Quantcast

Green, Green, Green… It’s Radon, It’s Not Seen!

Informed Voter 2012/04/08 15:06:41


You’ve all heard the radio
ads by now from the EPA and the Ad Council, the publicly funded entities
responsible for public service announcements. And though the arrangement of the
tune is deliberately crafted to appeal to a wide range of musical tastes from
country to gospel to just a single child singing, the message is the same.
After the musical refrain that blatantly connects a “green” agenda to an unseen
gas, a spoken voice defines, for a dumbed-down public, exactly what the song
means:



“Making it green
starts from the gound up...”
even though the message is about getting
you to test your home for something completely invisible: Radon.





Talk about bait and
switch! Exactly what does the color “green” have to do with testing your home for
an unseen gas?





By turning off the
majority of Americans have come to realize the entire “green” phenomenon is
based on an elaborate hoax, the crucial message of radon awareness is lost.





So why is it important
for the average American to test their homes for the presence of radon (which
has nothing to do with the fantasy of
Anthropomorphic Global Warming)?





It comes down to defining
exactly what radon is (something that gets lost in the Ad Council’s disingenuous
connection to a “green” agenda).





What is radon? In layman's
terminology,
Radon
is a cancer-causing
radioactive gas.
You cannot see, smell or taste radon,
but it may be a problem in your home
.”



http://www.radon.com/radon/radon_facts.html



So if you can’t “see, smell or taste radon,” then exactly
how did the EPA and the Ad Council make this connection between an invisible
gas and a “green” agenda? Instead of “making it green,” how about making it safe by emphasizing the genuine
danger, not a fabricated one?



By alienating the population who understand the
propagandized value of militant environmentalism, the EPA and the Ad Council
risk losing the opportunity to carry a valuable message to a wider audience!



You!
Add Photos & Videos

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • thefatguy 2013/02/11 02:38:59
    thefatguy
    +1
    The more these deceptive manipulative Eco-Nazis push their "green" agenda, the more I want to bury aluminum cans and dump used motor oil on my neighbor's lawn. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have some trees to chop down.
  • Quincy Jones 2013/02/07 18:11:58
  • Icarus 2012/04/08 22:24:22
    Icarus
    Perhaps you're the one who believes a fantasy - the fantasy that we can do whatever we like on this planet with no consequences. It's anthropogenic global warming, and it's real, whether you like it or not.
  • Informe... Icarus 2012/04/08 22:58:01 (edited)
    Informed Voter
    Hmm... Really? That's just another so-called name for the Global Whining Myth!

    I do so wish you Libs would get your facts straight!

    Anthropogenic or Anthropomorphic Global Warming?

    http://noblesseoblige.org/200...
  • Icarus Informe... 2012/04/09 09:10:49
    Icarus
    It's not a myth, it's scientific fact. Why do you think the Earth was so hot when the dinosaurs were alive? The sun was cooler but atmospheric CO₂ was much higher than today.
  • Informe... Icarus 2012/04/09 09:32:10
    Informed Voter
    LOL! And you were there to measure the sun's temperature, right?

    It's a farse perpetrated by the IPCC... PERIOD! If the e-mail scandal wasn't enough to convince you, then perhaps the debunking of the so-called "Hockey stick" just might.

    Don’t take my word for it, listen to the Danish Scientist, Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensien!
    He is “director of the Danish National Space Center. (Among his numerous accomplishments), he is author or coauthor of some 100 peer-reviewed articles and has presented more than 50 invited papers oat international conferences. He holds a Magisterkonferens (PhD.) in geophysics from the University of Copenhagen.”
    ref: Lawrence Solomon, The Deniers, (USA: Richard Vigilante Books, 2008), p. 139.

    He, with a colleague, Knud Lassen, “a pioneer in research into the aurora borealis”
    published a path-breaking study … showing a startling correlation between global temperature and the sunspot cycle. The significance was that by finding that (sunspot) cycle lengthy rather tan sunspot quantity correlated better to temperature change… The real value of a correlation is if it can indicate where to search for a physical mechanism.”

