That is one scared puppy.

"Air Bud 32: Hotdog"?

Related to TFA but in a parallel way. This story reminds me of the time that some farker called me an idiot, insisting that medical use oxygen tanks aren't flammable, when I had suggested that they are.

If you're out there, you can kiss my...

/glad the dog made it
//love my pooch

bluehubcap: Related to TFA but in a parallel way. This story reminds me of the time that some farker called me an idiot, insisting that medical use oxygen tanks aren't flammable, when I had suggested that they are.

If you're out there, you can kiss my...

/glad the dog made it
//love my pooch

Do we get to have the argument again as to whether oxygen is "flammable" in itself, or merely enhances the flammability of other items in the vicinity? Let's not, kay?

Was he found with three baby dragons?

...and people make fun of me for my plan to teach my cats to run out to the patio when the smoke alarms go off.

Nice, you go in to rescue 2 O2 tanks, and leave the dog to burn, when he's in a cage in the back of the house, where there isn't fire. Facepalm. Give your dog to someone who really cares.

/assholes.

Highly concentrated sources of oxygen promote rapid combustion. Fire and explosion hazards exist when concentrated oxidants and fuels are brought into close proximity; however, an ignition event, such as heat or a spark, is needed to trigger combustion.[115] Oxygen itself is not the fuel, but the oxidant. Combustion hazards also apply to compounds of oxygen with a high oxidative potential, such as peroxides, chlorates, nitrates, perchlorates, and dichromates because they can donate oxygen to a fire.

Concentrated O2 will allow combustion to proceed rapidly and energetically.[115] Steel pipes and storage vessels used to store and transmit both gaseous and liquid oxygen will act as a fuel; and therefore the design and manufacture of O2 systems requires special training to ensure that ignition sources are minimized.[115] The fire that killed the Apollo 1 crew in a launch pad test spread so rapidly because the capsule was pressurized with pure O2 but at slightly more than atmospheric pressure, instead of the 1/3 normal pressure that would be used in a mission.[116][117]

Liquid oxygen spills, if allowed to soak into organic matter, such as wood, petrochemicals, and asphalt can cause these materials to detonate unpredictably on subsequent mechanical impact.[115] As with other cryogenic liquids, on contact with the human body it can cause frostbites to the skin and the eyes.

There, that should settle the argument guys.

Link

Is Michael Bay directing?

Bit'O'Gristle: Nice, you go in to rescue 2 O2 tanks, and leave the dog to burn, when he's in a cage in the back of the house, where there isn't fire. Facepalm. Give your dog to someone who really cares.

/assholes.

Gramps went in to try to smother the flames, not to get his O2.

Still, I'm not impressed that they didn't stop for the dog... twice....

Gyrfalcon: bluehubcap: Related to TFA but in a parallel way. This story reminds me of the time that some farker called me an idiot, insisting that medical use oxygen tanks aren't flammable, when I had suggested that they are.

If you're out there, you can kiss my...

/glad the dog made it
//love my pooch

Do we get to have the argument again as to whether oxygen is "flammable" in itself, or merely enhances the flammability of other items in the vicinity? Let's not, kay?

I hate semantics.

Background: On a post once upon a time I said something to the effect that fire and an oxygen tank were a bad/unsafe mix. The farker in question insisted that since oxygen itself is not flammable, that it was perfectly safe and I was an idiot. citation

"...still locked in a crate..."

Well, there's your problem right there.

I gave a key to my neighbour in case there's a fire when I'm out.
"Just prop a door open and let the cats out if you're able...help yourself to anything in the fridge."

bluehubcap I hate semantics.

This isn't "semantics". It's "reality". Pure O2 doesn't burn. Period.

spidermann: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 297x285]

WTF JUST HAPPENED?!?!?

How about;

No! Please! Not the crate again!

Or

Everybody is assholes and elbows when there's a fire. BUT does anybody remember the Dog! NOOOoooo!

