Windmills!!

[Drewp]

Thank you Marc!!!

Way to steer clear of the topic for a while Sam. What was that, like all of an hour?

Little River, sorry but I'm about to hijack again...

Hey Mods out there, just out of curiosity, what is the "Off Topic" section on this website for? I'm seeing a blatent and appalling form of censorship, and I don't like it one bit. I'm all for talking fishing, but shouldn't you be able to discuss whatever you want in the "Off Topic" section? Or should it be the "Off Topic, Except Politics, And Other Issues That People May Not Agree On" section. I don't understand why many of the people on this thread (notice I said many, and not all) have to be such a whiny cry-babies. If you dont' feel like you are up to the debate, then don't participate. It's that simple. But if you can't resist putting your two cents in, and then don't like the rebuttal you recieve, in my opionion, you don't have a leg to stand on.

When Mods, or whoever, start saying what people can and can't post, that's when you lose members. Maybe we need to create a forum called "Politics."

[shawn]

Thank you Marc!!!

Way to steer clear of the topic for a while Sam. What was that, like all of an hour?

Little River, sorry but I'm about to hijack again...

Hey Mods out there, just out of curiosity, what is the "Off Topic" section on this website for? I'm seeing a blatent and appalling form of censorship, and I don't like it one bit. I'm all for talking fishing, but shouldn't you be able to discuss whatever you want in the "Off Topic" section? Or should it be the "Off Topic, Except Politics, And Other Issues That People May Not Agree On" section. I don't understand why many of the people on this thread (notice I said many, and not all) have to be such a whiny cry-babies. If you dont' feel like you are up to the debate, then don't participate. It's that simple. But if you can't resist putting your two cents in, and then don't like the rebuttal you recieve, in my opionion, you don't have a leg to stand on.

When Mods, or whoever, start saying what people can and can't post, that's when you lose members. Maybe we need to create a forum called "Politics."

DrewP I would have to agree with you about off topic this is the perfect place for this discussion or debate better here than in the fishing threads.

[leahcim_dahc]

When Mods, or whoever, start saying what people can and can't post, that's when you lose members.

There's a fine line between debating and a personal attack because of some political agenda and ideological extremism. In my opinion that line was crossed.

Maybe we need to create a forum called "Politics."

I don't think a fishing site such as this needs a "Politics" forum. Political discussions all too often turn very ugly in a short amount of time simply because of the vast opinions and more often than not, emotions associated with political viewpoints.

Very good case in point, my brother and I have not spoken to each other in about a year because of some heated political debates that turned ugly. Things were said and done that can not be taken back nor forgotten. Very unfortunate that those things happen, but it does.

Debates that are moderated by individuals with absolutely no political affiliation whatsoever can be good, clean and healthy (in terms of voicing one's opinion)...however, in the end someone's feelings and ego always seem to get hurt. That's when you loose members. I say no political forum is needed. No warranty expressed or implied, opinions and mileage may vary.


Chad

[littleriver]

OK guys. I'm a little disappointed that things started going awry here so let me review my position on this thread.


1. This is the "Off Topic" portion of the site. Personally I don't think the windmill issue is all that "off topic" (certainly not as off topic as talking pigskin picks) because the rapid increase in windmill construction in this state has started to encroach on recreational hunting and fishing areas. This should be of great concern to all who visit this site. Just because windmills haven't encroached on the places you use doesn't mean it's not a valid topic for discussion.

2. I realize that I've talked about this issue before and it may seem like I'm "Windmill Obsessed" but I provided long and detailed arguments to support the reasons for this apparent obsession. I welcome any discussion and/or response to those arguments. If you choose not to respond to those arguments then I respect that. If you choose to respond to the specific arguments I will engage in respectful debate presenting my side of the issue. If we ultimately fail to agree I hope we will part friends who disagree on a specific topic. The only thing that really annoys me is to ignore my arguments and then start telling me that we shouldn't be talking about this subject. Hey Guys, I argue about this kind of stuff with my wife all the time and there are many issues on which we have decided to do just that (e.g.:part friends who disagree on a subject) and I still love her to death (oops, maybe I didn't word that right). In my previous discussion about windmills it was peripheral to a discussion about gas prices (and gas prices are relevant to the fishing community.... when gas is $3 a gallon you spend a certain amount to go out fishing.. when it's $6 a gallon you spend a lot more and you may not be able to go to the fishing area you really want to visit) and the windmill thing was brought up by one of the other persons engaged in the debate. In this thread I talk specifically about windmills because I am emotionally distraught about a very specific wind farm in the colockum which I found last weekend as I took a long drive to check out the area for winter hiking opportunities. I've used this area off and on for almost 40 years but haven't been there for about 2 or 3 and seeing the windmills there really shocked me. So in neither thread where I talk about windmills am I the one who initiates the subject. In the first thread I was responding to another poster who brought them up and in this thread I'm responding to what I saw in the colockum last weekend.

