It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

First Irish Case of Death by Spontaneous Combustion

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
The guy was sitting next to an open fire and the inspectors say they cant find a source of ignition is a block in logic. Id say a spark jumped from the fire.

Its like a headline in the national enquirer. Sponataneous combustion. Its the twilghlight zone/.

Most of these cases seem to involve people who didnt trash about,or escape from the flames.so they were already dead or basicly in a coma. Possibly elderly alcoholics.Pickeled in alcohol. Sweating it,breathing it and farting it. Sorry to sound insensitive to this poor guy,Im just trying to make sense of it.

I know after having chilles, I sweat chillies, I smell like a chilly./I like to take a run now and again,and sweat like the clappers,and if I have eaten a lot of chillies on my food,I feel it as I sweat,I smell it as it oozes out of my pores. I even taste it as sweat runs down my face, Alcohol would be the same.

So, if some lonely pensioner who likes to drink a alot, falls into a drunken coma and is farting,belching and sweating alcohol, building up a gas in the room and him soaked in a flammmable alcohol body ,then woosh ! One in a squilion chance ,but thats what happens.




posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Angrybadger
 


So he was found near his fireplace? . One ember or spark from a fire can cause a fire. A spark can leap across a small room that is why most people have fireplace screens. What I think probably happened is he had a heart attack or a stroke an fell while tening to the fire.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 06:04 PM
link   
I don't believe it,
I think his body was burned
and was then put back in the chair.
That could explain how that nothing else was
caught on fire at the time.
The motive could be anything, but I believe
the important fact everyone is missing is that
an outside force possibly could of been involved
even if it does not appear to be.
There was an ignition source, whether it started on the inside
or outside whether they could officially find it or not.
edit on 24-9-2011 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Most victims of SHC are always alone when it happens. I find this as a main reason to think that SHC is not real. If it was wouln't we see people exploing? What about animals? Is there animal combustion? There are cases were people's clothes have caught fire with witnesses but the witnesses usually are there to help. The victims usually live for a short perio after that. Static Flash Fires can easily explain it away. The one thing I woner on the static flash fires is how can static cause a fire by itself? I never use dryer sheets an have static at times.
One incident of a disable woman who was on fire but her father was there but did not see. They failed to mention in most reports of this he was smoking a pipe at the time. I believe what happened is she got an ember from his pipe in her mouth that is why fire came from her mouth.
Most victims are either elderly or disabled or alone. The survivors are younger, not disabled or have people around them. I think this has more to do with someone who can't get up or has already die when they were on fire.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Even if the victim is ignited from an external source, how does one explain the body being so consumed by fire that the body itself must have acted as the fuel source?



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   
Seen this earlier am only slightly shocked it still presents itself. While some say the cause remains unknown, I feel it's ingredients are internal possibly sparked by an outside source, depends on situation it seems but more likely in common cases.

If you're looking into more information(vid wise anyway) check this out...
Inside Spontaneous Human Combustion part 1/5 with Bruce Dickinson



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


Could be a natural occurance of some sort that we dont understand yet.
But artificially this can be accomplished with scalar wave weapons.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 04:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


One detail I notice is that many victims are found in or near a fireplace/chimney flue. Could the chimney be a conduit for - rough guess - lightning perhaps? That might give a catalyst for the fire and why the people don't move from the spot, but doesn't explain the way the bodies are reduced to ash. there must be something else involved, a fierce updraft when the fire takes hold? I'm coming on a bit Arthur C Clarke here.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 04:18 AM
link   
Bruce Dickinson cracks me up.

It's useful to note the extreme rarity of these events, and how long they've been reported. Charles Dickens even wrote about one in 'Bleak House'. That should put paid to any ideas of secret government technology being the cause.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 05:44 AM
link   
wow that is interesting. I never knew that this could actually happen. Guess it can tho.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Wick effect theory is pretty much grand, besides three details.
1. It was never observed occuring (and SHC was, altough of course, people lie all the time).
2. Victim had to be pretty much dead or heavily unconcious for it to occur. Your flesh being burned is pretty good wake-up call. Wick effect needs hours.
3. If the fire reaches temperature that allow to incinerate bones, why it often doesn't spread to lower torso, temperate over 1000C just extuingishes itself while there is still fat to burn (buttcheeks, legs)

I somehow lean to theory, that it's some extremely rare malfunction of mitochondrias.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by stainlesssteelrat
Wick effect theory is pretty much grand, besides three details.
1. It was never observed occuring (and SHC was, altough of course, people lie all the time).
2. Victim had to be pretty much dead or heavily unconcious for it to occur. Your flesh being burned is pretty good wake-up call. Wick effect needs hours.
3. If the fire reaches temperature that allow to incinerate bones, why it often doesn't spread to lower torso, temperate over 1000C just extuingishes itself while there is still fat to burn (buttcheeks, legs)

I somehow lean to theory, that it's some extremely rare malfunction of mitochondrias.
I don't see why any of those three details would bother anyone and why you'd then prefer a much less plausible mitochondria theory that's totally ridiculous, if you are referring to Heymer's theory.

People die all the time, so of course they could be completely dead, or dead drunk. Some of the cigarette started SHC thoughts are that the person died of a heart attack, dropped the cigarette and then failed to wake when they caught fire because they are already dead. Why this bothers you is beyond me, it seems quite plausible.

It's very rare and it's observed with pigs which are very close to humans in body composition, so the fact it hasn't been observed isn't precisely true. It has been observed, but on pigs rather than humans. Few logical people would argue it could happen to a pig but not a human, there's no justification for that claim. The rarity of the event easily explains why it's not observed in humans. Another part of the explanation is, if another person was in the room and saw someone catch on fire, they'd put it out, not wait until they burst into flames, so your expectation that this phenomenon would be observed real seems inconsistent with the fact that nobody will wait to put out a fire they see burning on another person.

