Screamingly Obvious

Break rocks to make them sharper.
Self-governing teams out-perform rigid hierarchies.
Nuclear power pollutes. Nuclear fusion is, it seems, a viable non-polluting alternative.
When you test, use one button.
Early intervention is cheaper than late.
Wash your hands before performing surgery.
Proceed in tiny iterations with simple code.

Notice that all of these things were once hotly debated. But all of them are not only obvious, but very lucrative, after you've done them and seen for yourself. So the fix just might be to try them instead of debate them.

In what way is "Nuclear Power Pollutes" "lucrative"?

Items someone censored from the list:

Heavy things fall at the same acceleration as light things.
Sex education reduces teen pregnancy rates.
Grow more hemp.
Nobody says "screamingLY obvious" where gerunds may modify adjectives.

The moral is, no matter how loud an issue screams, there is always someone unable to hear it. (A disagreeing statement once followed, but it has ironically been censored.)

The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him. -- Proverbs 18:17 NIV

In other words, things seem ScreaminglyObvious to us until we hear the other side of the story.

Why do you think it's screamingly obvious that heavy things fall fall at the same acceleration as light things? Granted there is a simple GedankenExperiment to show that it's likely, but direct everyday experience suggests otherwise. I second this thought. This rule applies only if you ignore air resistance. But it seems the ScreaminglyObvious thing to do is not to ignore it!
While it may be true that sex education reduces teen pregnancy rates, there is a counter point (also regarded by some as ScreaminglyObvious) that it also results in more teen sex. Some people believe that teen sex is a BadThing, and that the single fact of reducing teen pregnancy rates is insufficient.

There's just (June 2002) been a study reported in the UK news (see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2043093.stm) that showed the sex education didn't reduce the age of first sexual experience, and didn't mean any more use of birth control. So this one isn't ScreaminglyObvious.

See WhatYouResistPersists.

Odd point on the controversial article about sex-ed:

In five of the trials examined - four abstinence programmes and one school-based sex education programme - an increase in pregnancies among the partners of young men involved was observed.

So whether or not sex-ed is a bad thing, I think the study does demonstrate that Abstinence-oriented sex-ed is just pathetic. -- MartinZarate

Another conclusion from the article seems to be that there's a minority that's hard to reach one way or another, but that the majority seems to benefit from sex-ed.

I really don't want to get side-tracked into questions of pragmatics, dialects and common usage versus externally imposed, formal grammars, because I think this page makes a useful point and I don't want it to get lost. However, to me the original title of the page was talking about the activity of screaming the word "obvious". The comment about gerunds modifying adjectives is one of finding a grammar that explains the existing usage and therefore somehow allowing it to be called "correct". My point is that while it may be the case that for some people there is no distinction between "ScreamingObvious" and "ScreaminglyObvious", to me they convey completely different ideas. Losing that distinction seems a shame.