On Nov 13, 10:14 am, wrote:
Yes, keep posting pics of the handful of scary pictures from the
hundreds of millions of surge protectors in use. I can post pics of
car wrecks. Does that mean that all cars are inherently unsafe and
you should not own one?

A problem was not shown in 1 million pictures. The NC Fire Marshall
even describes why some fires occurred. To trader4, that proves the
threat does not exist. Another Trader4 post chock full of denial
reasoning twisted into factual proof. Bud posted his usual diatribe
of half truths? A Bud post is also factual proof? Why does trader4
use a Bud claim as proof? Oh. Otherwise trader4 must learn
technology? Trader4 even claims exploding MOVs provide safe
protection. Manufacturers say otherwise. Trader4 - why did you know
without first learning from manufacturer datasheets? Or am I assuming
you can comprehend technical numbers?

Trader4 posts resumes. That proves people recommend protectors
without earth ground? At least one of his 'experts' state that
protectors must be earthed to provide effective protection. Why did
trader4 forget to quote that part? Trader4 makes claims by posting
half facts. He has a big resume. Therefore he must say protectors
don't need earthing?

Examples from virtually every high reliability facility demonstrate
what the effective protector does - shunt, connect, clamp, divert a
destructive surge to earth. Manufacturers with far more responsible
names make effective 'whole house' protector. Why? More facts that
trader4 must ignore. Where is energy dissipated? Trader4 believes a
silly little one inch part will absorb all surge energy? Without
earthing, that surge energy is magically eliminated? Or too much
energy gets dissipated in grossly undersized plug-in protectors;
sometimes even creates 'scary pictures'. But trader4 says that
'scary picture' problem does not exist because not enough pictures
were provided. So surge energy must magically disappear. Trader4
says so. It must be true. Trader4 must ignore.

Quotes the NIST and IEEE say protectors must be earthed. Both
state surge energy must be dissipated in earth. How do trader4 and
Bud get around this? They just ignore the parts they don't like. It
is called denial. Simply ignore facts such as the essential need for
earthing. It is called propaganda - rationalization by half facts.
Trader4 just ignores.

Bud stopped quoting another favorite source because that source also
said plug-in (point of use) protectors can even be destructive to
adjacent appliances. How curious. Same was demonstrated on Page 42
Figure 8. Matzloff's statement of fact was so fundamental as to be
his first conclusion:
Conclusion:
1) Quantitative measurements in the Upside-Down house clearly
show objectionable difference in reference voltages. These occur
even when or perhaps because, surge protective devices are
present at the point of connection of appliances.

Manufacturer specifications claim protection as trader4 and Bud
stated? Oh. Neither could provide one single manufacture spec
number. Why no numbers? Plug-in protector manufacturers do not
claim protection from the typically destructive surge. Why would they
claim protection that does not exist? Best is to say nothing -
ignore. No protection specs is trader4 proof that protection
exists. How simple. Manufacturer specification will not even list
the many types of surges - define no protection. That means
protection must exist? Since those numbers do not exist, then
protection must exist? Trader4 and Bud reasoning.

Why would the manufacturer claim protection? A $3 power strip with
some fancy paint and a few $0.10 parts. Sell it for $25 or $150. Why
would the manufacturer risk such obscene profits with honesty? Since
the fanatical trader4 *automatically knows* by selectively ignoring
facts, then why confuse myths with numeric specs? Trader4 - where is
surge energy dissipated when the protector has no dedicated earthing?
Why does an EE Times report on electronics protection not discuss
protectors; only discuss earthing? Where must surge energy get
dissipated? Crickets.

No earth ground means no effective protection. Effective protection
means surges are earthed before entering the building. Effective
protection means a surge will not overwhelm protection already inside
the appliance. Effective protection grounds a surge so that energy is
dissipated harmlessly in earth; not 8000 volts destructively through
the adjacent TV - Page 42 Figure 8.

Responsible companies have well earned reputations AND make
protectors with that 'all so critical' earthing connection. Effective
'whole house' protectors cost about $1 per protected appliance AND
will protect the most critical electronic devices such as GFCIs, smoke
detectors, and furnace. Many of those responsible manufacturer were
listed previously. Protection will only be as effective as its
earthing.

Some homes - especially those with two wire wall receptacles - must
have breaker box earthing upgraded to post 1990 code requirements. No
wiring changes are made inside the home. Surges earthed by one
'whole house' protector and 'upgraded earthing' means effective
protection - without rewiring the entire house, without 'scary
pictures', and without 8000 volts destructively through household
appliances.

How many millions of 'scary pictures' and how many thousands of
professional citations does trader4 need to admit a protector is only
as effective as its earth ground? trader4 ignores what he can't
understand - even when multiple IEEE Standards are quite blunt.
Eathing is where surge energy is dissipated. No earth ground means no
effective protection.