News Briefs 2-2-2009

It sure is nice to be in such fine company here. Thanks, guys.

Thanks to one and all for a big bunch o' news -- passed on by Turner Young.

Quote of the Day:

There's going to be a whole generation of people who, when they think of the Maya, think of 2012, and to me that's just criminal. There is no serious scholar who puts any stock in the idea that the Maya said anything meaningful about 2012. The whole year leading up to it is going to be just crazy, I'm sorry to say.

David Stuart, director, Mesoamerica Center, University of Texas at Austin.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours

Its ironic that religion and the belief in god is the number one cause of all human suffering.

Cheers

Greg's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
2 hours 54 min
tihz_ho wrote:

Its ironic that religion and the belief in god is the number one cause of all human suffering.

Citation?

I'm no fan of organised religion, for a number of reasons (both logical and personal), but I keep hearing this line (most often from atheists/skeptics) and I'm very doubtful of it. I'm very interested to hear where this 'fact' comes from.

Kind regards,
Greg
-------------------------------------------
You monkeys only think you're running things

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours

Granted if there weren't any beliefs in god and the religions thereof of course there would be something else to fight about. So for now god and religion gets the finger... :)

A History of Religion

The Holy Wars / Crusades

The Inquisition

Stalin, Mao and Hitler and many others supplanted beliefs in god and religion for themselves and their government and in so doing becoming a religion. (Mao is still revered as a "god" by many in China.)

While WWI was not religiously motivated WWII was. The Jews were the problem for everything. All the other causes of WWII were underpinned by the "Jewish Conspiracy". Keep in mind no distinctions made between a race of people and Judaism as a religion. If you were a Jew, that’s it.

The Middle East, Jihad, "Holy War"? East Africa, if you are not a Muslim...well...better get with the program there pal!

There is a fine line between religion and politics and many years ago there was no line at all - religion was not only political but it was how you lived, period, and woe on to those who don't agree...even today.

So lets face it - we are what we are.

Cheers

earthling's picture
Member since:
22 November 2004
Last activity:
5 weeks 1 day

tihz_ho wrote:

Its ironic that religion and the belief in god is the number one cause of all human suffering.

But, at this point I want to add another example. In Germany, a pacifist coalition came to power in late 1998. This included the Green party, and the foreign minister was Joschka Fischer, a Green party leader. The Greens are pacifists.

Less than 6 months later, Germany is in a shooting war (Kosovo), actively helping with the shooting (they did targeting), for the first time since 1945. All it took was some pacifists in government.

Your list of guilty people and organizations contains atheists.

Now you can say that atheism and pacifism are religious in nature.

But if you do that, your original statement breaks down, or more precisely is a null statement because everything is a religion.

----
It is not how fast you go
it is when you get there.

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours
Quote:

Your list of guilty people and organizations contains atheists.

Now you can say that atheism and pacifism are religious in nature.

But if you do that, your original statement breaks down, or more precisely is a null statement because everything is a religion.

Ahhh...

That's the point! If there wasn't a god and the attending religion then it would be something else just like it. The God gene hypothesis proposes that human beings inherit a set of genes that predisposes them to belief in a higher power.

So if its not god then it’s a political figure et al. The belief in god is just that, a belief. It cannot be quantified, measured...its a concept. A religion develops from the concept of a god.

I am sure there are people out there who pray to Elvis. Me? If I was going to pray to someone it would be Joe Pesci, he seems to be someone who gets things done. :)

Ancient people did not make any distinction between religion, state and how one lives - it was all one. Today there are countries who merge religion and state together - Iran, Saudi Arabia and so on.

One has to accept that all beliefs no matter what they are such as god, religion, political, Santa Clause et al are just that...beliefs which cannot be proven to exist or not exist.

If someone who does not believe in god, an atheist, takes it upon themselves to convince other people to have the same view then how are they different from people promoting their beliefs in god? Quick way to get into a fight!

An active atheist promoting a disbelief in god cannot disprove there is a god while religious people who promote a belief in god cannot prove god exists! Round and round it goes with the only thing certain is it’s a fight of words and logic.

For me, I don't care either way, god or no god. I'm sure if its that important I will find out when I die.

It is a good discussion though...

Cheers

earthling's picture
Member since:
22 November 2004
Last activity:
5 weeks 1 day

For me one of the most interesting observations is that anti-war demonstrations are often quite violent. Pacifists will starts fights quite willingly.

