Energy-saving bulbs tossed in trash, leaking mercury into environment

We warned our readers about CFL bulbs more than four years ago. According to a new report by CTV, 90% of these mercury-containing bulbs are ending up in landfills and leaking mercury into the environment. The government is now scrambling for a way to fix this.

Personally, I got rid of almost all my CFL bulbs a few years ago and stocked up on incandescents. Saving a few cents isn’t worth the hassle. Read the government’s instructions on how you’re supposed to clean up if one of those bulbs breaks. It happened to me once and it was a 3-hour nightmare to clean up the mess. Never again.

The government tries to reassure us that these bulbs are safe, but when you read the extensive cleaning instructions, you can’t help but wonder how unsafe these trinkets must be.

I guess nobody thought ahead as to what would happen when millions of these would start getting thrown in the trash. Now we know.

FOUR THINGS TO REMEMBER ABOUT THE POPE’S ENVIRONMENT LETTER

I suspect and hope that this encyclical will not be the gas the liberals need to light their inferno.

In fact, I hope the Pope puts something in there about the real and present danger posed by population control fanatics who have taken over the environmental movement.

In fact, it would be rather safe to say that, without them, there would be no movement at all.  I wonder if these inconvenient facts will make it into the Encyclical?

Maybe Cardinal Pell can give it a critique before it hits the Press.

Pope Steyn, And That’s No Papal Bull, Either

I’m not a Catholic, and so my views on the Vicar of Christ are neither here nor there. In the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury is generally regarded as a camp joke on a par with the leading panto roles, but I understand that not all “faith traditions” are the same in this respect. Nevertheless, I’m not a big fan of the present pontiff. Pope-wise, I like the other fellow – the Pope Emeritus or whatever you call him. Yet, putting personal preferences aside, the notion of a papal encyclical on climate change in order to “impact” a UN conference is utterly depressing in its cobwebbed banality.

And also kind of decadent at a time when some of the oldest Christian communities on earth are being systematically extinguished. That’s a real present-tense crisis, not one of those Al Gore if-we-don’t-act-now-time-is-running-out-to-save-the-polar-bears crisis. It’s happening now, now, now. Oughtn’t that to take priority for the Bishop of Rome? Is the Pope Catholic?

Nor is the onslaught on Christians confined to the Holy Land and the rest of the Middle East. Today’s paper includes an account of the ransacking of a Italian church by a man uttering certain phrases in Arabic. He smashed the baptismal font, two altarpieces, a painting of the Assumption, statues of the Madonna with child, our Lady of the Sorrows, our Lady of the Rosary, and St Joseph. No doubt he was just another of the “mentally ill“. Maybe all these mentally ill Koran-quoters would be worth an encyclical. (Source)

Mark Steyn for Pope…and since the current regime is not too concerned with definitions these days, the fact that Mark isn’t Catholic should be no barrier to entry.

Viva Steyn!

Oil sands cause cancer, except when they don’t

Looks like another myth has been busted.

Much like other claims made by opponents of oil sands development, shocking stories about higher cancer rates among aboriginals living near such projects are falling apart with close scrutiny.

After reviewing the incidence of cancer in the Fort Chipewyan, Alta., aboriginal community between 1992 and 2011, Alberta’s Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr. James Talbot, said Monday the overall cancer rate in the community is not significantly higher than elsewhere — 81 cases, compared with 79 that would be expected in the rest of Alberta.

While three types of cancer — cervical cancer (four cases), lung cancer (eight cases) and bile duct cancer (three cases) — are slightly more prevalent, the first two are preventable through vaccination and less smoking, he said. The third is more complicated and has been linked to such risk factors as obesity, diabetes, alcohol, viral hepatitis and family history.

“There isn’t strong evidence for an association between any of these cancers and environmental exposure,” Dr. Talbot told reporters after releasing the report in Edmonton.

The doctor responsible for spreading the notion that the oil sands were causing cancer among aboriginals was a Greenpeace campaigner. He has been rebuked by both Health Canada and the Alberta College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Birth CONTROL

Last week, former United States Vice President Al Gore again blamed overpopulation for what he says are destructive results of climate change. The environmental activist, whose work has been severely criticized in many quarters, was speaking at the 44th World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland. (Source)

Don’t kid yourself, Buckwheat.  In the end, women (or men) don’t control births.  That’s just a temporary scam to get to the goal line.  In the end, control of births resides in one of two places…with God (and nature) or with the State (and the pharmaceutical companies).

And when you tie it to the fraud of Global Warming you have a very deadly mixture.   Just like you now have a “duty to die” with Euthanasia,  you will have a “duty to be sterilized”.  Believe me, the show of abortion is really not over and there is the last frontier yet to cover here in the West of coerced abortion “for the sake of Mother Earth” and the new Eco-religion.   And don’t think the government won’t try and enforce it either.

He called it, back in ’68 (funny, for an old celibate man, he certainly did know a lot about sex and politics, huh?) :

Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife. (HV, 17)

Science paper doubts Global Warming, so whole journal gets terminated!

The publisher appears to be shocked that in a recent special issue the scientists expressed doubt about the accelerated warming predicted by the IPCC. For the crime of not bowing before the sacred tabernacle, apparently the publishers suddenly felt the need to distance themselves, and in the most over-the-top way. The reasons they gave had nothing to do with the data, the logic, and they cite no errors. There can be no mistake, this is about enforcing a permitted line of thought….(Source)

Hahahaha.  Progressives are so intulectial, aren’t they? — until, of course, it challenges their religion.

What a joke the industry of science has become.  Just another political power play, serving their liberal masters.  Bah.

Moral relativism threatens science itself

Christopher Monckton of Brenchley is a world-renowned speaker on the weakness of the scientific claims for man-made global warming. He knows the science very well. He’s also a Catholic.

He recently wrote a lengthy article on Watts Up With That, the world’s foremost website for scientists that question the science of climate change. Scientists on that site have been fuming over the past few years in the wake of numerous scandals whereby scientists pushing global warming have been caught fudging their data to produce alarmist results. That site, like many scientific circles, is also hostile towards religion. Nevertheless, Monckton brilliantly challenged his colleagues on two key issues related to morality. Continue reading