Back in 1947, my parents were living in a converted chicken shack. It had electricity and a tiny room used for the washing machine and stored items. There was an electrical fire in that room, and my parents and whoever else fought the fire and put it out before the rest of the shack was damaged. When the fire was out, my parents realized they had forgotten 2 year old me. They really panicked and were greatly relieved that my 4 years brother had pulled me out of my crib and taken me out to the car and held me there. Not an easy task. I was a realy spitfire.

Yeah, this dog will have well-deserved abandonment issues. I hope he craps in their shoes every chance he gets.

/off to hug my goofball Lab

Tanthalas39: This isn't "semantics". It's "reality". Pure O2 doesn't burn. Period.

I can play that game too: pure thermite doesn't burn -- it requires an energy input to get it going.

But since "pure" anything is unlikely to occur in the real world -- the 0₂ in question is contained in a steel tank that will rapidly react with it given a bit of extra energy -- arguing about such things does seem a bit semantic.

/ Unless you want to be pedantic about semantics

profplump: Tanthalas39: This isn't "semantics". It's "reality". Pure O2 doesn't burn. Period.

I can play that game too: pure thermite doesn't burn -- it requires an energy input to get it going.

But since "pure" anything is unlikely to occur in the real world -- the 02 in question is contained in a steel tank that will rapidly react with it given a bit of extra energy -- arguing about such things does seem a bit semantic.

/ Unless you want to be pedantic about semantics

You're correct that pure thermite doesn't burn - it's missing heat and an oxidizer, same as pure oxygen is missing heat and fuel. Accurately describing combustion is not semantics, it's chemistry. Also, if by "a bit of extra energy" you mean "800 degrees celsius" and by "a steel tank" you mean "steel wool", you may be correct. A steel tank simply doesn't have the surface area to ignite at cigarette, lighter, or even standard gasoline feasible temperatures. I can't find any online citation of a steel oxygen tank igniting (without, say, a concomitant structure conflagration a la 9/11 ensuing all around). Even then, there's a good probability it would first burst due to increasing internal pressure.

/perhaps i am pedantic about chemistry

Tanthalas39: profplump: Tanthalas39: This isn't "semantics". It's "reality". Pure O2 doesn't burn. Period.

I can play that game too: pure thermite doesn't burn -- it requires an energy input to get it going.

But since "pure" anything is unlikely to occur in the real world -- the 02 in question is contained in a steel tank that will rapidly react with it given a bit of extra energy -- arguing about such things does seem a bit semantic.

/ Unless you want to be pedantic about semantics

You're correct that pure thermite doesn't burn - it's missing heat and an oxidizer, same as pure oxygen is missing heat and fuel. Accurately describing combustion is not semantics, it's chemistry. Also, if by "a bit of extra energy" you mean "800 degrees celsius" and by "a steel tank" you mean "steel wool", you may be correct. A steel tank simply doesn't have the surface area to ignite at cigarette, lighter, or even standard gasoline feasible temperatures. I can't find any online citation of a steel oxygen tank igniting (without, say, a concomitant structure conflagration a la 9/11 ensuing all around). Even then, there's a good probability it would first burst due to increasing internal pressure.

/perhaps i am pedantic about chemistry

Of course, now that I re-read that, thermite has its own oxidant, doesn't it. Sigh. FINE I'M PEDANTIC

Jclark666: "...still locked in a crate..."

Well, there's your problem right there.

Agreed. Pets have become show pieces like zoo animals. Let them out for a bit, then back in the cage you go. And children are now the pets to be kept on a leash. People are too farking lazy to properly train/teach either so do what's convenient.

Luke, still locked in a crate in the back side of the home.

They are going to have trouble the next time they go to put that dog in the crate. Just a hunch.

ByOwlLight: How in the hell do you leave your dog in a locked crate in the house when you have time to run in to try to smother the flames? That poor dog.

Absolutely!

The plot line for the next... Disney movie

Jclark666: "...still locked in a crate..."

Well, there's your problem right there.

This. Thanks a lot assholes.

The next day . . .

wants to adopt the dog.