----
It is not how fast you go
it is when you get there.

bladerunner's picture
Member since:
1 May 2004
Last activity:
30 weeks 1 day

Are often started by agents of the government. As a way to break up and discredit movements, against the government, and powers that be.

earthling's picture
Member since:
22 November 2004
Last activity:
5 weeks 1 day

Yeah sure, the government agents are faking the burning of cars, destruction of stores, physical attacks on other demonstrators etc. The only innocent ones are the "peace activists".

Sure.

----
It is not how fast you go
it is when you get there.

red pill junkie's picture
Member since:
12 April 2007
Last activity:
10 hours 7 min
Quote:

Ancient people did not make any distinction between religion, state and how one lives - it was all one. Today there are countries who merge religion and state together - Iran, Saudi Arabia and so on.

The same thing happens in America, vato. They have merged the religious and government power, too.

But the God of America is this.

Trouble is, the most recent Economic breakdown has sparked a big batch of Dollar Atheists :-)

PS: Your assertion that WWII was religious-inspired is over-simplistic. The real reasons behind WWII were Economic factors; the poverty suffered in the German state out of their loss in WWI and the Versailles pact, so common people wanted someone to blame and found them in the sempiternal patsies: the Jews.

We humans don't fight for God. We fight for POWER.

-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

Red Pill Junkie

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours
"RPJ" wrote:

Your assertion that WWII was religious-inspired is over-simplistic. The real reasons behind WWII were Economic factors; the poverty suffered in the German state out of their loss in WWI and the Versailles pact, so common people wanted someone to blame and found them in the sempiternal patsies: the Jews.

Yes, I agree that the causes of WWII are complex. WWII concluded suddenly with German soldiers still in enemy territory, the Treaty of Versailles, the French occupation of the Rhine, the loss of German territory, war reparations which crippled the German economy left Germans feeling that they have been "sold out". Hitler's to rise to power along with his conclusions that it was the Jews who had "masterminded" the selling out of Germany was accepted by Germans.

If one were to say Germans had little or no idea that Hitler and the NSDAP (NAZI party) thought Jews were cause of all that is wrong in Germany and the world at large is wrong.

Propaganda is a powerful and we have many examples aside from NAZI Germany...like "Freedom" as an excuse to do anything for its sake.

Cheers

earthling's picture
Member since:
22 November 2004
Last activity:
5 weeks 1 day

Undeniably the Jews were being blamed for many of the problems in Germany at the time. But this was not religious in nature. It was simply envy of a supposedly identifiable group, that people thought were better off. It was racism much more than religion.

But the main reasons for WW2 were desire for revenge for the Versailles treaty, and Hitler's desire to take over Eastern Europe. Getting rid of the Jews was viewed as a side effect, which the Nazis greatly appreciated.

----
It is not how fast you go
it is when you get there.

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours

If you study Hitler and his inner circle the motivating force was racial purity and they viewed the Jews as a kind of virus invading the host.

History does not agree with your statement that "getting rid of the Jews" was a side effect. Getting rid of the Jews was in their view getting rid of the cause of the ills bestowed unto Germany (and the world) includeing but not limited to post WWI, the Versailles Treaty and so on.

Hitler saw Poland and Slavic people as subhuman with Eastern Jews even lower yet so their elimination was without question. Hitler viewed Communism as the product of Jews so Russia had to be eliminated as well - scorched earth policy on the eastern front.

Hitler was compelled to expand the Third Reich to all of Europe in order to influence the world so the Jewish question could be solved once and for all.

Why then immediately after every expansion of territory made by Nazi Germany the local Jews were rounded up and sent off to concentration / death camps?

This action of deporting the Jews by Nazis continued up to the final days of the war. Therefore if the annihilation of the Jews were a side effect why were critical resources used to deport and continue to annihilate Jews instead being used for the war effort by which time in 1943 they were clearly losing the war in the east and by 1944 in the west?

Nazi persecution of the Jews was religious. Its astounding how Hitler echoes Martin Luther work: On the Jews and Their Lies a 65,000-word treatise written by German Reformation leader Martin Luther in 1543.

"On The Jews and Their Lies - Martin Luther" wrote:

Luther advocated an eight-point plan to get rid of the Jews either by religious conversion or by expulsion:

1. "First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. ..."
2. "Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. ..."
3. "Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them. ..."
4. "Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb. ..."
5. "Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. ..."
6. "Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them. ... Such money should now be used in ... the following [way]... Whenever a Jew is sincerely converted, he should be handed [a certain amount]..."
7. "Seventh, I commend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow... For it is not fitting that they should let us accursed Goyim toil in the sweat of our faces while they, the holy people, idle away their time behind the stove, feasting and farting, and on top of all, boasting blasphemously of their lordship over the Christians by means of our sweat. No, one should toss out these lazy rogues by the seat of their pants."
8. "If we wish to wash our hands of the Jews' blasphemy and not share in their guilt, we have to part company with them. They must be driven from our country" and "we must drive them out like mad dogs."

