# US town rejects solar panels....



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

> *....amid fears they 'suck up all the energy from the sun'*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-up-all-the-energy-from-the-sun-a6771526.html


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

The article demonizes a small town to make the "global climate deal" look better. Local servants made out to be villains. Not all towns have people standing in line to be elected officials. Might be more to this story!


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

There are people that are that dumb out there.

Some might think this is a stupid question, but why would they _want_ vegetation to grow around solar panels?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

As usual, the OP picked a "source" filled with half truths and omissions.
The citizens naturally distrust solar farms because of who is behind it.
The whole thing is an eyesore, and will kill property values.
the town is fighting for it's life, but of course the "administration" doesn't care about a small town, not enough votes to matter.
And yes, those huge panels do shade the ground and kill vegetation.
Don't these people have the right not to have their town destroyed by this debacle?
http://www.roanoke-chowannewsherald.com/2015/12/08/woodland-rejects-solar-farm/


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Solar farms are for deserts. Very limited ecological impact, naturally sunny, what the heck are they doing in NC? I realize they get plenty of sun in NC, but doesn't the west have issues with brown outs these days? Go soak up some sun in the desert, geniuses.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> And yes, those huge panels do shade the ground and kill vegetation.
> Don't these people have the right not to have their town destroyed by this debacle?
> http://www.roanoke-chowannewsherald....ts-solar-farm/


They didn't have problems with the other solar farms already there, and the "town" only has a population of about 850. 

My high school had more people


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

The production of solar cells do cause pollution enough to keep crops from growing. But unless they are making them in that town it wont be a problem there anyway. 

When I was in Florida I read an article in the local paper that said a company wanted to build a plant that uses super heated lasers to burn trash and convert it to fuel. There was to be no pollution (according to the company) and would get rid of the large trash piles there. Many were against that too without having all the facts. Never did hear how that one turned out. 

Many Audubon groups are against wind generators and solar too. But still want us to clean up our act.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

A tabloid site from the UK having some fun with the unsophisticated rural folks maybe?

The local article says three other solar farms were already approved, maybe these people think that is enough.

_"Three other solar farms had previously been accepted by the town council, with one of them now putting solar panels up._
_The solar farm companies seek placement around Woodland because it has an electrical substation the solar power generated by the panels can be hooked up to the electrical grid._

_Strata&#8217;s proposal would have competed encircling the Woodland substation."_


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

I share their concerns. We only make 1 gallon of sun tea at a time because I'm not sure we have enough sun power for 2. Seriously, let the town decide if they want them. Some of the uppity places in New England won't allow wind mills offshore because they say it spoils the view. Maybe these people don't want to see solar farms either.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

nchobbyfarm said:


> The article demonizes a small town to make the "global climate deal" look better. Local servants made out to be villains. Not all towns have people standing in line to be elected officials. Might be more to this story!


 I am totally stumped at how you got that out of the article. Poking at bit of fun at the mind blowing ignorance maybe, especially on the part of the science teacher who ought to know better. It didn't have anything at all to do with the global climate deal. 

This is right up there with Leonardo DiCaprio not knowing about Chinooks. Y'all thought that was pretty hilarious. A science teacher thinking it's possible to soak up all the sun's rays and leave the plants to starve is pretty crazy and funny too.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

MO_cows said:


> A tabloid site from the UK having some fun with the unsophisticated rural folks maybe?
> 
> The local article says three other solar farms were already approved, maybe these people think that is enough.
> 
> ...


The Independent is not a tabloid.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> *A tabloid site from the UK having some fun with the unsophisticated rural folks maybe?*
> 
> The local article says three other solar farms were already approved, maybe these people think that is enough.
> 
> ...


Yes it sure is when the material they get is from
*FREELANCERS AND BLOGGERS~!*


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

wiscto said:


> Solar farms are for deserts. Very limited ecological impact, naturally sunny, what the heck are they doing in NC? I realize they get plenty of sun in NC, but doesn't the west have issues with brown outs these days? Go soak up some sun in the desert, geniuses.



I've just seen the 3rd solar "farm" completed within 5 miles of my house, in the mountains of NC. They are rather small but there is one of the largest in the U.S. not far from here.
There is also another factor going on here with Duke power finally getting behind the building of some. They have some of the most advantageous laws regarding price that the power company has to pay for killowatts from those farms. IOW Duke gets a great deal. Look up who our governor used to work for and it will all make sense.

I live amongst rural farmers who go back several generations and have never heard such stupidity come out of their mouths. But stupid knows no boundaries.:shrug:


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

wiscto said:


> Solar farms are for deserts. Very limited ecological impact, naturally sunny, what the heck are they doing in NC? I realize they get plenty of sun in NC, but doesn't the west have issues with brown outs these days? Go soak up some sun in the desert, geniuses.


Maybe you should tell the Germans solar is just for the desert. http://www.energyrefuge.com/blog/massive-solar-pv-farm-opens-in-germany/

Or some of my neighbors here in Wisconsin.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> Yes it sure is when the material they get is from
> *FREELANCERS AND BLOGGERS~!*


The story came from the local paper
http://www.roanoke-chowannewsherald...urce=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link


----------



## Agriculture (Jun 8, 2015)

> Members of the public in Woodland, North Carolina


They're not breaking any stereotypes down there.
I love the idea of solar, but I do have to admit that the panels are an eyesore. Wind turbines on the other hand don't look all that bad to me. I've seen some of the big farms in CA, and they're kind of cool. I wouldn't want them in every picturesque view or in all directions, but here and there they are not too bad.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They didn't have problems with the other solar farms already there, and the "town" only has a population of about 850.
> 
> My high school had more people


So they don't matter?
My town is smaller than that, and we wouldn't want that garbage here
It'll just go broke like all the other solar scams pushed by Obama and paid for by us.
Then the town will be dead, the thieves in Washington will move on to another small town that doesn't matter to them.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> I am totally stumped at how you got that out of the article. Poking at bit of fun at the mind blowing ignorance maybe, especially on the part of the science teacher who ought to know better. It didn't have anything at all to do with the global climate deal.
> 
> This is right up there with Leonardo DiCaprio not knowing about Chinooks. Y'all thought that was pretty hilarious. A science teacher thinking it's possible to soak up all the sun's rays and leave the plants to starve is pretty crazy and funny too.


