Wind farm protest

Enable JavaScript to get the best experience.

Search Subscribed Topics Active Topics

Created by

elk > 9 months ago, 27 Oct 2023

thedoor

2487 posts

6 Nov 2023 9:09pm

looks like i missed something here. 6 pages deep

remery

3709 posts

6 Nov 2023 10:13pm

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..

Disgusting level of abuse - next level.

From no doubt a staunch atheist.

So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander.

Proverbs 14:5
An honest witness does not deceive, but a false witness pours out lies.

Doggerland

222 posts

6 Nov 2023 10:41pm

"poke taco!"
Kai K.
Scripture of The First Day Maui Live Stream that spread The FloatnRide Gospel without Hiccups

windfred

65 posts

7 Nov 2023 7:02am

Select to expand quote

ptsf1111 said..
Yeah, who knows... Climate change happened naturally, for instance the Ice Age but it's not that hard to imagine that these emissions of burning fossil fuels have a dramatic impact on people and nature. It's not that these emmisions just disappear right?

Compare it to cooking food inside or burning a bonfire in your living room. It won't get pretty or comfortable. Most of the stuff that we burn (including from your petrol or diesel powered engine) stays in the atmosphere, it's trapped and there is no extractor hood like in your kitchen. So it's probably not a terrible idea to prevent more emissions from getting into the atmosphere before we kill ourselves and nature. But yeah, that's only in two generations so who cares right? Not everyone apparently...

Maybe a wind park is not the best answer, we'll find that out later but it's surely better than a cole plant. Fair enough if it affects your local sailing spot to protest and find a more suitable location but does it?

C02 is the main concern for climate kookoo's. You do realize trees and plants absorb c02 it doesn't just sit in the atmosphere, if it did we would all be dead now.
My 2cents on climate change.

Why did they stop calling it global warming? Maybe
because some places on earth are actually cooling

I remember not many years back when everyone was freaking out saying we were going to have another ice age? Look it up

I do believe in climate change though, Earths climate has been changing since the beginning of time. (BG before gasoline). Pretty arrogant to think anyone can stop it but hey while you're at it go ahead and stop the polar caps from shifting too.

decrepit

12802 posts

7 Nov 2023 7:23am

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said.. Disgusting level of abuse - next level.

From no doubt a staunch atheist.

So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander.

Hold a mirror up in front of you Pete and have a good look!!!!

stehsegler

3557 posts

7 Nov 2023 11:07am

Select to expand quote

windfred said..
C02 is the main concern for climate kookoo's. You do realize trees and plants absorb c02 it doesn't just sit in the atmosphere, if it did we would all be dead now.

We are producing more than is absorbed. In addition to cutting down more forests than ever before.

Select to expand quote

Why did they stop calling it global warming? Maybe
because some places on earth are actually cooling

I remember not many years back when everyone was freaking out saying we were going to have another ice age? Look it up

Hundreds of peer reviewed research reports and papers suggest otherwise. But hey, never let facts get into the way of opinion.

Select to expand quote

I do believe in climate change though, Earths climate has been changing since the beginning of time. (BG before gasoline). Pretty arrogant to think anyone can stop it but hey while you're at it go ahead and stop the polar caps from shifting too.

It's about abrupt change of climate. If The change occurs over millions of years the environment can generally adapt. If it happens over a short period of time due to external factors something usually gives. The last major climate event wiped out the dinosaurs.

Chris 249

NSW

3531 posts

7 Nov 2023 3:32pm

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..

Chris 249 said
More lies. Many good and honest people disagree with me on many aspects of life, like religion, politics, and what board to sail. The fact that other people disagree with me is fine when they use reason and logic or even just emotion.

You are something else. You are a liar. The reason that I refer to the lie you peddled about 1500 scientists signing a paper is that it also shows how utterly scared and gullible you are. Anyone with an ounce of nous or the ability to do their own research could have just looked at the paper you referred to and seen that most of those signing it were not scientists as you claimed.

Anyone with an ounce of self-respect or integrity would have admitted that their claim that the paper was signed by 1500 scientists was wrong, and that would have been no big deal. We all make mistakes or get carried away. That's fine.

What makes you such a coward is that even when a person as gullible as you must have known that you lied, you lacked the simple honesty and courage to admit it. Instead you just double down and lie more and more. That is absolutely pathetic.

The other weird thing is that you are so naive and so gullible. Anyone with any shred of common sense would have looked at the paper you claimed had been signed by 1500 scientists and checked to see if it really was. But being a follower, a sheep and simply a gullible sucker you obviously didn't bother to check up. You just swallowed the line you were fed.

