache, or hit F5 to refresh the page, & I think you too will find it's no longer there...

[Rheghead]

OK, thanks, I wonder who it was?

[Rheghead]

Anyway, talking about wind farms and rent-a-mobs, there was an article in the Groat today about a pair of anti-wind activists gurning to a reporter about camster wind farm.

Gordon Calder must have a very dry sense of humour because he reported that one likened the turbines to a scene from War of the Worlds. But then said in a separate sentence that both denied any scaremongering!!! Now that made me smile.

[ywindythesecond]

Anyway, talking about wind farms and rent-a-mobs, there was an article in the Groat today about a pair of anti-wind activists gurning to a reporter about camster wind farm.

Gordon Calder must have a very dry sense of humour because he reported that one likened the turbines to a scene from War of the Worlds. But then said in a separate sentence that both denied any scaremongering!!! Now that made me smile.

Not too far fetched Reggy, this will be the view from Reay Golf Club car park if Limekilns goes ahead.

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/2306/500mmlimekilnsgolfclub.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/809/500mmlimekilnsgolfclub.jpg/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

However, the really scary bit you didn't mention is that the existing big turbines in Caithness add £35 million a year to our electricity bills and if all the big Caithness windfarms in the planning system go ahead, that will go up to £100 million from Caithness alone. Check out www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk (http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk) !!

[Rheghead]

However, the really scary bit you didn't mention is that the existing big turbines in Caithness add £35 million a year to our electricity bills and if all the big Caithness windfarms in the planning system go ahead, that will go up to £100 million from Caithness alone.

Not very scary when put into context of what else is going on with our fuel bill. Remember, wind farms are there to ween us off our fossil fuel addiction.

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f244/Rheghead/189073_386603928075563_1985480087_n_zps4dcd7065.jp g

17493

[newweecroft]

Do you happen to know if the large number of turbines planned of shore will have red lights on them all?

[Rheghead]

Trump's anti-wind rally was cancelled through lack of interest, even though a free $20 note was on offer.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/questions-remain-over-rentacrowd-wind-farm-protest-8473599.html?origin=internalSearch

[Rheghead]

Not too far fetched Reggy, this will be the view from Reay Golf Club car park if Limekilns goes ahead.

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/2306/500mmlimekilnsgolfclub.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/809/500mmlimekilnsgolfclub.jpg/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)



Interesting photomontage. Narrower field of view, doesn't seem to conform to accepted standards. I have looked at the developer's photomontage from a similar viewpoint and although it is not exactly the same, the position of the turbines on the right do appear to sit further to the right your photomontage thus giving an impression that the wind farm is bigger. All this despite the fact that the developer's photomontage is taken just a little closer. Weird.
Also, the height of the turbines do differ between the two photomontages, they definitely look lower in the developer's photomontage.

[ywindythesecond]

Interesting photomontage. Narrower field of view, doesn't seem to conform to accepted standards. I have looked at the developer's photomontage from a similar viewpoint and although it is not exactly the same, the position of the turbines on the right do appear to sit further to the right your photomontage thus giving an impression that the wind farm is bigger. All this despite the fact that the developer's photomontage is taken just a little closer. Weird.
Also, the height of the turbines do differ between the two photomontages, they definitely look lower in the developer's photomontage.

Do you want to audit this one as well Reggy? As I recall you actually complimented me on the one of Baillie from the Golf Club house.

[Rheghead]

Do you want to audit this one as well Reggy? As I recall you actually complimented me on the one of Baillie from the Golf Club house.

I'd love to. However, I lost the code for my Microsoft office installation so I will find it difficult atm. Yes I said you had updated the original photomontage to our mutual satisfaction after several errors were pointed out. One memorable 'error' was one turbine that looked 25m higher.

[ywindythesecond]

I'd love to. However, I lost the code for my Microsoft office installation so I will find it difficult atm. Yes I said you had updated the original photomontage to our mutual satisfaction after several errors were pointed out. One memorable 'error' was one turbine that looked 25m higher.

Didn't remember a 25 metre "error" so I looked up your original spreadsheet.

What is striking was not how different our results were but how similar coming from two different methodologies.
http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/4420/sgolfclubbailliespreads.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/688/sgolfclubbailliespreads.jpg/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

[Rheghead]

Well I think our table of results was compiled after we happily put the original error down to a typo/oversight on your part and after the question arose about how the other turbines faced up to scrutiny.

[Alrock]

.....http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/2306/500mmlimekilnsgolfclub.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/809/500mmlimekilnsgolfclub.jpg/).....

Looks fine to me.... If anything they have a beauty all of their own....

I wonder if ancient Egypt had its share of nimbys moaning about the construction of the Pyramids?

[Rheghead]

The Curse of the Dummy?

[Mystical Potato Head]

Interesting photomontage. Narrower field of view, doesn't seem to conform to accepted standards. I have looked at the developer's photomontage from a similar viewpoint and although it is not exactly the same, the position of the turbines on the right do appear to sit further to the right your photomontage thus giving an impression that the wind farm is bigger. All this despite the fact that the developer's photomontage is taken just a little closer. Weird.
Also, the height of the turbines do differ between the two photomontages, they definitely look lower in the developer's photomontage.