Destroying a small town is funny to you too huh?


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

IMHO - Whoever owns the land should be able to do with it as they wish. If the property owner wants to build a solar farm, so be it or do the lot of you not believe in property rights?

WWW


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

wy_white_wolf said:


> IMHO - Whoever owns the land should be able to do with it as they wish. If the property owner wants to build a solar farm, so be it or do the lot of you not believe in property rights?
> 
> WWW


Only their own. But I understand the need for zoning and proper siting of things like this. Of course the decisions should be based on rational thought and not the idea that we'll somehow run out of sunshine.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

I am with the property owners. If they want to build a solar farm, or, strip mine the place for coal, it is their right. (of course, they should be liable for any damage to neighboring property as a result of their actions)


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

Agriculture said:


> They're not breaking any stereotypes down there.
> I love the idea of solar, but I do have to admit that the panels are an eyesore. Wind turbines on the other hand don't look all that bad to me. I've seen some of the big farms in CA, and they're kind of cool. I wouldn't want them in every picturesque view or in all directions, but here and there they are not too bad.


 Guess everyone is entitled to their opinion, personally I believe solar panels look a whole lot better than those gawd-awful wind turbines. Plus they have a fraction of the maintenence issues,and a much longer lifespan. 
Got a 1KW solar array on my roof, and it looks pretty nice in my opinion. The reduction in my power bill is a nice bonus also.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

mmoetc said:


> Only their own. But I understand the need for zoning and proper siting of things like this. Of course the decisions should be based on rational thought and not the idea that we'll somehow run out of sunshine.


Nobody thinks we are running out of sunshine, that's just the spin the lefties put on it to mock those who don't agree with the scam


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

greg273 said:


> Guess everyone is entitled to their opinion, personally I believe solar panels look a whole lot better than those gawd-awful wind turbines. Plus they have a fraction of the maintenence issues,and a much longer lifespan.
> Got a 1KW solar array on my roof, and it looks pretty nice in my opinion. The reduction in my power bill is a nice bonus also.


If solar is so good, why did all the solar companies Obama backed go belly up?


----------



## susieneddy (Sep 2, 2011)

Cornhusker said:


> If solar is so good, why did all the solar companies Obama backed go belly up?


this is one reason:

In 2010, China produced enough panels to generate 10,922 megawatts of electricity (about five times the capacity of the Hoover Dam), equivalent to 45 percent of new solar panel production worldwide. By 2012, that had risen to 20,903 megawatts, or 56 percent of total global production. As Chinese factories churned out panels, prices around the world fell. Between 2009 and 2011, the price of solar panels dropped from $2.79 to $1.59 per watt, pushing many American solar companies into bankruptcy.


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

Cornhusker said:


> If solar is so good, why did all the solar companies Obama backed go belly up?


Good doesn't equal profitability

WWW


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

i totally agree with the town. 
And I have proof: We were off grid for many years and still have solar panels. 
I never tan. I stay pearly white year round. 

There you go: proof positive that the solar panels are sucking up the all the available sunshine. :heh:


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Maybe I misread the article but the comment about sucking up the sunshine came from a science teacher, kinda wonder what is going on in the public schools. 

Other than that seems the questions raised were valid and if the town declines to rezone that should be up to them. There are already two solar farms in the area, so it doesn't seem they are adverse to the idea.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

no really said:


> Maybe I misread the article but the comment about sucking up the sunshine came from a science teacher, kinda wonder what is going on in the public schools.
> 
> Other than that seems the questions raised were valid and if the town declines to rezone that should be up to them. There are already two solar farms in the area, so it doesn't seem they are adverse to the idea.


Well since they already approved two other solar installations before this one came up for a vote, it is safe to assume that the "teacher" doesn't represent the population of the town. And who knows, maybe he/she was being facetious and nobody got it.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Cornhusker said:


> So they don't matter?
> My town is smaller than that, and we wouldn't want that garbage here
> It'll just go broke like all the other solar scams pushed by Obama and paid for by us.
> Then the town will be dead, the thieves in Washington will move on to another small town that doesn't matter to them.


They didn't mind the ones already there, and they made the ridiculous comments.

Obama had nothing to do with any of it, and bringing him into every topic makes you look silly sometimes.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Agriculture said:


> They're not breaking any stereotypes down there.
> I love the idea of solar, but I do have to admit that the panels are an eyesore. Wind turbines on the other hand don't look all that bad to me. I've seen some of the big farms in CA, and they're kind of cool. I wouldn't want them in every picturesque view or in all directions, but here and there they are not too bad.


They are pretty cool. We drove through a big field of them on our way to Chicago, I think they were in Indiana? It was really impressive seeing them up close like that, they are enormous.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

basketti said:


> i totally agree with the town.
> And I have proof: We were off grid for many years and still have solar panels.
> I never tan. I stay pearly white year round.
> 
> There you go: proof positive that the solar panels are sucking up the all the available sunshine. :heh:


Hrm maybe we need solar panels? Knocking back the sunshine a bit here in the summer wouldn't be such a bad thing!


