Green Movement Founder Opposes Wind Turbines in His Backyard

One of the world’s premiere environmentalists, credited as a founder of the green movement, is fighting plans to erect wind turbines in his own village.

Professor James Lovelock, 93, is renowned for having created the “Gaia Theory” and becoming one of the World’s earliest and most active modern environmentalists. He is also known for predicting global warming and saying that by the year 2100 warming would kill off four fifths of the world’s population.

Lovelock has, however, has lately come at odds to the movement he helped foster angering the environmental movement by becoming a recent advocate of nuclear power and for opposing wind energy.

It’s a case of NIMBY (not in my back yard) for the professor as he has joined local activists in Broadwoodwidger, Devon, who are trying to stop the erection of wind turbines. Lovelock says wind turbines are “monuments of a failed civilization.”

“I am an environmentalist and founder member of the Greens but I bow my head in shame at the thought that our original good intentions should have been so misunderstood,” Lovelock recently wrote.

“We never intended a fundamentalist Green movement that rejected all energy sources other than renewable, nor did we expect the Greens to cast aside our priceless ecological heritage because of their failure to understand that the needs of the Earth are not separable from human needs.”

Lovelock especially stands against greenism via certain acts of government fiat legislation calling it something akin to “fascism.”

“Although well-intentioned it is an erosion of our freedom and draws near to what I see as fascism,” he said.

Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™
#BENGHAZI: Absentee President When Four Americans Died
  • retired.military

    As usual the law of unintended consequences bites the dems (and as a result the rest of the country) in the ass.

  • herddog505

    “Although well-intentioned it is an erosion of our freedom and draws near to what I see as fascism,” he said.

    Part of me is glad to see this fellow having a “road to Damascus” moment: better late than never.

    The other part of me says, “See this? It’s the world’s smallest violin playing ‘My Heart Bleeds Purple Piss For You’. A**hole.”

  • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

    He should have spoken up quite a while back.

    But fame and respect are heady brews, and hard to put down once taken up…

  • GarandFan

    Lovelock, a day late and a dollar short.

  • jim_m

    Lovelock says wind turbines are “monuments of a failed civilization.”

    Exactly. What these people have really determined is that human civilization is a failure. Therefore the only way that they can be proven right is to oppose anything which might help mankind. If they shut off the use of fossil fuels and shut off the opportunities for alternative energy then they will have a greater likelihood of being proven correct.

    They don’t want to help anyone. They just want to be in a position where they can piously claim, “I told you so”. Man’s suffering is the only thing that will satisfy their enormous egos.

  • lasveraneras

    News just in, as reported by Matt Ridley, at his Rational Optimist blog:

    “Did you know that the Earth is getting greener, quite literally? Satellites are now confirming that the amount of green vegetation on the planet has been increasing for three decades. This will be news to those accustomed to alarming tales about deforestation, overdevelopment and ecosystem destruction…

    The latest and most detailed satellite data, which is yet to be published but was summarized in an online lecture last July by Ranga Myneni of Boston University, confirms that the greening of the Earth has now been going on for 30 years. Between 1982 and 2011, 20.5% of the world’s vegetated area got greener, while just 3% grew browner; the rest showed no change…

    Dr. Myneni… concludes that 50% [of the increased greening] is due to “relaxation of climate constraints,” i.e., warming or rainfall, and roughly 50% is due to carbon dioxide fertilization itself. In practice, the two interact. A series of experiments has found that plants tolerate heat better when CO2 levels are higher.

    The inescapable if unfashionable conclusion is that the human use of fossil fuels has been causing the greening of the planet in three separate ways: first, by displacing firewood as a fuel; second, by warming the climate; and third, by raising carbon dioxide levels, which raise plant growth rates.”

    Wait, then that must mean man-made CO2 is actually making the earth more flora and fauna friendly? Who knew? Well, now all you SUV drivers can stop and pat yourselves on the back for your contributions to the environment!

    This would be funny – watching the environmental radical “Chicken Little”s fulminate against the imagined “sky is falling” – if they weren’t still such a major threat to the well being of plants and animals, most especially including human beings, around the world.

    • jim_m

      The far left, getting it wrong since Thomas Malthus.

    • Brucehenry

      Now if we can just find a use for kudzu.

      • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

        Animal feed. And supposedly the young leaves make a decent salad green.

  • klem

    I’ll bet he knows that when a wind turbine is built on someone’s property, the value of that property goes up because it becomes an income generating piece of land. However the value of all of the nearby properties go down in value because no one wants to live near a wind turbine. Its basically a transfer of wealth from the neighbors to the to the owner of the wind turbine property. If i were in his position I’d fight wind turbines too.

  • SteveCrickmore075
    • jim_m

      Somewhat ironic that you post a comment claiming that weather does not equal climate when 99.9999% of your proofs of global warming are citations of the weather.

      • SteveCrickmore075

        climate is the accumulation of weather..but droughts and storms, even winter storms will get fiercer.. gradually.

