A victory for the Eco-Freaks! No, wait, that's a defeat for the Eco-Freaks, no, ...

The Audubon Society has done a study and found that there will be a
minimal to no effect on the bird population in Nantucket Sound if a
proposed Wind Turbine farm is erected there.

It was first proposed years ago, and was fought by the NIMBYs in a long,
hard battle that finally decried the loss of the majority of the bird
population in the Sound.

So, what will their next salvo in the battle be?

These Earthy-Crunchies really crack me up. They scream about reducing our
dependance on Foreign Oil, but when presented with a solution, it's No
Good.

Their first salvo was that it will wreck the natural beauty of the area.
The "WHO CARES" was deafening.

Then, the Bird ploy was brought up.
Today the Audubon Society said "What Brid population devastation?"

It will be interesting to see what they come up with next.

You just can't win with these people!

--
In the grand scheme fo things...
What difference does it make?

Hachiroku wrote:[color=blue]
> The Audubon Society has done a study and found that there will be a
> minimal to no effect on the bird population in Nantucket Sound if a
> proposed Wind Turbine farm is erected there.
>
> It was first proposed years ago, and was fought by the NIMBYs in a long,
> hard battle that finally decried the loss of the majority of the bird
> population in the Sound.
>
> So, what will their next salvo in the battle be?
>
> These Earthy-Crunchies really crack me up. They scream about reducing our
> dependance on Foreign Oil, but when presented with a solution, it's No
> Good.
>
> Their first salvo was that it will wreck the natural beauty of the area.
> The "WHO CARES" was deafening.
>
> Then, the Bird ploy was brought up.
> Today the Audubon Society said "What Brid population devastation?"
>
> It will be interesting to see what they come up with next.
>
> You just can't win with these people!
>
> --
> In the grand scheme fo things...
> What difference does it make?[/color]

You just want to spoil Kennedy's view. There are no nimbys in Hyannis.
I know thats true, I read on the web.
Ron

"Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote in message
news:juGWf.32$Ah.21@trndny09...[color=blue]
> The Audubon Society has done a study and found that there will be a
> minimal to no effect on the bird population in Nantucket Sound if a
> proposed Wind Turbine farm is erected there.
>
> It was first proposed years ago, and was fought by the NIMBYs in a long,
> hard battle that finally decried the loss of the majority of the bird
> population in the Sound.
>[/color]

The Audubon Society has obviously figured out that birds are smart
enough to flap away from a big stationary windmill that has moving
arms. If birds were that dumb to be hitting windmills they would be
crashing into each other all the time.
[color=blue]
> So, what will their next salvo in the battle be?
>
> These Earthy-Crunchies really crack me up. They scream about reducing our
> dependance on Foreign Oil, but when presented with a solution, it's No
> Good.
>[/color]

Most of the Earth Crunchies are pretty solidly in favor of wind farms.
Also, when power companies offer a choice of spending a bit more
on "green" power as an option, I think you will find the Earth Crunchies
are more likely to put their money where their mouths are and choose
the green power.

That of course does not mean that some of the really rabid Earth Crunchies
are simply against cars, period, and are hoping the oil runs out and that
there
is no vehicle substitute merely so that everyone will be forced onto
bicycles.

I also think the NIMBYers have quite a number that are not at all
in the Earth Crunchie camp and are merely using "green" arguments
against it because they can't find anything else.

Ted

"Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$lykxwi$9jx1$1@news.ipinc.net...[color=blue]
>
> "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote in message
> news:juGWf.32$Ah.21@trndny09...[/color]

<SNIP>
[color=blue][color=green]
>>
>> These Earthy-Crunchies really crack me up. They scream about reducing our
>> dependance on Foreign Oil, but when presented with a solution, it's No
>> Good.
>>[/color]
>
> Most of the Earth Crunchies are pretty solidly in favor of wind farms.
> Also, when power companies offer a choice of spending a bit more
> on "green" power as an option, I think you will find the Earth Crunchies
> are more likely to put their money where their mouths are and choose
> the green power.
>
> That of course does not mean that some of the really rabid Earth Crunchies
> are simply against cars, period, and are hoping the oil runs out and that
> there
> is no vehicle substitute merely so that everyone will be forced onto
> bicycles.
>
> I also think the NIMBYers have quite a number that are not at all
> in the Earth Crunchie camp and are merely using "green" arguments
> against it because they can't find anything else.
>
> Ted[/color]

They also wanted to put a few of them up on a very large hillside in Heath,
MA to thw west of Greenfield. Same arguements.
It will spoil the view, it will kill birds.