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

MO_cows said:


> Well since they already approved two other solar installations before this one came up for a vote, it is safe to assume that the "teacher" doesn't represent the population of the town. And who knows, maybe he/she was being facetious and nobody got it.


Since her husband doubled down on it I doubt it.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They didn't mind the ones already there, and they made the ridiculous comments.
> 
> Obama had nothing to do with any of it, and bringing him into every topic makes you look silly sometimes.


The town doesn't want them
Why force it on them?
Did you even read the link from the local paper I posted?
Apparently they are in a different place, and the town doesn't want them.
Too bad the left doesn't believe in letting people decide for themselves....oh wait....just not everybody


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> Since her husband doubled down on it I doubt it.


I'm glad you are all for forcing others to do what they don't want with their town.
Just like a typical "progressive"


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Cornhusker said:


> The town doesn't want them
> Why force it on them?
> Did you even read *the link from the local paper I posted*?
> Apparently they are in a different place, and the town doesn't want them.
> Too bad the left doesn't believe in letting people decide for themselves....oh wait....just not everybody


It's the same link that was in the OP
I read it the first time it was posted, and it doesn't change anything I said

No one is "forcing" anything on them.
The story is about their ignorance evidenced by the reasons they gave.

From the OP:


> A US town has rejected a proposal for a solar farm following public concerns.
> Members of the public in Woodland, North Carolina, expressed their fear and mistrust at the proposal to allow Strata Solar Company to build a solar farm off Highway 258.
> During the Woodland Town Council meeting, one local man, Bobby Mann, said solar farms would suck up all the energy from the sun and businesses would not go to Woodland, http://www.roanoke-chowannewsherald...urce=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It's the same link that was in the OP
> I read it the first time it was posted, and it doesn't change anything I said
> 
> No one is "forcing" anything on them.
> ...


No "ignorance", the "sucking up sunshine" bit was kind of a BS sling, not what was actually said.
I understand people's concerns
Property values are going down, the town is dying, people are moving out and the greedy left doesn't care


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Cornhusker said:


> If solar is so good, why did all the solar companies Obama backed go belly up?


Because they were designed, formed and construction started - in about a month. Not usually the best long-term business model.

They were designed to be part of the _stimulus plan_, to _quickly_ create jobs and at least make Americans, _think_, we weren't going completely down the toilet.

We might be swirling, but we haven't gone the tubes yet!


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Cornhusker said:


> No "ignorance", the "sucking up sunshine" bit was kind of a BS sling, *not what was actually said.*
> I understand people's concerns
> Property values are going down, the town is dying, people are moving out and the greedy left doesn't care


So where's *your* evidence of what they "actually said"?

Why would the local paper lie?
People say lots of stupid things and I have no trouble believing they said what is claimed


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Cornhusker said:


> No "ignorance", the "sucking up sunshine" bit was kind of a BS sling, not what was actually said.
> I understand people's concerns
> Property values are going down, the town is dying, people are moving out and the greedy left doesn't care


Ok, so the town is dying. So what? That's been happening in towns across America, since it's inception, for various reasons.

Maybe solar panels is the best thing for it. Donald Trump is not going to build a factory there.



> the greedy left doesn't care


It's good, that no individual or Corporation, from the Right, is willing or able to take advantage of a 30% tax credit, or other incentives, for solar. That almost sound too capitalistic, anyway.

Besides, who wants electricity, that's free to produce?


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Wind farms are ugly. I rather look at smoke stacks on a coal fueled electric plant.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

plowjockey said:


> Ok, so the town is dying. So what? That's been happening in towns across America, since it's inception, for various reasons.
> 
> Maybe solar panels is the best thing for it. Donald Trump is not going to build a factory there.
> 
> ...


Free huh? A guy I know installed a serious solar array, it was $40k but he got about $20k covered by various programs and tax credits. Those big wind turbines are million dollar units. Nothing in this world is free my friend, there is a cost one way or the other.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

MO_cows said:


> Free huh? A guy I know installed a serious solar array, it was $40k but he got about $20k covered by various programs and tax credits. Those big wind turbines are million dollar units. Nothing in this world is free my friend, there is a cost one way or the other.


I priced one of those big arrays from a coupla different contractors. Then I get a call a few weeks later from the power company wanting to buy my future carbon credits. Did your friend get a call too?


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Cornhusker said:


> If solar is so good, why did all the solar companies Obama backed go belly up?


 because they were just fronts for a money laundering scheme .
at least, that is what I think they were


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

City Bound said:


> because they were just fronts for a money laundering scheme .
> at least, that is what I think they were


Do you have any evidence for that at all?


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

City Bound said:


> because they were just fronts for a money laundering scheme .


 No, it is because they could not compete with Chinese manufacturers and their heavily subsidized solar industry.


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

http://www.snopes.com/north-carolina-town-rejects-solar-panels/

If you read this it'll clear up a lot of the BS

WWW


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

wy_white_wolf said:


> http://www.snopes.com/north-carolina-town-rejects-solar-panels/
> 
> If you read this it'll clear up a lot of the BS
> 
> WWW


Uh, that's hideous. I wouldn't want to look at that, either.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

wy_white_wolf said:


> http://www.snopes.com/north-carolina-town-rejects-solar-panels/
> 
> If you read this it'll clear up a lot of the BS
> 
> WWW


Snopes said the same thing we all said here so I am not sure what you mean about clean up the BS? The science teacher said what she said. And it is disturbing that a woman teaching science in the school system really has no idea how solar panels work nor how photosynthesis does either. And her husband was no better informed. And then there was the cancer claim.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> Do you have any evidence for that at all?