Obviously Hitler did not agree with any conversion of the Jews the answer was untimely to eliminate them.

The Nazis displayed On the Jews and Their Liesduring Nuremberg rallies, and the city of Nuremberg presented a first edition to Julius Streicher, editor of the Nazi newspaper Der Stürmer.

Religion played more than a minor role in Nazi Germany's treatment of the Jews.

If you are interested in reading more about this I suggest getting a copy of The Rise and Fall of Nazi Germany.

Cheers

earthling's picture
Member since:
22 November 2004
Last activity:
5 weeks 1 day

No, getting rid of the Jews was not the point of the war.

The point of the war was conquest of Eastern Europe, including Russia. And thereby the creation of another mighty German empire.

The elimination of the Jews was a definite goal, perhaps more important to Hitler, but it was separate from the war. However the war did make it easier, and provided more Jews to eliminate.

But neither one of these goals was religiously motivated. The Jews were (and are) convenient scapegoats. Martin Luther's comments on the Jews may well have been religiously motivated.

Hitler was compelled to expand the Third Reich to all of Europe in order to influence the world so the Jewish question could be solved once and for all.

Some historians may have written that, but it is just plain silly. This war was about power, and lots of it.

The resentment towards the Jews then and now has not been about how they pray. It is about control, power and money. There was no religious motivation at all.

----
It is not how fast you go
it is when you get there.

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours
Quote:

The point of the war was conquest of Eastern Europe, including Russia. And thereby the creation of another mighty German empire.

The war and conquest of Eastern Europe & Russia was important to eradicate the subhuman races so that there CAN be a mighty German empire - master race etc.

Not religiously motivated?

Himmler - the occult, the runes for the SS?

The Blutfahne (Blood flag) was a Nazi Swastika flag which was used in the attempted Nazi Beer Hall Putsch in Munich. At the Blutfahnenweihe (Blood flag consecration) new Standarten (flags) of SA- and SS-units were "consecrated" by touching their guidons with the Blutfahne.

The Spear of Destiny. The spear, along with the crown and jewels of the Holy Roman Empire, wood from the cross, and the sword of Mauritius, were taken to Nuremberg, the centre for the Nazi movement, and placed in the hall of Saint Katherine's Church.

Hitler claimed that the Imperial Regalia had always belonged in Nuremberg and had been taken from the city in 1796, to keep Napoleon from finding the spear. According to Hitler's view of history, Charlemagne was a German, as were the great emperors of the Holy Roman Empire.

Throughout the war, Hitler remained convinced that the occult powers of the spear would bring victory to the Third Reich.

The NAZI swastika...?

Sorry, but when you read more of Hitler's writings & speeches, other Nazi inner circle writings, speeches and propaganda you can get a sense of what the real motivations were. :)

Cheers

earthling's picture
Member since:
22 November 2004
Last activity:
5 weeks 1 day

Certainly they believed they were a superior race. As do the Chinese. The Italians to this day believe the Roman Empire should rise again. OK the Nazis were more oriented by race than by culture, compared to Italians or British or French.

But this goes back to your statement that the war was intended mainly to eradicate the Jews for religious reasons. It wasn't, it was intended to create a mighty German empire. to achieve that, the competition had to give way. Any competition.

So I maintain that it was about control, power and money. The rest was cheap symbolism, albeit done much more extensively than usual.

Nobody bought into the symbolism as a religion, even those (perhaps even a majority) who happily believed that Germans were a superior race.

People were catholic or protestant mostly. At the same time some were communist or Nazi.

Would you see high school marching bands in the Southern US as an indication of a pagan religion?

And indeed Charlemagne was a Frank. The Franks were Germans, in the sense of being a Germanic tribe. That isn't just Hitler's view, it is actually correct. Also which emperors of the Holy Roman Empire were not German? Are you referring to the branch of the Habsburgs ruling from Spain?

One can also say, convincingly I believe, that WW2 was started for medical reasons: Hitler was insane. But that leaves out a whole lot of reasons why he and his inner circle (which changed over time) were able to do what they did. The same is true of Hitler's belief in the occult. While it was there, it did not cause the war.

----
It is not how fast you go
it is when you get there.

red pill junkie's picture
Member since:
12 April 2007
Last activity:
10 hours 7 min

It would definitely be a mistake to overlook all the mysticism that permeated the philosophy of the founders of the Nazi party. I think Hitler cherry-picked every occult idea he would find suitable to support his political interests; even if those ideas were contradictory!

