Lighting question
 

In article ,
j r powell wrote:

"Dave Plowfool" wrote in message
...
In article ,
j r powell wrote:
That is an example of lag (time taken for heat from radiators to reach
thermostat), and this is one which the Heat Anticipator is designed to
compensate for

Still harping on about radiators? Hasn't it occurred to your limited
intelligence that there are other heat sources in a house that the
thermostat has to react to?

But just stick your thermostat over a radiator to reduce the reaction
time to a minimum and disconnect the accelerator coil. You know it
makes sense.

BTW, ever wondered why air con thermostats can have an accelator coil?

Still stuck with the 3rd rate diversionary tactics eh, Plowfool? I know
it's easier than answering the questions but it's such an obvious,
devalued ploy.

If you really want to save face, rather than demonstrating your
laughable inability to follow and comprehend my factually-correct
postings, you ought to explain and back-up your absurd claim (which we
now know you've nicked from your fellow ****head over in uk.d-i-y) that
Heat Anticipators (which you wrongly call accelerators) alter
hysteresis!

I've provided you with two sources which rightly agree with how I've said
it works. You, on the other hand (despite I'm sure furious searching), can
only dribble on and on with nothing to support your ridiculous version -
which a 5 year old could tell was flawed.

So I'm going to leave it there for the sake of other's sanity - although I
doubt any others are still reading this thread.

--
*Always drink upstream from the herd *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Lighting question
 

In article ,
j r powell wrote:
Heh heh - it amuses me to see him dig a deeper and deeper hole.

ooh look, mungo Plowfool's still in denial!

Couldn't think of anything original to put, jumbo?

--
*I have a degree in liberal arts -- do you want fries with that

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Lighting question
 

"Dave Plowfool" wrote in message
...

I've provided you with two sources which rightly agree with how I've said
it works. You, on the other hand (despite I'm sure furious searching), can
only dribble on and on with nothing to support your ridiculous version -
which a 5 year old could tell was flawed.

Unfortunately for you, you *still* haven't provided one scintilla of evidence
to support your deranged and unscientific claims!

Your first "source" aka diversionary tactic saw you trying to claim that
because two words happened to appear on the same webpage, it automatically
made you right - how utterly pathetic! *Nowhere* in that webpage did it state
that the Heat Anticipator device "alters the hysteresis" as you claimed.

Your second "source" aka diversionary tactic, saw you quoting from one of your
fellow novice ****heads over on uk.d-i-y - equally pathetic of course because
his words carry no more weight than yours, and it only served to expose your
own badly-chosen sources of misinformation!

I've provided one of many available sources to back up my well-researched
scientific facts.
You've provided none to back up your bull****.


So I'm going to leave it there for the sake of other's sanity - although I
doubt any others are still reading this thread.

Learn to keep your stupid mouth shut in future and - if you want to save
yourself from further embarassment - don't come back.

jamie.
--

Lighting question
 

"Dave Plowfool" wrote in message
...
In article ,
j r powell wrote:
Heh heh - it amuses me to see him dig a deeper and deeper hole.

ooh look, mungo Plowfool's still in denial!

Couldn't think of anything original to put, jumbo?

I find pure statements of fact work best, mungo.

jamie.
--