Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Islander7

With all due respect, Scientific American took a wackjob turn a number of years ago promoting among other things, the now scientifically well discredited CO2 global warming agenda. I haven’t made up my mind on this issue except to say that Scientific American has degenerated to a very unreliable politically driven fish wrapper.

Are you aware that regular glass absorbs a significant % of UV light going through it? In fact quartz has to be used in casings to permit UV in significant % to get through.

Again let’s use some peer reviewed citations to back this assertion.


20 posted on 01/09/2013 5:53:23 PM PST by 4FreeSpeach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: 4FreeSpeach

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1751-1097.2012.01192.x/abstract


27 posted on 01/09/2013 6:36:25 PM PST by listenhillary (Courts, law enforcement, roads and national defense should be the extent of government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: 4FreeSpeach

I don’t know one way or the other but the article in Scientific American was quoting the research done at Stony Brook University and that explains it better.

http://commcgi.cc.stonybrook.edu/am2/publish/General_University_News_2/SBU_Study_Reveals_Harmful_Effects_of_CFL_Bulbs_to_Skin.shtml


28 posted on 01/09/2013 6:40:23 PM PST by jazusamo ("Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent." -- Adam Smith)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson