Analyzing the claims made by Steve Gass (9) in
9a. Steve Gass “…there’s about 60,000 medically treated accidents treated on table saws every year.”
9b. Every year, there is about 60,000 incidents where someone needs medical attention resulting from a table saw accident.
9c. This claim seems factual. If he was making this up, it obviously would not be factual. I would like to see proof of this, but I believe Steve. Its an evaluation of how many people have been effected by table saws, and had to seek medical attention every year.
9d. This seems like a logical claim to make in his case. he is justifying the importance of his invention by giving a fact of why this invention is necessary. if this is true that 60,000 people have had an accident due to table saws every year, it makes sense to push out a safety stopper. A quality claim to show the dangers of table saws.
9a. Steve Gass “The system can tell the difference between your finger and the wood.”
9b. This machine that I invented can tell the difference between a human finger, and a piece of wood.
9c. This claim is an evaluation of what his machine is capable to accomplish. This claim would not hold true if Steve did not put his finger in it as proof later ion the video. Proving his claim, this claim is factual. suggesting it is okay for a finger to be caught in the blade rotation.
9d. This is a claim that seems true, but I would not want to try it out. This claim is only persuasive because he proves it later on. If someone were to show me the blade in full motion, and told me that it would detect a finger and stop, I would not believe it. This claim is also the main aspect of his invention. a machine that is able to detect a finger.
9a. Steve Gass “It felt a little like a, I don’t know, a buzz or a tickle almost.”
9b. When I put my finger in the saw blade, when it stopped it felt like a buzz, or a tickle.”
9c. This is Steve’s opinion. Everyone feels pain differently, and to him, what felt like a buzz or a tickle to someone else might hurt more. This cannot be proved also, only to him it could feel like a buzz. He could also be lying to make his product sell.
9d. considering the fact that Steve put his finger in, and it stopped on a dime, I could believe him. before he said this, the video showed the finger in the blade in slow motion. it did not cut him, nor did he wince when it hit his finger. It looked painless, but it still is not that convincing. It still hits you, and if you’re a person that cant take pain, you might really be unhappy.
CLAIM BY SawStop official company http://www.sawstop.com/why-sawstop/the-technology
1a. SawStop website “The blade carries a small electrical signal, which the safety system continually monitors.”
1b. the blade has a small conductor on each blade, which carries an electrical signal to detect a finger”
1c. This is a fact. the blade has a small conductor, which gets set off when a wet finger comes in contact with it. This is a fact because it can be/ has been proven.
1d. The claim states just what it needs to prove why the system works. The main task the system is responsible for is to conduct electricity to stop. I am fully persuaded that the blade carries a small electrical signal, which the safety system continually monitors.
1a. website “An aluminum brake springs into the spinning blade, stopping it in less than 5 milliseconds!”
1b. An aluminum brake spring can stop the mechanism in less than 5 milliseconds.
1c. This claim seems factual. I would like to see proof of this, but I believe the claim. It is an evaluation of the skillset of the machine. saying that it will stop in less than 5 milliseconds is a big claim, and might not seem believeable, but if it is a fact this is pretty impressive.
1d. This claim is right in the beinning of the website section on how the machine works. I wish I could have proof for these claims, but I just have to take the websites word for it. I guess if they said it took 3 milliseconds to stop, I would also believe it.
Rowan Counterintuitive 