Obama was involved, that's evidence right there.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> Snopes said the same thing we all said here so I am not sure what you mean about clean up the BS? The science teacher said what she said. And it is disturbing that a woman teaching science in the school system really has no idea how solar panels work nor how photosynthesis does either. And her husband was no better informed. And then there was the cancer claim.


Do you hate all small town people, or just those who don't go along with your team?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Just for curiosity sake I googled the town. They are in the middle of absolute nowhere. Kids are leaving because there is nothing there. There are plenty of chicken houses and a big old hog farm with a nice big stinky lagoon in the area. If I had to choose between living next door to the solar farm or the hog farm I would take the solar one any day.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> Just for curiosity sake I googled the town. They are in the middle of absolute nowhere. Kids are leaving because there is nothing there. There are plenty of chicken houses and a big old hog farm with a nice big stinky lagoon in the area. If I had to choose between living next door to the solar farm or the hog farm I would take the solar one any day.


What is it with your crusade against this town?
Why are you so horrible and hateful towards it's people?
You've mocked them, called them ignorant and carried on like your mother-in-law lives there.
Why the hatred?


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

MO_cows said:


> Free huh? A guy I know installed a serious solar array, it was $40k but he got about $20k covered by various programs and tax credits. Those big wind turbines are million dollar units. Nothing in this world is free my friend, there is a cost one way or the other.


Reread my post and comprehend.

Solar (and wind) cost *nothing* to produce electricity. Nada, zip. Zero.

Of course they cost money to build, install and maintain. What doesn't?

A coal fired power plant certainly does not produce for free. It has to have coal to run.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

plowjockey said:


> Reread my post and comprehend.
> 
> Solar (and wind) cost *nothing* to produce electricity. Nada, zip. Zero.
> 
> ...


And Obama declared war on coal, swearing to take down the coal industry.
I wonder if he cares how many jobs that would eliminate?
Nah, he doesn't care


----------



## Lisa in WA (Oct 11, 2004)

Cornhusker said:


> What is it with your crusade against this town?
> Why are you so horrible and hateful towards it's people?
> You've mocked them, called them ignorant and carried on like your mother-in-law lives there.
> Why the hatred?


Why are you being so dramatic? And why do you even care?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

basketti said:


> Why are you being so dramatic? And why do you even care?


I guess because I was raised in a small community, and I raised my kids in a small town.
It really irritates me when some internet know it all belittles the people in small towns just out of pure hatred and meanness.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> Just for curiosity sake I googled the town. They are in the middle of absolute nowhere. Kids are leaving because there is nothing there. There are plenty of chicken houses and a big old hog farm with a nice big stinky lagoon in the area. If I had to choose between living next door to the solar farm or the hog farm I would take the solar one any day.


Doesn't sound to me like they need to change a thing....


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Patchouli said:


> Just for curiosity sake I googled the town. They are in the middle of absolute nowhere. Kids are leaving because there is nothing there. There are plenty of chicken houses and a big old hog farm with a nice big stinky lagoon in the area. If I had to choose between living next door to the solar farm or the hog farm I would take the solar one any day.


How do you know the lagoon stinks? I have family and friends in the hog farming business and properly maintained, the lagoons have almost no odor. I work on several farms each year helping out when I can. That is a very prejudicial blanket statement.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Cornhusker said:


> I guess because I was raised in a small community, and I raised my kids in a small town.
> It really irritates me when some internet know it all belittles the people in small towns just out of pure hatred and meanness.


It has nothing to do with hatred or meanness.
They said some stupid, funny stuff.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

To be fair there are some scientist that say that dirty electricity and EMFs can cause cancer. So does everything I use but only in California. Maybe that teacher was from there or something and just has to get with the Carolina program instead. 


just trying to help her out a bit is all.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It has nothing to do with hatred or meanness.
> They said some stupid, funny stuff.


So of course, she just digs in and mocks the entire town
What a nice person she must be


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Cornhusker said:


> So of course, she just digs in and mocks the entire town
> What a nice person she must be


Yeah, you'd never mock entire groups of people, cause you're too nice, huh?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Yeah, you'd never mock entire groups of people, cause you're too nice, huh?



Small town and rural people built this country, they don't deserve to be badmouthed by some city slicker.
I don't like bullies or gasbags.
If that makes me bad, then I'm bad.
(BTW, who did I mock?)


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

nchobbyfarm said:


> How do you know the lagoon stinks? I have family and friends in the hog farming business and properly maintained, the lagoons have almost no odor. I work on several farms each year helping out when I can. That is a very prejudicial blanket statement.


I have yet to have ever experienced a scent free hog farm unless the hogs are on pasture. Please let me know where these magical places exist. Trust me I have been around plenty of hog farms and they stink to the high heavens. And I live in the middle of Tyson chicken house land and those are some of the foulest smelling things on the planet.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It has nothing to do with hatred or meanness.
> They said some stupid, funny stuff.


I guess some people around here never laugh at ******* jokes either since they take it all so personally. 

I live in a small rural county near a town of 100 people. And they can be pretty funny sometimes. But I like them and respect them and get along with them all just fine. They think I am pretty crazy sometimes too with my "yaks" and other weird animals and my pigs on grass. I don't take it personal.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

mreynolds said:


> To be fair there are some scientist that say that dirty electricity and EMFs can cause cancer. So does everything I use but only in California. Maybe that teacher was from there or something and just has to get with the Carolina program instead.
> 
> 
> just trying to help her out a bit is all.


I have heard of EMFs being a problem. I think those come from power lines and the big transformers though don't they? I don't think solar panels actually emit EMFs.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Cornhusker said:


> *Small town and rural people built this country*, they don't deserve to be badmouthed by some city slicker.
> I don't like bullies or gasbags.
> If that makes me bad, then I'm bad.
> (BTW, who did I mock?)


