he never understood the wind

Comments

daftcunt's picture

Fucking hell, I thought this was ONN. Amazing how retarded this is.

+1
+7
-1
Vote comment up/down
monkeymania's picture

Quite simply, this guy is a complete fucking moron.

+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

would you have preferred Hillary was elected?

+1
-4
-1
Vote comment up/down
monkeymania's picture

Over this dumbfuck? I'd say they are about equal and as a conservative Republican, that would be impossible to say if Trump wasn't such a dipshit.

 

“I never understood wind. I know windmills very much, I have studied it better than anybody,” he said.

“I know it is very expensive. They are made in China and Germany mostly, very few made here, almost none, but they are manufactured, tremendous – if you are into this – tremendous fumes and gases are spewing into the atmosphere. You know we have a world, right?” -Donald Dumbfuck Trump

 

 

+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

For someone with such a huge hate boner for Trump, you sure love posting giant images of him into your comments. The mind boggles as to why.

 

Do you agree either of these quotes?

Every nation gets the government it deserves.

- Joseph de Maistre

 

We have the best government that money can buy.

- Mark Twain

 

+1
-3
-1
Vote comment up/down
puttefnask's picture

Wow, it's almost like you quoted the video we just watched.

 

He's pretty much right on point for most of it, if you want to fact check him.

 

As for his windmills causes cancer statement, everyone knows that is equivalent to anyone here saying you cause cancer on this site. People will agree, but it's not supposed to be taken as a factual statement.

+1
-6
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

Why don't YOU indulge us and give us the facts about windmills, especially about the pollution they create and the eagles.

 

Also Mr. "I change my SN ID once the old one became too embarrassing" is not exactly the brightest light in the chandelier, you should expect dumb shit like this, similar to trumptard posts from "your" side of the spectrum. Because of this regarding the "cancer" statement: I am not so sure he does not believe that or want people to believe that. trump government is not exactly a "believer in science". 

+1
+3
-1
Vote comment up/down
puttefnask's picture

Well for one some of the materials used to build windmills are non-recycleable. Which means when parts are replaced, which is often, they have to be either buried or burned. I don't have to explain how that's not good for the environment.

Germany is the only country who found another use for those materials, as alternative fuel for a cement factory, but that just means they burn it too.

 

The reason the parts have to be replaced is because these are gigantic structures with points that take a lot of tension from strong winds which wear and tear at their structural integrity.

 

The death of birdlife is atm not comparable to other sources of death, but if you want to increase the production of windmills in windy areas, which are birdlife havens, that statistic will increase. Which may lead to birdlife migration patterns changing, which will impact their survivability.

 

As of 2019 a windmill costs around $1million per megawatt. That price will decrease if China increases their mining and export of rare metals, which the special type of glassfiber and other parts require. But prices might increase as US and China are in a disagreement regarding trade, and you can probably blame Trump for that, as you do regarding just about everything anyway.

 

Comparing wildlife, carbon and pollution footprints now that energy produced from wind turbines barely touch any other form of energy production is asinine and only serve as a current useful argument for fanatics who'll gladly overlook the detriment their own naive vision for the world will have over time.

 

And property prices close to windmills do drop substantially. That's just a fact.

 

Trump is always going to do what he deems is profitable for the United States. His Space Force is basically taking Neil Degrasse Tyson's words to heart which will bring advances to technology we can't even currently imagine. Technologies that may one day solve both the energy crisis and environmental ones, despite any perceived ulterior motive, true or not.

 

I changed my old spikedhumor ID because I thought it sounded arrogant. I'm not in hiding from comments made elsewhere. Sure my opinions on a lot of topics have changed as I've grown older, which goes without saying. But using it against me, years later, is a cunt move. What you gonna do? Cancel me? Ugh.

 

I couldn't be bothered to check the previous history of any user on this site, unless when there is a clear and obvious coordinated move to downvote someone's comments or posts, which implies one user having several user accounts. Often I'm left to guess, and even with my limited investigation powers once got one user to confess, of which I'm proud. But I've never asked for actions to be taken against anyone. I've come to assume this is just how shit works on this site and my words and opinions will either fall on deaf ears or they won't. I try to comment on the subject at hand and engage in topics I feel motivated to talk about.

 

But I'm not just going to take shit from some asswipe who is high on Greta Thunberg-rhetoric either.

 

BTW there is an EDIT option if you forgot to add something latin to sound more intellectual.

+1
-3
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

Regarding the ID and the limited cerebral capacity I was not referring to you but rather to the one you replied to. I apologise, I thought this was clear. 

 

Of course there may be un-recycleable materials in windmills but this is true for literally any means of generating energy and thus blown way out of proportion. Windmills can also be placed in areas where they affect the migrating birds the least hence the problem is blown, you guessed it, way out of proportion.
Especially in comparison with any current fossil or nuclear source of energy.
In northern europe they put them in the northern and eastern seas btw. In Germany "visual impact" is a bigger issue than recycling or birds, and believe me, there even the most conservative are more environmentally (that includes wildlife) conscious than 90% of all americans. Another issue there, besides the visual impact, is "electro smog" of the power distribution lines, so unfortunately we can't say we don't have any deluded or dumb in europe.

In the US recycling is not a big deal in day today life, it of course only becomes important when it is in opposition to the political agenda.

 

"Space force" has been on the table in the 70'ies and has been disregarded, the groundrules have not changed, it remains a dumb idea when one looks into it.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
puttefnask's picture

No, it was not clear that you referred to another person, next time use a nick.

