On Sunday, January 13, 2013 11:27:49 AM UTC-8, Billy wrote:

And here I thought you were a man of science, but what to my wondrous

eyes appear, but another Willy Loman.


My, for a person who name calls and casts aspersions so easily, you have a very thin skin. I'll guess that your feelings were hurt when I noted your ignorance about the risks of indoor air pollutants. But there is nothing wrong with ignorance about a particular field of knowledge. Recognizing our ignorance and doing something about it with study and experimentation is what scientists do all the time. Of course, if one persists in ignorance despite the evidence, then we call that person stupid.

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 3:43:03 PM UTC-8, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Stuart Strand wrote:



I do wish to thank the list, especially David and Billy, for teaching

me that most people are ignorant of the seriousness of the risk of

indoor air pollutants, especially benzene and chloroform. I had

assumed that the risk of these pollutants would be an easy sell, but

I was wrong.



Stuart



Most people in the USA are not sure that evolution is responsible for the

existence of those potted plants, that pests might evolve to become resitant

to sprays or that human activity is the cause of climate change. There is a

sizable number who believe in astrology and moonplanting, that Fox News is

giving them good information and that Osama Bin Laden is at this moment

having a beer with Elvis in a little bar in Tupelo. You should get out

more.



D

David, Glad you escaped the fires long enough to post a nasty little comment. Name calling is an unpleasant habit, and so is disparagement of an entire nation. Is it just me and most Yanks you dislike, or mankind in general?

I am still waiting for a response to my detailed and quantitative reply to your ill-informed and insulting request for the levels of the air pollutants that threaten our families. I provided the documentation you requested. What's your problem?

Stuart Strand wrote:
On Sunday, January 13, 2013 3:43:03 PM UTC-8, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Stuart Strand wrote:



I do wish to thank the list, especially David and Billy, for
teaching

me that most people are ignorant of the seriousness of the risk of

indoor air pollutants, especially benzene and chloroform. I had

assumed that the risk of these pollutants would be an easy sell, but

I was wrong.



Stuart



Most people in the USA are not sure that evolution is responsible
for the

existence of those potted plants, that pests might evolve to become
resitant

to sprays or that human activity is the cause of climate change.
There is a

sizable number who believe in astrology and moonplanting, that Fox
News is

giving them good information and that Osama Bin Laden is at this
moment

having a beer with Elvis in a little bar in Tupelo. You should get
out

more.



D

David, Glad you escaped the fires long enough to post a nasty little
comment. Name calling is an unpleasant habit, and so is disparagement
of an entire nation. Is it just me and most Yanks you dislike, or
mankind in general?


I am not disparaging a nation buts its general lack of understanding of and
trust in science and the ready acceptance of the lies of vested interest and
plain* mumbo jumbo. You will find there is supporting evidence for all my
examples. Maybe not for the bar in Tupelo.

I am still waiting for a response to my detailed and quantitative
reply to your ill-informed and insulting request for the levels of
the air pollutants that threaten our families. I provided the
documentation you requested. What's your problem?

I wanted to see if you were a marketdroid or a researcher and I asked for
some way to distinguish between the options, why is that insulting? Stuart
you are just a name on a message here, we get all manner of liars, conmen
and good people who are the same. It now appears that you are genuine.
Would you have it that all strangers are accepted on face value or just you
and your project?

David

* I accidentally typed "palin" here but the spell checker caught it. Get
thee behind me satin (slip).

D

In article ,
Stuart Strand wrote:

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 11:27:49 AM UTC-8, Billy wrote:

And here I thought you were a man of science, but what to my wondrous

eyes appear, but another Willy Loman.


My, for a person who name calls and casts aspersions so easily, you have a
very thin skin. I'll guess that your feelings were hurt when I noted your
ignorance about the risks of indoor air pollutants. But there is nothing
wrong with ignorance about a particular field of knowledge. Recognizing our
ignorance and doing something about it with study and experimentation is what
scientists do all the time. Of course, if one persists in ignorance despite
the evidence, then we call that person stupid.

Uh-Huh
Billy 1/1/13
It seems that you make a good case, and I would think that there are
many who would jump at your product. Personally, I prefer to reflect on
it for awhile, and see if there aren't any unintended consequences. In a
world where scalawags seem intent on poisoning the biosphere, your
plants may be needed by the entire world.


Stewart 1/1/13
I do wish to thank the list, especially David and Billy, for teaching me
that most people are ignorant of the seriousness of the risk of indoor
air pollutants, especially benzene and chloroform. I had assumed that
the risk of these pollutants would be an easy sell, but I was wrong.

Billy 1/13/13
And here I thought you were a man of science, but what to my wondrous
eyes appear, but another Willy Loman.

It would have been an easier sell, if you would have attributed the
health costs of these toxics in terms of financial costs, quality of
life, or in terms of decreased mortality. You offered to solve a problem
whose dimensions were never illustrated.
------

Speaking of which, you seem to be having a tough time selling this
product to ANYBODY.

faculty.washington.edu/sstrand/Assets/FAQ.pdf
Why not try to get a research grant from NSF, EPA or NIH (for your
Superpothos)?
We have tried, but without success. The reviewers had several problems
with the proposals: they thought that the levels of chloroform and
benzene in household air were too low to pose a significant risk, that
too many plants would be needed to be practical, that limited air
circulation would limit the effectiveness of the removal, that the topic
was too applied and would not advance scientific knowledge
significantly, and that the project should be funded privately. One of
the reviewers expressed a personal philosophical opposition to
genetically modified plants and another worried about negative outcomes
of using genetically modified houseplants, without suggesting any
specific negative scenarios.
-----

The NSF, EPA, nor NIH won't fund your work, but you call people who have
doubt about your work, ignorant? That's a lot of chutzpah, Stewie-boy.

Intimidating prospective buyers puts you in the Willy Loman group by
doing anything to sell your widget.

Meanwhile back at the ranch,

http://www.ext.colostate.edu/pubs/consumer/09938.html
Improving Air Quality in Your Home

http://www.webmd.com/lung/features/1...or-air-quality

Breathe Easy: 5 Ways To Improve Indoor Air Quality
WebMD Feature provided in collaboration with Healthy Child Healthy World

http://www.anr.state.vt.us/air/airto...tm/sources.htm
Sources of Toxic Air Pollution

http://ewg.org/comm/ewg-california-c...sehold-product
s-0
Control Toxic Fumes from Household Products

don't even mention benzene or chloroform. Is this where you ran into
trouble with your argument with the NSF, EPA, and NIH?

It seems the best solution to benzene, and chloroform is to open your
windows once and awhile. As YOU said in YOUR FAQ, "
Once in the air chloroform persists in the atmosphere of the home, until
it is degraded or it leaks out of the home. "


Oh, and tell me again how these plants will protect me from chloroform
that comes from the shower head, while I shower.

Idiot!

--
Welcome to the New America.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg
or
E Pluribus Unum
Next time vote Green Party