Nah, these people are just k00ks. They scream and holler about alternative
energy, but when presented with the choices, they don't really want
anything. Not many of the Environmentalist Wackos around here are in favor
of anything.
There are TWO people I know that truly shun anything that uses electricity.

One of them is an Electrical Engineer...

There would be three, but the third one has a Biodiesel setup and plays
electric guitar...

I'd put up windmills all over thae place. Free power? (Well, minus the cost
of the windmills of course)
More gas for me!!!

Imagine how the NIMBYers will go nuts where they want to install a comply
new hydrogen distribution system throughout the county or guess what will
happen when the oil companies try to build more refineries ;)


mike



[color=blue]
>
> Most of the Earth Crunchies are pretty solidly in favor of wind farms.
> Also, when power companies offer a choice of spending a bit more
> on "green" power as an option, I think you will find the Earth Crunchies
> are more likely to put their money where their mouths are and choose
> the green power.
>
> That of course does not mean that some of the really rabid Earth Crunchies
> are simply against cars, period, and are hoping the oil runs out and that
> there
> is no vehicle substitute merely so that everyone will be forced onto
> bicycles.
>
> I also think the NIMBYers have quite a number that are not at all
> in the Earth Crunchie camp and are merely using "green" arguments
> against it because they can't find anything else.
>
> Ted
>
>[/color]

"Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote in message
news:juGWf.32$Ah.21@trndny09...[color=blue]
> The Audubon Society has done a study and found that there will be a
> minimal to no effect on the bird population in Nantucket Sound if a
> proposed Wind Turbine farm is erected there.
>
> It was first proposed years ago, and was fought by the NIMBYs in a long,
> hard battle that finally decried the loss of the majority of the bird
> population in the Sound.
>
> So, what will their next salvo in the battle be?
>
> These Earthy-Crunchies really crack me up. They scream about reducing our
> dependance on Foreign Oil, but when presented with a solution, it's No
> Good.
>
> Their first salvo was that it will wreck the natural beauty of the area.
> The "WHO CARES" was deafening.
>
> Then, the Bird ploy was brought up.
> Today the Audubon Society said "What Brid population devastation?"
>
> It will be interesting to see what they come up with next.
>
> You just can't win with these people!
>
> In the grand scheme fo things...
> What difference does it make?[/color]

The majority of the "Earth Crunchies" favor windmills. Some are concerned
about bird migrations. It's the rare "Earth Crunchy" who recommends halting
windmill development altogether but quite a few are in favor of study and
careful siting to avoid inflicting a disaster on bird populations. That's
just common sense.

The issue with Cape Cod is that, in addition to legitimate concern for bird
populations, there's a lot of local concern that tourism revenue might be
affected, plus a healthy dose of NIMBY from the wealthy, few of whom posture
as "Earth Crunchies."

I think you'd find more support on the Cape and Islands for a prototype
deep-ocean thermal converter. I foget what it's called - OTEC, maybe - but
the visual impact would be less and the energy impact might be greater.

This particular "Earth Crunchy" is also in favor of nuclear power, he just
doesn't trust private industry to put safety first over profits. Many of my
"Earth Crunchy" friends also favor nukes and have the same concern about
safety vs profit priorities. If you're old enough to remember TMI, you'll
also recall their #1 priority was CYA. Other "Earth Crunchies" aren't as
supportive of nuclear power but have come to see it as a necessary evil.
They share the same concern for priorities.