        • jim_m

          Another bogus claim. there is no trend in hurricane landfalls globally.

          So your claim that severe weather will increase (or for that matter any counter claim that it will decrease) is completely and utterly bogus. Storms are not getting worse or more frequent. All claims by warmists are a bunch of crap meant to fool the weak minded.

          • SteveCrickmore075

            Like a baseball player on steroids, our climate system is breaking records at an unnatural pace. And like a baseball player on steroids, it’s the wrong question to ask whether a given home run is “caused” by steroids. As Trenberth wrote in his must-read analaysis, “How To Relate Climate Extremes to Climate Change,”,,
            .. All weather events are affected by climate change because the environment in which they occur is warmer and moister than it used to be.”

            Of course most of you who seem to fall in love with myths and fables and fictions, would probably deny that steroids had any thing to do with baseball records being broken, nor has one conservative Wizbang poster (find one) ever for a moment criticized Lance Armstrong on this site, whom Kevin in 2003 called ” perhaps the greatest American athlete ever”, without even a smidgen of doubt or satire, even though the allegations were convincing even then.

          • jim_m

            I appreciate that the people you are citing cannot distinguish between the gulf stream and sea surface temperature anomaly.

            If you look at the actual sea surface temp it isn’t really very warm.

            Once again I reiterate my statement:” All claims by warmists are a bunch of crap meant to fool the weak minded.” You accept their BS as revelation from God and you never think about questioning it.

          • jim_m

            Or perhaps Steve you could look at this graph and explain just how it is that January sea temps in New England have increased despite science’s inability to actually measure that increase.

            Once again we see that the warmist does not believe in science but believes in the revealed truth from his priests.

          • SteveCrickmore075

            During the first six months of 2012 sea surface temperatures in the Northeast Shelf Large Marine Ecosystem were the highest ever recorded, according to the latest Ecosystem Advisory issued by NOAA’s Northeast Fisheries Science
            Center (NEFSC). Above-average temperatures were found in all parts of the ecosystem, from the ocean bottom to the sea surface and across the region, and the above average temperatures extended beyond the shelf break front to the Gulf Stream.

          • jim_m

            From the link I posted earlier:

            satellite-era sea surface temperature data indicate the oceans warmed naturally, not via manmade greenhouse gases. NOAA’s ocean heat content data also do not support the hypothesis of manmade global warming.

            So had you bothered to even look at them you would have noted that regardless of whatever you source from NOAA, they have already admitted that it does not support AGW. As I said, there is no evidence to support your religious belief.

          • SteveCrickmore075

            I suppose it is a religious belief and lefty extremism that is the impelling the World Bank to issue a report
            Turn Down Heat, Why a 4degreesC must be avoided
            or Price Waterhouse Coopers, the world’s largest professional services firm (investment plus accounting) to urge “ lt’s time to plan for a warmer world. The annual Low Carbon Economy Index centres on one core statistic: the rate of change of global carbon intensity. This year we estimated that the required improvement in global carbon intensity to meet a 2°C warming target has risen to 5.1% a year, from now to 2050. We have passed a critical threshold – not once since World War 2 has the world achieved that rate of decarbonisation, but the task now confronting us is to achieve it for 39 consecutive years.”

          • jim_m

            Wow, Steve. I didn’t realize that the World Bank was such a prestigious center of science. I thought that they were mostly about lending money.

            Also we can put away any pretense that changing our behaviors now will have any effect on climate. The Warmists long ago said tat if we didn’t curtail our emissions by now that the damage would be irreversible.

            Also, The estimated effect on average global temperature by the measures proposed by the IPCC are so small that we would not even be able to determine whether or not they had any effect.

            Add to that the fact hat warmists have lied about the polar ice cap melting away, lied about the himalayan glaciers melting away, lied about polar bear populations being wiped out, lied about their data and covered it all up, and you are left with a left wing gambit to parlay natural changes in climate into an excuse for authoritarian control over the world’s economies and radical redistribution of wealth from the developed world to political operatives and third world kleptocracies.

            Warmism does not have real science behind it. If it did the so called scientists behind it would be willing to share their data and not refuse FOIA requests for their data. They would welcome scrutiny of their data and conclusions. But they know that they are wrong. They know that their data is falsified and their conclusions bogus because every time we actually get that data we find out that the reality is that they are all frauds. If there were real science behind warmism they would act like scientists and not like fascist thugs shouting down their opposition.

          • jim_m

            From the link I posted earlier:

            satellite-era sea surface temperature data indicate the oceans warmed naturally, not via manmade greenhouse gases. NOAA’s ocean heat content data also do not support the hypothesis of manmade global warming.

            So had you bothered to even look at them you would have noted that regardless of whatever you source from NOAA, they have already admitted that it does not support AGW. As I said, there is no evidence to support your religious belief.

          • retired.military

            There is this thing called “The SUN”. I think that most people agree that that will cause large amounts of water to warm up.