3. In this thread I purposely used strong (but not vulgar) language for the purpose of maybe drawing in someone from PSE (someone from upper management or public relations) to discuss the wind farm. I've done this kind of thing successfully on other forums and when you can draw in a real participant in a real current news or political event it makes the discussion a heck of a lot more interesting than when it's just us sporties kicking things around. So even though I knew it was a long shot to goad someone in authority from PSE into the discussion I thought it was worth a try because I am very passionate about the new wind farm on the "Whiskey Dick". And I think where things started going awry was when bassackwards (a PSE employee but one who is obviously not involved in and certainly not responsible for the wind farm under discussion) picked up on the thread and joined the discussion without really understanding what he was getting into. I took a lot of time to prepare and write a detailed response to his initial post and in this response I told him that it was OK if he chose not to respond. In fact I mentioned this "out" more than one time. But instead of just saying he 'respectfully declines to discuss the subject', he responded by telling me we shouldn't be doing this and sort of picked up his ball and went home. This was the only point in the thread where I sort of lost it and wrote some things that were a little too strong but I still think the "Warrior standing in the town square" thing was kind of funny. But it was a "Don Quixotian" kind of excess. It was an attempt to be colorful not an attempt to ridicule or demean anyone. I mean, check out my avatar guys. That's me standing there and it should be obvious from the picture that noone has ever mistaken me for Arnold Swarzenegger. So, Bassackwards, I still love you man. I don't take myself too seriously and I don't hold grudges. I just love to debate. I mean it's in my blood.

[A9]

Thank you Marc!!!

Way to steer clear of the topic for a while Sam. What was that, like all of an hour?

Little River, sorry but I'm about to hijack again...

Hey Mods out there, just out of curiosity, what is the "Off Topic" section on this website for? I'm seeing a blatent and appalling form of censorship, and I don't like it one bit. I'm all for talking fishing, but shouldn't you be able to discuss whatever you want in the "Off Topic" section? Or should it be the "Off Topic, Except Politics, And Other Issues That People May Not Agree On" section. I don't understand why many of the people on this thread (notice I said many, and not all) have to be such a whiny cry-babies. If you dont' feel like you are up to the debate, then don't participate. It's that simple. But if you can't resist putting your two cents in, and then don't like the rebuttal you recieve, in my opionion, you don't have a leg to stand on.

When Mods, or whoever, start saying what people can and can't post, that's when you lose members. Maybe we need to create a forum called "Politics."

Politics can get heated. And fast and can cause stuff to get way too intense and can ruin the rest of the forum...

We've had this discussion before and it went too far. If people can have acceptable and tolerable debates, then go ahead, but I tihnk it's already gone too far with the name calling. Like leahcim_dahc mentioned, it's gone over the debating line and has been personal attacking.

I understand no one wants censorship, but this is a private website owned by Mike. He can censor what he wants cause its his site.

But if you guys can start and keep a healthy, clean debate, go ahead, do it, but I think it's past that level and some of the individuals taking place in this argument have gone the other way with it already and theres no point in continuing it.

BTW Drew I meant steer clear as in not participating in the debate. I simply thanked Marc for what he said and I don't think you need to rip on people because of that....

[bassackwards]

A healthy debate is good...I'm all for it. When someone starts "calling out" one group (PSE) and I actually offer myself up for conversation, then they start questioning my employment???? Where's the "debate" in that??? Exactly!!!

I enjoy political conversations, NOT name calling. As soon as this got personal, I stopped. Period. I don't know LR from Adam, I have no idea his background or motive for this discussion. Like Marc said, if you're looking for educated debate and that's how you spend you free time, go get 'em. If you want to know what fish are biting, we're here.

"Off Topic" or not, name calling shouldn't be allowed anywhere on this site. I'm a Moderator in the Bass Forum, so I'll save "Ipod" that hassle and "Moderate" myself here.

Good luck in your search for answers LR!!