You might take a look at this:
[url]http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html[/url]

My "Earth Crunchy" friends and I have been concerned about this for quite
some time. Most of my "Earth Crunchy" friends are not 100% sure that global
warming will go quite as the climatologists expect. There could be
compensating processes we don't yet understand BUT:

- We appreciate the stakes for which we're playing. If Global Warming plays
out as expected, there WILL be massive changes. Consider that, at present,
much of the US is excellent farmland. There's no IMPROVING on that, any
CHANGE will be for the WORSE. Over the long haul, the Western deserts may
become excellent farmlands but the time required for the current good
farmland to turn to a dustbowl will be a lot shorter than the transition of
desert to farmland (even if it starts getting adequate rainfall, for many
years, it will just be useless damp sand). There will be many hungry years
in between the loss of good farmland and the development of new farmland.
- Dialling back on oil consumption - a staple of the "Earth Crunchy"
vision - wins three ways: 1) reduces cash to terrorists and oppressive
regimes; 2) improves our balance of trade; 3) reduces pollution. Taking
Jimmy Carter seriously 30 years ago would have given us a great head start
on this. As a bonus, Detroit would probably be good at building cars the
Third World actually wants and our trade balance would be enhanced. And bin
Laden might not have had the funding to succeed in attacking us. The
Wahabbists would have had to develop an actual economy and get jobs in it
and wouldn't have quite as much time for Jihad.
- "Earth Crunchies" do not generally expect people to give away their
quality of life, at least not to the extent that some "Earth Crunchies" have
changed their own lives, but some adjustments will probably have to be made.
Heavy investments in technology could both improve the health of the planet
and position the US economy to be the leader for the 21st Century. Call it
the "Toyota Model," keep up the investment in new products and processes and
you will dominate your industry and make money. We've seen the "GM Model"
in action and it's a lot like the current administration's stance on energy
policy. You have lived long enough to see something like this played out
twice: 1) The "invention" of the Internet spawned a whole host of companies
and created a crapload of jobs; 2) Heavy investment in infrastructure and
education has enabled India to suddenly take over a huge chunk of the
world's IT business. I have several close "Earth Crunchy" friends with
engineering and hard sciences doctorates, employed in private industry, who
are amazed and appalled that there's been so little encouragement of real
alternative energy development since the 1970s.


In other words, Hachiroku, you should get your information about what the
"Earth Crunchies" want and don't want form the "Earth Crunchies" themselves
rather than Rush Limpballs or some other equally ignorant source.


*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from [url]http://www.SecureIX.com[/url] ***

"DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
news:442c17df$0$20703$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...[color=blue]
> "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote in message
> news:juGWf.32$Ah.21@trndny09...[color=green]
>> The Audubon Society has done a study and found that there will be a
>> minimal to no effect on the bird population in Nantucket Sound if a
>> proposed Wind Turbine farm is erected there.
>>
>> It was first proposed years ago, and was fought by the NIMBYs in a long,
>> hard battle that finally decried the loss of the majority of the bird
>> population in the Sound.
>>
>> So, what will their next salvo in the battle be?
>>
>> These Earthy-Crunchies really crack me up. They scream about reducing our
>> dependance on Foreign Oil, but when presented with a solution, it's No
>> Good.
>>
>> Their first salvo was that it will wreck the natural beauty of the area.
>> The "WHO CARES" was deafening.
>>
>> Then, the Bird ploy was brought up.
>> Today the Audubon Society said "What Brid population devastation?"
>>
>> It will be interesting to see what they come up with next.
>>
>> You just can't win with these people!
>>
>> In the grand scheme fo things...
>> What difference does it make?[/color]
>
>
> In other words, Hachiroku, you should get your information about what the
> "Earth Crunchies" want and don't want form the "Earth Crunchies"
> themselves
> rather than Rush Limpballs or some other equally ignorant source.[/color]

A lot of what you say is good and true.
There are two things you missed:

I *LIVE* in Massachusetts and know about all of this first hand.

