What are your thoughts on the new trump course?

First topic message reminder :

So trump has officially opened his new course on the menie estate and among the first players to tee off were Monty and Paul Lawrie. It is sad to see that Paul lawrie makes another decision which only someone unable to comprehend a wider world could make. For Monty, associating with the obtuse just seems normal and unfortunately he seems comfortable with this.

Lawrie skips the US open and then fails to realise what a terrible raping of the land he is condoning. He can help all the young Scottish folks in the world but it does not seem to help him to expand his mind.

There is no doubt I will get the usual backlash from those who see environmentalists as over sensitive or only repeating what the guardian told us to. But I would hope everyone, regardless of whether you think destroying an sssi is ok, can see that a great fraud has been committed against the people of Aberdeen and the country as a whole in the building of this course. The levels of corruption needed to gain planning permission for this course are just unacceptable and the government should never be held to ransom by one individual businessman.

Why any pro golfer would want to be seen standing by trump is a mystery, well it is not really; they no doubt had their wallets sufficiently stuffed. You would just hope they had a bit more integrity.

Navy, it's not so much that that gets me, it's that all these people are supposedly caring so much about the site, where in fact I think it is purely down to their dislike of Trump.

In this case, for the god of the local economy I think modifying part of a SSSI was worth it. SSSI's are not immune.
I've had the benefit of seeing it before and after, and people really are going off the deep end and over-reacting about this. It's very sympathetic to the surrounding environment. People are going on like he's installed 100 smoke stacks and paved the place with concrete and with rough made out of the same material as his wig.

Had this been a course financed by anyone else, I sincerely doubt there would be anything like this level of opposition.

your right SR. but on the other side of the debate-Who but someone like trump could have developed this course

mystiroakey wrote:NBS dude the problem is that you buy petrol for your car dont you, you may buy battery farmed chicken? you use banks to look after your money? you may eat cod fish?

whats the difference.

Its all well and good getting on your high horse but the problem is people end up becoming hypocritical..

I use petrol - I have little choice.
Under no circumstances do I buy or eat battery farmed chicken if I can help it.
I use a bank - again, I have little choice.
Hardly ever eat cod as I don't actually rate it much as a fish. Anyway, your point about cod is?

Suggesting I'm a hypocrite is a bit strong. I think Trump's an arse, I understand that what he's done to create this monument to ego isn't snow white and therefore I wouldn't play it if you paid me. What's wrong with that? I have a choice on this one and I wouldn't go near it.

RE chicken:

if i can help it?(buying battery chicken)- you see i never do either- but i have eaten the occasional kfc!!!

You must understand what i mean by cod surely! if you have such strong opinions about the envioroment!

nothing wrong with your view,however every day we are supporting the trumps of this world and in many cases we dont even know how or why at the cost to our envioroment!

super_realist wrote:Navy, it's not so much that that gets me, it's that all these people are supposedly caring so much about the site, where in fact I think it is purely down to their dislike of Trump.

In this case, for the god of the local economy I think modifying part of a SSSI was worth it. SSSI's are not immune.
I've had the benefit of seeing it before and after, and people really are going off the deep end and over-reacting about this. It's very sympathetic to the surrounding environment. People are going on like he's installed 100 smoke stacks and paved the place with concrete and with rough made out of the same material as his wig.

Had this been a course financed by anyone else, I sincerely doubt there would be anything like this level of opposition.

A good point, well put. He's still a tool and I don't like the way he operates one iota. There's literally hundreds of courses in Scotland I haven't played and would rather play than this one.

mystiroakey wrote:RE chicken:

if i can help it?(buying battery chicken)- you see i never do either- but i have eaten the occasional kfc!!!

You must understand what i mean by cod surely! if you have such strong opinions about the envioroment!

nothing wrong with your view,however every day we are supporting the trumps of this world and in many cases we dont even know how or why at the cost to our envioroment!

KFC?
I assume you're talking about cod over-fishing? Pretty well regulated now isn't it and stocks are supposed to be recovering so I'm not sure eating it is so dodgy these days. Still not really a fan of it as a fish to eat either.

This sort of thing is a minefield anyway. I can choose not to play Fart International so I will thanks .

your argument agaisnt playing it means your a bit of a hypocrite thats all.

just admit you dont like trump and be done with it..

super_realist wrote:It's amusing how holier than thou some people are on here, I bet not a single person would turn down a free round.