Take for example those 'scientific' current that were heavily studied during the Nazi Germany: The theory of Ice Genesis and the theory of the Hollow Earth.

The Ice Genesis posited that, unlike the concepts of the Big Bang, it was ice and cold the primordial energy that fueled the Cosmos, ignited the stars (!) and promoted evolution. The Aryans felt they were descendants of the mighty legnedary civilizations of Lemuria & Hyperborea.

The Hollow Earth theory claimed that the moon, sun and planets were not as big as modern astronomers believed, but were fixed on the Earth inner 'skin', and that the rising and setting of the sun was an optical illusion, because we all lived inside the Earth.

So the guy who promoted his Ice Genesis theory hated the guts of the Hollow-Earth guy; when inner party people asked the almighty Führer to interfere, his reply was "There is no reason for conflict: they can both be right".

So for Hitler, the truth was not as important as the power of the myth to fuel his ambition. For a guy like him 2+2 can be 4, 5, or both at the same time, depending on what's more suitable for the situation.

He knew he needed to give the German people a new myth in order to turn citizens into nationalist fanatics.

Did he believe his own bullsh*t? It is difficult to say. There have been reports of people seeing the Fuhrer scream hysterically pointing to an invisible presence no one could see. Maybe he was an schizophrenic; maybe he was a natural medium like Rasputin. I don't think we will ever know the truth behind the rise and fall of the 3rd Reich, must people don't want to know anyway.

This book is IMO, required reading for any Grailer interested in all those mysteries; it's a wonderful messy cocktail—here in the Grail we often praise the work of the likes of Charles Fort and Mr. Vallee, but I think we should also look into the work of Jacques Bergier and Louis Pauwels, two unsung heroes in the Pantheon of Fringe Phenomena.

-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

Red Pill Junkie

Greg's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
2 hours 54 min
tihz_ho wrote:

Stalin, Mao and Hitler and many others supplanted beliefs in god and religion for themselves and their government and in so doing becoming a religion. (Mao is still revered as a "god" by many in China.)

No, you most definitely can't claim Stalin, Mao and Hitler. Your words: "religion and the belief in god is the number one cause of all human suffering." The three above are *ideology*, not religion, and most definitely are not about the "belief in god". Ironically, you left out the other mid-19th century aggressor - Japan - whose militaristic motivations lay in part in Shintoism.

Moving on...

Quote:

While WWI was not religiously motivated WWII was. The Jews were the problem for everything. All the other causes of WWII were underpinned by the "Jewish Conspiracy". Keep in mind no distinctions made between a race of people and Judaism as a religion. If you were a Jew, that’s it.

No, that's so wrong I don't know where to start. "All the other causes" of WWII were definitely not "underpinned" by the 'Jewish Conspiracy'. It's difficult to boil WWII down to any one 'underpinning' cause, but if you were to do so then that cause would be the symbiotic pairing of nationalism and imperialism (both of which employed smatterings of the 'scientific racism' which took hold across Europe post-Darwin. Hitler's rise to power in Germany was pretty much a reaction against the impositions of the Treaty of Versailles - that is, an effort to restore the former glory of Germany - and concerns over the relatively new Soviet Union and 'Red' ideology. Mussolini was promising a new Roman Empire for Italy. The rise of Showa Nationalism in Japan was an outgrowth of long-held fears of western imperialism.

BTW, Hitler's explanation of his anti-semitism directly contradicts you. His dislike of the Jews was not on religious grounds, but for nationalist/racist reasons. Originally, he said...

...the only external mark which I recognized as distinguishing them from us was the practice of their strange religion. As I thought that they were persecuted on account of their faith my aversion to hearing remarks against them grew almost into a feeling of abhorrence. I did not in the least suspect that there could be such a thing as a systematic antisemitism. Once, when passing through the inner City, I suddenly encountered a phenomenon in a long caftan and wearing black side-locks. My first thought was: Is this a Jew? They certainly did not have this appearance in Linz. I carefully watched the man stealthily and cautiously but the longer I gazed at the strange countenance and examined it feature by feature, the more the question shaped itself in my brain: Is this a German?

Gypsies, homosexuals and the disabled were as much outcasts as the Jews, largely based not on religious grounds, but in fact based on eugenics and non-religious bigotry.

But returning to my original question - I can't see how religion can trump poverty and disease as being "the number one cause of all human suffering". I think putting that much blame on religion (and "belief in god") is fundamentally incorrect.