The Earthy Crunchies I know don't really want ANY progress. At all. None.
Period.
I live in one of the most Liberal, Eco-Minded areas of the United States.
These people are rabid in their beliefs, to the point that they make Rush
Limbaugh look like a choirboy. NOTHING is good! Windmills are an eyesore.
Coal and oil pollute. Nuclear is the way to weapons. Solar is ok. That's it.


[color=blue]
>
>
> *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
> *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
> [url]http://www.SecureIX.com[/url] ***[/color]

On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 20:47:38 GMT, "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote:
[color=blue]
>The Earthy Crunchies I know don't really want ANY progress. At all. None.
>Period.
>I live in one of the most Liberal, Eco-Minded areas of the United States.
>These people are rabid in their beliefs, to the point that they make Rush
>Limbaugh look like a choirboy. NOTHING is good! Windmills are an eyesore.
>Coal and oil pollute. Nuclear is the way to weapons. Solar is ok. That's it.[/color]

Anyone ever tell these people that the Sun is a Nuclear energy source?

--

Scott in Florida

They would not believe you if you did LOL


mike


"Scott in Florida" <MoveOn@outa.here> wrote in message
news:pkvo22tkv3621di98t46bsorlbeqnpu342@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 20:47:38 GMT, "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>The Earthy Crunchies I know don't really want ANY progress. At all. None.
>>Period.
>>I live in one of the most Liberal, Eco-Minded areas of the United States.
>>These people are rabid in their beliefs, to the point that they make Rush
>>Limbaugh look like a choirboy. NOTHING is good! Windmills are an eyesore.
>>Coal and oil pollute. Nuclear is the way to weapons. Solar is ok. That's
>>it.[/color]
>
> Anyone ever tell these people that the Sun is a Nuclear energy source?
>
> --
>
> Scott in Florida[/color]

"Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote in message
news:KtXWf.120$Se.59@trndny01...[color=blue]
> I *LIVE* in Massachusetts and know about all of this first hand.
>
> The Earthy Crunchies I know don't really want ANY progress. At all. None.
> Period.
> I live in one of the most Liberal, Eco-Minded areas of the United States.
> These people are rabid in their beliefs, to the point that they make Rush
> Limbaugh look like a choirboy. NOTHING is good! Windmills are an eyesore.
> Coal and oil pollute. Nuclear is the way to weapons. Solar is ok. That's
> it.[/color]

What you're saying is the main reason why I believe we should ration
gasoline and jack up the price to at least $8 a gallon. Turn the screws
until the rich bitches squirm. And they will when they realize no amount of
money will get them more than 3 gallons.

In article <juGWf.32$Ah.21@trndny09>, [email]Trueno@ae86.GTS[/email] says...[color=blue]
> These Earthy-Crunchies really crack me up. They scream about reducing our
> dependance on Foreign Oil, but when presented with a solution, it's No
> Good.
>[/color]
We get that in the UK with wind farms.
When it gts to court over the planning, you have the environmentalists
for the wind farm, and the conservationists against it. And when law and
order breaks down it is knitted muesli cardigans and home cultured
sandals everywhere.
--
Carl Robson
Car PC Build starts again. [url]http://smallr.com/rz[/url]
Homepage: [url]http://www.bouncing-czechs.com[/url]

What happens to the economy when people can not get to work etc, if your
policy were implemented? What happens to the excess gasoline left over
from the refining process, do they just burn it off again at the refinery
like they did before it became a motor fuel? LOL


mike hunt


"mark_digital" <xxx976@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:66idnRbk7OJMOrHZnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=blue]
>
> "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote in message
> news:KtXWf.120$Se.59@trndny01...[color=green]
>> I *LIVE* in Massachusetts and know about all of this first hand.
>>
>> The Earthy Crunchies I know don't really want ANY progress. At all. None.
>> Period.
>> I live in one of the most Liberal, Eco-Minded areas of the United States.
>> These people are rabid in their beliefs, to the point that they make Rush
>> Limbaugh look like a choirboy. NOTHING is good! Windmills are an eyesore.
>> Coal and oil pollute. Nuclear is the way to weapons. Solar is ok. That's
>> it.[/color]
>
> What you're saying is the main reason why I believe we should ration
> gasoline and jack up the price to at least $8 a gallon. Turn the screws
> until the rich bitches squirm. And they will when they realize no amount
> of money will get them more than 3 gallons.[/color]

