| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 9/6/2015 8:19 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 9/6/2015 8:52 AM, George Cornelius wrote: In article , Jerry Stuckle writes: This is one reason why ionization detectors are not recommended any more - too many false alarms. That, plus photoelectric detectors are much faster at detecting real fires. And to avoid everyone just repeating whomever their favorite pontificator is, let's inject something a bit more authoritative. Courtesy Wikipedia: snip rest of crap You really cite Wikipedia as a trusted source? ROFLMAO! Try a real source - like reports from NFPA, independent laboratory tests, etc. Then maybe you can have some respectability - which you do not have now. George He did, via Wikipedia. "According to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)... " You haven't learned to read yet? |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Battery question | Moderated | |||
| HT Battery question | Equipment | |||
| IC-730 and IC-735 battery question | Equipment | |||
| Battery question | Homebrew | |||
| battery question | Scanner | |||