One person in the r/Conspiracy subreddit wanted to discuss the pros and cons of wind energy — and the commenters were ready to engage.
The poster shared a link to an article from an online opinion publication, Front Page Magazine. In the article, the author made several unsubstantiated and outright false claims about the so-called threats of wind energy.
For example, he argued that felling trees to build turbine blades was counterproductive to the efforts of shrinking carbon pollution, as forests serve as natural carbon sinks. And while it's true that forest conservation is imperative to delay the rising temperatures of the atmosphere, the rate of deforestation is nowhere near what he was suggesting.
Even the article he linked to, which discussed the felling of trees for turbines in Scotland, stated clearly that the trees cut down to empower wind farms took up less than 1% of the country's wooded area.
Nevertheless, the original poster remained convinced, calling wind energy "harmful" and saying it's "not really clean at all." Commenters were quick to push back on the false idea.
"This is not completely true," one wrote. "Windmills will produce energy for 20ish years and it takes less then a year for it to produce the same energy that was spent to create it."
And importantly, they pointed out, researchers and scientists "are getting closer and closer to recycling the magnets and wings. It's definitely possible to do."
One common question about wind power is whether or not...
WILLIAMSPORT — The president judge of Snyder and Union counties has accused a criminal defendant from California and his media companies of embarking on a lie-filled attack aimed at destroying her....