Windmills have small footprints, and there's no claim in this article that the windmills or associated infrastructure is killing any caribou, let alone a substantial number.

And windmills work better in some areas than others, and not everywhere can support a meaningful number of turbines.

>What are you wasting your time on?

Trying to make someone understand that their myopic polarization is foolhardy, in a vain attempt to maybe help build common ground in a toxic, polarized culture?

>I already know what you are.

That's a neat trick. I don't know what I am. Please, if you can point me to the tribe that is in favor of carbon taxes, nuclear energy, universal healthcare, gun rights, and Jesus, I'll be happy to find them.

>I’m not engaging.

You very clearly are engaging. You're engaging so hard your trawling through my post history to find subs you don't like so you can justify ignoring my good points about the environmental movement sabotaging itself.

I feel like I'm very squarely on point, talking about caribou and wind power in a thread about caribou and wind power.

Please, name me some places in Norway where there will be no environmental impact at all from constructing wind farms. Then explain to me why the possibility of building there is better than actually building windmills here.

This is the problem with environmentalists. Any time we build something, there's going to be an environmental impact. So if solving our CO2 problem is going to require building more zero-emission power generation, we're going to have to tolerate some degree of environmental impact.

The only alternative is to just give up on modernity, blow up the majority of our infrastructure, and ride out the collapse of civilization as we know it. Between that and annoying some caribou, I'll annoy the caribou.

I know. That is why building green power generation is more important than disrupting caribou grazing. You know what else disrupts caribou and arctic indigenous societies? Global warming.

Carbon dioxide emissions are causing a mass extinction, and people who believe that are more worried about bothering a few caribou. It’s insane. These people should be jumping up and down to build every turbine, solar array, reactor, and dam we can muster.

Back to the ad hominem. You got me, though. Nothing says “doesn’t really care about the environment” like…

checks notes

…occasional participation in subs about distrusting government and industry. No overlap there. Never mind that my last comment there got downvoted because I pointed out that the post was ragebait.

You’re right though, they believe some cRAzy sHit over there. Like some folks really believe COVID leaked from a lab in Wuhan. Total nutters.

Seriously, buddy, take off the political blinders. Just because someone agrees with you about something doesn’t mean they’re going to agree with you about everything. They’ve got you so worked up you’re lashing out at shadows.

> You people are painfully disingenuous, and far more transparent than you think that you are.

And you’re not nearly as smart or perceptive as you think you are. I mean, talk about an ad hominem. “I bet you’re the wrong kind of person because you questioned my political tribe, therefore you’re wrong.”

No, I do believe in climate change. Which is a bummer, because the people I agree with about that are too chickenshit to go after real solutions, and torpedo their credibility by opposing hydro, nuclear, and even wind and solar if they aren’t 100% happy with the location.

Look, if I go with a colleague to convince a neighbor that their pesticide is killing the local bees, and that neighbor offers to switch to an alternative, and my colleague says “absolutely not, my cat might sneeze occasionally if you use that one,” then I can hardly blame my neighbor for thinking my colleague and I are full of shit. It’s the same with climate change.

Greens could have had nuclear and hydro power coming out of their ears 20 years ago if they pitched it as a win-win for climate and “energy independence.” But, in typical fashion, they let perfect be the enemy of the good and insisted that we get rid of existing clean, renewable energy. You can’t do that and then expect people to believe you that climate change is an existential threat.

1. Windmills aren’t going to kill off the caribou. That’s nonsense.
2. We can’t build enough windmills if we scrap every project every time someone comes up with some objection.
3. We can’t solve climate change if we won’t allow anyone to have their lives impacted in some way. NIMBYism is bad enough when the stakes are affordability; it’s not acceptable when the stakes are ecological collapse.

I mean it. At the point you’re standing in the way of people trying to prevent catastrophic climate change and ecosystem collapse because you are so wise and humble, it’s not really humility.

I get all that. That’s why it’s stupid to protest green energy over fucking reindeer grazing. If you tell someone that you think everyone will die off they don’t give up their cheap, reliable electricity, but then throw a fit about windmills because of fancy elk, you lose credibility.

I understand that. You’re missing the point. If you think climate change is going to lead to massive ecosystem collapse and extinction, worrying about minor disruptions to grazing patterns on “indigenous land” (not actually owned, just ancestrally claimed) is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. There’s literally not one place on the planet where someone can’t make some objection to building power plants. If we stop everywindmill every time someone doesn’t like the location, we are all going to fucking die. It’s the height of idiocy.

Please, explain to me how what I said is stupid. If you’re so much smarter, you should be able to.

If the stakes are extinction-level, worrying about disrupting some caribou grazing is insane. If you’re working about caribou grazing, then clearly you’re not really worried about them all going extinct due to habitat loss and ecosystem collapse. If you really do think all the caribou are at risk of extinction, but you insist that any solution not have comparably irrelevant consequences because of some prideful “humility”, then you’re an idiot.

Really? How. Explain why caribou grazing is more important than developing alternative energy generation capacity from a climate change perspective.

This is why I understand why climate change skeptics don’t trust environmentalists. If someone really thinks carbon emissions are going to kill flipping everything on Earth, they wouldn’t be bitching about whether windmills interfere with caribou grazing, or whether dams interfere with salmon spawning, or whether nuclear power plants present some small risk of a meltdown. Why do you expect me to believe you when you tell me I need to get my electricity from more expensive sources or all the caribou will die, if you complain when I try to build a windmill somewhere a caribou might eat?

Edit: ITT, myopic partisans proving my point. Thanks, y’all, you’ve managed to further reduce my faith in humanity.

The old Palpatine playbook.

Yes he was.

Why does everything have to be sexy? Why would I buy a “sexy” raincoat? On my list of characteristics I want in a raincoat, “sexy” does not make an appearance.