Fri Jun 28, 2013, 01:50 PM

WestStar (202 posts)

Birders fake birds death to discredit wind power

An enthusiast who travelled to the Western Isles to view a rare bird has told of his "dismay" after watching it fly into a wind turbine and die.

The white-throated needletail, which breeds in Asia and winters in Australasia, was spotted on Harris.

About 30 birdwatchers travelled to the island to see the unusual visitor, which has only been recorded five times in the UK since 1950.

However, they then saw it die after colliding with the wind turbine.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-23082846

They have no actual evidence of the windmill actually striking the bird, just conjecture.

I'm suspicious.

136 replies, 9275 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

136 replies	Author	Time	Post
Birders fake birds death to discredit wind power (Original post)	WestStar	Jun 2013	OP
ACTUAL HEADLINE: Birdwatchers see rare white-throated needletail fly into turbine on Harris	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#1
ACTUAL HEADLINE from youtube link this goes to "Demise of the needletail"	uppityperson	Jun 2013	#8
Nadin gave the BBC headline	muriel_volestrangler	Jun 2013	#12
Let's make this really, really clear: that bird is not an endangered or threatened species.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#23
Let's make this very clear.	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#24
I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#25
Once again	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#26
Fine. Power lines kill birds. Birds have flown into my windows and parked car and killed themselves.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#28
Birds are bright	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#48
Awesome. Birds are friggin' geniuses. I don't give a damn.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#68
Wind power has issues whether you like it or not	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#69
Agreed. But I don't like being lied to or manipulated in an effort to prove that point.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#71
Alas the story stated a fact	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#76
"The bird is rare were it was sighted." Not what it said.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#80
Not opponent of wind power	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#91
There seems to be a lot of anti-wind and green tech going around	maddezmom	Jun 2013	#93
In some ways, I find being manipulated by a focused campaign more forgivable than willful ignorance.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#101
Yes, and this is a valuable bird	siligut	Jun 2013	#103
There is no reason to believe the claim in the OP that the story is made up	muriel_volestrangler	Jun 2013	#108
Agree, the OP is spreading his own bias here	maddezmom	Jun 2013	#110
I think that she is an opponent of the blades and a proponent of the new bladeless wind turbine.	djean111	Jun 2013	#115
precisely	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#126
If you read the article,	Ms. Toad	Jun 2013	#109
Bald eagles	RudynJack	Jun 2013	#30
That is why killing one comes with, heavy, heavy fines	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#33
So you're switching your claim now	RudynJack	Jun 2013	#35
No I am not	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#43
Doesn't change the fact that you're wrong about the endangered status of bald eagles...	SidDithers	Jun 2013	#52
Personal experience has nothing to do with it.	RudynJack	Jun 2013	#54
You go argue with the act	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#58
So you're just gonna double-down	RudynJack	Jun 2013	#62
I said they were protected	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#63
No, you said they were endangered...	SidDithers	Jun 2013	#65
Anybody can	RudynJack	Jun 2013	#87
I said protected, have a wonderful, long life in my ignore list	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#89
It looks like you said 'endangered'	bike man	Jun 2013	#97
Maybe "Bold" eagles are so endangered,	DevonRex	Jun 2013	#117
Bold eagles are the most susceptible	treestar	Jun 2013	#136
I'm proud to join	RudynJack	Jun 2013	#116
So you ignore people who call you out in factual errors?	Squeegee	Jun 2013	#121
you also have an issue withprotected i guess	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#123
then	RudynJack	Jun 2013	#124
The facts...	Squeegee	Jun 2013	#129
You argue with congress over the meaning of the Act that protects these	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#130
Not arguing about what Congress does	Squeegee	Jun 2013	#131
No.	RudynJack	Jun 2013	#132
No, you didn't say protected. You twice denied saying endangered, but here it is:	bike man	Jun 2013	#133
Even your own link says bald eagles are not endangered...nt	SidDithers	Jun 2013	#64
She's talking about BOLD eagles tho.	DevonRex	Jun 2013	#118
!!!	zappaman	Jun 2013	#120
!!!!!	DevonRex	Jun 2013	#122
They are covered under a different law.	alarimer	Jun 2013	#96
Which I noted bellow	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#98
To be fair, bold eagles are indeed very, very rare...nt	SidDithers	Jun 2013	#49
Indeed!	RudynJack	Jun 2013	#60
I agree but yes they are protected	truegrit44	Jun 2013	#125
Do you mean CEQA? That's California-specific, NEPA would be the relevant act	petronius	Jun 2013	#46
Both...since many of these projects	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#50
Bald eagles aren't endangered	Sgent	Jun 2013	#79