Hey, I turned down a free round on Trump last Friday! To be fair, it was only because I was committed to playing in a charity golf outing elsewhere. Gutted I had to say No!

Nonsense. You're right about the Trump bit though.

nonsense my ass!!

If you wanna live by this sword then die by it..I wanna make a stand against hypocrites . I was chatting to a vegetarian the other day that had such strong views about aniimal cruelty whilst she was tucking into some haribo sweets- lols

Fine. You act the fool. Your logic on the other hand means you'd no doubt buy a diamond ring mined by some child at gun point in Sierra Leone as the finished article looks nice because not to do so would be, hey, hypocritical and we can't have that now can we?
Rather my (so-say) pick and choose hypocrisy than your 'end justfies the means' approach any day.

I can just imagine certain people in aberdeen that are against this course, jumping into there 'surrey tractor' and driving to some course 200 miles away as a stand against envioromental damage for there special golf day.

navyblueshorts wrote:Fine. You act the fool. Your logic on the other hand means you'd no doubt buy a diamond ring mined by some child at gun point in Sierra Leone as the finished article looks nice because not to do so would be, hey, hypocritical and we can't have that now can we?
Rather my (so-say) pick and choose hypocrisy than your 'end justfies the means' approach any day.

NBS that isnt true though is it. I dont buy batterry farmed chicken. I drive a golf tdi blue motion. But I am gonna play that course because it looks immense. How bad is this course on the envioroment- do you actually know?

anyway the reality is- how is this trumps fault? surely its scotlands fault- its the councils/powers at be fault for allowing it to happen.

If you really wanna make a stand do something about it.But I now you wont. Were you protesting against it- or are you just jumping on some holier than tho bandwagon because you dislike someone?

Steady lads, obviously there's going to be a split on this issue. Personally as an Aberdeen resident I know it's well supported, but can understand why some are opposed, I think it's more a grudge against Trump though masquerading as environmentalism.

No need to have a go at one anothers virtue

Christ, Super Realist the peacemaker.........words fail me.
I wouldnt play it, being pro environment and disliking Trump are clearly not mutually exclusive.

Anyone doubting the value of an unaltered natural environment should check out the research carried out after the Exxon valdez disaster off the coast of Alaska. It was shown that people place an incredibly high value on the natural world even if they will never see it or set foot on it. The idea that the natural world is unharmed and still exists is actually worth a lot to people. (google contingent valuation)

Something like this might be a good place to start;

http://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/6984.html

Oakey

Sounds to me like we're just as hypocritical as one another. Which sort of shows how grey these things are.

Moving on....

Yeah we all are-I didnt say i wasnt.. i made that point earlier on(that i have eaten kfc, yet i but free range chicken and eggs normally)- we all are- understanding that fact means that when we argue we can argue without trying to say one is better moraly than another..

Thats what i hate- the people that are clearly holier than tho on a topic and need to shout it from a roof top.. when in reality its just an arm chair opinion

McLaren wrote:Anyone doubting the value of an unaltered natural environment should check out the research carried out after the Exxon valdez disaster off the coast of Alaska. It was shown that people place an incredibly high value on the natural world even if they will never see it or set foot on it. The idea that the natural world is unharmed and still exists is actually worth a lot to people. (google contingent valuation)

Something like this might be a good place to start;

http://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/6984.html

Mac, did you know that a lot of the cleaning of an oil spill is considerably more harmful than the spill itself, detergents and the pulverising pressure of the piped water kill much more invertebrates than the actual oil.

For that reason, when you see clean up ships on the sea after an event, many are actually just piping sea water, nothing more as a gesture.

Super

All that means is that there is even more reason to avoid oil spills. And that anyone spilling oil should be fined even more.

i think BP were fined enough Mac, especially considering it was there subbies that fked things up!

Your right though its awfull- but i think we are at the point off almost doing everything we possibly can to avoid them due to that hefty fine and overall cost- i think it was something like 40 bill if we include all costs

McLaren wrote:Super

All that means is that there is even more reason to avoid oil spills. And that anyone spilling oil should be fined even more.