That has nothing to do with this topic.
This is about some stupid remarks made by a few *individuals*

You're the only one trying to turn it into something against the whole town, along with some global conspiracy involving BO


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Patchouli said:


> I have yet to have ever experienced a scent free hog farm unless the hogs are on pasture. Please let me know where these magical places exist. Trust me I have been around plenty of hog farms and they stink to the high heavens. And I live in the middle of Tyson chicken house land and those are some of the foulest smelling things on the planet.


I did not address chicken houses. I did address a blanket statement that hog farm lagoons are big and stinky. I never said odorless, but to declare all lagoons as a source of foul odors is wrong. Maybe the farms you visit should employ different management techniques. NCSU has been helping farmers for decades with research and management techniques.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

And in some areas even home owners can have lagoons for their wastes to go in form the toilet etc. and if maintained PROPERLY they should also not stink either. So do many other types of lagoons in hog farms etc. One should never make these planet statements when so many on here know the difference and have experienced many from all over the country and the world as far as that goes. Too many on here are more world then some and know just what they are taking about. Never make such planet stamens as lagoons stink. And I am surrounded by many chicken barns East, West, North, and South and have yet to smell them. ALL within a 2 mile radius too. @ of them are less then a mile away. LOL


----------



## AdmiralD7S (Nov 1, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> I have heard of EMFs being a problem. I think those come from power lines and the big transformers though don't they? I don't think solar panels actually emit EMFs.



Electro-magnetic fields occur any time there is electricity going somewhere. In fact, a magnetic field and a current must coexist. If there is an electrical current, then there will be a magnetic field (this is how maglocks on many 2-door bank front doors are controlled). If there is a magnetic field, there will be electrical current (this is how a magneto keeps your push mower running without a battery).

The thing to note is current and magnetic fields are proportional. A large current will generate a large magnetic field, and vise versa. Solar panels themselves will have some EMF from the power they generate, but I suspect (but I can not say for sure) that it is negligible for each individual panel. My guess is that EMFs are only significantly strong where the panels come together (where banks meet and where the whole system is connected to the electrical grid).

What problems do you believe that EMFs cause?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

I would sure hate to see my whole community get judged like is being done here, based on a stupid sounding comment from one person....

We've got some doozies, too, but they are by far the minority. I don't know how the press always finds them but there is apparently some "hick-dar" where they can find the most embarrassing representative of a community and quote them or get them on video.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Patchouli said:


> A science teacher thinking it's possible to soak up all the sun's rays and leave the plants to starve is pretty crazy and funny too.



What's funny is that some people would make fun of her for stating a fact. 
Please educate yourself on the science. 

We use this fact to reduce herbicide use in fields.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They didn't have problems with the other solar farms already there, and the "town" only has a population of about 850.
> 
> 
> 
> My high school had more people



So only big government should have rights. 
Well at least you are consistent.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> What's funny is that some people would make fun of her for stating a fact.
> *Please educate yourself* on the science. [/B]
> 
> We use this fact to reduce herbicide use in fields.


She wasn't talking about plants in the shade of the panels, and unless it's her property, the plants there are really none of her business

Knowing the science is what made the remarks so ridiculous



> AmericanStand:
> So only big government should have rights.
> Well at least you are consistent.


I didn't mention governments nor rights, so I have no idea where you came up with that


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> She wasn't talking about plants in the shade of the panels, and unless it's her property, the plants there are really none of her business
> 
> Knowing the science is what made the remarks so ridiculous
> 
> ...



So you don't know this discussion is about how a small town is making a decision but you do know what some teacher miles away is thinking ?
You seem to have very special abilities.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> So you don't know this discussion is about how a small town is making a decision but you do know what some teacher miles away is thinking ?
> You seem to have very special abilities.


You're remarks were about what *I *was supposedly thinking, but you were incorrect.

The reports were about the ridiculous statements they made while protesting the rezoning.

Plants will grow even in the shade, so if that's what she meant, she's still wrong.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Actually the headline is misleading, one idiot in town said that.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> Actually the headline is misleading, *one idiot* in town said that.


There were two, Bobby and Jane.
It's in the OP



> one local man, *Bobby* Mann, said solar farms would suck up all the energy from the sun and businesses would not go to Woodland, the Roanoke-Chowan News Herald reported.
> *Jane *Mann, a retired science teacher, said she was concerned the panels would prevent plants in the area from photosynthesizing, s


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-up-all-the-energy-from-the-sun-a6771526.html

I've seen some long diatribes on another site about how the town is located in "the most liberal part of NC" along with the population and other demographics, and several agreed and added their comments, but they are talking about "Woodlawn" and the story is about "Woodland". 

It makes them look really stupid in addition to the lame comments they made about the town


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

AdmiralD7S said:


> Electro-magnetic fields occur any time there is electricity going somewhere. In fact, a magnetic field and a current must coexist. If there is an electrical current, then there will be a magnetic field (this is how maglocks on many 2-door bank front doors are controlled). If there is a magnetic field, there will be electrical current (this is how a magneto keeps your push mower running without a battery).
> 
> The thing to note is current and magnetic fields are proportional. A large current will generate a large magnetic field, and vise versa. Solar panels themselves will have some EMF from the power they generate, but I suspect (but I can not say for sure) that it is negligible for each individual panel. My guess is that EMFs are only significantly strong where the panels come together (where banks meet and where the whole system is connected to the electrical grid).
> 
> What problems do you believe that EMFs cause?