Oh, and none of what I say about use is as insulting as what you say about scientists and others so I have every reason to use such terms.

Disgusting level of abuse - next level.

From no doubt a staunch atheist.

So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander.

The Ten Commandments say that you should not bear false witness, so why do you lie?

None of your cowardly attempts to blame others can change the reality that you lied. If you believe in God you are breaking his commandments whenever you lie as you did about the paper being signed by 1500 scientists when it was not, and when you put forward other lies.

When you lied about the "1500 scientists" and when you lied with your claim that I think anyone who disagrees with me is a liar (to use just two examples of the many times you have lied) you broke a commandment. As it says in John 2:4, someone like you who says they are Christian but do not follow the commandments "is a liar, and the truth is not in him".

When you lie as you do, you are "an abomination to the Lord" you claim to believe in (Proverbs 12:22). When you bear false witness as you do you have one of the "six things the Lord hates". (Proverbs 6:16-19). When you lie with claims such as the one about 1500 scientists, you are "A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish." (Proverbs 19:9)

So, mate, you should stop lying. The God you believe in really, really doesn't like it.

Oh, and don't be a wimp and complain about what I say about you when you throw so many vile, foul lies at scientists and others.

FormulaNova

15090 posts

7 Nov 2023 12:39pm

Select to expand quote

stehsegler said..

The last major climate event wiped out the dinosaurs.

Are we expecting an asteroid impact anytime soon? I think that's a pretty extreme 'climate event' and there is nothing we could do about an instant winter... except burn more fossil fuels ironically.

Chris 249

NSW

3531 posts

7 Nov 2023 3:52pm

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..

Disgusting level of abuse - next level.

From no doubt a staunch atheist.

So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander.

Chris 249

NSW

3531 posts

7 Nov 2023 3:58pm

Select to expand quote

windfred said..

C02 is the main concern for climate kookoo's. You do realize trees and plants absorb c02 it doesn't just sit in the atmosphere,

Are you really trying to say that because things absorb pollution, it doesn't matter how much pollution we make?

You can get potassium canisters that absorb Co2.They used them in old submarines for when they were low on air. The canisters absorbed Co2 but when there was more Co2 than the canisters could absorb, the crew died.

The lesson is obvious to anyone. No matter whether you have matter that absorbs Co2 or not, it has to absorb ENOUGH Co2 or the atmosphere will change. For hundreds of years we have been putting out vast quantities of Co2 AND cutting down the trees and plants so there are fewer of them to absorb Co2.

It's not arrogant to do scientific calculations about Co2 proportions and absorption and use science to come to conclusions. It is arrogant to think that you are so much smarter than the people who spend years studying this stuff that you show that they have been getting it wrong for decades.

Oh, and look it up. You're wrong. "Everyone" was not freaking out about another ice age happening in anything like our relevant future. A very small number of people were looking into it. To say "everyone was freaking" about it is simply not true.

AUS 808

510 posts

7 Nov 2023 2:57pm

Whatever, but my phone's going flat??

decrepit

12802 posts

7 Nov 2023 4:35pm

Select to expand quote

AUS 808 said..
Whatever, but my phone's going flat??

Did you run over it with a steam roller?

Carantoc

7194 posts

7 Nov 2023 5:14pm

Stop the panic.

Its going to be tiny anyway. Says so on the ABC

www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-07/bluefloat-illawarra-wind-farm-plans-withdrawn/103074274

In its submission, BlueFloat confirmed its South Pacific wind farm would cover a 359-square-metre area between Shellharbour and Clifton.

It would consist of 105 turbines located 14-30 kilometres off the Illawarra coastline.

359 square metres. Using the Olympic swimming pool unit of measurement you'd fit 3 of those windfarms in one swimming pool.

105 turbines in 359 m2, that's one turbine for every 3.5m2. They are going to be dinky little things, no bigger than a small wingfoil.

ABC, trusted news since forever.

Mr Milk

NSW

3120 posts

7 Nov 2023 10:57pm

I've got to agree that the opponents seem to have blown it up out of all proportion to the actual impact it will have on their favourite sailing spots

remery

3709 posts

7 Nov 2023 9:13pm

Select to expand quote

stehsegler said..

It's about abrupt change of climate. If The change occurs over millions of years the environment can generally adapt. If it happens over a short period of time due to external factors something usually gives. The last major climate event wiped out the dinosaurs.

