100w Light Bulbs.

[clumsy bastard]

I would say the majority at the beeb dont do science.

[clumsy bastard]

R4 the other morning, talking about compensation over an insurance failure, spoke of "savers", "investors" and "shareholders" as if they were the same thing.

[clumsy bastard]

the argument is over.

[Bob Eager]

There's lots of science there, but it doesn't all say the same thing.

[geoff]

In message , Andrew Gabriel writes

I don't think it had anything to do with understanding, or lack of it

It had everything to do with bending the truth to "prove" the point she was trying to make

[The Natural Philosopher]

:-) s/fuel consumption/mpg/a

[Huge]

Oh, there never was an "argument". We're just poking you with sharp sticks and pointing and laughing.

[Huge]

Yep. That's "More or Less". An excellent programme. I heard that one, too.

Of course, it may not *be* a blunder. Much like regression to the mean being used to prove that speed cameras "work".

[clumsy bastard]

if it all said the same thing, I would be suspicious. As it is, over the last few years of debate, most have accepted its correct, except for Bush/oil sponsored people of course. There are still lots of members of the public, who never dream of arguing with scientific opinion elsewhere, who now suddenly start questioning this science because its conclusions are inconvenient. When New Scientist starts saying its all "greenpiss" I will start to listen, but for now its yesterdays argument, however much arrogant oafs like Huge try to laugh.

[clumsy bastard]

you just being the oaf you usually are. replonk

[The Natural Philosopher]

New scientist is a very poor magazine for science. Its is, like New Socialist, essentially run for political purposes.

The articles are either written by hacks who don't understand what they are reporting on, or written as populist scare stories.

New scientists are firmly in the greenpiss camp already.

Surprisingly FOE seem to be half sane.

[Mark Evans]

Having street names like "water lane" might be a bit of a clue.

Maybe the reason for these areas not having old buildings on them is that when people previously tried to build there nothing stayed up long, due to flooding :)

[Mark Evans]

In certain cases they simply won't physically fit. Even those lamps which have a similar shape to incandescents are often longer/larger.

[Mark Evans]

IME CFLs often come with instructions not to be used in timer and PIR controlled lights.

[dennis]

Flood Street around here, people are still surprised when it does.

[Andrew Gabriel]

At the moment, CFL's larger than 11W (40W real equivalent) will always be larger than their filament equivalents. Technology is slowly allowing CFL's to be made smaller, and that cross-over point is slowly increasing. Note however that generally, the smaller the CFL, the less efficient due to increase in the self-shadowing of the tube. Most efficient ones tend to be spirals with the spiral as open/stretched as possible (and no outer bulb, except where used in exposed cold/draftly locations).

[Jason]

Isn't that just what happens when the mainstream media tries to report science? Nothing to do with what the science is about IMO.

-- Jason

[Jason]

Blunder? You think it was an accident? You think most of the population will actually question the statistic or have the slightest clue why it is wrong?

This is politics in action.

[clumsy bastard]

really.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Yes, really.

e.g.