What Scientific Authorities Have to Say About Whale Mortalities

[captbogan]

Squirrel, I don't think anyone in our fishing community is an affirmative for an oil rig off of NJ, so I don't know why you keep bringing that up.

No matter what form of energy we use, there will be a plus and a minus column.

It would be great if those windmill farms didn't harm the eco-system and provided steady, clean, inexpensive energy. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

[Blind Squirrel]

Originally Posted by NoLimit

Show us one current picture of one whale with prop marks on its back. There are none, only this BS about blunt force wounds to the head.

https://abc7ny.com/climate-change-de...area/12901186/

[Blind Squirrel]

Originally Posted by bbfisherman

Simple question blind squirrel. Show us a reputable scientific article that states for a fact that sonar blasting cannot cause harm to marine life.

Show us where I ever said that sonar blasting cannot cause harm to marine life.

[Blind Squirrel]

Originally Posted by NoLimit

Got biased sources? Fracking fluid is 99.9% water and sand and you can literally drink it with no harm. https://financialpost.com/commoditie...fracking-fluid

Halliburton isn't a biased source, now is it...

[bbfisherman]

You're done arguing then blind squirrel. Sonar blasting causes harm to marine animals. Windmills are not cost effective. Foreign companies are the ones profiting from the windmills. Portugal has many land based windmills and the electric costs have not saved them a penny. We are getting these windmills shoved down our throats. Animal harm, no savings, and follow the money corruption

[Blind Squirrel]

Originally Posted by NoLimit

We see that you ignored the question. How do you compare a License to Kill rare whales with the concept of insurance? The answer is that you cant.

Calling the issuance of IHAs, ITAs, etc. to lawful industries "a License to Kill" is begging the question.

[Blind Squirrel]

Originally Posted by NoLimit

So you have to go back 15 years to find a picture of a pelican from an oil spill? What about the 35 million critters killed every year by windmills including whales. Plus windmills are not efficient. They are taxpayer subsidized because they cant compete with modern cogen power plants that run on clean and green natural gas. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/...-birds/672877/

Show us one current picture of one whale killed by a wind turbine.

[Blind Squirrel]

Originally Posted by captbogan

Squirrel, I don't think anyone in our fishing community is an affirmative for an oil rig off of NJ, so I don't know why you keep bringing that up.

No matter what form of energy we use, there will be a plus and a minus column.

It would be great if those windmill farms didn't harm the eco-system and provided steady, clean, inexpensive energy. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

It would be great if ANY SOURCE didn't harm the eco-system and provided steady, clean, inexpensive energy, Captain Bob, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Wind energy is a new & improving technology that isn't linked to global climate change

[Blind Squirrel]

Originally Posted by bbfisherman

You're done arguing then blind squirrel. Sonar blasting causes harm to marine animals. Windmills are not cost effective. Foreign companies are the ones profiting from the windmills. Portugal has many land based windmills and the electric costs have not saved them a penny. We are getting these windmills shoved down our throats. Animal harm, no savings, and follow the money corruption

The consequences of global climate change are far less cost-effective, BB...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...t/10454327002/

[Ry609]

The responses from this guy sound like some of those AI Chat GPT conversations I've seen videos of You're all on an FBI watch list now for arguing with it lol