I don't think a solar panel array will spill any EMF over to neighboring homes. One of those big towers strung near your house definitely can though. High EMFs can make you feel bad. Headaches, anxiety and nausea are common side effects of being exposed to high EMFs. I don't think it has any long term affects. I think people make more out of it than is actually there. But the minor effects are pretty well documented.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

MO_cows said:


> I would sure hate to see my whole community get judged like is being done here, based on a stupid sounding comment from one person....
> 
> We've got some doozies, too, but they are by far the minority. I don't know how the press always finds them but there is apparently some "hick-dar" where they can find the most embarrassing representative of a community and quote them or get them on video.


I think that is because they are generally the ones most likely to show up at city meetings and the loudest voices in the room.  I doubt the whole community is that backwards.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

AmericanStand said:


> What's funny is that some people would make fun of her for stating a fact.
> Please educate yourself on the science.
> 
> We use this fact to reduce herbicide use in fields.


What? You use solar panels to soak up the sun in your fields so you can use less herbicides? Seriously? Well that's a new one on me. Please provide a link for that.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> What's funny is that some people would make fun of her for stating a fact.
> Please educate yourself on the science.
> 
> We use this fact to reduce herbicide use in fields.


If you are suggesting shade caused by solar panels or other solid object is going to substantially reduce herbicide usage, I would find that an extremely unlikely notion. Any nearby shade would also reduce general plant growth, not just weed growth.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

In many crops a short-term acting herbicide is used to allow the plants of the crop to get a clean start
The shade from the crops themselves then limits growth of the weeds
That reduces the need for longer acting herbicides or additional treatments. 
Yes my crops are solar collectors. Gathering the suns energy and turning it into use full products


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> In many crops a short-term acting herbicide is used to allow the plants of the crop to get a clean start
> The shade from the crops themselves then limits growth of the weeds
> That reduces the need for longer acting herbicides or additional treatments.
> Yes my crops are solar collectors. Gathering the suns energy and turning it into use full products


Your assertion is accurate but simplistic. It fails to also take into account that once the plants are larger than the weeds, they starve the weeds of nutrients and local CO2, as well as shade. Solar panel shade will not decarbonate or denutrify the soil.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> I have heard of EMFs being a problem. I think those come from power lines and the big transformers though don't they? I don't think solar panels actually emit EMFs.


I cant say for sure but I have heard that some scientists believe they do.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> In many crops a short-term acting herbicide is used to allow the plants of the crop to get a clean start
> The shade from the crops themselves then limits growth of the weeds
> That reduces the need for longer acting herbicides or additional treatments.
> Yes my crops are solar collectors. Gathering the suns energy and turning it into use full products


So you really aren't talking about solar *panels* at all, but just playing word games.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I was talking about shade.

I'm fairly sure a weed being shaded out does not care if the shade comes from a solar panel or a plant. 

I don't have a link or proof for that assertion let's just call it intuition.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> I was talking about shade.
> 
> I'm fairly sure a weed being shaded out does not care if the shade comes from a solar panel or a plant.
> 
> I don't have a link or proof for that assertion let's just call it intuition.


Is your assertion that solar panels are harmful because of the shade they cast? That would't matter in the desert. Further, coal plants are fairly large and cast a shadow themselves, and coal mining can create environmental damage.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Heritagefarm said:


> Your assertion is accurate but simplistic. It fails to also take into account that once the plants are larger than the weeds, they starve the weeds of nutrients and local CO2, as well as shade. Solar panel shade will not decarbonate or denutrify the soil.



True but you have to stop somewhere. For instance you left out the part about some plants create chemicals that inhibit other from growing near them. 

It's a great topic that I'm always interested in but I will stop now.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Heritagefarm said:


> Is your assertion that solar panels are harmful because of the shade they cast? That would't matter in the desert. Further, coal plants are fairly large and cast a shadow themselves, and coal mining can create environmental damage.



No my assertion in that Jane Mann was probably accurate and truthfull when she said she had seen plants harmed by the shade of solar panels. 
I suppose those panels are harmful to those plants but I don't find that to be a big deal. 
I don't think the panel farm in the OP is located in the desert but I still don't see the harm as likely to be anyone but the landowners problem. 
They seem willing to deal with it.


----------



## OffGridCooker (Jan 29, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-up-all-the-energy-from-the-sun-a6771526.html


I am skeptical!
Sounds like a false flag plant to "kookify" the people in evolved.
Like the racist plants that show up at tea part events.
Another tactic the dishonest left uses is to find a kook and present them as being just like everyone that opposes them.
Do you reall think that a majority of the people rejected the project for such nutty ideas?
It is possible but I doubt it, considering how dishonest the environmentalist left is.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Do you reall think that *a majority of the people* rejected the project for such nutty ideas?


A "majority of the people" had nothing to do with a town council vote.
Most probably don't care at all what others do on their own land.

The crazy ones got the attention, but no one claimed they were a "majority" It's just one of the more notable reasons given



> US town rejects solar panels amid fears they 'suck up all the energy from the sun'


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

To me it sounds like some people think the panel farms are ugly Nd are trotting out every negative in hopes of stopping it. 
Trying to convince others the bad outweighs the good. 
In small towns it doesn't take much to make things happen one wY or another. 
If the teacher was popular it might get voted out simply because they don't want to upset her. 
I've sat in on meeting where the reasons for doing things were far more silly than these.


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

I went to Snopes and got a whole different perspective on this subject...


----------



## OffGridCooker (Jan 29, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> A "majority of the people" had nothing to do with a town council vote.
> Most probably don't care at all what others do on their own land.
> 
> The crazy ones got the attention, but no one claimed they were a "majority" It's just one of the more notable reasons given


The statement is clear in its intention to kookify the town.
It said
"US town rejects solar panels amid fears they 'suck up all the energy from the sun'"

The statement should have read town rejects solar panels, and a nut said they"suck up all the energy from the sun"

But if they had been honest it would have not been a story.
I see what they are doing and it is dishonest journalism.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

OffGridCooker said:


> The statement is clear in its intention to kookify the town.
> It said
> "US town rejects solar panels amid fears they 'suck up all the energy from the sun'"
> 
> ...


