In article
,
RicodJour wrote:

On Oct 24, 10:26*pm, Smitty Two wrote:
In article
,

*RicodJour wrote:

http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files//PD...mokeAlarms.pdf
From page 59 of that report:

"Aging Home Smoke Alarms

snip

*Zero* mention of any scientific evidence *whatsoever* that age alone
would render a smoke alarm inoperative. Absolutely NOTHING to suggest
the rationale behind the guideline of replacing them every ten years.

Are you *quite* sure about THAT? Perhaps *you* could contact the NFPA
(already capitalized) and ask to SEE their data. I'm *sure* that
statistically SPEAKING one could determine the *likelihood* of HALF of
the *inoperative* smoke DETECTORS being over TEN *YEARS* OLD. It is
*very* UNLIKELY that it would be a *random* occurrence.

Your words carry no more weight with the unseemly emphasis than
usual. The NFPA - silly folk with a predilection for creating
arbitrary standards - have absolutely no data with which to back up
their recommendation. You should write an angry letter. Use a lot of
emphasis to show you really mean it.

R

You're the one holding them up as some sort of authority. I don't know
whether the NFPA has any data to back up their claim, but if they do,
they sure didn't put it on page 59 of their silly report. And since
their recommendation makes no reasonable sense, I'm pretty sure that,
yeah, it has no reasonable basis.

The only gods I worship are Science and Reason and Logic, and there's
precious little of any of those left in the world.

There are a lot of reasons why a ten year old piece of electronic gear
might not function, none of which have jack squat to do with needing to
be replaced for no good reason. Maybe clean the greasy conductive dust
out, brighten up the battery contacts, put in a fresh battery, and THEN
tell me the thing's no good.

Solid state electronic components tend to last a very, very long time,
particularly when they're in an environment as innocuous as a house and
never get used.

You read a piece of nonsense from an agency of the gummint, and you hold
it to be gospel just because you left your critical thinking skills down
at the bar.

I'll emphasize *whatever the ***** I want to emphasize. But don't worry,
I won't stoop to using those gay emoticons.