Kind regards,
Greg
-------------------------------------------
You monkeys only think you're running things

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours
Greg wrote:

No, you most definitely can't claim Stalin, Mao and Hitler. Your words: "religion and the belief in god is the number one cause of all human suffering." The three above are *ideology*, not religion, and most definitely are not about the "belief in god"

A cult of personality is similar to general hero worship, except that it is created specifically for political leaders. However, the term may be applied by analogy to refer to adulation of religious or non-political leaders.

Throughout history, monarchs were almost always held in enormous reverence. Through the principle of the divine right of kings, rulers were said to hold office by the will of God. Imperial China (see Mandate of Heaven), ancient Egypt, Japan, the Inca, the Aztecs, Tibet, and the Roman Empire (see imperial cult) are especially noted for redefining monarchs as god-kings.

Propaganda in the 1930's was used to build up Stalin's image akin to religious worship, a cult of Stalin was formed. Stalin was revered by the people as a godlike leader. Mao, Hitler and Mussolini weren't far behind. Japan? Hirohito, well he was a living god.

Quote:

An ideology is a set of aims and ideas, especially in politics. An ideology can be thought of as a comprehensive vision, as a way of looking at things

A set of aims and ideas applies to religion and politics both of which are concepts and beliefs. If there a line between ideology and religion its mighty thin if there even is one!

Greg wrote:

Gypsies, homosexuals and the disabled were as much outcasts as the Jews, largely based not on religious grounds, but in fact based on eugenics and non-religious bigotry.

About Hitler and his thoughts about Jews.

Hitler wrote:

The best (Jewish)characterisation is provided by the product of this religious education, the Jew himself. His life is only of this world, and his spirit is inwardly as alien to true Christianity as his nature two thousand years previous was to the great founder of the new doctrine. Of course, the latter made no secret of his attitude toward the Jewish people, and when necessary he even took to the whip to drive from the temple of the Lord this adversary of all humanity, who then as always saw in religion nothing but an instrument for his business existence. In return, Christ was nailed to the cross, while our present-day party Christians debase themselves to begging for Jewish votes at elections and later try to arrange political swindles with atheistic Jewish parties-and this against their own nation.

Yes, Hitler wrote "On this first and greatest lie, that the Jews are not a race but a religion..."

In practice anyone who was Jewish by faith had no recourse in NAZI Germany. Would they have been able to go to court and prove that they were Jewish by choice? Show me where that ever happened.

Homosexuals and Gypsies in NAZI Germany were still classed higher than Jews.

"Precise figures on the number of homosexuals exterminated in Nazi Death camps have never been established. Estimates range from 10,000 to 15,000. It does not appear that the Nazis ever set it as their goal to completely eradicate all homosexuals. Rather, it seems, the official policy was to either re-educate those homosexuals who were "behaviourally" and only occasionally homosexual and to block those who were "incurable" homosexuals through castration, extreme intimidation, or both. For a fascinating empirical sociological examination of this idea, the reader is referred to the work of Reudiger Lautmann. Nor does it appear that their efforts extended beyond Germany itself to the occupied territories.

"The leadership of the Nazi Party included at least one avowed homosexual, Ernst Roehm. He was a member of Hirschfeld's League for Human Rights and openly attended homosexual meeting places. Between 1933 and 1934, Roehm was the leader of the SA (Stormtroopers) and, before the death of Hindenberg in 1934, he was a potential challenger to Hitler's supremacy."

Gypsies were another issue in NAZI Germany...

Greg wrote:

I can't see how religion can trump poverty and disease as being "the number one cause of all human suffering". I think putting that much blame on religion (and "belief in god") is fundamentally incorrect.

Why is there poverty and disease in the first place? It wouldn't have anything to do with all the fighting would it? And what are these people fighting about? :)

Cheers

red pill junkie's picture
Member since:
12 April 2007
Last activity:
10 hours 7 min

Perhaps the reason why so—relatively—few homosexuals were exteminated by the Nazi's death machine, was that it is easier for a homosexual to conceal his identity. At least much more so than for a Jew or a Gypsy.

-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

Red Pill Junkie

petelyon73's picture
Member since:
17 November 2007
Last activity:
9 weeks 4 days

ww1 definately had religious reasoning, and christian zionism would be the main contributor.....the end result being a whole nation of people being told to leave their country so a nation with no country could move in....although the nation removed was not given somewhere else to go!!
all bacause some peanut decided they couldnt get to heaven if Israel didnt exist ?
Needless to say...i ant a big fan of organised religion either.
I reccommend reading "Whose Promised Land" by Colin Chapman

Onya Cobber :)
Pete

.......................................................

who are you to say that your imaginary friend is better than mine?