You can call it "dishonest" but the actual words prove you're incorrect.

Why would the local paper want to "kookify" the town?


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Why would the local paper want to "kookify" the town?



Perhaps you should ask them ?


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> No my assertion in that Jane Mann was probably accurate and truthfull when she said she had seen plants harmed by the shade of solar panels.
> I suppose those panels are harmful to those plants but I don't find that to be a big deal.
> I don't think the panel farm in the OP is located in the desert but I still don't see the harm as likely to be anyone but the landowners problem.
> They seem willing to deal with it.


 Well then, we appear to agree on this. 



OffGridCooker said:


> The statement is clear in its intention to kookify the town.
> It said
> "US town rejects solar panels amid fears they 'suck up all the energy from the sun'"
> 
> ...


 And exactly how much journalism is honest journalism? You seem to have an unhealthy fear of the left - which is quite a lot of the population I might add.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Perhaps you should ask them ?


I don't think they did what they are accused of.
I think they reported what was said at the meeting because it was likely the biggest event in the county that day


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

light rain said:


> I went to Snopes and got a whole different perspective on this subject...


I went looking for that on snipes, and I see what you mean.

http://www.snopes.com/north-carolina-town-rejects-solar-panels/
*Bobby Mann said he watched communities dry up when I-95 came along and warned that would happen to Woodland because of the solar farms.

&#8220;You&#8217;re killing your town,&#8221; he said. &#8220;All the young people are going to move out.&#8221;

He said the solar farms would suck up all the energy from the sun and businesses would not come to Woodland.

Comments made by the Manns were widely reproduced across web sites in the United States and internationally. However, Jane Mann's concerns differed slightly from Bobby Mann's, who likened the transformation of the town to the one that occurred when Interstate 95 routed through the area and affected the flow of commerce. While both cited ambient fears about the panels' effect on the local ecosystem, the latter concern spoke more directly to general worries about large-scale changes to the local economy.

*





When I first read the OP article I wondered if it was really that outrageous or if it was a mixture of poor public speaking and poor reporting that made it into a laughable story.

If that was actually the case, then what is closer to the truth is, the man was bemoaning the fact that as the solar farms took over surrounding property and "soaked up all the sun" (which is what they do - capture sunlight for energy) there would be less property available for businesses to come into town and keep the local economy going.

Poorly worded and poorly retold by the newspaper, but not as absurd as it was presented to the meeting.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> *Poorly worded and poorly retold* by the newspaper, but not as absurd as it was presented to the meeting.


They both made the absurd statements according to all sources.
Spinning it won't change reality.
The paper didn't make it up


----------



## OffGridCooker (Jan 29, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They both made the absurd statements according to all sources.
> Spinning it won't change reality.
> The paper didn't make it up


It is possible to have a town of kooks, if so I hope they point out how rare that would be, and not use this as antidotal evidence to paint all small towns as ignorant.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

OffGridCooker said:


> It is possible to have a town of kooks, if so I hope they point out how rare that would be, and not use this as antidotal evidence to paint all small towns as ignorant.


There is no antidote for ignorance


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They both made the absurd statements according to all sources.
> Spinning it won't change reality.
> The paper didn't make it up


Of course the paper didn't "make it up".
They used their words, just as they said them or close to it, while leaving it up to the readers who weren't there to decide on the context and meaning.

The exact same thing happened on this thread. It took a while to decipher that the poster was talking about a literal killing of tyne surrounding vegetation because of the shading from the panels, just like Mann's wife described.
If Mr Mann spent 5 minutes talking about killing the town's economic growth and 5 seconds that had the phrase "sucking up all the sun" in it, and that was the sentence the reporter accurately quoted and chose to print, then he can steadfastly claim he told the truth and at the same time distort the meaning of what was said.
I'm sure you know exactly what I mean. :heh:


----------



## TnAndy (Sep 15, 2005)

Wish this were true.....I have to weed eat under mine to keep the weeds/briars down...and they are pretty much in the shade.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> If Mr Mann spent 5 minutes talking about killing the town's economic growth and 5 seconds that had the phrase "sucking up all the sun" in it, and that was the sentence the reporter accurately quoted and chose to print, then he can steadfastly claim he told the truth and at the same time *distort the meaning of what was said*.
> I'm sure you know exactly what I mean.


You keep trying to claim something was "distorted" when they simply reported what was said. 

It's not "distortion" to leave out non-relevant statements.

The town's population is higher now than it was 40 years ago, and there's really nothing there to attract new businesses


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

It's easy to do............

*"You claim something was reported." 

"It's "distortion" to leave out relevant statements."

"The town's really nothing"*

*No problem, I was in a hurry, so I edited out the poster's name.*
*I think the demonstration quite effective, though, huh?*
*Leaving out key bits of information, sure does make a difference.*

gre:


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> It's easy to do............
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Bearfootfarm View Post
> You claim something was reported.
> ...


It's against the rules to reword posts and present them as actual quotes, so you may want to edit your lie.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> You keep trying to claim something was "distorted" when they simply reported what was said.
> 
> It's not "distortion" to leave out non-relevant statements.
> 
> The town's population is higher now than it was 40 years ago, and there's really nothing there to attract new businesses



Lol yes we know you live by those ideas. 

You are wrong. The problem is in deciding what isn't relevant. 

Let me demonstrate 

Warning the following is a manipulation of BFFs words. 




