This goes along with a Time Magazine front page photo commenting on industrial pollution. It had a CEO of a energy production company and in the background was a picture of a cooling tower that, with no knowledge, looks like it is putting plumes of smoke in the air. It looks like smoke and with the caption would be viewed as smoke. The truth is it is condensed water vapor from the cooling process of the water. Steam! That is what is wrong with the media today, they dress things up and spin them to provoke a certain way of thought. The sooner we start doing our own research and break the reliance of mainstream media for our opinions, the sooner this will become a better informed society.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
We have a local generating plant that produces tons of what looks like pollution into the sky, but it utilizes "clean coal burning" and the smoke is basically vapor. I should mention this in my planned argument before the board of directors at my college. They have just recently enforced a ecig ban on campus, with the decision being made behind closed doors without it being brought to the attention of faculty. A professor who vapes brought it to my attention when he saw me vaping outside of class. Since there are no signs saying that ecigs are banned, I dismissed his warnings, and things went fine for several weeks. Not too long ago a security guard stopped me, and I was able to convince him what I was doing was fine. Just last week, it didn't go as well. Basically I challenged him as I have done in the past..
him-You cant smoke that
me-Im not smoking
him-you cant use that, they aren't allowed
me-Why?
him-No tobacco products on campus
me-oh this isn't a tobacco product, there isn't any tobacco
him-it has nicotine, you cant use it
me-actually there isn't any nicotine, look at my juice (I keep a bottle that says 0 nicotine on me)
This is the typical conversation I have and it always worked in past... this time... (and I was surprised at my quick thinking)
him-well the board of directors said that those are not allowed, they are not approved by the fda
me-oh, well neither is this (shows him my monster energy drink I happened to have)
him-I need you to come with me
Lol.. So I was taken to security, where I explained that I refused to recognize a rule that had no rationality behind it. They agreed that the ban needed clarification so now I am waiting on a reply to my paperwork requesting a formal meeting with the board to discuss the issue at hand.
I plan on showing the comparison between Nicorette mist- an FDA approved product that contains the ingredients of Eliquid PLUS half a dozen more chemicals. Using precedent, it could be argued that the ingredients of eliquid are already approved as seen in Nicorette Mist. I then plan to point out that there are non-fda approved products all over the campus (like energy drinks). Ban one thing, ban them all... I also plan on arguing that the ecig cant be banned based on it possibly containing nicotine. If they want to ban based on that premise, gum will also have to be completely banned as well as certain foods. If they argue about odor, ban the colognes and perfumes..
I hope to provide a convincing enough argument to leave them quiet in thought... At that point I will remind them that the college is an institute of higher education, and that I hope they place themselves at a higher standard than the general "act first, think later" behavior that seems to dominate today's society. If they can provide a logical reason for banning the ecig, then I could accept it. I refuse to recognize a ban that has no logical reasoning behind it, and an institute of higher education should not only respect that ideology, but encourage it.