They are covered by this	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#92
Don't domestic cats kill far more birds than windmills ever will, by a factor of 10,000 or greater?	madinmaryland	Jun 2013	#44
How many hawks and eagles do house kitties	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#53
Unless it is this kitty	Ms. Toad	Jun 2013	#111
Well that is the exception to every rule	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#112
Sorry, the bird is rare in the Western Isles n/t	intaglio	Jun 2013	#38
No, no, no. That is NOT what the OP implied at all.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#40
You're talking bollocks	muriel_volestrangler	Jun 2013	#55
Not playing your game.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#66
You are so wrong, in all aspects, that it's laughable	muriel_volestrangler	Jun 2013	#70
"The quote is the OP explicitly says the bird is rare in Britain." BULLSHIT!	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#72
"only been recorded five times in the UK since 1950" - again. For the hard of reading.	muriel_volestrangler	Jun 2013	#95
Basically, you could not be bothered to read	intaglio	Jun 2013	#73
Same challenge to you as the poster above: Cut the nonsense and provide the quote.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#74
2nd paragraph	intaglio	Jun 2013	#78
and nowhere does it say that the bird is not rare. It say it is rare, which has strong implications.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#83
In other words you were wrong n/t	intaglio	Jun 2013	#84
LOL! No.	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#86
Caption are often inaccurate due to space limitations.	Ms. Toad	Jun 2013	#113
They're rare in Britain	XemaSab	Jun 2013	#105
Indeed	Aerows	Jun 2013	#56
Interesting. I'd be surprised if it doesn't happen, but that doesn't	mtpscwriter	Jun 2013	#2
Welcome to DU!	XemaSab	Jun 2013	#11
Your title line needs one of thse at the end "?"	DURHAM D	Jun 2013	#3
i assume you are being sarcastic n/t	Enrique	Jun 2013	#4
Or we could continue to pollute the skies and kill us all and the birds (nt)	The Straight Story	Jun 2013	#5
Don't forget all the chemicals and pesticides Americans throw on their lawns.	FSogol	Jun 2013	#39
Wind power may cause cancer!	zappaman	Jun 2013	#6
huh, think you have a case of the woo. how the hell do wind turbines cause cancer	loli phabay	Jun 2013	#13
Apparently you missed the sarcasm tag on that post.	MH1	Jun 2013	#16
lol okay, just kinda blew me away.	loli phabay	Jun 2013	#18
You missed a couple of awesome threads back in May...	SidDithers	Jun 2013	#20
doh i remember them now, had a brain fart. problem with working thirty hours straight	loli phabay	Jun 2013	#21
Here ya go.	zappaman	Jun 2013	#45
lol. i would be looking out for acme trebuchets if i was them	loli phabay	Jun 2013	#51
And cliffs that end too soon :D n/t	Aerows	Jun 2013	#61
Thanks. I'd seen references to the old moon bombing threads a while back	winter is coming	Jun 2013	#77
You apologists keep referring to the PENETRATION OF MOTHER MOON as a "bombing"...	Democracyinkind	Jun 2013	#29
Wait, I thought it was lunar rape...nt	SidDithers	Jun 2013	#34
The East County News	treestar	Jun 2013	#15
Coyote clusters (and their noise) cause cancer too!	FSogol	Jun 2013	#41
see reply #45 n/t	zappaman	Jun 2013	#47
Thanks ! Missed that the first go-round	treestar	Jun 2013	#75
They cause cancer too!!1	HappyMe	Jun 2013	#7
The link didn't say "Birders fake birds death to discredit wind power"	In_The_Wind	Jun 2013	#9
This message was self-deleted by its author	Buzz Clik	Jun 2013	#22
Considering your screen name, I don't trust you on this issue. nt	Democracyinkind	Jun 2013	#31
My username never had anything to do with wind energy.	In_The_Wind	Jun 2013	#36
I assumed so.	Democracyinkind	Jun 2013	#37
Thank you for explaining.	In_The_Wind	Jun 2013	#42
Way to edit the headline to fit a personal agenda...	Earth_First	Jun 2013	#10
+1 n/t	Ms. Toad	Jun 2013	#114
reminds me of the otter that was released with the bbc there to film	loli phabay	Jun 2013	#14
I'm not sure how true the turbine killing bird populations thing is.	Arcanetrance	Jun 2013	#17
agreed	burnodo	Jun 2013	#19
I consider myself an environmentalist.	Arcanetrance	Jun 2013	#90
The problem is serious enough where take permits are issued	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#94
Here is a pretty good article on it. Wind farms, sky scrapers and cats.....	maddezmom	Jun 2013	#85
Darwin Award!	JaneyVee	Jun 2013	#27
Wind turbines will be blade-less pretty soon anyway, at least I predict that.	Democracyinkind	Jun 2013	#32
There's already at least one company working on this:	Buns_of_Fire	Jun 2013	#67
I dare you to post this in the Birders forum	Aerows	Jun 2013	#57
I think there should be a push to get tiny helmets for our	Vinnie From Indy	Jun 2013	#59
Genius.	zappaman	Jun 2013	#81
I got two conures	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#99
Hundreds of birds daily get sucked into jet engines	The Second Stone	Jun 2013	#82
I'm shocked that people would fake the deaths of birds to discredit wind power.	Apophis	Jun 2013	#88
No-one did - the thread starter made that up.	muriel_volestrangler	Jun 2013	#106
They should not resort to this.	alarimer	Jun 2013	#100
Read the original linked article	nadinbrzezinski	Jun 2013	#102
This has been a problem forever with windmills	thelordofhell	Jun 2013	#104
Saying this isn't a problem is just ignorant	XemaSab	Jun 2013	#107
I blame the bird.	NYC_SKP	Jun 2013	#119
SNOWDEN WORSHIPPER!	Scootaloo	Jun 2013	#127
Thanks OBAMA	treestar	Jun 2013	#135
I'm a major proponent of wind power.	last1standing	Jun 2013	#128
well	wingzeroday	Jun 2013	#134

