Thought the wick effect explains this...

Discussions and related news items
Post Reply
GT
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 145
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 6:41 pm

Thought the wick effect explains this...

Post by GT » Fri Sep 23, 2011 9:49 am

http://www.independent.ie/national-news ... 85633.html

I seem to remember some horizon program doing an expirament with pig limbs wrapped in cloth and putting in front of a fire.

Spontaneous Human Compustion has a bit of a paranormal slant to it in the media...
Regards,

GT

Faith is following someone else's lies.
aZerogodist
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1280
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 6:04 pm
Location: Co. CORK
Contact:

Re: Thought the wick effect explains this...

Post by aZerogodist » Fri Sep 23, 2011 10:11 am

I remember seeing something once newscientist/bbc ? As far as I remember diabetes is a factor and blood-sugar levels, not sure if the drug had an effect.

When I was young I read about SHC in 'The Unexplained' which didn't really explain much, maybe time for a mag called 'The Explained'
funkyderek
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 373
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Contact:

Re: Thought the wick effect explains this...

Post by funkyderek » Fri Sep 23, 2011 10:15 am

Yes, the wick effect explains why there was very little damage to anything but the body. Oddly, this seems to have caused the coroner to believe that the fire started spontaneously within the body rather than travelling from the nearby open fireplace. A more likely conclusion is that the man died or fell asleep or into a diabetic coma while near the fire, and began smouldering when a piece of coal flew out (something that anyone with an open fire will likely have observed).
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead

Image

Image Image Image Image
Dr Raskolnikov
Posts: 197
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:16 pm
Location: "In the beginning there was the word, and the word was "word up biatch""

Re: Thought the wick effect explains this...

Post by Dr Raskolnikov » Sat Sep 24, 2011 12:23 am

I think the most important thing to note about this story is that *bursts into flames*
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins the movie by telling you how it ends. Well, I say there are some things we don't want to know. Important things. - Ned Flanders
Feardorcha
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1266
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: Thought the wick effect explains this...

Post by Feardorcha » Sat Sep 24, 2011 10:30 am

The fire in the grate was the source of the flame. The mystery is where the gas came from - maybe the clothing the unfortunate man was wearing.
I've seen, on some science programme, experiments with sofas spontaneously combusting at distances of several meters from the fire source. Unfortunately, elderly people tend to keep windows and doors closed in cold weather and gases don't escape. Once the fire jumped, the wick effect would have caused the body to burn.
It would be worth examining the clothing the man was wearing and carrying out tests on it to prevent further such deaths.
bipedalhumanoid
Posts: 2675
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 1:55 pm

Re: Thought the wick effect explains this...

Post by bipedalhumanoid » Sun Sep 25, 2011 5:25 pm

I think the most important point of all is that the entire diagnosis is based on an argument from ignorance.

He pretty much came to this conclusion using the same means that the catholic church uses to examine miracle claims. Hit it with science and when you don't get an answer revert to the default answer selected in advance.

An honest report would have been that the man died from severe burn injuries received by unknown means. The media should be ridiculing and questioning this diagnosis. Instead they're reporting as a matter of fact that this person spontaneously combusted.
"The fact of your own existence is the most astonishing fact you will ever have to face. Don’t you ever get used to it." - Richard Dawkins... being shrill and offensive again I suppose.
Post Reply