Oh ya...one more thing...the PRIVATE OWNER of the land where the two wind farms were built, was paid nicely for an agreed upon amount of money. Have fun with that one my friend, it is what it is . :thumleft:

I'm officially banning myself from this thread

[Drewp]

Sam, by agreeing with Marc, you are continuing to add to the debate. You are implicating that you agree with what he just stated, and thus, are not "steering clear." You always do that - just gotta get that last word in. So I wasn't "ripping" on you, just calling you out on it. You are right, Mike (and Aaron) does own this site, so HE CAN decide to censor if he wishes, but no one else.

I completely disagree that this has crossed over into something personal. This is an internet forum, don't be so personally invested in what other people say, even it is about you or the company you work for. It's only as big a deal as you want to make it.

[A9]

Agreeing about saying "take it elsewhere" isn't adding to the debate. It's thanking him for making the point. That has nothing to do with getting the last word in and i don't feel any need to do such a thing...

[Drewp]

Agreeing about saying "take it elsewhere" isn't adding to the debate. It's thanking him for making the point. That has nothing to do with getting the last word in and i don't feel any need to do such a thing...

Haha, like you just did? Walked right into that one.....

[A9]

Thats not getting the last point in. Infact you just did it too if you are so worried about it. I was clarifying a misunderstanding. And theres no point in arguing about it anymore, so lets get back to fishing and drop it...

[Drewp]

Never said I was concerned with it. I'll stop when you do buddy ol pal. :bball:

[littleriver]

Could someone please explain to me why bassackwards thinks I "questioned" his employment.

I said I was surprised someone on the forum worked for PSE and I offered some comments that simply said that I didn't want to jeopardize his job. How is that "questioning his employment"??

And what in all of the discussion would cause anyone to think that I'm "looking for answers"???

OK, I did sort of imply that he might be unworthy of the debate but that was in the context of being colorful and after he had sort of blown me off for no real reason. But I still love you man.


I started the discussion because I am disturbed by the windmills on the "Whiskey Dick". That's it. Pure and simple. Ultimately, it looks like I'm going to have to learn to live with it but that doesn't mean I don't have the right to discuss my concerns or to bring this subject to the attention of other sporties because the expansion of wind farm operations is something that could ultimately have an impact on other places where we fish and recreate.

Now I'm kind of watching and thinking about these other places where wind farms might be springing up. Lake Chelan, Keechelus, Quincy WRA, Potholes, lenore, Rock Lake, Sprague Lake, Coffeepot..... I've fished them all and they all have wind generation potential..

[A9]

[lskiles]

This whole debate is, in my opinion, very healthy. For the most part the people in this country (this world!?!) are ignorant of energy policy and what is safe and what is worthless.
Anytime we can expand our knowledge of this and other topics we are better equipped to be responsible citizens.
I worked at Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant just outside Sacramento and we rebuilt that power plant to be, at the time, the most modern and safest plant in the world. When they were ready to bring it on line some moron said we needed to put it to a public vote since it was a public utility. Of course the enviro-nazis came out of the woodwork and from all over the country and miss-informed everyone that would listen and the plant was filled with concrete. The news readers did not mention that when they were experiencing “brown-outs” in California that their shortfall was almost exactly what Rancho Seco would have been producing ( I am not sure what the kilo/home/hours/watt numbers were)
My point is that the college professors and news readers will continue to lie and color any real progress as dangerous. Anytime we can inform people of what is really happening we should.
Thanks littleriver for this thread. I had no idea this was happening.

I guess sam was left speechless...unusual for a "collegeboy" LOL

[iPodrodder]

Hey, you guys are right. There is an off topic forum, but no "name calling" forum. As soon as it gets there, we have to step in. This is a very good debate idea, but the way you are executing your debate ("you stupid morons" which is as you put it, strong language) is not great for a site that wants, as Mike says, "A G rating."

LR, if you want something "better than us sporties kicking it around", go to that site Marc provided with other "educated and well informed" people that you so desire.

[lskiles]

Hey, you guys are right. There is an off topic forum, but no "name calling" forum. As soon as it gets there, we have to step in. This is a very good debate idea, but the way you are executing your debate ("you stupid morons" which is as you put it, strong language) is not great for a site that wants, as Mike says, "A G rating."

LR, if you want something "better than us sporties kicking it around", go to that site Marc provided with other "educated and well informed" people that you so desire.

Your put down of littleriver in insinuating he wants debate with the "educated and well informed" misses the point of this whole thread.