It's not so much about *the* planet or *the* environment. Planet earth will be fine, as it has for billions or years. The environment will be fine, there mostly be an environment that suits some sort of life form. Its the degradation of the specific environment that suits humans is what worries me. But then I have kids.

Pcdefender

1607 posts

8 Nov 2023 12:18am

Select to expand quote

Chris 249 said..

Pcdefender said..

Disgusting level of abuse - next level.

From no doubt a staunch atheist.

So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander.

It would be of no surprise if you have been sued previously for libel.

segler

1658 posts

8 Nov 2023 12:18am

I accept two FACTUAL things about climate change because they have been actually MEASURED.

1. Temperature. We have been MEASURING temperature all over the globe for about 150 years. The actual DATA show an increase in temperature on average worldwide.

2. CO2. We have been MEASURING CO2 all over the globe for about 100 years. The actual DATA show an increase in CO2.

Those are the FACTS. Everything else is conjecture, including the conjecture that #2 causes #1.

The earth is a giant buffer in equlibrium. The Le Chatelier principle about equilibrium: if you disturb the equilibrium the system adjusts itself to correct for the disturbance and return to equlibrium. The earth is doing this right now with temperature and CO2.

--segler
retired chemist

Pcdefender

1607 posts

8 Nov 2023 12:36am

Just Stop Oil mob destroy paintings in art gallery. with hammers.

Not allowing me to post the link....

boardsurfr

2454 posts

8 Nov 2023 1:20am

Select to expand quote

segler said..
Those are the FACTS. Everything else is conjecture, including the conjecture that #2 causes #1.

I think "conjecture" is the wrong word here, considering that its definitions often include words like "guess" and "tentative". In scientific terms, "conjecture" would be a hypothesis, and "proof" would be a generally accepted scientific law. Science provides for many graduations between these two extremes, based on evidence and deductions. In this respect, the idea that rising CO2 levels cause climate change is much closer to the "law" side. It will, however, never reach the "law" side of things, since proving causation on a global level is impossible.

Someone once said that putting climate change doubters in a car with closed windows (or an actual greenhouse) in the sun to let them experience the greenhouse effect first hand could help. I think that's vastly over-optimistic, since it would require understanding how greenhouses in the atmosphere can have the same effect as glass windows. One of these, you can touch, and easily experience the effect by opening and closing a window; the other one is invisible, and comprehending the effects a small rise has depends on understanding spectral changes when light is absorbed and re-emitted, and what extinction coefficient vs. wave length graphs mean.

Paducah

2792 posts

8 Nov 2023 1:41am

Select to expand quote

boardsurfr said..
Someone once said that putting climate change doubters in a car with closed windows (or an actual greenhouse) in the sun to let them experience the greenhouse effect first hand could help. I think that's vastly over-optimistic, since it would require understanding how greenhouses in the atmosphere can have the same effect as glass windows. One of these, you can touch, and easily experience the effect by opening and closing a window; the other one is invisible, and comprehending the effects a small rise has depends on understanding spectral changes when light is absorbed and re-emitted, and what extinction coefficient vs. wave length graphs mean.

What if we just send them to Venus instead? Surely, a bunch of carbon dioxide in a planet's atmosphere can't really be that bad of thing, right?

For all those doubting "climate change" because "science bad", let's read what one of the largest oil companies in the world was saying 45 years ago.
archive.org/details/ExxonClimateDocs/01_Credible Scientific Team 1978 Letter/

For those not wanting to wade through the source documents, here's a synopsis: www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings

Exxon's graph from 1982

Apologies if this has been posted in the previous six pages of my disappointment in humanity.

Imax1

QLD

4926 posts

8 Nov 2023 5:42am

Select to expand quote

Paducah said..
Apologies if this has been posted in the previous six pages of my disappointment in humanity.

What ?
You haven't read every word in the six pages of this intuitive and inspiring windsurf related topic ?

Doggerland

222 posts

8 Nov 2023 3:51am

Sometimes correlation is causation

musorianin

QLD

597 posts

8 Nov 2023 7:06am

And here was me thinking "wind farm" was a place where wind was cultivated and who would protest that in a windsurfing forum?

Then I read on... my mistake.

peterowensbabs

NSW

497 posts

8 Nov 2023 9:18am

Select to expand quote

Carantoc said..
Stop the panic.

Its going to be tiny anyway. Says so on the ABC

www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-07/bluefloat-illawarra-wind-farm-plans-withdrawn/103074274

In its submission, BlueFloat confirmed its South Pacific wind farm would cover a 359-square-metre area between Shellharbour and Clifton.

It would consist of 105 turbines located 14-30 kilometres off the Illawarra coastline.

