Please relax, you seem really defensive. We can have a friendly discussion. Your question is reasonable to ask, I’m just asking you (like the other commenter di

Please relax, you seem really defensive. We can have a friendly discussion. Your question is reasonable to ask, I’m just asking you (like the other commenter did) to consider the scale of your question, and to do some napkin-arithmetic estimates of the maximum possible magnitude of effect that turbines might have on the earth’s air, in order to answer the question you asked. There might be some effect. I’ll be surprised if it’s large, but it wouldn’t be the first time I was surprised. I’m also asking you to make some comparisons and put it in context. It doesn’t make sense to ask about wind turbine air turbulence causing climate change without asking the same question about cities and all the existing power plants and all man-made and plant structures that obstruct air. It’s not possible to answer your question about turbines and climate without talking about CO2, so if you refuse to discuss CO2, then... CO2 is the known cause of current climate change. I didn’t ask if wind is better than coal (answer:yes). The pre-supposed answer to your question by many people is that use of turbines will cause positive changes to the climate due to their ability to reduce CO2. Will that be offset by warming caused by turbulence? Personally I doubt it, but maybe. Deforestation is, as I understand it, contributing to warming, among other environmental negatives. It also removes turbulence causing obstacles from the boundary layer of air at the same time that turbines are adding some. Why wouldn’t you worry about tree turbulence, if you’re going to worry about wind turbine turbulence?