 

But what is clear is that, since the news you watch and read don't cover it:

 

The United States Space Force was signed into law December 20th 2019, just a week ago.

The Space Force was established as the sixth armed service branch with Air Force General John Jay Raymond, the head of Air Force Space Command and U.S. Space Command, becoming the first Chief of Space Operations.

 

About 16,000 Air Force active duty and civilian personnel are to be assigned to the Space Force while the branch is gradually integrated into the US Armed Forces ecosystem, including establishing independent procedures for manning equipment, training personnel, and creating uniforms, logo, patch, awards, and official song, reportedly within an 18-month period.

 

A youtube video from Thunderfoot featuring his biased opinions is not going to change the historic record.

 

And nothing you said debunked anything I said. "Of course" this and "believe me" that are not adequate arguments to dismiss the facts I laid before you.

+1
-2
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

your "facts" are worthless without proof as in publications on the topic, you, like me, are not an expert, albeit I most definitely spent more time researching this. "space force" will be useless if it is implemented as decribed in the video. So unless you come up with a better explanation I keep laughing about it.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
puttefnask's picture

I literally just explained to you that Space Force was established as the sixth armed service branch a week ago.

https://www.space.com/trump-creates-space-force-2020-defense-bill.html

A simple google search "trump space force" and a click on news is not really that fucking hard. Jesus fucking Christ.

 

It won't be what Thunderfoot says because despite having a good rundown of stuff related to subjects he covers, he always ends up putting his own subjective twist on it, where undeniable facts opposing his biases disappear, which means he's not objective and is actively disinforming his viewers, which he has been called out for previously.

 

As for wind turbines:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960148112000857?via%3Dihub

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013JEnvM.127..300K/abstract

https://www.clean-energy-ideas.com/wind/wind-energy/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-wind-energy/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_turbine#Disadvantages

 

Don't be scared by the weird links, some are just scientific papers. And they're not full of only disadvantages(because scientific papers require objectivity and wouldn't be accepted otherwise), but they do mention the same disadvantages Trump brought up. So what more do you want?

 

Oh I'm sorry, ORANGE MAN BAD.

+1
-3
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

The article about "space force" does not give any details whatsoever on what is proposed to happen, so I'm still laughing.
 

May I quote from the first link on Wind turbines:
"The study estimates that wind farms and nuclear power stations are responsible each for between 0.3 and 0.4 fatalities per gigawatt-hour (GWh) of electricity while fossil fueled power stations are responsible for about 5.2 fatalities per GWh. Within the uncertainties of the data used, the estimate means that wind farms killed approximately 20,000 birds in the United States in 2009 but nuclear plants killed about 330,000 and fossil fueled power plants more than 14 million. "

 

Thus making a good point PRO wind turbines with respect to bird killings.

 

The second is about "Skyglow effects in UV and visible spectra: Radiative fluxes" ???

From the conclusion of the third:
"So there we have a list of the different pros and cons of wind energy. Whilst there are many disadvantages to consider, the wind remains one of the cleanest and most environmentally friendly sources of energy available today."

The last one pretty much sums up the same, hence of course all this is, like I said before blown way out of proportion by your dear leader and yourself. Want to discuss like an adult? get your "facts" straight.

 

In contrary to you science has no political agenda.

 

 

 

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
puttefnask's picture

And all the links contain what Trump said, you imbecile. Do you know how to read?

 

"And they're not full of only disadvantages(because scientific papers require objectivity and wouldn't be accepted otherwise), but they do mention the same disadvantages Trump brought up."

 

All I did from the beginning was to point out that Trump knew about the disadvantages.

He knew more about it than you did which is now painfully clear. Whether his agenda was to disway people from supporting wind energy or not by listing them is is a completely different situation, and probably true since he wants coal and oil energy to thrive. But I know context is hard for someone like you.

 

And again, the Space Force was established a week ago. What they'll be doing in space has not been specifically laid out yet, but you would rather take Thunderfoot's idea of how useless it would be over Elon Musk making billions on NASA contracting and advising the US government, astrophysicist Neil Degrass Tyson with several books on the topic and having served on White House Advisory boards several times, or anyone with a vague concept of how much simpler it is to deliver nuclear warheads and weapon systems via space from a zero G environment as supposed to in atmosphere.

 

Space is the ultimate high ground for battlefield surveillance and weapon delivery systems, as when you get up there, you barely need fuel to move tonnes of payload millions of miles, at a speed inconceivable and unachievable on the Earth surface. If half of the satellites currently in orbit were equipped with weapon delivery systems, you would be in a range 24 hours a day. Which is why your smart phone is always connected, so it's really not that hard to fathom or imagine.

 

And mining minerals in space which is under way by several companies will produce the world's first trillionaire. That means the first one who succeeds would be able to solve world hunger like Bill Gates wealth was pocket change.

 

Yeah, you're not the one to speak to about this subject at all.

 

Science has no political agenda, but politicians still use science as a political tool to further non-scientific interests every day.

+1
-2
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

Well, it does not put your level of knowledge into a favourable light if the "disadvantages" you point out are way less of an disadvantage than those of litterally ALL THE OTHER sources of energy, even IN DIRECT COMPARISON! 
To translate it for you: If you want to save the eagles (and the other birds) get rid of fossil and nuclear and you've done it. 

 

This is not mentioning facts, it is propaganda for the trumptards. It is almost like they are living in an alternative reality.

 

And space force again, propaganda science fiction with NO FACTS whatsoever on the table, just a "concept" that is a vague as it can be. So, sorry, still laughing

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
puttefnask's picture

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

QED... Oh look it worked!

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down