    “To his surprise, the IPCC refused to consider the Sun’s influence on Earth’s climate as a topic worth of investigation.” (That’s not very scienti...



















    LOL! And you were there to measure the sun's temperature, right?

    It's a farse perpetrated by the IPCC... PERIOD! If the e-mail scandal wasn't enough to convince you, then perhaps the debunking of the so-called "Hockey stick" just might.

    Don’t take my word for it, listen to the Danish Scientist, Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensien!
    He is “director of the Danish National Space Center. (Among his numerous accomplishments), he is author or coauthor of some 100 peer-reviewed articles and has presented more than 50 invited papers oat international conferences. He holds a Magisterkonferens (PhD.) in geophysics from the University of Copenhagen.”
    ref: Lawrence Solomon, The Deniers, (USA: Richard Vigilante Books, 2008), p. 139.

    He, with a colleague, Knud Lassen, “a pioneer in research into the aurora borealis”
    published a path-breaking study … showing a startling correlation between global temperature and the sunspot cycle. The significance was that by finding that (sunspot) cycle lengthy rather tan sunspot quantity correlated better to temperature change… The real value of a correlation is if it can indicate where to search for a physical mechanism.”

    “To his surprise, the IPCC refused to consider the Sun’s influence on Earth’s climate as a topic worth of investigation.” (That’s not very scientific, is it? Now ask yourself WHY would the scientific community wish to stifle research that is germane to its investigation of climate change, unless their hiding something.)

    "Solanski's 2004 paper marked a pivotal point in the climate-change debate, invigorating research into solar factors involved in climate change. The furious denunciations against Friis-Christensen began to ring rather hollow when Max Planck Institute (among others) joined the fray.”

    “He insists, however, that much of the warming of the past 150 years cannot be explained by CO2 emissions and must have another source, with the Sun as an excellent candidate.” (Ibid, p. 150)

    “Dr. (Edward J.) Wegman is a director at the Center for Computational Statistics at George Mason University, chair of the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics, and board member of the American Statistical Association…Wegman’s work challenged, and many say demolished, one of the hottest and most publicized claims of the science-is-settled side (the hockey stick).” (Ibid, p. 10)

    “Wegman became involved in the global warming controversy after Energy and Commerce Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives asked him to assess the ‘hockey stick graph,’ the IPCC’s poster child in the global warming debate.” (Ibid)

    Wegman correctly demonstrated that University of Massachusetts’ Michael Mann’s “‘hockey stick,’ eliminated the Medieval Warming Period, making our recent 20th-century cooling look far more dramatic compared to the rest of the record. The impact was explosive.” (Ibid, p. 12)

    “Dr (Vincent) Gray has become known as one of the most persistent, even vitriolic, critics of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). He has gone so far as to denounce the entire IPCC process as a ‘swindle.’” (Ibid, p. 58)

    Dr. Grays’ experience with the IPCC has made him, “an angry man, aghast at what he sees as an appalling absence of scientific rigor in the IPCC’s review process. ‘Right from the beginning, I have had difficulty with their procedures. Pertinent questions often ended without any answer Comments on the IPCC drafts were rejected without explanation, and attempts to pursue the matter were frustrated indefinitely.’” (Ibid)

    Additionally, he commented, “I have been forced to the conclusion that for significant parts of the work of the IPCC, the data collection and scientific methods employed are unsound. Resistance to all efforts to try and discuss or rectify these problems has convinced me that normal scientific procedures are not only rejected by the IPCC, but that this practice is endemic, and was part of the organization from the very beginning.” (Ibid, p. 59)

    “Dr. Vincent Gray, is a graduate of the University of Cambridge, with a Ph.D. in physical chemistry. He has published more then a hundred scientific papers and authored the book, The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of “climate Change 2001.” Dr. Gray has participated in all of the science reviews of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and in 2006 was a visiting scholar at the Beijing Climate Center.” (Ibid)