          • cirby

            One of the best ways to measure the applicability of an example to a general case is to count the qualifiers.

            So… qualifying “Global Sea Surface Temperatures,” we have “Ecosystem,” “Northeast,” Shelf,” “Large,” and “Marine.” Add in “ever recorded” (dating back just 100 years, at best, for ocean surface temp measurements).

            Six qualifications? Worthless, when talking about global temperature trends.

            In other words, “we can’t show warming on a large scale over a long period, so we narrowed it down to a few hundred square miles, over a relatively short period, geologically speaking.”

            The people who DO measure the overall sea surface temperatures (and water temps going down a thousand feet or so) keep failing to find the sea surface temperature increases that are mandatory for AGW to be real.

          • SteveCrickmore075

            During the first six months of 2012 sea surface temperatures in the Northeast Shelf Large Marine Ecosystem were the highest ever recorded, according to the latest Ecosystem Advisory issued by NOAA’s Northeast Fisheries Science
            Center (NEFSC). Above-average temperatures were found in all parts of the ecosystem, from the ocean bottom to the sea surface and across the region, and the above average temperatures extended beyond the shelf break front to the Gulf Stream.

          • jim_m

            My friends back in Boston are all recalling This blizzard Which somehow occurred before global warmism.

            It appears that Steve’s memory is restricted to what he ate this morning for breakfast.

          • SteveCrickmore075

            You can sneer all you want but you are losing the scientific argument; (science is not all you side only theological prejudice). Of course, just as there were home run records and binges like Ruths or Maris in the past, global warmning ala McGuire, Bobby Bonds Jr. with the help steroids pushes the envelope, the extremes. slowly but perceptibly until there is a new paradigm.

            Trenberth: Accordingly, a change in climate is most likely to be perceived by encountering new “weather” and breaking records: changes in the extremes. Changes in certain extremes, such as higher temperatures and increases in heavy rains and droughts are expected with climate change..

          • jim_m

            Fool. Once again you cannot see that you are pointing to weather and calling it climate.

            The comparison to steroids in MLB is silly. You want to claim that the earth is warming and you selectively look at whatever time scale is convenient. Sometimes it is 10-20 years, sometimes it is the last century. You sure as hell never want to look at the last 1000 years when the medieval warming period would make you look like an ass.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Now you’re being redundant…

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Now you’re being redundant…

          • SteveCrickmore075

            http://www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm
            The Medieval Warm Period was not a global phenomenon. Warmer conditions were concentrated in certain regions. Some regions were even colder than during the Little Ice Age. To claim the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than today is to narrowly focus on a few regions that showed unusual warmth. However, when we look at the broader picture, we see that the Medieval Warm Period was a regional phenomenon with other regions showing strong cooling. What is more, and as can be seen in Figure 4, globally, temperatures during the Medieval Period were less than today.

          • jim_m

            Your link relies upon outdated information. More recent studies have demonstrated that the medieval warm period was indeed global and that previous studies underestimated the temperatures. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/09/this-is-what-global-cooling-really-looks-like/

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            Don’t really see how a localized warming would have worked anyway. If Europe’s 4-5 degrees warmer for a few centuries, wouldn’t the warmth have spread due to wind patterns and all?

            Oh, wait. This is AGW. ANYTHING is possible.

          • SteveCrickmore075

            http://www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm
            The Medieval Warm Period was not a global phenomenon. Warmer conditions were concentrated in certain regions. Some regions were even colder than during the Little Ice Age. To claim the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than today is to narrowly focus on a few regions that showed unusual warmth. However, when we look at the broader picture, we see that the Medieval Warm Period was a regional phenomenon with other regions showing strong cooling. What is more, and as can be seen in Figure 4, globally, temperatures during the Medieval Period were less than today.

          • jim_m

            Fool. Once again you cannot see that you are pointing to weather and calling it climate.

            The comparison to steroids in MLB is silly. You want to claim that the earth is warming and you selectively look at whatever time scale is convenient. Sometimes it is 10-20 years, sometimes it is the last century. You sure as hell never want to look at the last 1000 years when the medieval warming period would make you look like an ass.

          • jim_m

            My friends back in Boston are all recalling This blizzard Which somehow occurred before global warmism.

            It appears that Steve’s memory is restricted to what he ate this morning for breakfast.

          • Jwb10001

            I think we should stop fighting these people and declare them victorious. Pronounce their work finished, take away all their funding and instead route all future AWG funding to Exxon to develop alternative fuel sources that don’t emit CO2. Then stand back because all those heads exploding will probably launch a new global warming problem.

  • kazzer66

    I always considered myself an environmentalist until the far-left loonies took over and decided that man and planet were mutually exclusive.

    I’ll be d@mned if my granddaughter is going to freeze to death from no heat, because of losers like Al Gore.

  • Pingback: Fundador Movimiento Verde se opone a que le instales las turbinas de viento en su patio trasero « NUEVA EUROPA- Nueva Eurabia

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE