3/25/12

Changing diapers is not the last change Baby Boomers made.




One of the myths often perpetuated by wind developers when they target a community is a warning to their indentured leaseholders and Voters for Wind that, "many in the older generation don't want to embrace change, which is a common theme throughout history."


Under my recent post, Poll: Alternate energy loses support,  a person claiming to be a 27 yr. old doctoral student with parents in the Town of Lyme made a comment to Mary Kay Barton who, in a previous comment, had provided JLL readers with some resources that documented the rapidly growing opinion that "wind is a bridge to nowhere and a complete waste of our resources."

This is what the doctoral student had to say:



Holy crap! I knew the sparks would fly after that comment. The Baby Boom generation and the generation of those of us even older has always been one that has challenged the way society views life. From the free love of the 60’s, to the women’s movement of the 70’s, we have set the standard for change. Now that many of us are in our 50’s and 60’s we, are challenging the concept of what it means to grow older in society. We have embraced the technologies and in retirement continue to use the great gifts were were given in the fifties and sixties.

We have not only lived on change, but we have challenged change which would come to no good. 

This is Mary Kay Barton's reply to Anonymous at 12:14:


For the sake of the doctoral student, when he/she presents the "Stagnant Oldtimer Theory"  to the review panel, hope that no one on the panel is over 60. 



8 comments:

Anonymous said...

I've been in the wind trenches in Cape Vincent for years and I appreciate all the dedication and effort that people like Barton have committed to, but I agree with Mr. Academic on some of the information we "anti's" throw up to support our positions.

That being said, here's the most striking thing I got from the student's response, "Nor is it an end all be all solution to energy policy, but it's a dent." While at the same time concluding, "Energy and pollution will be a huge problem down the road."

So Mr. Academic, is this how your generation proposes to deal with "huge" problems facing your generation down the road, by offering and supporting "huge" federal and State subsidies for solutions that you admit up front will only make a "dent?"

I agree that future energy use is the equivalent of a head-on collision with train, but we will need more than just fixing the dents. We need to concentrate on big fixes, not little band aids. And government needs to shift it's myopic view of the problem and look beyond supporting wind technology just because it currently creates jobs (there is no other benefit and even at that it's a loser).

Mr. Academic, you make a good point about the careless use of information, but your critical thinking skills need to be honed, which will come with age, maturity and experience.

Anonymous said...

Interesting...

When I was working on my PHD in the sixties getting an advanced degree was more of a self-fulfillment followed by the reward of many job choices in responsible positions.

I remember once listening to a lecture by an aging Margaret Mead who told us that her studies showed that one of the most important aspects of older and surviving populations was the respect given to and the contributions derived from their elders.

Unfortunately, today, graduate studies is a last resort for many who can't get or keep a job and are hoping that the PHD will at least give them an entry level position.

My retirement home of Florida is populated with bartenders, golf course workers and shuttle drivers with advanced degrees. Good luck to the doctoral candidate and just remember, that self fulfillment is a very important part of your life and it is worth it.

Wind turbines are a green energy myth said...

Mr. Academic also said:

"Energy and pollution will be a huge problem down the road."

The pollution problems caused during production of turbines and the building of a wind farm must have been missed by Mr. Academic in his systems analysis of a wind turbine.

The mining and processing of the rare earth elements that are necessary to the production of the magnets needed in turbines is one of the extreme polluters of our earth. The Chinese have sacrificed many people to make turbine magnets available to the world.

Just the amount of polluting diesel fuel used to manufacture, ship, truck and erect a turbine makes the turbine being green claim nothing more than a false assertion.

In the future, the disposal of the hundreds of thousands of toxic carbon composite wind turbine blades will be challenging and unaffordable.

Taking them down and repairing the damage to nature will be unaffordable.

Concrete pads left in unique areas and once tillable areas will be a hinderance to the concept of a green planet that at some point might find it necessary to recover from the damage done by the wind industry.

Underground electric fields laced all around what was once God's green acres will cause untold damage.

And that is just a start as the claim of turbines being green is debunked.

Anonymous said...

Ya gotta love this 27 year old academic for his spunk, but he falls into a familiar trap of attacking the character of someone presenting an opposing position,rather than adressing their differences.

Maybe he should consider how immature and stubborn he sounds by referring to a world renowned physics researcher as to old to think

Anonymous said...

I have been involved with wind seminars around the state and academic discussion. I have always tried to figure out and put into simple language for purpose of discussion with my students what might make the difference between pro-wind and anti-wind thinking.

Pro-wind made their conclusions based on rather easy money in the offering and gratification. No need to know anything more.

Anti-wind have made their conclusions most often from the fact that their early thinking was that wind is a good idea to the realization that along with it comes trade-offs which have direct economic and life impacts on them and their families. Thus anti-wind are more versed in both sides of the argument.

Without my help, my students always come to the same conclusion.

Just an observation.

TJD

Anonymous said...

Divide and Conquer.

That's BFW's game.

If there had been a council of governments in place a la the THC model, a lot of this could have been avoided.

Joan Null said...

Mary Kay - I'm proud to call you friend!

Anonymous said...

A Doctoral candidate that struggles with the English language and did not get Mary Kay's last name right.

Sounds like that home boy that used to work in the Cape Acciona office.