Of course Mac, but it seems a bit odd that the current methods for clearing up are there to placate ecomentalists rather than actually in the best interests of clearing up the spill. Seems bizarre logic.

Spills are very rare though, and far worse pollution comes from our own waste that ends up in the oceans.

mysti

No way did the gulf rig incident cost BP $40 billion.

They haven't been fined yet, they haven't decided on the amount, probably around 10bn though.

not sure Mc,

If we add up all the costs associated(clean up,law suits, loss of resouce,compensation fund ,i could go on for ever) plus the fine we are surely getting close.

we also have the intangible loss from bad publicity, and the tangible stock write offs!!

yep i can see it going very close to 40 bill if not more

Ok just looked up

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/02/bp-oil-spill-costs-hit-40_n_777521.html


lol spot on with my figure!!

The bankers nearly brought the UK to bankruptcy, but we all have to use banks

Trump has bought his way in to this country, with tainted money, worse than what the bankers have done, but now we do have a choice, mines is to make sure he see's none of my money, and not to go anywhere near anything he has built.

As for the oil company's, they have stopped all the meaningfully development of sustainable energy.

It is said that they have all the patents for alternative energy locked up in vaults, and will not allow their development as they still see oil as money from heaven.

oldparwin wrote:The bankers nearly brought the UK to bankruptcy, but we all have to use banks

Trump has bought his way in to this country, with tainted money, worse than what the bankers have done, but now we do have a choice, mines is to make sure he see's none of my money, and not to go anywhere near anything he has built.

Anyone see that Bank Of Dave program on C4. What a character , a tad wearing after a while I'd guess but he showed what could be done. It's really not that hard.

oldparwin wrote:As for the oil company's, they have stopped all the meaningfully development of sustainable energy.

It is said that they have all the patents for alternative energy locked up in vaults, and will not allow their development as they still see oil as money from heaven.

Yeah, they've got the harmless cigarette, safe tan and alchemy tied up too, suppose you think 9/11 was an inside job and they didn't really land on the moon.

Ridiculous sixth form crackpot tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy Alex James nonsense.

everyone said that the technology to have battery powered cars was locked in some vault- then they came out and we still dont have the tech to make them practical!

Have people been watching too much batman?

great film tho dude

Super
He who laughs last laughs longest, when the oil starts to run out, you will be amazed at the alternative forms of energy, the oil company's come up with.

Now if the oil company's allow this alternative energy to be available just now, then it would be cheaper than oil, and profits for them would plunge, and with all the law suits going against them, they would be in dire straights.

So OP oil companies are the only ones capable of developing the technology are they?
Funny how no other companies have invented alternatives, or have they all been kidnapped and silenced by the big bad oil companies?

It's academic anyway, there's enough oil to see all our lives out.


Mac, if you are going to see Batman, take your kevlar jacket with you.

When you set up a capitalistic system, based on investment risk and reward, you will get exactly that - willingness to take risk and, once reward is gotten, desire to protect and maximize that.

But oil companies don't just need profits, they need long-term profits.

Is there any other resource that has invested in alternative sources of energy greater than the oil companies have?

(I wonder if all these windmills will be looked at as comical in the years ahead.)

why dont roads have rollers on them- everytime a car goes over it could create energy? imagine the m25 had them?

If you could add a gyro to macs Google engine amd eyes skimming the back cover of books or his fingers flicking through the guardian you'd power the planet.

I like the flux capacitors future power source system- we need to make one of them

What use are revolutionary sources of energy if there aren't any engines in which to put them. You can't just blame the oil companies.

No one believed, about papers hacking into other peoples mobile phones, but now it has been proved beyond doubt.

If a company came up with a cheap source of energy, that would run everything from cars to jet engines, how much would the oil company's pay to have that buried would imagine it would run into billions. You don't believe that has not already happened, the same way that no one hacked into mobile phones.

no one belived the hacking - are you serious- obvious as day dude.

On your energy philosphy.

what do you mean exactly- we know about the R@D into these new energy sources like orbo allready which claim to be able to power things like mobile phones to cars cheaply and powerfully..one day!!!