Bearfootfarm said:


> It's "distortion" to leave out non-relevant statements.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Lol yes we know you live by those ideas.
> 
> You are wrong. The problem is in deciding what isn't relevant.
> 
> ...


See my post above

I'm beginning to think you're just trying to get the thread deleted by intentionally posting lies :nono:

The reporters decided what was relevant to *their* stories.
If you don't like it you should discuss things with them

http://www.roanoke-chowannewsherald.com/


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The reporters decided what was relevant to *their* stories.
> 
> If you don't like it you should discuss things with them]



That was my point the reporters don't report the entire story just what THEY think is relevant. 
They are not here to discuss it with but you are. 
So we get to discuss it.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> That was my point the reporters don't report the entire story just *what THEY think is relevant.*
> They are not here to discuss it with but you are.
> So we get to discuss it.


That's their prerogative, so as I said you need to take it up with them.
Or you can discuss it with someone else.

Once you resort to lies, I'm done


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

Lies are as much about what isn't clearly stated as well as what is an out and out deception. The more subtle vague and edited reporting is probably more damaging because many folks will read it and believe it without fact checking. 

It is important to look for the truth in all situations and not consume "the news" without doing a little research. :hohum:


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

OffGridCooker said:


> I am skeptical!
> Sounds like a false flag plant to "kookify" the people in evolved.
> Like the racist plants that show up at tea part events.
> Another tactic the dishonest left uses is to find a kook and present them as being just like everyone that opposes them.
> ...


I just wanted to tell you how much I genuinely enjoy your posts. They are always entertaining and fascinating.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> You can call it "dishonest" but the actual words prove you're incorrect.
> 
> Why would the local paper want to "kookify" the town?


It's another one of those vast leftwing conspiracies. That science teacher was actually probably a crisis actor with a little extra time on her hands who showed up there to create a news story to make nice decent small town Republicans look kooky. I bet that man wasn't even her her real husband.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

> Claim: Residents of a North Carolina town rejected the local installation of a solar farm over fears the technology was harmful.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That is Snopes actual assessment. http://www.snopes.com/north-carolina-town-rejects-solar-panels/


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> WHAT'S FALSE: Concerns hinged solely on the dangers of solar panels


What is also false is the notion anyone said that was the only reason


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Correct.

This headline from UK didn't say it was the ONLY reason.......they just gave it top billing.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-up-all-the-energy-from-the-sun-a6771526.html


----------



## OffGridCooker (Jan 29, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> There is no antidote for ignorance


We probably agree but I don't think we are talking foolishness, not ignorance.
Ignorance is easily fixed with knowledge.
It is foolishness that is the larger problem.
Even education does not cure foolishness, and intelligence does not shield one from foolishness.
You probably have heard.
" threre is no fool like an educated fool"
Wisdom comes from trial and error over time, of using your intelligence and knowledge.
As smart as you are, you will be even wiser, with 10 more years of life. Hopefully!!
Wisdom is slow, If you personality never admits error, and you don't upgrade your opinion. If you are never wrong you don't need to learn anything. Think Hillary and Obama, (it is possible that they could be right and I may be the fool) 
And we are all fools when young! So being foolish is not "bad" it just may be the stage of life one is in.
The brain works the best at 40 years old, and continues to gain wisdom until?


----------



## OffGridCooker (Jan 29, 2010)

Why is this even a topic here?
Is this some type of antidotal evidence, to prove how ignorant the "red state ********" are.
Is this "find a kook" and present them as main stream country people?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

OffGridCooker said:


> Why is this even a topic here?
> Is this some type of antidotal evidence, to prove how ignorant the "red state ********" are.
> Is this "find a kook" and present them as main stream country people?


Lots of things are topics here, hence the title "*General* Chat".

Only those complaining about it are suggesting it applies to more than the two persons named


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> Correct.
> 
> This headline from UK didn't say it was the ONLY reason.......they just gave it top billing.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-up-all-the-energy-from-the-sun-a6771526.html


Of course they did, since that's the only part that made the story interesting. Otherwise it wouldn't have been reported at all.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's their prerogative, so as I said you need to take it up with them.
> 
> Or you can discuss it with someone else.
> 
> ...



Please point out a lie ?


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Patchouli said:


> It's another one of those vast leftwing conspiracies. That science teacher was actually probably a crisis actor with a little extra time on her hands who showed up there to create a news story to make nice decent small town Republicans look kooky. I bet that man wasn't even her her real husband.



I seldom believe in organized conspiracy. 
But I'm a firm believer in the weakness and self interest of people. 

In this case I would guess the original reporters had a boring story and picked the most interesting phrases to present. 
They probably even justified it to themselves by saying "when they read the whole story they will understand and if they don't read my entire work they are too ignorant to know the truth anyway. "


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

OffGridCooker said:


> Why is this even a topic here?
> Is this some type of antidotal evidence, to prove how ignorant the "red state ********" are.
> Is this "find a kook" and present them as main stream country people?


I explained why it was a topic. I read wr's thread laughing at Leonardo DiCaprio being confused about a Chinook and thinking it was proof of global warming. And then I saw this article and thought it was equally funny. People afraid of solar panels leaving plants to starve from lack of solar rays. 

It was just funny. I guess I am the only person here who is not so wedded to my personal politics that I can't see the humor in both sides of the fence being wrong.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

AmericanStand said:


> I seldom believe in organized conspiracy.
> But I'm a firm believer in the weakness and self interest of people.
> 
> In this case I would guess the original reporters had a boring story and picked the most interesting phrases to present.
> They probably even justified it to themselves by saying "when they read the whole story they will understand and if they don't read my entire work they are too ignorant to know the truth anyway. "


I was just being facetious.  I am with you.


----------

