Energy Saving Light Bulbs Are Poisonous To the Brain, Nervous System, Liver, Kidneys

Maybe it will cut down on all that foreign coal and natural gas we import...

 

I'm sure you have experienced many times when you went to turn on a cold incandescent bulb and you turn on the switch and there's a bright flash and the bulb is then burned out.

 

Perhaps you should invest in a wench.

They work well.

 

like this?

 

No, no, don't tell anyone that ESPECIALLY conservatives.

You could come up with an unbreakable coin sized disk that put out a 100 watts of pure spectrum sunlight and used no energy whatsoever forever and these (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s would (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) it didn't have the "warmth" of a candle flame. If these (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s were still in charge we'd be complaining of the whale oil shortage and blaming it on the evil Glouchester Cartel. "No whales, wattaya mean no whales, My uncle swears he hooked one under the bridge just last week, though it got away."

Conservatives, can't live with 'em and shooting them would bankrupt the Whole Foods Co.

 

So then, your claim...

"When comparing or rating all types of lighting Luminaires for producing natural light, they all are compared to the incandescent light."

...isn't substantiated.

 

You have to have something to compare things too.

 

So then you retract your claim because it has no basis in actual fact?

 

You have to have something to compare things too.

Let me provide an example. The U.S. Army War College uses the basic British infantryman to base all of the other armies in the world from. The British infantryman is always given a rating of 5. During WW ll the U.S. Army basic infantryman was also rated a 5, equal to the British infantryman. ( Now the U.S. Army wouldn't rate it's self to it's self would they ? ) Everything has to be compared to something else. The basic German Weremacht infantryman was rated at a 5.2. The Soviet soldier was rated at a 3.4 if my memory serves me right. U.S. Army Rangers, U.S. Marines, Royal Marines all rated well above 5.

The last time I had to deal with light was probably back in 1985, back then we had lumens meters and I believe they are obsolete today but still used in the field and laboratories. Also there was no white light LED's back then.

 

As usual, overblown right wing fear mongering because some liberal (literally) made a better light bulb.

http://energyblog.nationalgeographic.com/2014/01/08/separating-myth-from-fact-on-cfls-and-leds-five-concerns-addressed/

Also, no references to the research done, along with links to buy other lighting products. (sponsors anyone)

Good luck finding anything out about Fraunhofer Wilhelm Klaudia Institute, try a google search.

Please try a little harder next time before posting absolute garbage such as this thread.

 

But a comparison "claim" has to be based on fact or it is not a fact.

Your "claim" has no basis in fact.

Lumen meters are used all the time, especially by building inspectors and other concerned individuals.

 

Well electricity is not a fact but a theory, correct ?

 

Uh, no.

Now, back to your "claim"...

 

Everyone seems to agree it's electrical theory not a fact.

http://www.electricianinformationresource.com/electrical-school/basic-electrical-theory/

http://ecmweb.com/cee-news-archive/electrical-theory-part-1

http://www.electricianshangout.com/the-electron-theory/electrical-terminology/

http://www.electrical4u.com/electric-current-and-theory-of-electricity/

http://www.electrical4u.com/electric-current-and-theory-of-electricity/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m69Rcn-4F0w

 

Yet, you still can't admit that you were wrong about your "claim".

Why is that?

 

Why would I admit that what I was taught was wrong ?

Unless you can come up with another example than using an incandescent "bulb."

 

If you were "taught" that, then google would be your friend to prove your "claim".

It should then be a simple task, eh?

BTW...

...Example = The Sun

 

Why Google ? Why not play with the big boys at Google Scholar ? -> https://scholar.google.com/

 

O.K. That's about all I need.

I saw your posts and observed that you could put some actual thought in them.

I look for that in posters in these discussion groups for someone I can discuss issues and such with.

But when I find a poster who can't even admit a mistake for something as simple as the claim you made, I find that posters like that are pretty disingenuous and not worth discussing various subjects and issues with.

Pretty sad but I know when to move on.

 

I posted my comments including my first post on medical studies on LED is hard on your eyes.

Personally I wouldn't re-lamp my entire home using LED lighting because it hasn't been perfected yet. Every LED fixture I have installed and even every LED flashlight I have bought have failed, every one. LED white light is interesting but when they come up with one where a diode doesn't fail before it's suppose too, then I'll come aboard.

But as you may or may not have noticed, every time something is perfected and it works, it called obsolete. Ever noticed that ?

Who's behind the LED ? The same people who are pushing the LED were the same people who were behind pushing the re-lamping your home and businesses with first fluorescent lighting, then halogen lighting then the LCF and now the LED. Not forgetting fiber optics lighting. It's always the climate change bigots who have been wrong ever since they were yelling that the ice age was only ten years away, the IBEW and the manufactures of the the luminaires.

As soon as everyone has switched over to LED lighting and when it has been perfected and actually works trouble free, it will be called politically incorrect, environmentally unfriendly and obsolete. That's how it works.

Who was really behind outlawing the incandescent light bulb ? Follow the money trail to Washington DC and state legislatures. General Electric, Philips, Sylvania and the biggest union cash contributor to politicians, the IBEW.

FYI: Where did GE, Philips and Sylvania moved their incandescent manufacturing plants too ? China. The third world needs cheap reliable lighting and China will provide it.

 

The never-ending BS from Republicans is so endlessly never ends! Of course, why chould it stop with the huge money who propaganda for the oil and coal companies?

The same people that are demanding we burn coal endlessly worried about a few crumbs of tuna in a CFL

https://www.1000bulbs.com/pages/mercury.html