Now ask yourself this- are the oil companies bigger than the tech companies that need portable power- maybe and probally yes but still maybe not! i dunno- but i tell you what i reakon they havent sussed it yet- and there are companies that will pay multi multi billions of pounds to have this new clean energy source that packs a punch. the fact is we have battery powered cars and we have mobile phones and mobile laptops and we need more power..

They are also talking about new fuel like converting hydrogen- how we all know about this and many different scientists aroiund the owrld are working on it- could the oil companies get to all of them.. ok maybe one or two but eventually the truth would come out surely...

Nah we are not there yet mate, companies are working on it though..

A lot of conspiracy theories being thrown around there OP.

Imo you cannot say the oil companies are covering up new energy sources and power supply options! If that were the case would we be seeing wind farms, companies like Toyota and Vauxhall developing cars like the Prius & Ampera respectively which are the first proper production electric/hybrid motors.

There are to many new research companies worldwide that are on the open market for any oil company to simply sweep them under the carpet. Its a bit like saying you believe the Queen ordered the hit/accidental death of Diana & Dodi in Paris on that fateful night so as to distance any Royal links to an Arab family. Anything can be turned into a conspiracy depending on how you look at the evidence and seeing what you want to see.

With regards to Trumps course it seems a lot of people are using the excuse of environmental issues to cover the real reason they disapprove of the course, and that's a dislike for Donald himself. Especially several posters on here alone local to the area have said the course is welcomed by the local population

It's a bit of a stretch from phone hacking to oil companies covering up the solution to the energy crisis.( For your information the solex agitator in the man with the golden gun was fiction.)

Why do people believe such tinfoil hat theories? If anything oil companies are the driver behind new cleaner fuel. Companies like bp, shell amd Exxon are pouring billions into r and d. No doubt they prefer to see oil continue as its profitable and personally for my own wealth being part of the industry I want to see it continue, but these crazy theories have been around since the 50s alongside cover ups of roswell etc.
It all sounds a bit desperate op I'm afraid and completely without any basis in fact fact at all.

There are plenty chemical companies in the world as big as any oil company, are you trying to say the oil company has stolen the plans or killed agents with Bulgarian poison tipped umbrella?

Just anti capitalism drivel that keeps small minds going. Freedom for the people wolfie!

I have some di-lithium crystals in the shed - are they good for anything?

“Is there any other resource that has invested in alternative sources of energy greater than the oil companies have?”

As far as I can see oil companies have not invested heavily in alternate resources so far.

The car companies have had some attempts at electric and hybrid cars.

The car companies have also had a bash at hydrogen powered cars.

Small engineering companies and universities have tried wave power.

Governments have invested in an international fusion reactor project.

We also here of many other smaller companies trying everything from improving wind turbines to making oil from concentrated sunlight. Or even F1 teams developing energy recovery systems.

The search for new energy technologies seems primarily led by specialist engineering/science firms and academic institutions (funded by governments and industry).

But what do the oil companies do apart from occasionally “investing” a piddling amount in someone else’s project just so their logo gets associated with something positive. I doubt very much if anyone has economically viable sustainable energy technologies just sitting in the basement, especially not the oil companies.

McLaren wrote:“Is there any other resource that has invested in alternative sources of energy greater than the oil companies have?”


But what do the oil companies do apart from occasionally “investing” a piddling amount in someone else’s project just so their logo gets associated with something positive. I doubt very much if anyone has economically viable sustainable energy technologies just sitting in the basement, especially not the oil companies.

I dunno.. why don't we ask somebody in the oil industry....

Mac, which industry do you think that it was who has developed unleaded fuel, bio-diesel, LPG and leaner burning aviation fuel? Do you think it was Greenpeace?

I'm not sure why you think Oil companies ought to be developing renewable sources anyway. They are Oil companies, with expertise in Oil related matters, how does this qualify them to develop renewables?
It doesn't mean just because they are the energy industry that encapsulates everything to do with it. A brain surgeon can't just turn up and start doing heart transplants simply because he's had medical training and works in the medical sector.

Do you think Dyson should be making TV's simply because they produce electrical goods?

I'm still trying to work out the stages of separation that took us from the Trump Course to energy renewables....
Trump Course
Aberdeen
Oil industry
Energy
Renewables

Got it

Jas based on the conspiracy theories being thrown next we'll likely be discussing Roswel and no eco nut will be blaming trumps wig for the cover up.