On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 01:41:09 GMT, David A. Webb
wrote:

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 23:41:51 GMT, Kent Fowler
wrote:

Nope, I've been wrong on lots of occasions. My wife usually proves me
wrong at least once a day and I admit it. . But I will never, ever
change my opinion on this one. I think you need to go back and re-read
all the posts. I suggested he query the chief instructor at the Texas
A and M fire school as to his opinion. Does this sound like I think I
am right all the time? Or his local fire chief. Again, does this
sound like I think I am the only one who is right?? The response I
got was:

1. Fire Chiefs don't know **** about tanks and vessels with
hydrocarbons in them and he wouldn't ask a fire chief about anything.

2 Firemen don't know **** be cause they like to err on the side of
caution and really don't understand because they don't have a physics
or a chemical engineering degree and would do something else beside be
a fireman if they had said degrees.




3 And obviously believes that only degreed people have the mental
capacity to understand the fire triangle.

And you accuse ME of being block headed? I think you must have us
mixed up. I' m the guy who won't take a torch to a propane tank with
out it being cleared first.

Ya know... I don't mind people questioning me, or even calling me
stupid, but I do get ****ed when assholes put words in my mouth and
mis-quote me.

Just because I said that a fire chief will tend to error on the side
of caution does not imply I believe they don't know ****

"So, as far as I'm concerned, being a fire chief doesn't make a person
the final authority on risks of tank explosions."

Your words................. Sure sound to me like you have a pretty
low opinion of the chiefs. BTW, who is the "final authority" on tank
explosions in your humble opinion???? You?

I chose my words carefully because I know some firemen, and I didn't
want to generalize and say that ALL of them overreact to potential
fire hazards, or anything that remotely smells like one. But you ask
any one of them, and that one will be likely to admit that most
firemen will overreact.

Actually, ALL of the firemen I know do overreact to fire hazards.
And why do you suppose that is? Maybe because like any profession,
there is a certain amount of psychology involved in the person who
likes the authority to do their job. I'm sure everyone here would
agree that most police are cops because they wanted a job where they
could flex their muscle, and flaunt their authority.

A psych dude now??

Heck, YOU even got all rialed up because you think you know something
about chemical reactions, but you aren't smart enough to realize that
propane needs something to react with before it will do anything.

As I said, a spark or flame will make it react nicely. You do know
that fire is a chemical reaction?? And I do know lots about reactions,
a lot more than you.

..


I never once said that only "degreed people" would understand the fire
triangle. All I said was that I know some pretty ignorant firemen,
(note, I did not say stupid) and I am not going to take the word of
one as fact until they have something to back it up.


"I know that most firemen are extremely over reactive to people asking
questions about fire. Their passion sometimes gets in their way of
logic. I don't know any firemen with a degree in physics or
chemistry, probably because anyone with a degree in physics or
chemistry would be in a different career. Maybe forensics
investigator, or something of the sort, but not fire chief."

Your words............................... You think because they don't
have a degree they don't know **** or else you wouldn't have even
brought it up. Why does a fireman have to have a degree in order to
understand what he is dealing with?
.. You also said " their passion gets in the way of their logic." Sure
sounds like you're saying they don't know **** if thats the way you
think they think.

And they shouldn't take offense at that. I'm not taking your word for
it, because you aren't backing up your statements with facts either.

Such as??

Can you explain how the fire triangle applies in this case?

Heat, fuel, air

There was no oxygen inside the tank.

Your arguement about it being 100% vapor sucks wind after leaving
the valves open overnight.

Beecrofters words..........................not mine, but I happen
to agree with him.