I'm not sure what the point is here. Could it be:
- Some chemicals with unfamiliar-sounding names are harmless, therefore we should assume that all are?
- Warning labels about chemical hazards are stupid, because the public should be sufficiently educated about chemistry and toxicology to know if a compound is dangerous by it's name alone?
- Unfamiliar substances should be assumed to be safe unless we know otherwise with certainty?
Furthermore, if you use the name "di-hydrogen monoxide" for water, I'm going to assume you've had no chemistry beyond high school. No chemist would say "monosilicon dioxide" for quartz (SiO2) or "tri-iron tetra-oxide" for Fe3O4, for example. So if you're ridiculing people for not recognizing "dihydrogen monoxide", you're also looking like an noob to people who know better.