Thursday, 3 December 2009

Scott Rodgers - The Master Spammer

There is this joker named Scott Rodgers flooding the net with the most ignorant anti-lightbulb articles I've ever seen. Don't know how many times I've missed checking the author and wasted time posting some correcting facts, without any comments ever showing up at all, despite all the various fake blogs always appearing to be open to comment.

He has literally plastered the web with hundreds of articles at every conceivable outlet, inlcuding anti-lingbulb propaganda in an NLP blog and a Hoodia diet blog! Here is just a handful:

Is Florescent Light A Better Alternative To Incandescent Lights ?
Why The Incandescent Light Bulb Were Replaced With Other Bulbs?
Incandescent Light Bulb-The Less Efficient Bulb
Advantages Of Florescent Lights Over Incandescent Lights
Incandescent Light Bulbs-A Threat To Our Eco System

The funny thing is that Mr Rodgers always ends his often amateurish and poorly written articles bragging about his "fantastic" writing skills in comical superlatives, and how he has "generated business opportunities" for electricians in constantly new areas. Here are just two examples:
"Scott Rodgers is a highly knowledgeable writer on electrician works. His stupendous exposure on lighting works has helped a lot many Atlanta Electricians (Need one? click here!) and Belleair Beach Electricians (Need one? click here!) to get a strong grip on their business."

"Scott Rodgers is a writer with ample experience in electrcians work all over the country. His stupendous guidance has generated business opportunities for a lot many Plymouth Electricians (Need one? click here!) and Beavercreek Electricians (Need one? click here!) to get a strong grip on their business."
"Stupendous"? LOL! "A lot many"? I thought it was either "a lot" or "many". Well, you can still be knowledgable about lamps and electric work without fantastic language skills, but Mr Rodgers seems to be neither:
"Scientists, after a lot of research, came out with one alternative to these traditional light bulbs and that is compact fluorescent light bulbs(CFL). They are much more efficient and safe than the incandescent bulbs but unfortunately, the traditional bulbs are being widely used despite the fact that everyone is aware of its bad effects."
This is truly a stunning reversal of facts! There is nothing unsafe about incandescent lamps, it is CFLs that contain mercury and may be harmful to both health and environment!
"In addition to that the light produced is too dim. So, these reasons should be sufficient for anyone to limit their usage and help protect the environment as finally we would be the sufferers."
Incandescent light is not too dim, it is CFL and LED light that is usually too dim. Especially if you use the recommended 11-14W CFL to replace a 60W incandescent, or a 6W LED to replace a 25W incandescent, you will not get nearly as much light as you had, and it will keep getting even dimmer with age.
"Incandescent light bulbs waste a large part of the energy consumed. Only 5% of the energy consumed is converted into light and the rest is wasted."
This is correct, but the heat is wasted only outdoors and in warm climate zones and seasons. In cooler countries the heat adds to indoor heating in a pleasant way and keeps heating bills down.
"Unlike these, A CFL can save up to 80% of energy as it is capable of producing a larger quantity of light."
The EU Commission recently confirmed that this statement is an exaggeration (something anyone can check for themselves by comparing lumen values in manufacturer catalogues.) Nominal values (tested in optimal lab conditions) show 75% at best, less for covered models and poor quality lamps, and in reality often around 50% if you count poor power factor and the gradual light loss.

"Moreover, their life span is more than 8-10 times longer than any ordinary bulb."
That depends on model, brand and individual bulb. Some models are designed to last 4 500 hours, some up to 15 000, though at a larger reduction in output. Consumer tests have found many to not last as long as claimed. Also, using them in closed or recessed luminaires can make them overheat and go out prematurely, and switching them on and off often may reduce life with up to 85%! (See March archives on this blog for referenced details.)
"Moreover, compact fluorescent light bulbs can illuminate your home in a much livelier way, and yet be really low on power cost. Using a CFL lamp makes the ambiance much more radiant in its own unique way, with the light being much more on the whiter side. It can work wonders as accent lighting, with paintings and colored features coming out in their correct contrasts."
Again, the truth is the exact opposite (except that about the whiter light - some CFLs have a higher correlated colour temperature = colder light colour). Mr Rodgers has obviously never read a manufacturer catalogue where it is clearly stated that colour rendering index is only 82-85, vs 99-100 for incandescent (incl halogen) light.

And Mr Rodgers must not have tried his advice out for himself or he would have noticed how everything looks dead, dull and gloomy in fluorescent and LED light, and how colours come alive and sparkle only in the golden-white, brilliant light from incandescent and halogen lamps.

As Mr Rodgers is not above slagging CFLs in PR articles about LEDs, it seems obvious that this is just an opportunist looking for business by way of article-spamming en masse.

Don't buy it!


  1. Ah missed this guy.. or maybe not really "missed" him!

    There are some (other) strange blogs around that seem to carry mass produced pro-CFL articles,
    and never register comments made.
    I think they might be picking up people's email adresses for spam purposes.

  2. Oh I see! Sounds like a reasonable explanation.

    Very nefarious! :-(