cooltigger21 0 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Environmentalists got all bent out if shape over the birds that died as a result of the BP oil spill. In the same time span "environmentally friendly" wind turbines have killed even more. They don't seem to mind that. http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/20/wind-turbines-kill-more-birds-than-bp-oil-spill/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,455 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Oh no! You are stepping on PCers mantra !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 10,994 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 10,994 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 For comparison, how many birds are killed by simply flying into buildings every year? How about cats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,270 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Right, environmentalists oppose oil spills so logically, they aren't concerned about windmill strikes. :-\ This sort of dumb-ass perspective was tailored for the audience of simple-minded people. The sort of people with a strong egotistical susceptibility for exaggerated identity politics that support their pathetic partisan paradigms. So it's certainly no surprise to see TinyTim's prompt confirmation. :-\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,456 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Them windmills is bad for the envirement. Libtard thinkin is dumb. Bwhahahhaha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,455 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Oh no! You are stepping on PCers mantra !!! I told you so. Lock step Libs never waiver from marching orders. Priceless !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 What about shrimp? Have windmills killed more shrimp than the BP oil spill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 For comparison, how many birds are killed by simply flying into buildings every year? How about cats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,455 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 For comparison, how many birds are killed by simply flying into buildings every year? How about cats? Note to moron: Cats can't fly!!! Bwahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 10,994 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 For comparison, how many birds are killed by simply flying into buildings every year? How about cats? Note to moron: Cats can't fly!!! Bwahahaha They don't have to. They still kill 1.4 to 3.7 billion (that's billion, with a B )birds annually. Roughly a billion are killed by flying into buildings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 For comparison, how many birds are killed by simply flying into buildings every year? How about cats? Note to moron: Cats can't fly!!! Bwahahaha They don't have to. They still kill 1.4 to 3.7 billion (that's billion, with a B )birds annually. Roughly a billion are killed by flying into buildings. If that were Muslims little War Timmy would be inserting all sorts of dancing bananas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 For comparison, how many birds are killed by simply flying into buildings every year? How about cats? Note to moron: Cats can't fly!!! Bwahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 10,994 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 For comparison, how many birds are killed by simply flying into buildings every year? How about cats? Note to moron: Cats can't fly!!! Bwahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,455 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 That sewing circle e-mail hotline has you ladies working overtime!! Bwahahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooltigger21 0 Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 We haven't even gotten to the ones incinerated by solar farms. That's estimated to be around 30,000 a year. That is lowballing it I think. Birds killed by evil big oil is bad. Birds !killed by wind turbines and solar farms are just a necessary sacrifice for the environmental movement to save us from climate change or whatever they have decided to call it today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,365 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 This thread is sssooo funny on so many levels... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctoritas 2,826 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 This thread is sssooo funny on so many levels... Right? Besides, though, can you honestly tell me that this little birdy is innocent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Apples and oranges... The BP spill was a single event, an accident of (hopefully) improbable odds. The primary casualties were water-dwelling species and some on land (both wildlife, and humans suffering economically). It is not even logical to assume there would be equally significant damage in the air. How many fish do wind turbines kill every year? (And to be fair, off-shore wind farms probably do kill some--not with their blades of course, but other ecological effects due to their presence and maintenance.) The other statistic, turbine-caused bird deaths, is measuring an ongoing effect, not a singular unique event of catastrophic proportions. A more appropriate analogue would be to compare the regular annual casualties from other on-going sources--not only buildings, solar farms, or cats, as has been mentioned--but the environmental consequences of other energy sources: deaths from flying through smokestack exhausts, deaths from regular minor oil spills, effects of hydroelectric plants on the ecosystem or breeding, regular effects of tankers or drilling on sea bird colonies, etc. How about power plants that attract manatees into warm water and the propellers of motorboats? My point is that there is no scientific basis for comparing a one-time catastrophic event to annual, recurring attrition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Apples and oranges... The BP spill was a single event, an accident of (hopefully) improbable odds. The primary casualties were water-dwelling