Michele Bachmann: The Bulb is Dim

Like Al Gore, Bachman is a scientific dimwit ... although Gore is a far more dangerous dimwit than Bachman. Don’t be distracted by a bicycle accident (Bachman) while America’s freedom and economic vitality is ruined by the likes of the sneaky-snake Gore. Submission to science and policy of the likes of the physically expanding Al Gore will take way your freedoms (while expanding Gore’s influence), permit government to confiscate more of our money (while expanding Gore’s wealth), cripple our economy (while communist China is allowed to grow unabated), and subjugate America interests for the global interests of the likes of the corruption infested UN. BTW – Go nuclear!
 

The mercury pollution per hour of CFL lighting is actually comparatively very large despite the superficial numbers thrown around here.

For example, the purified mercury contained in the bulbs means that an additional 40% was released into the environment as unrecovered waste during its extraction and processing. The 4mg of mercury touted above is really 5.6mg. In addition, the 10mg of mercury attributable to coal power production to power an incandescent bulb assumes 100% of the power is coal power. It's not- coal produces about 52% of our power nationwide. The 10mg figure from coal gen can nearly be cut in half.

In addition, careful government studies at Lawrence Livermore Laboratories show that CFL's do not last as long as they are rated; if you use a bulb for an average of only one hour at a time, the lifetime if the bulb is slashed in half. These factors make the mercury pollution of the average CFL more than twice that of a traditional incandescent bulb for a given time period. If you add up the number of bulbs in your house, the number will represent an amount comparable to any other use you have- and rather than being used in a durable good like a thermostat, you will introduce a steady amount into the environment by throwing the bulbs away. Multiply this by tens of millions of households, and you are guaranteed to see a rise in mercury in our environment. Bad idea.

Even given the best recycling efforts with the public at large today, we cannot expect proper disposal for CFL's to be any higher than a few percent- think of the estimated disposal rate for fire alarms...less than 1/10th of one percent are properly disposed of despite their radioactivity.

If you want to save energy, which indisputably has the lowest cost per megawatt hour of any of the dreamy-eyed alternative energy schemes out there, buy LEDs. They are pricey. But they last longer than CFL's, they can make much nicer light, and they put a lot less pollution into the environment than CFL's.
 

Come on Bob don’t be so ignorant. You know that people like Chelsea, Chad and Kdhloretto do not use sound Scientific Theory they use sound Republican Theory!!! After all sound Republican Theory has accomplished so much!

It has gotten us into an incredibly wasteful/senseless war, $3.00 a gallon gas, a severally crippled economy, a banking crises, a healthcare crises, an energy crises and a debt that our children and grandchildren can probably never pay off.

We all must remember the Republicans want us to ignore all Scientific Theory that is based on sound research. We are suppose to follow them blindly. I guess we do have to remember that Republican Theory got America/the world George the Worst twice.

 

For those of you that believe that the debate on global warming is over, I challenge you to read the official US Senate report by over 400 scientists disputing the Al Gore hype. (Issued in Dec 2007)

To find it, just conduct a search with the following key words: "Senate Report global warming"

I think these guys know the definition of "Theory"

Here is one example (of over 400) from the report:

Canada: IPCC 2007 Expert Reviewer Madhav Khandekar, a Ph.D meteorologist, a scientist with the Natural Resources Stewardship Project who has over 45 years experience in climatology, meteorology and oceanography, and who has published nearly 100 papers, reports, book reviews and a book on Ocean Wave Analysis and Modeling: "To my dismay, IPCC authors ignored all my comments and suggestions for major changes in the FOD (First Order Draft) and sent me the SOD (Second Order Draft) with essentially the same text as the FOD. None of the authors of the chapter bothered to directly communicate with me (or with other expert reviewers with whom I communicate on a regular basis) on many issues that were raised in my review. This is not an acceptable scientific review process."
 