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:2midnTY7TNyB0rDZUSdV9g@ptd.net...[color=blue]
> What happens to the economy when people can not get to work etc, if your
> policy were implemented?[/color]

I imagine they'll finally start to figure out that living 30 miles into the
countryside was a bad plan. They'll figure out how to car-pool or use
public transport and they'll start to agitate for more public transport and
more bike paths and sidewalks. With fewer cars jamming the roads, we'll see
faster commutes. It might occur to the local authorities to more liberally
license "shared cabs" or other alternative forms of transportation. With an
increase in biking and walking (at least as far as the bus stop or car-pool
meeting place), America will work off some of its ugly fat. Our balance of
trade will improve. GM may finally feel goaded into shifting their
advertising budget into engineering small, fuel-efficient cars. You won't
see them building overweight useless vehicles like the 4700lb SSRs any more.
People who don't routinely pull a big honkin' trailer will stop buying big
honkin' SUVs just in case they ever do buy a big honkin' trailer. Every
morning, the expressway that goes by my neighborhood is bumper-to-bumper
SUVs carrying just one person.
[color=blue]
> What happens to the excess gasoline left over
> from the refining process, do they just burn it off again at the refinery
> like they did before it became a motor fuel?[/color]

What "excess gasoline?" You're talking about 1910 technology and practices.
Modern refineries will adjust to avoid producing excess product. The per
barrel production and import tax might be the best way to achieve this.
[color=blue]
> LOL[/color]

Why? This is serious business. If we don't get our oil appetite under
control, competition from the Chinese and Asian markets will cause us
strategic problems. Never mind that, we already have a strategic problem.
If the Straits of Hormuz were mined, life would suck. A determined Iran
could close the Persian Gulf. And I think they could keep it closed.
Smart, determined terrorists could probably disrupt supply enough to really
screw things up for years.
[color=blue]
> mike hunt
>
> "mark_digital" <xxx976@comcast.com> wrote in message
> news:66idnRbk7OJMOrHZnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=green]
> >
> > "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote in message
> > news:KtXWf.120$Se.59@trndny01...[color=darkred]
> >> I *LIVE* in Massachusetts and know about all of this first hand.
> >>
> >> The Earthy Crunchies I know don't really want ANY progress. At all.[/color][/color][/color]
None.[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> Period.
> >> I live in one of the most Liberal, Eco-Minded areas of the United[/color][/color][/color]
States.[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> These people are rabid in their beliefs, to the point that they make[/color][/color][/color]
Rush[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> Limbaugh look like a choirboy. NOTHING is good! Windmills are an[/color][/color][/color]
eyesore.[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> Coal and oil pollute. Nuclear is the way to weapons. Solar is ok.[/color][/color][/color]
That's[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> it.[/color]
> >
> > What you're saying is the main reason why I believe we should ration
> > gasoline and jack up the price to at least $8 a gallon. Turn the screws
> > until the rich bitches squirm. And they will when they realize no amount
> > of money will get them more than 3 gallons.[/color]
>
>[/color]


*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from [url]http://www.SecureIX.com[/url] ***

Have you ever been off the coasts of this country? Do you think everyone in
the US lives in a metropolitan area? For some people in the US the nearest
neighbor is a half days ride down the road.

Better research that a bit more, gasoline is a byproduct. The refiner can
not get to the expensive part of the crude, where they make real money,
without first cracking off all the light distillates like gasoline .