species and some on land (both wildlife, and humans suffering economically). It is not even logical to assume there would be equally significant damage in the air. How many fish do wind turbines kill every year? (And to be fair, off-shore wind farms probably do kill some--not with their blades of course, but other ecological effects due to their presence and maintenance.) The other statistic, turbine-caused bird deaths, is measuring an ongoing effect, not a singular unique event of catastrophic proportions. A more appropriate analogue would be to compare the regular annual casualties from other on-going sources--not only buildings, solar farms, or cats, as has been mentioned--but the environmental consequences of other energy sources: deaths from flying through smokestack exhausts, deaths from regular minor oil spills, effects of hydroelectric plants on the ecosystem or breeding, regular effects of tankers or drilling on sea bird colonies, etc. How about power plants that attract manatees into warm water and the propellers of motorboats? My point is that there is no scientific basis for comparing a one-time catastrophic event to annual, recurring attrition. Cooltigger be like........but......OBAMA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 10,994 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 This thread is sssooo funny on so many levels... :lol:/> Right? Besides, though, can you honestly tell me that this little birdy is innocent? Sure! Looks like a harmless little Marty Feldman bird! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooltigger21 0 Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 Apples and oranges... The BP spill was a single event, an accident of (hopefully) improbable odds. The primary casualties were water-dwelling species and some on land (both wildlife, and humans suffering economically). It is not even logical to assume there would be equally significant damage in the air. How many fish do wind turbines kill every year? (And to be fair, off-shore wind farms probably do kill some--not with their blades of course, but other ecological effects due to their presence and maintenance.) The other statistic, turbine-caused bird deaths, is measuring an ongoing effect, not a singular unique event of catastrophic proportions. A more appropriate analogue would be to compare the regular annual casualties from other on-going sources--not only buildings, solar farms, or cats, as has been mentioned--but the environmental consequences of other energy sources: deaths from flying through smokestack exhausts, deaths from regular minor oil spills, effects of hydroelectric plants on the ecosystem or breeding, regular effects of tankers or drilling on sea bird colonies, etc. How about power plants that attract manatees into warm water and the propellers of motorboats? My point is that there is no scientific basis for comparing a one-time catastrophic event to annual, recurring attrition. I'm just having fun watching you liberals try to make all kinds of excuses about this. I'm not the one all hyped up about the wonder of wind power and solar power. Evidently its ok to kill birds as long as it is done by an environmentally friendly wind turbine or solar panel. The environmentally friendly part is a joke in and of itself.I'm not the one that thinks oil is evil and needs to be done away with. Same goes for coal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Apples and oranges... The BP spill was a single event, an accident of (hopefully) improbable odds. The primary casualties were water-dwelling species and some on land (both wildlife, and humans suffering economically). It is not even logical to assume there would be equally significant damage in the air. How many fish do wind turbines kill every year? (And to be fair, off-shore wind farms probably do kill some--not with their blades of course, but other ecological effects due to their presence and maintenance.) The other statistic, turbine-caused bird deaths, is measuring an ongoing effect, not a singular unique event of catastrophic proportions. A more appropriate analogue would be to compare the regular annual casualties from other on-going sources--not only buildings, solar farms, or cats, as has been mentioned--but the environmental consequences of other energy sources: deaths from flying through smokestack exhausts, deaths from regular minor oil spills, effects of hydroelectric plants on the ecosystem or breeding, regular effects of tankers or drilling on sea bird colonies, etc. How about power plants that attract manatees into warm water and the propellers of motorboats? My point is that there is no scientific basis for comparing a one-time catastrophic event to annual, recurring attrition. I'm just having fun watching you liberals try to make all kinds of excuses about this. I'm not the one all hyped up about the wonder of wind power and solar power. Evidently its ok to kill birds as long as it is done by an environmentally friendly wind turbine or solar panel. The environmentally friendly part is a joke in and of itself.I'm not the one that thinks oil is evil and needs to be done away with. Same goes for coal. Who's making excuses? And I haven't heard anyone say bird deaths caused by turbines are "okay" because "green" is a friendlier way to die. No energy sources, indeed no human endeavor, is ever going to be perfect or completely free of negative effects.I'm neither defending nor attacking a particular technology. We have to make our decisions based on the relative merits and flaws of all competing technologies. My only points were points of logic, not statements about the pros and cons of oil, coal, wind, solar, nuclear, etc.: 1. It's illogical to expect water pollution to have similar aerial consequences as wind turbines. 2. And there is little statistical value in comparing a singular catastrophic event to regular, ongoing attrition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 10,994 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Helpful chart. Here I am whipping out numbers of bird deaths due to human activity numbered in the billions. Maybe your chart will help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.