For those who don't understand scientific theory, here is a short explanation:

According to the National Academy of Sciences,

Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature that is supported by many facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena.


 

Chelsea, of course, has no idea what she is talking about. We are talking about scientific theory here, which is based on fact and is based on a testable and provable model, which global warming is. For instance, we have atomic theory, which is testable and provable and we have seen can be used to blow up cities, like Hiroshima. In the same way, global warming has been proven and tested many times over by many, many scientists. Bachman is not only wrong, she is in opposition to established scientific fact. It is like saying the earth is flat and that sea water has no salt in it.

Global warming and greenhouse gas theory are facts. Period.
 

Honestly, they call it the greenhouse gas theory exactly because it is unproven. If we had proven greenhouse theory already we would call it the "law" of greenhouse gases. Ever hear of the law of gravity, it's not a theory anymore because we can prove it. We can prove its cause and effect.

Michelle Bachman is a bit of a door knob but she is right. And greanhouse gas theory is just a theory. Its a long way from becoming fact.
 

'Scuse me, that first sentence should read:
CO2 has a green house effect by absorbing infrared radiation (from the sun and reflected off the earth) and converts it to heat via vibration of the CO2 molecules.
 

CO2 has a green house effect by absorbing infrared radiation (from the sun and reflected off the earth) to heat via vibration of the CO2 molecules. Through this mechanism, the increase of atmospheric CO2 from anthropogenic sources (See the Keeling Curve and the Vostok Ice Core data) is causing an increase in the global mean temperature. This is not a hoax, its science.
 

On CFL's: I got duped into buying CFLs for use throughout 75% of my house and i have 8 months of energy bills to prove that they are NOT saving me electricity. The ones on my front porch didn't even work this winter. And now with the temperature in the low 40's they just barely glow.

On Human Caused Global Warming: The theory of greehouse gas hasn't been proven yet. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a hoax, but those who claim that they have evidence that Chevy suburbans and 747's are causing the earth to warm are just being intellectually dishonest. What caused the last ice age to end?. It wasn't human-caused global warming so how is it that we are not simply in another natural cycle of warming/cooling and temperature pattern shift? Just give me proof and I'll be on board.
 

I agree that Michele Bachmann can be controversial. That is how she was elected. As a conservative, I don't fully agree with her statement on the CFL bulb. I do agree that they might be a wise choice for many household applications. They consume much less power, and last for a long time. What I really don't like is that anyone would tell me that I am required to use them. They don't even fit in half to fixtures in my home. Also, they don't work in any unheated area during cold months. This has no business even being discussed in any legislative body. Educate me on why I should use them, but don't make me.
Regarding the global warming issue:
Again I don't necessarily agree with Michele's statement. There may in fact be some level of warming taking place. But I also don't think that the debate on what the human response should be is over. Has anyone seen the senate report that came out in December (2007) that has over 400 scientists that disagree with the Al Gore hype. Look it up. Anyway, to send the whole economy into disarray over this is beyond comprehension. The current economic downturn can be directly related to the global warming hysteria and the environment extremists. Don't think that just because I am a conservative, I don't want to leave a clean place for my children and grandchildren. I also want them to live in a country where freedom is still allowed.
 

I agree with Michelle, Global Warming is not "Caused" from carbon dioxide and I challenge you to show a direct cause and effect . All evidence points to increased carbon dioxide as a byproduct of warmer temperatures, not the cause.
CFL bulbs cost up to 8 to 12 times the cost of an incandescent bulb and they are only more efficient . CFL bulbs must remain on more than 29 minutes at a time.(not practical for all applications) to compare to an incandescent bulb. If the mercury in these CFL bulbs is is soooo safe, why is it recommended by the EPA to have pregnant women and children evacuate a home if one of these CFL bulbs is broken and DO NOT Use a vacumn?
 

What's truly frightening is what her election says about the folks she represents. It's not as if any of this comes as a surprise after her stint in the state legislature.