    Now, debunk any of these scientists' documented evidence... if you can!
    (more)
  • Icarus Informe... 2012/04/09 13:13:17
    Icarus
    Don't evade the issue. Solar physicists have known for at least 40 years that stars heat up as they get older and burn through their hydrogen. This is the source of the 'faint young sun paradox'. Several theories have been put forward to explain how the Earth could have been much warmer even when the sun was several percent cooler. Only an enhanced greenhouse effect caused by elevated atmospheric CO₂ provides enough warming influence on the climate to offset the cooler sun. So, how do you think it's *not* going to have the same warming influence today, when it's us putting CO₂ into the atmosphere, instead of nature? Answer the question.
  • Informe... Icarus 2012/04/09 21:41:25 (edited)
    Informed Voter
    Why don't YOU address each and every one of the facts I've just presented! Perhaps then the SH reading public (and me) MIGHT take you seriously.
  • Icarus Informe... 2012/04/09 21:47:16
    Icarus
    Why do you continue to evade my question?
  • Informe... Icarus 2012/04/09 22:03:50
    Informed Voter
    Why do YOU evade mine? You said man-made Global Whining was real.
    I PROVED it wasn't. You can't address a single proof I've offered.

    YOU LOSE!
  • Icarus Informe... 2012/04/09 22:54:09
    Icarus
    Your so-called 'proof' was just the usual bunch of myths, lies and misrepresentations - a way to evade the real issue, which is that CO₂ is the main driver of global climate -

    http://www.giss.nasa.gov/rese...
  • Informe... Icarus 2012/04/09 23:44:45
    Informed Voter
    Ah, the Liberal dismissal of facts. I believe Hilliary called it the, "suspension of disbelief."

    Rather than pronounce my evidence as false, PROVE IT, counselor!
    Or lose your case.

    I present it again...

    Listen to the Danish Scientist, Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensien!
    He is “director of the Danish National Space Center. (Among his numerous accomplishments), he is author or coauthor of some 100 peer-reviewed articles and has presented more than 50 invited papers oat international conferences. He holds a Magisterkonferens (PhD.) in geophysics from the University of Copenhagen.”
    ref: Lawrence Solomon, The Deniers, (USA: Richard Vigilante Books, 2008), p. 139.

    He, with a colleague, Knud Lassen, “a pioneer in research into the aurora borealis”
    published a path-breaking study … showing a startling correlation between global temperature and the sunspot cycle. The significance was that by finding that (sunspot) cycle lengthy rather tan sunspot quantity correlated better to temperature change… The real value of a correlation is if it can indicate where to search for a physical mechanism.”

    “To his surprise, the IPCC refused to consider the Sun’s influence on Earth’s climate as a topic worth of investigation.” (That’s not very scientific, is it? Now ask yourself WHY would the scientific community wis...



















    Ah, the Liberal dismissal of facts. I believe Hilliary called it the, "suspension of disbelief."

    Rather than pronounce my evidence as false, PROVE IT, counselor!
    Or lose your case.

    I present it again...

    Listen to the Danish Scientist, Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensien!
    He is “director of the Danish National Space Center. (Among his numerous accomplishments), he is author or coauthor of some 100 peer-reviewed articles and has presented more than 50 invited papers oat international conferences. He holds a Magisterkonferens (PhD.) in geophysics from the University of Copenhagen.”
    ref: Lawrence Solomon, The Deniers, (USA: Richard Vigilante Books, 2008), p. 139.

    He, with a colleague, Knud Lassen, “a pioneer in research into the aurora borealis”
    published a path-breaking study … showing a startling correlation between global temperature and the sunspot cycle. The significance was that by finding that (sunspot) cycle lengthy rather tan sunspot quantity correlated better to temperature change… The real value of a correlation is if it can indicate where to search for a physical mechanism.”