Delaiah's picture
Member since:
1 May 2004
Last activity:
1 day 17 hours

This old propaganda gets tiresome. There has been a Jewish prescence in the Holy Land for thousands of years. Conversely, the Palestinian is a modern invention. Use this term in the 1930s and you could be referring to a Jew! Between WW1 and WW2, massive numbers of Arabs moved to the Mandate. Many came for work or better conditions. When the state of Israel was created, Moslems were told to leave ahead of the planned genocidal Arab invasion. They could return after the Jews were all dead. Those who chose to stay are now Israeli citizens. Those that left have been confined and abused by Moslem powers.

If anything, Europeans encouraged Jewish settlement out of hatred and prejudice.

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours

In a word...

RUBBISH

White LEDs use a yellow phosphor (not to be confused with the element phosphorus) to convert UV emissions from the LED chip to visible light. Yellow and blue light combined looks white.

The process of UV conversion damages the phosphor over time reducing its light output and so changes the ratio of blue and yellow light which causes a colour shift from white to blue.

Cheap white LEDs look bluish for the same reason - less expensive phosphor is used.

While the LED chip may in fact still operate after many years however the phosphor will have only a fraction of its design lumen (light) output - the same as fluorescent and neon lamps.

Fluorescent Neon tubing (not red) by comparison may operate for +20 years however the light output is only a fraction of when it was new.

Quote:

...LED bulbs do not contain mercury, so disposal is less damaging to the environment, and they do not flicker - a problem that has been blamed for migraines and epileptic fits.

The article assumes that fluorescent lamps (& CFLs) are not disposed of properly so the mercury gets into the environment. If fluorescent lamps are disposed of properly they can be recycled.

By comparison LEDs have an plastic epoxy body and would not break down in the environment and cannot be recycled, they could be ground up for filler...

All modern fluorescent lamps and CFLs do not flicker as they use electronic ballasts operating at thousands of cycles per second. In the past conventional ballasts operated at line frequency of 50 or 60 cycles per second and yes, this caused the flickering reported in the article. This misinformation is the same as a article on electric cars stating they are better than conventional cars because they don't used leaded petrol / gasoline.

So the claims made in this LED article are questionable - file under "Marketing Crapola".

By the way, I work in the industry.

Cheers

Kat's picture
Member since:
1 May 2004
Last activity:
2 weeks 2 days

>>The article assumes that fluorescent lamps (& CFLs) are not disposed of properly so the mercury gets into the environment. If fluorescent lamps are disposed of properly they can be recycled.

All you have to do to dispose of CFLs properly is take them to an ACE hardward store.

With an ACE just up the street from me, I thought disposal of my CFLs would be easy as pie. I painstakingly cleaned up the one in my kitchen that exploded (due to someone bumping it with a mop handle), and sealed all the remains in a plastic bag, which I then hung on my back doorknob, planning to take it to ACE when they opened the next day. But when my hired helper saw the bag, she inexplicably went bonkers on me -- insisting that she was going to take the bag and throw it in the dumpster. My explanation about possible mercury contamination met with a brick wall -- I had to literally physically fight with her for 30 minutes to keep her away from the bag, eventually shoving her out my front door and locking it behind her so she couldn't get back in. ('Consider this notice that you're fired.') Unfortunately, the next morning, my carpenters showed up before I'd even had my first cup of coffee, and as they began installing new weather stripping around my back door, they found the bag, put it in the trash, and took the big trash bag to the dumpster. By the time I'd drank enough coffee to be conscious, and figured out what they'd done, the garbage company had just emptied the dumpster, and was rolling off down the street.

Like I said, Murphy's been stalking me lately.

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours

Yep, that bag was destined to go to the dump. :)

Kat, you did everything you can to do the right thing, however are you the exception to the rule...? I would say that you are. :)

What happens when there isn't a Ace, or Walmart to take the burned out CFLs to and in other countries like China? They just go into the trash...

CFLs are not a green solution for anything and LEDs are not either.

The real problem is the generation of energy. With clean efficient energy the best light source for the environment is the plain old incandescent light bulb media propaganda notwithstanding. :)

Cheers

red pill junkie's picture
Member since:
12 April 2007
Last activity:
10 hours 7 min

There are not Ace recycling centers here in Mexico. I don't know if Walmart accepts the used lightbulbs; I suspect not, but I haven't asked because my bulbs haven't worn out.

I have made this argment before, but even though I'm no fan of CFLs (I can't stand having a night lamp with one, the buzzing distracts me when I'm reading), we should also consider the enviromental impact of tungsten extraction for regular incandescent bulbs.

Yes, I agree the incandescent bulb is the best solution IF you have unlimited energy supplies. Wood is a damn good way to keep a home warm, if you have unlimited numbers of trees!

