Hacker News Reader

Comment by Spare_account | Hacker News Reader

Which is a subjective notion, of course. I look at a landscape full of wind turbines and I see the beauty of a species recognising it needed to change.

View on HN

Arguably, but then arguably a landscape covered in mines and coal fired power stations is also beautiful; mountains being moved in aid of making people's lives better, the foundations of centuries of human progress, etc, etc. A 10km by 10km concrete grid could be a beautiful monument to a species that has recognised it needed to master concrete (fantastic stuff concrete, a miracle substance really).

Windmills are a bit of an eyesore compared to a great natural scene.

Ditto, they make me feel like I’m living in a near-future sci-fi film. And let’s be honest, whatever natural beauty once existed in the UK was largely destroyed over the course of millennia.

Yeah so let's destroy pristine nature landscapes with ugly turbines (which kill a lot of birds and cost an arm to decommission). I've seen wild landscapes in Brittany completely ruined by still wind turbines. It's a disgrace.

I'd rather go nuclear in select ugly places.

What is beautiful is good. He who creates ugliness is evil.

>What is beautiful is good. He who creates ugliness is evil.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Indeed and I do not think Anglo Saxon protestants make correct beholders in this regard. Totally subjective I admit. However I stand for my views on aestetics. I think it's an important matter and that it is open for discussion.

Also, I have a deep aversion for relativism.

There is no wilderness in Brittany that I am aware of. Very little anywhere in Europe actually. My point being, man have altered the landscape in that part of the world on a continual basis for thousands of years. Heck, people have been building windmills, the very object you object to, on this land for that long. It seems a bit rich to suddenly stand on principle and proclaim No! This should be banned! What is there left to despoil? Virgin Amazon or Boreal forest? Sure. Brittany? C’mon.

Indeed you are not aware as you have not been there. It's in a border of an old forest. It's known that it kills bird. The visual pollution is really important and those who value technology and convenience over beauty have already done disastrous things to my country. It needs to stop.

I have been. You are referring I suppose to Brocélien. It is an old forest but not in any way wild. (Sa histoire: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forêt_de_Paimpont#Histoire). By "wild" I mean "untouched by man". Those places are worth saving, but there are not very many remaining, and certainly almost none in continental Europe. We should respect our forests and other open spaces, but some windmills is much less of a problem than the alternative.

If we don't destroy the pristine landscapes, were sure as hell going to destroy the pristine planet.

Nuclear is better, though, in the short term.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com