DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
I think it more plausible that the smell of smoke was imaginary and/or unrelated to the skin emanation, than that actual smoke was rising from this guy's skin.
Is it possible for a human's metabolism to set them on fire?
- Thread starter 0ddball
- Start date
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
No, he's been posting this nonsense for years. Also he does not confine himself to spontaneous combustion. Any sensationally impossible mode of spontaneous death will do. He's previously posted on the subject of someone "allergic to water" (yes, really) and then of course there was his piece de resistance: the man strangled by his own thymus gland in cold weather. He's just another obsessive, anti-science troll. But mercifully he only appears once every 6 months or so, is instantly recognisable - and is quickly banned.You don't think he might be considering a firebug crime and try to make it look like spontaneous human combustion????
Hey, where's that guy that shows up once a year to tell us that wearing shoes is bad for you?
Here's a link to one of the previous threads:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/is-it-possible-for-a-human-to-spontaneously-combust.140292/
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/is-it-possible-for-a-human-to-spontaneously-combust.140292/
i don't see why the thread was just not moved to fringe section if it's going to remain open for discussion yet oddball was banned. so what if they only post on certain type of topics? how does that hurt anyone else here?
why does this bother people so much because some question things that seem odd to you? you know what type of people are even worse anti-science as they know nothing about science and do not care? those who never question anything outside of what authority figures or mainstream has told them so just to fit in. not only are they the most obnoxious but also just as ignorant and here you are making fun of this guy.
evidently, he must think something is going on to question these incidents and to post them here asking for different opinions. at least that's better than those who don't question anything.
people like you make others afraid to question for fear of being ridiculed and even worse, to think at all. what is so horrible about questioning if someone can be allergic to water, for instance? yes, we are made of mostly water but perhaps there is something going on with the tissues, skin or something in the water that is making them allergic etc.
people are allergic to all sorts of things, even sunlight as weird as that is as well.
https://www.geek.com/news/the-11-weirdest-allergies-in-the-world-1633944/
this world is a weird place and those who question it are at least more sane than those who don't.
Last edited:
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
It bothers me because this person is a monomaniac who refuses to engage with the answers given, by several people over a long period, to the damn-fool questions he asks. Why ask a question if you are not interested in the answer, eh? And why repeat the same question , over and over again, when everyone has already given you their answers the first time round? What is the point of that?
If he had shown some ability to take in the answers, by responses that acknowledged what was being said in reply, he would not attract the scorn that he, rightly, does. Yes we make fun of him - or I certainly do - but he amply deserves it.
Defend open-mindedness by all means, but this subject and this individual are really poor examples for you to choose.
There is a much better thread running at the moment, started by Seattle about something he describes as a putative ghost. There, you will see that he is being treated with respect, even though most people including me are highly sceptical. That is because unlike this idiotic sockpuppet here, Seattle engages with what his interlocutors say, apparently in good faith. That is the difference.
As for the world being a weird place with unanswered questions, yes indeed, and the job of science is render is less weird by answering those questions where we can. It is not to make it seem more weird by encouraging the propagation of ballocks.
Last edited:
Why are you defending a sock puppet?
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
We all question these things. The fact that we find them short on compelling evidence does not mean we have not examined them. (I've been reading stories about SHC for the better part of a half century.)
Yes, this world is a weird place, and it is full of false attributions too. We are simply being diligent in weeding out the probably false from the probably real.
These anecdotes of the banned member do not meet even the most optimistic criteria for probably real.
But apparently questioning things not enough for you. Apparently you aren't happy unless we reach the same conclusions as you, too (that every leprechaun is real)?
There are folks who request cremation rather than embalming or other means of disposing of their bodies after death.
Note that there are folks who escape from burning buildings with burns causing serious damage. I have never read or heard of news reports describing flesh actually burning..
There are accounts of torture via fire which do not describe the results as causing body parts to burn.
Cremation is never performed via causing the corpse to burn. It is done in some sort of oven.
Note that there are folks who escape from burning buildings with burns causing serious damage. I have never read or heard of news reports describing flesh actually burning..
There are accounts of torture via fire which do not describe the results as causing body parts to burn.
Cremation of a dead body is carried out at a temperature ranging between 1400 to 1800 degrees Fahrenheit. The intense heat helps reduce the body to its basic elements and dried bone fragments
http://www.cremationresource.org/cremation/how-is-a-body-cremated.html
Enough said?
RADII
Registered Senior Member
Sterno, the last resort of the truly hardcore, unless they're serving asea. Or do they not power torps w/ ethanol anymore?