CFLs: Why Do Climate Alarmists Hate Women And Children?

It’s been mentioned many times before, the dangers of mercury in compact fluorescent light bulbs. And here’s more

ENERGY-saving light bulbs were at the centre of a fresh health scare last night after researchers claimed they can release potentially harmful amounts of mercury if broken.

Levels of toxic vapour around smashed eco-bulbs were up to 20 times higher than the safe guideline limit for an indoor area, the study said. It added that broken bulbs posed a potential health risk to pregnant women, babies and small children.

Well, isn’t that great? It’s obvious that in the alarmists march towards limiting your free market choices because of a nebulous Jonestown idea that Mankind is killing Gaia with greenhouse gas releases, they end up creating a real world danger. Of course, many alarmists will surely not care, because they place the climate, something that has always changed, over human beings welfare, and face it, these same alarmists want to reduce the human population.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “CFLs: Why Do Climate Alarmists Hate Women And Children?”

  1. John Ryan says:

    CFL HYSTERIA !!! Flee !Flee save yourself. Teach The total amount of mercury in a new CFL bulb is less than 6 with most being in the 3/1000s or 4/1000s of a gram. Volume wise that is about the size of this period . If it were a sphere, If it ALL vaporized which I cannot see happening, it would be still under the safe guidelines. Talk about hysteria. So take a deep breath their Teach and try and cool down. The total amount of mercury put into the environment by having to burn extra coal fro your beloved incandescent bulbs is 10 times more than that from an improperly disposed of CFL. Also Teach please tell us how much more mercury there is in a cell phone than in a CFL.

  2. Why do you hate women and babies, John?

  3. captainfish says:

    Seems to me, we are throwing tons of money at eradicating lead-based paint in VERY old homes to keep babies from picking and eating the paint off the walls – which I have never heard of a kid doing for real.

    But, yet enviros and Johnny-baby are very happy with putting mercury-filled glass in each and ever lamp in our homes????

    For all the money and effort and time that these idiots and lobbyists have put in to CFL poisons, they could have been employing LEDs.

    But, since when have enviros and lobbyists like Johnny ever concerned with safety, economics and logic.

  4. Brian says:

    Good response to the idiotic premise stated by “teach” (talk about an ironic name). As an energy manager with a Bachelors in the subject, I have some background and science around the topic. Your comments John were spot on. And it’s reflected by the schoolyard response of the short-sighted website. No one hates children. If thats your best argument then continue working on your GED. All you need is the ability to do research from disinterested 3rd parties. Not these 18th century folks who have figured out how to turn on a computer and therefore pronounce expertise on things they’re clueless about.
    The more accurate question teach is why do YOU hate children since all your opinions seem centered around your own personal comfort and pigheadedness with no thought for the future of the planet…which means the human race. And 3mg of mercury is hardly “mercury filled”. Unless you consider fumes in your gas tank the same as “filled up”.
    No, you’ll just throw around more baseless, inaccurate tantrums. How about a response with actual peer-reviewed scientific data? Let me answer that. You won’t because there is none.

  5. captainfish says:

    Hey Brian, I mean John, why not have your little kiddies, if you have any (or yourself if you don’t) swallow that 3mg of mercury and then come back and tell us how safe mercury for personal use really is.

  6. So, Brian, can we assume that you live a completely carbon neutral lifestyle, use no standard light bulbs, do not take any fossil fueled conveyances, etc and so on? Or, are you simply one of the standard “everyone else should change their lifestyle” liberals?

    And that’s cute, throwing around “peer reviewed.” That seems to be the alarmist response when they do not like a scientific study, as provided through the actual link. You should take some time and actually read it. You might learn something, though, I suspect nothing will turn your narrow minded cultish behavior around so that you can play with the adults.

Pirate's Cove