Comment posted Caithness wind farm rejection by Robert Wakeham.
By mentioning clippers you’re tempting fate; wait for some luminary to point out that as the wind doesn’t blow all the time sailing boats are utterly impractical and would never catch on.
Robert Wakeham also commented
- It takes one luminary to recognise another, but I do try to get my facts right, Malcolm, because I think presenting stuff as fact when a little bit of checking would have proved it wasn’t is really rather tedious after a while. Thames barges seem to have been remarkably successful, and fit for purpose, in their time – the programme stated there were thousands of them. Your comparison of my comments on Diego Garcia with the defence of the Falklands isn’t comparing apples with apples, and unfortunately this is a habit of yours. A long time ago, when I was very young, my father was fond of reminding me that it’s better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and prove it, and while that was designed to deflect annoying questions it can be used in the context of some of your less well considered pronouncements.
- Henri, the Argyll settlement pattern doesn’t fit your model, and there will always be a need for transport of some sort.
- Malcolm: ‘nowadays we we would go in there with millions of pounds (actually probably US dollars) worth of equipment and ‘rescue’ them and give them a lovely home somewhere else – sorted!’ No, Malcolm, we wouldn’t – going on our track record. If they’re a small population, in a remote place, we might just repeat our treatment of the population of the Chagos archipelago (Diego Garcia) where we drop kicked the people into a Port Louis slum in Mauritius so we could rent their atoll on a long lease to the US Dept of Defense. Hah! you might say, that was in the bad old colonial times; so it was, but we’ve denied those people their rights to live in their own homeland ever since – and even denied them decent compensation.
- It’ll be an even greater achievement if the next revision of the building regulations can manage to impose the next step in achieving increasingly energy efficient buildings without further adding to the opacity and complexity of the regulations.
I can’t help thinking that – if the tightening of energy standards for buildings was matched in the vehicle construction and use regulations – the big high performance ‘gas guzzling’ 4WD car would be an extinct species by now
- Malcolm, the answer is not to provide the sort of fodder that encourages this kind of response.
Recent comments by Robert Wakeham
- Sarwar makes decision in favour of his party
By wielding that old catch-phrase ‘bitter together’ you conveniently forget how many of the ‘no’ voters want to see a strong, vigorous Scotland but without casting off from Britain and throwing away the lines.
Strange how so much of what you spout seems to be motivated by an underlying bitterness all of your own – an irresistible urge to indulge in sour comment and petty back-biting, NCH.
- A83 Latest – closure [updating regularly]
So if all the other options were ‘ridiculously expensive’ are we stuck with the status quo?
Or is it, perhaps, that what is ‘ridiculously expensive’ is in fact relatively commonplace in some other European countries?
- MoD still to give ‘definitive answer’ to cause of ‘loud bang’ in Western Isles
The ‘stray’ was apparently a Latvian cargo plane that lost contact over Kent, but what seems to be causing concern is the number of Russian military aircraft, including refuellers, flying around European international airspace without filing flight plans, with no transponders, and maintaining radio silence.
- Forestry Commission says A82 Glen Righ landslips not result of forestry felling
This is a good demonstration of the benefits of forestation – even in places where it can’t provide the full answer.
- Scottish Labour Leadership: the timeline is Murphy’s headache
Not sure about medical terms, but authoritarian might be close to the mark, and it wouldn’t be the first time that justifiable nationalism morphed into something a lot less attractive.
powered by SEO Super Comments