Response to WestStar (Original post)

Fri Jun 28, 2013, 01:53 PM

nadinbrzezinski (154,021 posts)

Birders fake birds death to discredit wind power

1. ACTUAL HEADLINE: Birdwatchers see rare white-throated needletail fly into turbine on Harris

8. ACTUAL HEADLINE from youtube link this goes to "Demise of the needletail"

12. Nadin gave the BBC headline

23. Let's make this really, really clear: that bird is not an endangered or threatened species.

24. Let's make this very clear.

25. I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say.

26. Once again

28. Fine. Power lines kill birds. Birds have flown into my windows and parked car and killed themselves.

48. Birds are bright

68. Awesome. Birds are friggin' geniuses. I don't give a damn.

69. Wind power has issues whether you like it or not

71. Agreed. But I don't like being lied to or manipulated in an effort to prove that point.

76. Alas the story stated a fact

80. "The bird is rare were it was sighted." Not what it said.

91. Not opponent of wind power

93. There seems to be a lot of anti-wind and green tech going around

101. In some ways, I find being manipulated by a focused campaign more forgivable than willful ignorance.

103. Yes, and this is a valuable bird

108. There is no reason to believe the claim in the OP that the story is made up

110. Agree, the OP is spreading his own bias here

115. I think that she is an opponent of the blades and a proponent of the new bladeless wind turbine.

126. precisely

109. If you read the article,

30. Bald eagles

33. That is why killing one comes with, heavy, heavy fines

35. So you're switching your claim now

43. No I am not

52. Doesn't change the fact that you're wrong about the endangered status of bald eagles...

54. Personal experience has nothing to do with it.

58. You go argue with the act

62. So you're just gonna double-down

63. I said they were protected

65. No, you said they were endangered...

87. Anybody can

89. I said protected, have a wonderful, long life in my ignore list

97. It looks like you said 'endangered'

117. Maybe "Bold" eagles are so endangered,

136. Bold eagles are the most susceptible

116. I'm proud to join

121. So you ignore people who call you out in factual errors?

123. you also have an issue withprotected i guess

124. then

129. The facts...

130. You argue with congress over the meaning of the Act that protects these

131. Not arguing about what Congress does

132. No.

133. No, you didn't say protected. You twice denied saying endangered, but here it is:

64. Even your own link says bald eagles are not endangered...nt

118. She's talking about BOLD eagles tho.

120. !!!

122. !!!!!

96. They are covered under a different law.

98. Which I noted bellow

49. To be fair, bold eagles are indeed very, very rare...nt

60. Indeed!

125. I agree but yes they are protected

46. Do you mean CEQA? That's California-specific, NEPA would be the relevant act

50. Both...since many of these projects

79. Bald eagles aren't endangered

92. They are covered by this

44. Don't domestic cats kill far more birds than windmills ever will, by a factor of 10,000 or greater?

53. How many hawks and eagles do house kitties

111. Unless it is this kitty

112. Well that is the exception to every rule

38. Sorry, the bird is rare in the Western Isles n/t

40. No, no, no. That is NOT what the OP implied at all.

55. You're talking bollocks

66. Not playing your game.

70. You are so wrong, in all aspects, that it's laughable

72. "The quote is the OP explicitly says the bird is rare in Britain." BULLSHIT!

95. "only been recorded five times in the UK since 1950" - again. For the hard of reading.

73. Basically, you could not be bothered to read

74. Same challenge to you as the poster above: Cut the nonsense and provide the quote.

78. 2nd paragraph

83. and nowhere does it say that the bird is not rare. It say it is rare, which has strong implications.

84. In other words you were wrong n/t

86. LOL! No.

113. Caption are often inaccurate due to space limitations.

105. They're rare in Britain