We've been here before with this narrower than excepted field of view haven't we? Well you didnt answer me when i replied last time when i said that if you use a narrower field of view then not only will the windmills appear larger but the hills,land or whatever will also appear larger.Perspective is far more important but you never mention it.A small change in the perspective/pov of this shot can make the headstones look higher which in turn detracts from the size of the windmills.Take a similar shot from here but slightly more to the right so that the large headstone is out of shot the trubines will appear more prominent on the hilside because there is nothing in the foreground that detracts your eye from them.Change the contrast of the sky and the windmills will appear darker and more prominent or the exact opposite if you wish, so even if you took a shot at whatever these accepted standards are you could make the windmills appear larger or smaller by changing the perspective/pov and contrast of the shot.

[Flynn]

Looks fine to me.... If anything they have a beauty all of their own....

I wonder if ancient Egypt had its share of nimbys moaning about the construction of the Pyramids?

Probably not, but there was probably the same amount of religious fervour in favour of building them.

[Phill]

Do you happen to know if the large number of turbines planned of shore will have red lights on them all?Probably a mix of red and white. Steady red and flashing white up top to stop aeryplanes hitting them and white down the bottom to stop boats hitting 'em. It'll be like all year round chrisssy deccys in the Moray.

[secrets in symmetry]

Do you happen to know if the large number of turbines planned of shore will have red lights on them all?It's a windfarm, not a brothel! :cool:

Seriously though, it's an interesting question. Thanks for answering it Phill.

[Rheghead]

We've been here before with this narrower than excepted field of view haven't we? Well you didnt answer me when i replied last time when i said that if you use a narrower field of view then not only will the windmills appear larger but the hills,land or whatever will also appear larger.Perspective is far more important but you never mention it.A small change in the perspective/pov of this shot can make the headstones look higher which in turn detracts from the size of the windmills.Take a similar shot from here but slightly more to the right so that the large headstone is out of shot the trubines will appear more prominent on the hilside because there is nothing in the foreground that detracts your eye from them.Change the contrast of the sky and the windmills will appear darker and more prominent or the exact opposite if you wish, so even if you took a shot at whatever these accepted standards are you could make the windmills appear larger or smaller by changing the perspective/pov and contrast of the shot.

There's areason why the field of view is regulated in photomontages. You don't get perspective with narrow fields of view, and that is the whole point of giving a photomontage. Duh!

There are rules with foreground clutter in photomontages, they are not allowed.

I suggest you google this subject to more info.

[squidge]

Did any of you listen to Costing the earth on Radio 4 this week? They were in germany talking about their approach to wind farms and renewables. There was some discussion of the attitude to wind farms which suggested that in the villages where the community own their own windfarms, they can sell the excess energy back to the grid and their attitude to the presence of windmills is positive rather than resentful. It was interesting although I didnt hear it all. You should find it on iPlayer.

[Rheghead]

Did any of you listen to Costing the earth on Radio 4 this week? They were in germany talking about their approach to wind farms and renewables. There was some discussion of the attitude to wind farms which suggested that in the villages where the community own their own windfarms, they can sell the excess energy back to the grid and their attitude to the presence of windmills is positive rather than resentful. It was interesting although I didnt hear it all. You should find it on iPlayer.

Thanks, I just listened to it. The difference in attude couldn't be more stark between our two countries. Not a perfect solution but they have an energy policy of incredible endeavour and vision.

[MerlinScot]

Squidge, it is not just the attitude against windfarms. Germany (and also the Netherlands) let the citizens benefit of their renewable energies directly.
They're not using it all for the grid and then you've to pay more for every KWs as it happens here.

Many years ago I visited two villages in Tuscany, Radicondoli and Larderello. Thanks to their geotermal energy, the villagers have nearly non-existent energy bills. The rest of the energy goes to the main grid.
Posting this link, although it takes a while to load...
http://www.erec.org/fileadmin/erec_docs/Projcet_Documents/RESTMAC/EGEC-Brochure_Geothermal_E_CHP.pdf

[Mystical Potato Head]

There's areason why the field of view is regulated in photomontages. You don't get perspective with narrow fields of view, and that is the whole point of giving a photomontage. Duh!

There are rules with foreground clutter in photomontages, they are not allowed.

I suggest you google this subject to more info.

What do you call a narrow field of view?85mm telephoto?150mm tele?btw,perpsective is still there at both these "narrow" fields of view,Duh!,it is just reduced or less apparant but there nonetheless.

[secrets in symmetry]

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/2306/500mmlimekilnsgolfclub.jpg

Interesting photomontage. Narrower field of view, doesn't seem to conform to accepted standards. I have looked at the developer's photomontage from a similar viewpoint and although it is not exactly the same, the position of the turbines on the right do appear to sit further to the right your photomontage thus giving an impression that the wind farm is bigger. All this despite the fact that the developer's photomontage is taken just a little closer. Weird.
Also, the height of the turbines do differ between the two photomontages, they definitely look lower in the developer's photomontage.Why do you think it's interesting?

I think it's a horrible picture. Those two cars are ugly, and the windmills should be bigger, more elegant, and therefore more powerful. :cool:

Come on Caithness, you can do better than this!

[Rheghead]

What do you call a narrow field of view?85mm telephoto?150mm tele?btw,perpsective is still there at both these "narrow" fields of view,Duh!,it is just reduced or less apparant but there nonetheless.

Anything greater than 50mm.