Bogey persons

Opposing wind farms should be socially taboo, says Ed Miliband

This should, technically, be under the ALT. ENERGY category, but I think I'll give it its own splash.

What the heck does that headline, and by association the words of a government minister, mean?

'Should be socially taboo'? Is he simple? Or just playing to the crowd at the premiere of the Age of Stupid which, a few blogs earlier I have stated I wish to watch, but am more than unimpressed that will not allow any dissenting commentary to enter their realms.

Opposing wind farms should be subject to reasoned debate, facts, objectivity and (what is left of it) democratic process. Plus...enviROI. Just because there's a big whirl thing that meets an EU target and a lobbyist's entreaties doesn't make it right.

Next thing you'll find is Ministers will go on air claiming that the court of public opinion should take precedence over the law....oh.

I think these things can and should be embraced, wherever and whenever practically and cost/eco-effectively possible. But then I don't live near any. I like the look of them. But I accept there are negatives, from noise (close up) to property prices being reduced. Such things cannot be dismissed in such a manner by breaking out of one's pod like something from 'Invasion of the Body Snatcher's and hissing 'Nimby' at folk who have other views, any more than one should throw around pejoratives like 'denier' or 'Treehugger'. Especially if thy are there and you are just passing by.

I'm with Voltaire here, and I while I may agree with much that Mr. M is trying to do, I think he has a darned doltish way of saying it.

Stupid is as Stupid does

I am going to see the Age of Stupid.

I am going to do so because I have heard about it, it sounds interesting, it may be worth a gander and I'll learn something.

The producers must be thrilled.

However, they might not be so pleased that I am going with an eyebrow now cranked, and not in a good way. And it's their fault.

The rage of stupid

This bit, especially, did not help: the site's managers are taking no chances. Their comment box carries a legend that somewhat undermines this apparently glowing feedback. It reads: "Any comments from climate deniers/sceptics will be deleted."..the site's managers are taking no chances. "

That smacks of a slight lack of confidence from the off, and also suggests that balance may not be uppermost. Which means the science I see may not be the science there is.

You know, I may wait for a few more reviews where all 'sides' are allowed to comment free of censorship/agenda/narrative enhancing, etc, and then decide whether I'll go.

Now, was/is that the intention?