w_tom wrote:
On Nov 14, 2:11 pm, wrote:
EARLY 1980's! Wasn't that over 25 years ago?

Yea, but that’s all poor w_ can find.

And that may be when he stopped thinking.


No earth ground means no effective protection.

The required statement of religious belief in earthing.


Bud must post
incessantly.

w_ must post incessantly because the religious foundation of his world
has been challenged. Just like arguing with a Jehovah’s Witness.

But of course no link to another lunatic that says plug-in suppressors
are NOT effective. Still only w_'s opinions based on his religious
belief in earthing. Do ya suppose no one agrees with you w_? Too bad w_,
seems like no pigeons here.

And still no answers to really simple questions:
- Why do the only 2 examples of protection in the IEEE guide use plug-in
suppressors?
- Why does the NIST guide says plug-in suppressors are "the easiest
solution"?
- How would a service panel suppressor provide any protection in the
IEEE example, pdf page 42?
- Why did Martzloff say in his paper "One solution. illustrated in this
paper, is the insertion of a properly designed [multiport plug-in surge
suppressor]."
- Why does the IEEE Emerald book include plug-in suppressors as an
effective surge protection device.
- Why don't favored SquareD service panel suppressors list "each type of
surge"?
- Where is the link to a 75,000A 1475Joule rated MOV for $0.10.
- What are w_'s connections to surge protection equipment
manufacturers? Specifically ZeroSurge?
What’s the matter w_? The questions are simple?


Bizarre claim - plug-in surge suppressors don't work
Never any sources that say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.
Twists opposing sources to say the opposite of what they really say.
Invents opinions and attributes them to opponents.
Attempts to discredit opponents.
w_ is still a purveyor of junk science.

--
bud--