This kind of debate is only valuable when it informs the ignorant. I was ignorant of the fact that they were putting up those wind farms…now that I know I can look at politicians and policies and see if I can influence intelligent energy policy with my vote or petition or whatever avails itself.

Your comment on name calling reminded me of when my daughter was four and she came out of Sunday school and in the crowded foyer told me that her teacher said a bad word. Everyone for about a ten-foot radius stopped talking and pricked their ears toward her and I asked, in a very animated fashion what bad word did she say. At this my princess told me, “She said STUPID.” Lets man-up and not be so easily offended.

[Drewp]

Lets man-up and not be so easily offended.[/size]

Word is bond I-skizzle! :king:

[leahcim_dahc]

Lets man-up and not be so easily offended.

However nice that would be...this is Washington state...you know, the land of extreme political correctness and sensitivity. It's all about perception and interpretation, what you or I would perceive or interpret as something to be "not so easily offended by", isn't the same as anyone else. I might tell someone they're were retarded for doing something stupid at work...but at the same time I'd have my ******* in a vise with the HR department because of it.

Anyrate...I remember seeing something about an education in the science of energy somewhere in this thread...I am all ears.


Chad

[iPodrodder]

Hey, you guys are right. There is an off topic forum, but no "name calling" forum. As soon as it gets there, we have to step in. This is a very good debate idea, but the way you are executing your debate ("you stupid morons" which is as you put it, strong language) is not great for a site that wants, as Mike says, "A G rating."

LR, if you want something "better than us sporties kicking it around", go to that site Marc provided with other "educated and well informed" people that you so desire.

Your put down of littleriver in insinuating he wants debate with the "educated and well informed" misses the point of this whole thread.

This kind of debate is only valuable when it informs the ignorant. I was ignorant of the fact that they were putting up those wind farms…now that I know I can look at politicians and policies and see if I can influence intelligent energy policy with my vote or petition or whatever avails itself.

Your comment on name calling reminded me of when my daughter was four and she came out of Sunday school and in the crowded foyer told me that her teacher said a bad word. Everyone for about a ten-foot radius stopped talking and pricked their ears toward her and I asked, in a very animated fashion what bad word did she say. At this my princess told me, “She said STUPID.” Lets man-up and not be so easily offended.

Not putting down LR. He seems to think bassackwards is unworthy, and seems to have answers to everything, so let him battle with his own kind.

[Mr. Magler]

I have some catching up to do, littleriver:

LR-

Nuclear power is a great way to get a lot of power to a lot of people. However, it has one major pitfall: 1) WE HAVE NO WAY TO DISPOSE OF NUCLEAR WASTE! The high-level radioactive waste produced by nuclear reactors must be stored in containers that are capable of holding in elements like plutonium for their entire half-lifes. I don't like the idea of these highly toxic containers strewn about the earth.

Granted, most of the containers they use now are guaranteed for 50 years or so and I may die before i ever see any repercussions from leaky storage containers....I certainly don't want them anywhere near my house - or even near my sate, for that matter. These gigantic poison vaults are too risky for my liking. (Although I hear Hanford is just lovely this time of year ) Not to mention, a 50 year guarantee is a joke - plutonium lasts hundreds of thousands of years before it decays completely.

With that being said, nuclear power certainly isn't all bad - it emits almost no CO2 into the atmosphere, which keeps Al Gore happy. Also, I have heard of hybrid nuclear reactors that can actually gobble up most of the waste during the fission reaction that releases the nuclear energy. These hybrids would still produce high-level radioactive waste that would need to be disposed of, but it would be much less than the old-school reactors produce now. I'm interested in learning more about the viability of those. I still don't want one in Washington though.

Is wind power the solution? NO. But when combined with other forms of renewable resources like geothermal and solar power (among others), it could become part of a less risky solution. As a country we don't invest nearly enough money in renewable resources in my opinion. (At risk of sounding like a hippie)

BTW.....You want to talk about PSE being politically driven? HA! They have nothing on the USNRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). Talk about political propoganda! I certainly don't feel any safer knowing that they are the ones regulating the nuclear power industry. Leave PSE alone! You can only bash PSE if you are not on the grid, pal. You're obviously on the grid though, since you're so infatuated with nuclear power. You seem a little too close-minded/geographically-biased about this issue.

Sidenote: 4-wheeling and sport hunting don't make you any better than a windmill. After all, they just make noise and kill birds in "them thar hills." Sound familiar?