359 square metres. Using the Olympic swimming pool unit of measurement you'd fit 3 of those windfarms in one swimming pool.

105 turbines in 359 m2, that's one turbine for every 3.5m2. They are going to be dinky little things, no bigger than a small wingfoil.

ABC, trusted news since forever.

This is the first piece of information regarding why the project may be unsettling locals, NOT objecting to a wind farm rather an objection to a lack of process.

Thank you ABC as usual balanced and informed.

Obviously the 359m squared number is incorrect. Perhaps a typo. As the very next line states (along with a very clear map.)-
"It would consist of 105 turbines located 14-30 kilometres off the Illawarra coastline.The turbine rotors would have a diameter of up to 275m and feed into three offshore substations."

Little bit of selective quoting there.

MarkSSC

QLD

642 posts

8 Nov 2023 8:57am

I am amazed by the degree of certainty expressed from both sides of the debate. All that aside, I witnessed massive destruction of Gold Coast beaches during the 1960's. The storms didn't just destroy the beaches, the roads next to them were removed as well. This was on the Qld Gold Coast. Furthermore, a number of beachside homes also fell into the sea. For a number of years, many of the coast's beaches did not have sand, the surf was crashing onto the rock wall. If this had all happened in 2023, what sort of comments would be made? Will your conclusion be made from logical reasoning or because of the cultural noise and belief systems that influence our daily lives?

Carantoc

7194 posts

8 Nov 2023 8:11am

Select to expand quote

peterowensbabs said..
This is the first piece of information regarding why the project may be unsettling locals, NOT objecting to a wind farm rather an objection to a lack of process.

Just to be internet pedantic...

The first piece of information was the original quote in this thread:
...it will be a good opportunity to send a message to the idiot politicians and environmental vandal greens, letting them know that people don't want these disgusting looking windmills of our coast
Where the objection appears to be based solely on visual amenity.

And the respondents in the ABC article include:
Micheal McKeogh from the Illawarra Coalition Against Offshore Wind.

Lack of consultation, planning and assessment would generally seem like perfectly reasonable grounds for complaint.

But it would seem a stretch to deduce that the Illawarra Coalition Against Offshore Wind and people complaining about visual impact of wind turbine generators 20km+ out to sea approached the consultation period with a completely open mind.

I'm not sure how a wind turbine anywhere from 14km to 50km away from a beach I'm stood on is any more visually obtrusive than the dozens of ships lined up on the horizon you can see everyday down that way. The worst thing I see on the beach is litter, closely followed by them stupid cabana tent things. I'd suspect a fair few people in this world object to seeing kites and surfboards all over the beach, creating dangers for their dogs they are taking for a **** in the sand.

If the turbine blades spin around and chop up whales or there is a fear a giant coal ship will collide with one and pollute the ocean with crap then fair enough, but the objections put forward seem to be finding any excuse to support a pre-conceived opinion.

remery

3709 posts

8 Nov 2023 10:13am

Select to expand quote

segler said..
I accept two FACTUAL things about climate change because they have been actually MEASURED.

1. Temperature. We have been MEASURING temperature all over the globe for about 150 years. The actual DATA show an increase in temperature on average worldwide.

2. CO2. We have been MEASURING CO2 all over the globe for about 100 years. The actual DATA show an increase in CO2.

Those are the FACTS. Everything else is conjecture, including the conjecture that #2 causes #1.

The earth is a giant buffer in equlibrium. The Le Chatelier principle about equilibrium: if you disturb the equilibrium the system adjusts itself to correct for the disturbance and return to equlibrium. The earth is doing this right now with temperature and CO2.

--segler
retired chemist

That's true, there is little chance of runaway climate change turning the Earth into a barren rock supporting no life. But what about the environment our great-grandchildren will be faced with?

remery

3709 posts

8 Nov 2023 10:17am

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..

Just Stop Oil mob destroy paintings in art gallery. with hammers.

Not allowing me to post the link....

It was one painting and it sustained only minor damage. Truth matters.

remery

3709 posts

8 Nov 2023 10:30am

Exxon, 1980.

Doggerland

222 posts

8 Nov 2023 2:42pm

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..
with hammers.

Hammers are cool. The one truly universal tool from diagnostic to repair. Low carbon too
Even the bible digs them:
Jeremiah 50:23
Hammer is used figuratively to symbolize "that which affects change." A literal hammer affects change in what it is used for or against. It can be used for constructive building or for bashing and tearing apart.

?feature=shared

Loading more posts...

Please Register, or first...

Topics Reply