    “To his surprise, the IPCC refused to consider the Sun’s influence on Earth’s climate as a topic worth of investigation.” (That’s not very scientific, is it? Now ask yourself WHY would the scientific community wish to stifle research that is germane to its investigation of climate change, unless their hiding something.)

    "Solanski's 2004 paper marked a pivotal point in the climate-change debate, invigorating research into solar factors involved in climate change. The furious denunciations against Friis-Christensen began to ring rather hollow when Max Planck Institute (among others) joined the fray.”

    “He insists, however, that much of the warming of the past 150 years cannot be explained by CO2 emissions and must have another source, with the Sun as an excellent candidate.” (Ibid, p. 150)

    “Dr. (Edward J.) Wegman is a director at the Center for Computational Statistics at George Mason University, chair of the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics, and board member of the American Statistical Association…Wegman’s work challenged, and many say demolished, one of the hottest and most publicized claims of the science-is-settled side (the hockey stick).” (Ibid, p. 10)

    “Wegman became involved in the global warming controversy after Energy and Commerce Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives asked him to assess the ‘hockey stick graph,’ the IPCC’s poster child in the global warming debate.” (Ibid)

    Wegman correctly demonstrated that University of Massachusetts’ Michael Mann’s “‘hockey stick,’ eliminated the Medieval Warming Period, making our recent 20th-century cooling look far more dramatic compared to the rest of the record. The impact was explosive.” (Ibid, p. 12)

    “Dr (Vincent) Gray has become known as one of the most persistent, even vitriolic, critics of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). He has gone so far as to denounce the entire IPCC process as a ‘swindle.’” (Ibid, p. 58)

    Dr. Grays’ experience with the IPCC has made him, “an angry man, aghast at what he sees as an appalling absence of scientific rigor in the IPCC’s review process. ‘Right from the beginning, I have had difficulty with their procedures. Pertinent questions often ended without any answer Comments on the IPCC drafts were rejected without explanation, and attempts to pursue the matter were frustrated indefinitely.’” (Ibid)

    Additionally, he commented, “I have been forced to the conclusion that for significant parts of the work of the IPCC, the data collection and scientific methods employed are unsound. Resistance to all efforts to try and discuss or rectify these problems has convinced me that normal scientific procedures are not only rejected by the IPCC, but that this practice is endemic, and was part of the organization from the very beginning.” (Ibid, p. 59)

    “Dr. Vincent Gray, is a graduate of the University of Cambridge, with a Ph.D. in physical chemistry. He has published more then a hundred scientific papers and authored the book, The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of “climate Change 2001.” Dr. Gray has participated in all of the science reviews of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and in 2006 was a visiting scholar at the Beijing Climate Center.” (Ibid)

    Now, debunk any of these scientists' documented evidence... if you can!
    (more)
  • Icarus Informe... 2012/04/10 06:32:19
    Icarus
    You're still evading the issue. Why is that?

    I know why: You can't answer the question because to answer it you'd have to admit what climate scientists already know:

    CO₂ is the main driver of global climate.
    Humans have raised atmospheric CO₂ by 40%.
    This is heating up the planet.

    Pretty simple and undeniable, which is why you keep evading the question.
  • Informe... Icarus 2012/04/10 10:22:53
    Informed Voter
    LOL! So far, you haven't quoted ONE scientist to prove your half-baked theory.

    If you've BOTHERED to read my responses, I did answer you genius! Too bad the reception of facts seems to be a skill you've never mastered.

    FACT: CO2 is NOT a polutant!
    http://www.populartechnology....

    FACT: Humans have no dominion over global temperatures (hot or cold)!
    http://csanad.hubpages.com/hu...

    And if you MUST call it "Anthroprogenic" global whining, I have an article for you on that subject, too:

    Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?
    http://www.google.com/#hl=en&...


    Hmm... even a sixth grader knows this:
    http://www.oregoncitynewsonli...

    FACT: AS the evidence above suggests, your uncoordinated "facts" have been debunked. But you are still hell-bent on ignoring them.

