In a recent edition of the Record, I saw that the windmill opponents are grasping at straws again. Mr Villeneuve informed us that he is going to research the ill effects of windmills in the development of young people. The only way this research could be valuable, is if he would be impartial on the subject; by his own admission, however, he is not impartial. Therefore, almost by definition, his conclusion will be less than valuable. Because he will find the result that he wants to find. Let’s pretend we want to find the ill effects of, I don’t know, bees. We will end up seeing stuff about allergic reactions to bee stings, food poisoning through raw honey, or a person with an aversion to flowers because of a bee sting in a flower bed during their childhood. Conclusion: bees are bad. But if you happen to like bees, what is going to be mentioned is how healthy raw honey is or bees pollinating flowers of various plants. Now the conclusion is going to be: bees are good. Both conclusions would be useless because the person doing the work is not impartial.
To go back to Mr. Villeneuve’s project for a minute; I could save him some work because I happen to have proof that windmills are actually very beneficial to the development of young people; it makes them smart and witty. You know the Netherlands? Full of windmills – have been for three or four centuries – my mother-in-law was born and raised there!
George den Dunnen