Table - German power

[kristopher]

39. Bullpucky. You've been party to stalking me off of DU.

You were not hypothesizing, it is crystal clear from the content of your post that you were stating something you knew. I don't mind actually, or I wouldn't have shared my real name with several EE posters. I just wanted you to admit what you've been doing.

This isn't the first time you've tried this type of smear.
April 2011 I explained fully what I'm doing here after you started the same thing.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x285888

Or here when Josh did it behind my back, posts 19 then 110-114
http://www.democraticunderground.com/124020508

This current instance is probably approaching 10 times I've addressed this issue. Here is another time when I volunteered the information because I was asking another poster if they had a conflict of interest. I'm not linking to it because it I don't want it to seem like a call out.

"'I'm an independent self-funded researcher who has worked for 8 years trying to identify the type and source of misinformation in the public debate over energy.

I have a background in cultural anthropology and am trained on the subject of carbon mitigation policy, strategies and technologies. My professional profile would place me as an energy policy analyst specializing in the transition to a noncarbon economy."

My sole financial stake in this effort lies strictly with small possibility that I might attempt to publish the results of my research in the popular press as a book, which again would not depend on the success or failure of any technology.

As to your "discovery" that I have a consulting company that uses my name as its name, yes, I do. I started it in about 2006 because I needed a vehicle to be paid on a state contract from the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control for an outreach effort where I spent the summer going around the fresh water fishing spots in the state talking to fishermen directly to get their help in spreading the word about toxins in the fish and what the safe consumption limits are.

That is the one and only time that "company" has transacted any business. I do keep it alive in order to have it available if I decide to do something other than what I'm doing now - an effort for which I receive no compensation of any kind.

You say you are honest about your ties to "Big energy"? Then it wouldn't bother you to do as I did. You could if you wished email me your name so that I can do as you did and check your background. I'm sure you have my non-DU email address.

It is worth pointing out one thing: this is a progressive discussion forum and the energy policy I endorse is based on energy efficiency and 100% renewables. It is recognized by virtually every independent energy expert as the most rapid, least cost path to a carbon free economy for the US and the world. It is a policy embraced by virtually every progressive that claims the title.

You and the other nuclear supporters on the other hand are trying to promote a recognized dead end energy source that is the least publicly acceptable of all ways of generating power. It has long been a darling of the republican party and in the last campaign was embraced by McCain with a pledge to build 100 new plants if he were elected. While a small number of progressives will accept nuclear power because of concern about climate change, the idea that a progessive forum is dominated by the vanishingly small number of rabid pronuclear progressives is a statistical anomaly that probably rivals winning the MegaMillions jackpot.

When you add to that the fact that the American Nuclear Society and the Nuclear Energy Institute both expend vast resources promoting the nuclear gospel with thousands of volunteers and paid operatives, then we can get a sense of where the probabilities lie regarding whose message is more a product of sincere beliefs and whose is influenced by dark motives.

Probabilities are just that, they aren't proof of anything. But they do give a good indication of where to look first for explanations.