The corpses I've seen photos of tend to be burned where the fat content is the highest. The burning stops for one of two reasons:
1. there is insufficient fat, so extremities like hands and feet with low fat content often survive.
2. The wick loses contact with the fat supply. The fat won't burn by itself. Just like a candle, it needs a wick to burn. If the wick is no longer in contact with the fat for whatever reason, it won't continue to burn. Again this is quite simple and why this detail would bother you is beyond comprehension.

Furthermore, the guy promoting the mitochondrial theory seems to be a completely ignorant wacko:

Mitochondrial explosions

Heymer[4] suggests that a psychosomatic process in such emotionally distressed people can trigger a chain reaction by reacting nitrogen within the body and setting off a chain reaction of mitochondrial explosions. This hypothesis has been criticized on the basis that Heymer "...seems to be under the illusion that nitrogen exist as gases in the blood and are thus vulnerable to ignition, which is, in fact, not the case."[9] The hypothesis also fails to take into account the fact that nitrogen is an inert, non-flammable gas.
He thinks that nitrogen burns.

News flash: nitrogen doesn't burn. I don't know why they even included that insane theory in wikipedia, it doesn't meet their quality standards. It has zero credibility, none.

Here's a good article with more of a scientific slant: wiki.benecke.com...:_Spontaneous_Human_Combustion

That article also debunks Heymer's ridiculous mitochondria theory.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyingSpaghettiMonster
reply to post by Essan
 


One detail I notice is that many victims are found in or near a fireplace/chimney flue. Could the chimney be a conduit for - rough guess - lightning perhaps? That might give a catalyst for the fire and why the people don't move from the spot, but doesn't explain the way the bodies are reduced to ash. there must be something else involved, a fierce updraft when the fire takes hold? I'm coming on a bit Arthur C Clarke here.
That explanation is the opposite of occams razor which roughly means the simplest explanation is most often the most likely one.

The lightning is the most complex explanation, not the simplest one. Therefore it's very unlikely, there are many, more likely, ignition sources.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
It's very rare and it's observed with pigs which are very close to humans in body composition, so the fact it hasn't been observed isn't precisely true. It has been observed, but on pigs rather than humans. Few logical people would argue it could happen to a pig but not a human, there's no justification for that claim.

Dead pigs I would also add
. Ive seen experiments, your absolutely right that blanket wasn't right choice.



The rarity of the event easily explains why it's not observed in humans. Another part of the explanation is, if another person was in the room and saw someone catch on fire, they'd put it out, not wait until they burst into flames, so your expectation that this phenomenon would be observed real seems inconsistent with the fact that nobody will wait to put out a fire they see burning on another person.


I was rather thinking about situations, were people reported that their skin was pierced through with, let's say, cinder from fireplace while they were asleep, and fat was ignited. Also, people die in fires caused by debris from fireplace all the time. It's pretty common, especially here in Ireland. Wick-effect is extremely rare, never observed in nature.



The corpses I've seen photos of tend to be burned where the fat content is the highest. The burning stops for one of two reasons:
1. there is insufficient fat, so extremities like hands and feet with low fat content often survive.
2. The wick loses contact with the fat supply. The fat won't burn by itself. Just like a candle, it needs a wick to burn. If the wick is no longer in contact with the fat for whatever reason, it won't continue to burn. Again this is quite simple and why this detail would bother you is beyond comprehension.

Well, lower torso does contain lot of fat, im not talking bout feet here. Also, garments around waist are usually tighter then lets say shirt, apropos wick losing contact with skin.



Furthermore, the guy promoting the mitochondrial theory seems to be a completely ignorant wacko:

Yes, he is, hence the "Somehow I lean..." part. And I'm not trying to proove it or explain it, that guy is a crook for sure.
I'm not trying to discredit wick-theory, as I said it's pretty grand and definitely could explain a lot of cases. But not all of them IMHO. And also, I'm pretty sure, victim would have to die before from f.i. heart-attack. (as it happened in some cases, I know)

We won't know 100%, until we observe it (not on dead pigs).Anyone have some spare fresh body?
edit on 25-9-2011 by stainlesssteelrat because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Blimey, for once I'm on the other side of the argument! Simplest is *usually* the answer, true, but not always. I was speculating about mechanisms. Sometimes it's a rare combination of events that produces 'unexplained' phenomenae.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   
I read or heard somewhere that some people that suffers from alcoholism can't break down alcohol as the "ordinary people" does. Instead it turns to aetone, if this is somewhat correct I do not know but it's the first thing that came to mind to this case..

edit: think it had something to do with some missing enzymes in the liver..
edit on 25-9-2011 by Azmodan85 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   
I read in a charles berlitz book once that said something about it being to do with a self-willed suicide ability?



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
it's observed with pigs which are very close to humans in body composition..

If you're referring to the video I remain unconvinced. Large parts of the pig's skin were unscorched and where the flesh did burn the charring was not deep, and this is more indicative of a fire fueled by an external source--the blankets.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


I don't believe this for a second. There had to have been an ignition source, the old man probably fell asleep while he was smoking.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by OldCorp
 


Damn you, sir, damn you! Not only the ideal obvious comment in the context, but first in the thread as well! My commendations.

A star for expressing my precise thought in advance of my arrival.

On second thought, perhaps leprechauns forget to put out their pipes while sharing beds with humans, unbeknownst to said humans, fall asleep and drop their smoldering pipe, occasionally set the unsuspecting slumbering human ablaze, perhaps once a millennium or so.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join