If oil producing countries do not sell their oil to willing buyers what will
do with it, eat it? ;)

The fact is without oil all the economies of the world wound crumble


mike hunt




"DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
news:442d6dd0$0$9687$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...[color=blue]
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:2midnTY7TNyB0rDZUSdV9g@ptd.net...[color=green]
>> What happens to the economy when people can not get to work etc, if your
>> policy were implemented?[/color]
>
> I imagine they'll finally start to figure out that living 30 miles into
> the
> countryside was a bad plan. They'll figure out how to car-pool or use
> public transport and they'll start to agitate for more public transport
> and
> more bike paths and sidewalks. With fewer cars jamming the roads, we'll
> see
> faster commutes. It might occur to the local authorities to more
> liberally
> license "shared cabs" or other alternative forms of transportation. With
> an
> increase in biking and walking (at least as far as the bus stop or
> car-pool
> meeting place), America will work off some of its ugly fat. Our balance
> of
> trade will improve. GM may finally feel goaded into shifting their
> advertising budget into engineering small, fuel-efficient cars. You won't
> see them building overweight useless vehicles like the 4700lb SSRs any
> more.
> People who don't routinely pull a big honkin' trailer will stop buying big
> honkin' SUVs just in case they ever do buy a big honkin' trailer. Every
> morning, the expressway that goes by my neighborhood is bumper-to-bumper
> SUVs carrying just one person.
>[color=green]
>> What happens to the excess gasoline left over
>> from the refining process, do they just burn it off again at the refinery
>> like they did before it became a motor fuel?[/color]
>
> What "excess gasoline?" You're talking about 1910 technology and
> practices.
> Modern refineries will adjust to avoid producing excess product. The per
> barrel production and import tax might be the best way to achieve this.
>[color=green]
>> LOL[/color]
>
> Why? This is serious business. If we don't get our oil appetite under
> control, competition from the Chinese and Asian markets will cause us
> strategic problems. Never mind that, we already have a strategic problem.
> If the Straits of Hormuz were mined, life would suck. A determined Iran
> could close the Persian Gulf. And I think they could keep it closed.
> Smart, determined terrorists could probably disrupt supply enough to
> really
> screw things up for years.
>[color=green]
>> mike hunt
>>
>> "mark_digital" <xxx976@comcast.com> wrote in message
>> news:66idnRbk7OJMOrHZnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@comcast.com...[color=darkred]
>> >
>> > "Hachiroku" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote in message
>> > news:KtXWf.120$Se.59@trndny01...
>> >> I *LIVE* in Massachusetts and know about all of this first hand.
>> >>
>> >> The Earthy Crunchies I know don't really want ANY progress. At all.[/color][/color]
> None.[color=green][color=darkred]
>> >> Period.
>> >> I live in one of the most Liberal, Eco-Minded areas of the United[/color][/color]
> States.[color=green][color=darkred]
>> >> These people are rabid in their beliefs, to the point that they make[/color][/color]
> Rush[color=green][color=darkred]
>> >> Limbaugh look like a choirboy. NOTHING is good! Windmills are an[/color][/color]
> eyesore.[color=green][color=darkred]
>> >> Coal and oil pollute. Nuclear is the way to weapons. Solar is ok.[/color][/color]
> That's[color=green][color=darkred]
>> >> it.
>> >
>> > What you're saying is the main reason why I believe we should ration
>> > gasoline and jack up the price to at least $8 a gallon. Turn the screws
>> > until the rich bitches squirm. And they will when they realize no
>> > amount
>> > of money will get them more than 3 gallons.[/color]
>>
>>[/color]
>
>
> *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
> *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
> [url]http://www.SecureIX.com[/url] ***[/color]

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:2midnTY7TNyB0rDZUSdV9g@ptd.net...[color=blue]
> What happens to the economy when people can not get to work etc, if your
> policy were implemented? What happens to the excess gasoline left over
> from the refining process, do they just burn it off again at the refinery
> like they did before it became a motor fuel? LOL
>
>
> mike hunt
>[/color]

Don't worry. The intent is to share the pain and change some minds.