    Pretty simple and undeniable, wouldn't you say?
    LOL! So far, you haven't quoted ONE scientist to prove your half-baked theory.

    If you've BOTHERED to read my responses, I did answer you genius! Too bad the reception of facts seems to be a skill you've never mastered.

    FACT: CO2 is NOT a polutant!
    http://www.populartechnology....

    FACT: Humans have no dominion over global temperatures (hot or cold)!
    http://csanad.hubpages.com/hu...

    And if you MUST call it "Anthroprogenic" global whining, I have an article for you on that subject, too:

    Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?
    http://www.google.com/#hl=en&...


    Hmm... even a sixth grader knows this:
    http://www.oregoncitynewsonli...

    FACT: AS the evidence above suggests, your uncoordinated "facts" have been debunked. But you are still hell-bent on ignoring them.

    Pretty simple and undeniable, wouldn't you say?
    (more)
  • Icarus Informe... 2012/04/10 13:29:31
    Icarus
    If you're so sure of what you claim, why can't you answer the simple question that I started with? -

    Why was the Earth so much hotter millions of years ago, when the sun was cooler but atmospheric CO₂ was much higher?

    The answer, as you know and as I said before, is that CO₂ is the main driver of global climate -

    http://www.giss.nasa.gov/rese...

    When are you going to address the evidence instead of continually evading it?
  • Informe... Icarus 2012/04/10 22:11:19 (edited)
    Informed Voter
    It's not a claim... it's fact! And YOU have not proved your side of it.

    All of your so-called evidence is based on the MYTH of the Hockey Stick which as been thoroughly debunked by over 30 PhDs in "The Deniers" (Including Freeman Dyson!)

    You lost... get over yourself.

    Thanks for playing.
  • Icarus Informe... 2012/04/10 22:13:43
    Icarus
    Take it up with NASA.
  • Informe... Icarus 2012/04/10 22:45:20
    Informed Voter
    I don't have to. I have over 30 PhDs that would argue the point for me!

    Talk about evasion... ANSWER MY questions, genius?
  • Icarus Informe... 2012/04/10 22:52:10
    Icarus
    Guess why your '30 PhDs' are still chewing over a 14-year-old paper. That's right - they have no actual argument or evidence to support AGW denial. They have no alternative theory to explain global warming. They have nothing but myths, lies, misrepresentations, diversionary tactics, cherry-picked and corrupted data... all because the established *fact* is that CO₂ is the main driver of global climate, and the primary cause of anthropogenic global warming. The fact that you still can't bring yourself to even address this issue, let alone refute it, speaks volumes.
  • Informe... Icarus 2012/04/10 23:13:59
    Informed Voter
    I guess YOU don't know how to address a single one of THEIR facts.... Here's your final opportunity to do so... or LOSE your argument PERMANENTLY:

    I present it again...

    Listen to the Danish Scientist, Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensien!
    He is “director of the Danish National Space Center. (Among his numerous accomplishments), he is author or coauthor of some 100 peer-reviewed articles and has presented more than 50 invited papers oat international conferences. He holds a Magisterkonferens (PhD.) in geophysics from the University of Copenhagen.”
    ref: Lawrence Solomon, The Deniers, (USA: Richard Vigilante Books, 2008), p. 139.

    He, with a colleague, Knud Lassen, “a pioneer in research into the aurora borealis”
    published a path-breaking study … showing a startling correlation between global temperature and the sunspot cycle. The significance was that by finding that (sunspot) cycle lengthy rather tan sunspot quantity correlated better to temperature change… The real value of a correlation is if it can indicate where to search for a physical mechanism.”

    “To his surprise, the IPCC refused to consider the Sun’s influence on Earth’s climate as a topic worth of investigation.” (That’s not very scientific, is it? Now ask yourself WHY would the scientific community wish to stifle research that is ger...



















