TBone wrote:
"Gus" blabbered on in message
oups.com...

The point is, bonehead, that the "bucket of water" example has nothing
whatsoever to do with woodworking, dust collection, dust explosions, or
anything else even remotely relevant.


Starting off with name calling I see. That just shows the strength (or lack
of) of your argument. Like I said, you simply don't understand. The point
is GUS, that there are some things that can be said with 100% certainty and
the bucket of water was an example. Unless the laws of physics are
different in your world, water in its liquid state cannot burn so there is a
100% certanity that a bucket of water sitting in your garage WILL NOT burst
into flames.


Obviously, I cannot state, with certainty, the chances of anything
bursting into flame. Nor can you.


Sure I can. If you actually studied a few facts, you could as well.


Conversely, you cannot state, with
certainty, that something will "never" burst into flame.
It's not a question of flammability but of precision in meaning.


I guess that the laws of physics don't apply in your world or are you trying
to justify this crap with the chaos theory of variables. The fact is that
many of these variables are so rare that they become statistically
insignificant and are treated as non-existent. Simple facts say clearly
that a bucket of WATER will never burst into flames and if something were to
contaminate it and make it flammable, then it is no longer just a bucket of
water now, is it? The same can be said for explosions in a home shop dust
collection system. The mixture and conditions simply are not there to cause
an explosion and if you introduce variables that don't exist in a normal
home shop, then you are not dealing with a home shop dust collection system
anymore.



I sure wish you and/or LRod would elaborate on these "Laws of Physics"
you're always quoting with such alacrity.

There's all kinds of them, you know, conservation of mass, conservation
of energy.....do a little fact checking yourself, TBone.

Homer