But since we are living on a planet with FINITE resources, the incandescent bulb no longe becomes a viable solution. Not with so many nations wishing to have what the west has enjoyed for the past 70 years: instant reliable light at night that helps you extend human activities and increase production and education.

But I am wondering about something...

Tihz_ho, you say you 'work in the industry'. Does that mean that you work in a factory that produces CFL bulbs?

And that you're fully aware of the detrimental in the enviroment that these bulbs cause once they are discarded... and that is OK with you?

-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

Red Pill Junkie

Kat's picture
Member since:
1 May 2004
Last activity:
2 weeks 2 days

>>...I'm no fan of CFLs (I can't stand having a night lamp with one, the buzzing distracts me when I'm reading)

My Philips CFL bulbs don't buzz. The 23 watt ones are almost as bright and white as the 100 watt Reveal bulbs I still use in a couple of locations, and the CFLs have definitely lowered my electricity bills over the past couple of years, which also means my utility company burned a bit less coal (even though I pay a little extra for their '100% wind power' option).

>>...we should also consider the enviromental impact of tungsten extraction for regular incandescent bulbs.

I recently read that, at the current rate of extraction, Earth's tungsten deposits will be exhausted in 30 years.

Hey Tihz_ho -- do you happen to know what sort of 'bulbs' are in those solar-powered garden-path lights (the ones that look like they're mounted atop a two-foot tall stake)? I've thought about buying a 4-pack of those at Costco, and bringing a couple of them in every night to illuminate my hallways for 'free' -- along with the semi-medieval appeal of having these modern-day 'torches' sticking out of mounts on my walls at an angle. hehe

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours

My main industry is in illuminated signs and lighting - specifically neon and cold cathode lamp manufacture. By trade I am a neon tubing glass blower which means I hand blow the glass tubing to make neon sign tubing and cold cathode lamps.

Cold cathode lamps are similar to "normal" fluorescent tube lamps. The difference is the electrodes, normal fluorescent tube lamps what are called "hot cathode" electrodes which uses a hot filament to facilitate the low voltage (~109v) current flow through the lamp. A cold cathode fluorescent lamps and neon tubing uses a open ended metal shell (looks similar to a bullet casing) which requires high voltage (up to 7.5kv) for the current to flow through the lamp.

CFLs do contain less mercury than standard fluorescent tubes and neon and they banned batteries containing mercury because of the disposal issues. That makes me think its all about money not the environment. The incandescent bulb market is old - nothing can be done any more to get people to switch brands. This is not true with CFLs...see what I mean?

You note that tungsten extraction is damaging the environment and tungsten is used in incandescent bulbs. Well guess what, tungsten filaments are also used with CFLs and hot cathode fluorescent lamps...so there is no difference there.

Cheers

red pill junkie's picture
Member since:
12 April 2007
Last activity:
10 hours 7 min

You are quite an artist! :-D

Quote:

Well guess what, tungsten filaments are also used with CFLs and hot cathode fluorescent lamps...so there is no difference there.

Well, the difference would be the lifespan of the lamps, wouldn't it be?

-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

Red Pill Junkie

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours

How they work...

All fluorescent lamps no matter the configuration are gas discharge tubes. When an electric current is passed through a gas it ionise it and creates light. The light produced by the ionised gas may be visible such as with neon gas - a bright orange red, or produces strong UV such as with mercury vapour.

A fluorescent lamp is filled with argon gas and mercury in liquid form which produces a vapour. The UV produced by the ionised mercury vapour is absorbed by the phosphor powder coating the inside of the glass tube. The phosphor converts the invisible UV to visible light - this is called "UV conversion" in the industry.

Depending on temperature the amount of mercury vapour varies - hotter, more mercury vapour colder less vapour. This explains why fluorescent lamps need to "warm up" before they are bright.

With Hot Cathode fluorescent lamps the filament needs to heat up so electrons are emitted and the electric current discharge can start through gas.

Every time a hot cathode fluorescent lamp is lighted the stress of starting the gas discharge erodes the filament which shortens its life. If you want to demonstrate this take two new CFLs operate one on a flasher, and the other is left on. Depending how rapid the lamp flashes on and off you will see it fail long before the other one which is left on all the time.

Cold cathode lamps do not have a filament and so they are not affected by on off cycles - flashing them has no detrimental effect on their life whatsoever. Flashing neon signs for example. There have been neon signs which have been in operation for more than 20~40 years.

The filament in incandescent bulbs are not greatly affected by on off cycles and generally they can be switched on and off as you like. You can do the same experiment as before and you will find the flashed bulb will fail before the other which is left on - but the difference is not as nearly as great as with hot cathode fluorescent lamps (CFLs).