    I guess YOU don't know how to address a single one of THEIR facts.... Here's your final opportunity to do so... or LOSE your argument PERMANENTLY:

    I present it again...

    Listen to the Danish Scientist, Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensien!
    He is “director of the Danish National Space Center. (Among his numerous accomplishments), he is author or coauthor of some 100 peer-reviewed articles and has presented more than 50 invited papers oat international conferences. He holds a Magisterkonferens (PhD.) in geophysics from the University of Copenhagen.”
    ref: Lawrence Solomon, The Deniers, (USA: Richard Vigilante Books, 2008), p. 139.

    He, with a colleague, Knud Lassen, “a pioneer in research into the aurora borealis”
    published a path-breaking study … showing a startling correlation between global temperature and the sunspot cycle. The significance was that by finding that (sunspot) cycle lengthy rather tan sunspot quantity correlated better to temperature change… The real value of a correlation is if it can indicate where to search for a physical mechanism.”

    “To his surprise, the IPCC refused to consider the Sun’s influence on Earth’s climate as a topic worth of investigation.” (That’s not very scientific, is it? Now ask yourself WHY would the scientific community wish to stifle research that is germane to its investigation of climate change, unless their hiding something.)

    "Solanski's 2004 paper marked a pivotal point in the climate-change debate, invigorating research into solar factors involved in climate change. The furious denunciations against Friis-Christensen began to ring rather hollow when Max Planck Institute (among others) joined the fray.”

    “He insists, however, that much of the warming of the past 150 years cannot be explained by CO2 emissions and must have another source, with the Sun as an excellent candidate.” (Ibid, p. 150)

    “Dr. (Edward J.) Wegman is a director at the Center for Computational Statistics at George Mason University, chair of the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics, and board member of the American Statistical Association…Wegman’s work challenged, and many say demolished, one of the hottest and most publicized claims of the science-is-settled side (the hockey stick).” (Ibid, p. 10)

    “Wegman became involved in the global warming controversy after Energy and Commerce Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives asked him to assess the ‘hockey stick graph,’ the IPCC’s poster child in the global warming debate.” (Ibid)

    Wegman correctly demonstrated that University of Massachusetts’ Michael Mann’s “‘hockey stick,’ eliminated the Medieval Warming Period, making our recent 20th-century cooling look far more dramatic compared to the rest of the record. The impact was explosive.” (Ibid, p. 12)

    “Dr (Vincent) Gray has become known as one of the most persistent, even vitriolic, critics of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). He has gone so far as to denounce the entire IPCC process as a ‘swindle.’” (Ibid, p. 58)

    Dr. Grays’ experience with the IPCC has made him, “an angry man, aghast at what he sees as an appalling absence of scientific rigor in the IPCC’s review process. ‘Right from the beginning, I have had difficulty with their procedures. Pertinent questions often ended without any answer Comments on the IPCC drafts were rejected without explanation, and attempts to pursue the matter were frustrated indefinitely.’” (Ibid)

    Additionally, he commented, “I have been forced to the conclusion that for significant parts of the work of the IPCC, the data collection and scientific methods employed are unsound. Resistance to all efforts to try and discuss or rectify these problems has convinced me that normal scientific procedures are not only rejected by the IPCC, but that this practice is endemic, and was part of the organization from the very beginning.” (Ibid, p. 59)

    “Dr. Vincent Gray, is a graduate of the University of Cambridge, with a Ph.D. in physical chemistry. He has published more then a hundred scientific papers and authored the book, The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of “climate Change 2001.” Dr. Gray has participated in all of the science reviews of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and in 2006 was a visiting scholar at the Beijing Climate Center.” (Ibid)

    Now, debunk any of these scientists' documented evidence... if you can!
    (more)
  • Informe... Icarus 2012/04/10 22:52:43
    Informed Voter
    Here, take it up with Dr. John Brignell's list collected from every newspaper story that blamed each of the following items' on Global Warming....

    http://www.americanthinker.co...

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/11/28 12:18:28

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals