ForArgyll.com: Argyll's online broadsheet.

Go on let us know, enlighten us … …

Comment posted on Fracking facts: pros, cons and issues by Webcraft

Go on let us know, enlighten us … we’re agog!

Oh no – a troll feeding frenzy. Techroom, it might be interesting to check the IP addresses of the newcomers.

Webcraft also commented

  • It’s not so hard to spoof an IP address. The speed of their response leads me to suspect that these guys are professional doubtmongers, probably working out of some right wing ‘think tank’ in the US.
  • Techroom – thanks.

    I think one thing we can learn from this thread is that there are climate change deniers sitting in the offices of places like the Heartland Institute constantly monitoring the web for any mention of climate change, fracking, MMGW etc – and of course sites like ForArgyll are spidered by Google almost constantly.

    It’s worth remembering that although they make an awful lot of noise there are very few of them. To illustrate, there is currently an e-petition to repeal the Climate Act, and in six weeks it has garnered less than 600 signatures (compared eg with 76,000 who have signed a petition to make financial education part of the school curriculum).

    This is why IMO climate deniers are so dangerous. They are organised, hyperactive compared to the vast majority who accept the consensus, loud, rude and very adept at swamping discussions like this. They need to be actively resisted, not ignored.

  • And – now it has 8+ and 14-ve and has come back. This is not going to work, is it?
  • I have just discovered that one of my early posts on this thread (comment no. 3) is now hidden from view because it has 6 positive and 14 negative ‘comments’.

    This particular post was not particularly controversial, was right on topic and contained some valid general observations on the subject. It has been given a bunch of negative comments presumably by the invading climate change deniers from over the pond and is therefore no longer visible unless you click on the link.

    Here is the post. Tell me why you think this should be hidden because of ‘disapproval spamming’:

    Fracking shale is just another putting off of the inevitable for a few years. We really need to grow up a little as a species and accept that the free ride we’ve had from fossil fuels for the last two centuries is slowing down and will soon stop.

    The real danger is that excitement over a new source of relatively accessible hydrocarbons combined with the continuing recesson in the West will drastically slow down the development of low-carbon technologies, so we will still have nothing in place when the new ‘bonanza’ runs dry.

    The shale gas industry in the UK will be a colourful circus for a while, but even Cuadrilla only estimate that their ‘huge find’ increases the UK’s domestic gas reserves by between 5 and 10 percent. Those who claim our energy problems are now solved are dangerous fantasists.

    Meanwhile, the talk of ‘light touch’ regulation for the frackers is slighly worrying – especially if you live in Lancashire, I would imagine. No further news on exploring the central belt shale deposits is good news AFAIAC – lets see how Lancashire gets on first.

    So – that’s the post that has been hidden ‘by popular request’. It looks as though post no. 2 by Stephen Mackenzie is about to go the same way.

    I think this shows quite clearly that the ‘self moderation’ feature introduced by this site is open to abuse and not fit for purpose.

  • Dr. McKenzie,

    Please don’t dignify the likes of Charles Higley with the label of ‘sceptic’. A sceptic is one who keeps an open mind – indeed, scepticism is the default position of all science, climate science included.

    No, Mr. Higley is a straightforward denier of climate change and the proponent of such tosh as:
    CO2 is plant food and with our climate entering a cooling phase, we will need our crops to have the best advantages they can have with CO2 fertilizing the atmosphere.

    Arguing with people like this or entering into dialogue with them is utterly pointless – their minds are closed. These people are mad evangelists who constantly scan the web for sites like this where climate change issues are raised then fill the comments sections with their pseudo-scientific drivel.

Recent comments by Webcraft

  • Russell admits vehicle element of former Dunoon ferry was indeed publicly funded
    A threnody is a song, hymn or poem of mourning composed or performed as a memorial to a dead person.

    Quite appropriate. The promise that was the original ForArgyll is indeed quite dead.

    I think I will stick to the Cowal Courier from now on. That’s a proper news site that seems to have your measure.

    Toodle pip!

  • Russell admits vehicle element of former Dunoon ferry was indeed publicly funded
    Oh do cheer up Newsroom! The hybrid ferries are non-military ships being built on the Clyde. Surely something to cheer about?

    Re. your concerns about staff training – I think you will find that staff require retraining whenever a new vessel is brought into service . . . each boat is different.

    And please do stop all this ‘we hear rumours’ rubbish. No-one believes you. Come up with facts and their sources like a real journalist or stop smearing doom and gloom. Less fuel is less fuel. And the new ferries are also designed to have lower maintenance costs.

    Now, here’s some more potential good news on the ship technology front for Scotland . . . CMAL has been commissioned to carry out a feasibility study for Scottish Enterprise to evaluate the technical and commercial possibilities of using hydrogen fuel cells to power zero emission ferries. If this goes ahead it could put Scotland at the forefront of another new technology, with the consequent design, development and manufacturing of hybrid engines being located here. Great news – though I expect ForArgyll will want to talk it down.

  • New Mobile Theme for ForArgyll.com
    The mobile version isn’t triggered by my iPad, which is a good thing – but it does come up in an iPhone emulator I tried.

    Strangely enough specific mobile versions of websites (as opposed to apps – which are here to stay) may be a relatively short-lived phenomenon. As bandwidth on phones increases dramatically and most displays become HD 1024 pixels wide or more so standard websites become more and more useable. I don’t come across many that don’t display well on the iPad.

    A mobile version was far more essential on older 320 pixel devices like Nokias, but these will die out. The non-mobile version of this site (for example) is quite useable on a new smartphone once it is rotated horizontally.

    Apps that do specific things on mobile devices are another matter – they are definitly here to stay. And for blog sites like this the mobile version definitley increases useability (but see below).

    Some feedback – I couldn’t view the comments on the mobile version, but I was using an emulator rather than an actual smartphone. Can other people view and post comments OK on the new mobile site using an iPhone or Andriod phone?

  • Clyde shipyards at risk – news by year end
    Just testing the comments function on the mobile version of the site.

    (Using an online iPhone emulator)

  • Scottish Conservatives underline common ownership of Saltire
    It is Scottish Labour that really needs to up its game dramatically if it wants to keep a credible presense in Holyrood in the 2016 election. What Ruthie and the Scottish Conservative Party do is of little relevance.

    According to Newsnet Scotland a recent poll shows Westminster voting intentions in Scotland as:

    SNP 39%
    Labour 33%
    Conservative 16%
    LibDem 6%
    Others 7%

    If this doesn’t ring alarm bells for Labour nothing will.

powered by SEO Super Comments

· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·


Related Articles & Comments