Only if the air is compressed. If you fill a fire extinguisher with literally just air, nothing happens if you pressed the nozzle. Everyone but you understood that. But it’s pointless to even type this as you already made up your mind, champ. Feel free to think you are a big mind.
Point in case: the dude I “rebutted” against (lol) agreed that their initial comparison (a fire extinguisher filled with gasoline) was not appropriate.
If we’re talking regular atmospheric air that has oxygen in it, blowing air can absolutely amplify a flame by providing oxygen to replace air that has already been burned. It’s very common to blow on camp fires to add heat, for example.
Needs to be pressurized. Else nothing happens (as in homeopathy where nothing happens; not sure what is hard to understand here honestly). I know how a fire works. But whatever, I’m done with this comment chain.
I wished I wouldn’t live on this planet anymore. Fuck all y’all.
Try and put out a fire with an empty fire extinguisher, tell me how far you get and whether it had a positive (less fire) or negative (same or more fire) effect.
The point is the method is not effective and allowing the problem to continue makes the problem harder to deal with.
Edit: a full fire extinguisher is pressurized unless it utilizes a hand pump, so filled with air denotes that it would be pressurized or that the medium used is air and will be pumped (which will behave like a bellows).
An unpressurized extinguisher is considered empty unless it is manually operated.
A drug is typically filled with a working agent unless it’s homeopathic and is water. The homeopathy “drug” is water, so the fire extinguisher is empty.
Look, I didn’t bring up the fucking fire extinguisher analogy, berate that other dude who initially posted it. But you won’t because you are on some kind of crusade because you think I’m defending homeopathy or some shit. No, the FDA just does not regulate advertisement of non-prescription pills. Your excruciatingly bad reading comprehension is not my problem, so stop replying to me multiple times like a badly trained bot. And now complain about ad hominem to make your bullshit feature-complete.
I know you didn’t bring up the fire extinguisher, but you displayed a misunderstanding about how they opperate and how that would affect a fire.
I don’t know if you normally get this upset when you make mistakes, but calling people bots accusations of ad hominem because you doubled down on a bad analogy just shows that you aren’t better than you claim me to be.
A fire extinguisher filled with air can make a fire much larger.
That wasn’t a rebuttal, it was an admission of ignorance.
Only if the air is compressed. If you fill a fire extinguisher with literally just air, nothing happens if you pressed the nozzle. Everyone but you understood that. But it’s pointless to even type this as you already made up your mind, champ. Feel free to think you are a big mind.
Point in case: the dude I “rebutted” against (lol) agreed that their initial comparison (a fire extinguisher filled with gasoline) was not appropriate.
If we’re talking regular atmospheric air that has oxygen in it, blowing air can absolutely amplify a flame by providing oxygen to replace air that has already been burned. It’s very common to blow on camp fires to add heat, for example.
Needs to be pressurized. Else nothing happens (as in homeopathy where nothing happens; not sure what is hard to understand here honestly). I know how a fire works. But whatever, I’m done with this comment chain.
I wished I wouldn’t live on this planet anymore. Fuck all y’all.
Try and put out a fire with an empty fire extinguisher, tell me how far you get and whether it had a positive (less fire) or negative (same or more fire) effect.
The point is the method is not effective and allowing the problem to continue makes the problem harder to deal with.
Edit: a full fire extinguisher is pressurized unless it utilizes a hand pump, so filled with air denotes that it would be pressurized or that the medium used is air and will be pumped (which will behave like a bellows).
An unpressurized extinguisher is considered empty unless it is manually operated.
A drug is typically filled with a working agent unless it’s homeopathic and is water. The homeopathy “drug” is water, so the fire extinguisher is empty.
Look, I didn’t bring up the fucking fire extinguisher analogy, berate that other dude who initially posted it. But you won’t because you are on some kind of crusade because you think I’m defending homeopathy or some shit. No, the FDA just does not regulate advertisement of non-prescription pills. Your excruciatingly bad reading comprehension is not my problem, so stop replying to me multiple times like a badly trained bot. And now complain about ad hominem to make your bullshit feature-complete.
I know you didn’t bring up the fire extinguisher, but you displayed a misunderstanding about how they opperate and how that would affect a fire.
I don’t know if you normally get this upset when you make mistakes, but calling people bots accusations of ad hominem because you doubled down on a bad analogy just shows that you aren’t better than you claim me to be.
ah i see where you said that. bit confusingly written but you are correct.
You apparently don’t know how extinguishers work.
Not being able to put out a fire isn’t the absence of a negative effect. It allows the fire to grow larger. Which is a negative effect.