Conclusion: If you use CFLs as you would incandescent bulbs, which is switching them off when leaving a room they will have a much shorter life...funny how the manufactures don't mention this, huh? Maybe they don't mind selling more CFLs?

I hope you found this interesting... :)

Cheers

red pill junkie's picture
Member since:
12 April 2007
Last activity:
10 hours 7 min

From what you write, the logical conclusion would be to strict the use of CFLs to Strip malls, public buildings and offices where the lights are kept on for periods of 6-8 hours minimum.

But what would you recommend for home use? We have to keep in mind that incandescents still have a very short light span, and the ratio of visible light/energy consumed is too short. Most of the energy in an incadescent is lost through heat. Plus, the heat would also force some consumers to increase their A/C use.

That's why I still think there's great promise in LEDS for home use.

-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

Red Pill Junkie

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours

Yes, leaving any CFL or Fluorescent lamp on is better than switching them on and off. This is why office buildings leave the lights on 24/7 as its cheaper in the long run to pay the electricity than re-lamping more often.

Incandescent bulbs heating up a room? You would need a lot of them say 200~600watts, think electric heater wattage. A couple of 60watt bulbs is nothing... The impact is felt in retail shops where they have many spot lights - the wattage is high.

Having said that there is no substitution for halogen spot lights for retail display cases...what is going to happen in Australia when these are banned along with other incandescent lamps? Greg any input on what's happening in Oz in this regard?

LEDs? It will be a while before they can directly substitute a common light bulb. The problem is heat dissipation - high output LEDs run very hot and the heat lowers the life. Very high output LEDs need heat sinks like other electronic equipment.

Another issue is while the LED looks very bright its total light output is very low. I have yet to see a LED torch (flash light) equal a conventional incandescent bulb torch - and if its halogen? Fuggettaboutit! The reason is LEDs create the light from a small point and is very directional compared to a bulb which is at least 270 degrees.

Cheers

earthling's picture
Member since:
22 November 2004
Last activity:
5 weeks 1 day

I believe there is another lifetime issue for incandescent lamps. I have observed that in some houses incandescent lights have a very short lifetime of much less than a year, while the various gas discharge lights or LEDs don't have this problem.

I can think of two possible reasons, vibration and over-voltage. I have seen this only in wooden buildings close to roads with heavy traffic, so my first bet would be vibration. But over-voltage could be there for a similar reason - voltage could be higher close to the main supply lines.

----
It is not how fast you go
it is when you get there.

tihz_ho's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
3 days 20 hours

Yes you are correct that vibration does reduce the life of incandescent bulbs.

Over voltage would manifest itself in other electrical items as well. Usually the one would have under voltage not over.

Another factor to consider life expectancy is the size of the bulb. Usually a 25watt bulb is under vacuum while 40watt and above are filled with Argon gas at a partial vacuum. The Argon gas filling reduces the evaporation of metal from the filament thereby increasing its life.

Using a dimmer also greatly increases the life of incandescent bulbs. I have a 40watt hall light on a dimmer going 24/7 for over one year, that’s over 8,700hrs.

Cheers

MUMBLEY's picture
Member since:
5 June 2008
Last activity:
5 years 5 weeks

There is a god. Religion is man-made. It was man who created religion. All the current religions have god speaking to one man and "he" spreads the word. Each of these religions have then been edited and re-interpreted by men for over thousands of years. Stories change. Word of mouth is seldom accurate.

In the beginning and in many cases still today, it was and is tranmitted verbally to the illiterate.

do not distrub this ruble. Sapho

RonB's picture
Member since:
19 August 2004
Last activity:
4 years 33 weeks

It's really sad that Nancy Cartwright decided to (or was pressured into) doing that robocall using Bart's voice on behalf of Scientology. I could care less what her beliefs are however I think there might be some pushback on the Simpsons because of this and that would be sad indeed. I hope it blows over without too much fanfair and that most people don't notice it.

I hope this doesn't tarnish a great program. The show itself could care less about any religion, they thumb their noses at everything as it should be. Well I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

red pill junkie's picture
Member since:
12 April 2007
Last activity:
10 hours 7 min

There were some folks pointing out at the irony of using the voice of Bart Simpson for promoting Scientology, when The Simpsons had an episode called 'The Leader' in which they made fun of precisely that sort of cult groups. On the other hand, it is true that this particular episode was probably more focused on Heaven's Gate than Scientology, but still...

IMO the Simpsons was the greatest TV show of all time, but its best years have passed long ago. I thought the show would end with the movie, but I guess Fox is not ready to slaughter its cash cow.

-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

Red Pill Junkie