[Aria]

Originally Posted by Psychonautical ↗

You have just completely convinced me that it is bullshit with your strong and compelling argument.

Your research is sound and your wording is perfect!

My hat is off to you sir, continue to spread the good word about the lie that is spontaneous combustion!

haHA!

Well said, well said..

[FuckYourAccount]

Originally Posted by Psychonautical ↗

You have just completely convinced me that it is bullshit with your strong and compelling argument.

Your research is sound and your wording is perfect!

My hat is off to you sir, continue to spread the good word about the lie that is spontaneous combustion!

HAHA, that gave me a good chuckle.

Like others have allready said, these photos are not fake, they're very common photographs that have been at the focal point of SHC debates ongoing for years and years. They've been featured in a few documentaries and documentary styled TV programs. Unsolved Mysteries even did an episode on SHC a while ago, I remeber seeing it as a very young child and it was the first time I'd heard of it and have been very interested in it since.

Someone else in this thread had mentioned that there are documented and scientificly proven cases of animals spontaneously combusting.. anyone have any info on that? hadn't heard of that at all before.

[Jayy]

Originally Posted by Psychonautical ↗

You have just completely convinced me that it is bullshit with your strong and compelling argument.

Your research is sound and your wording is perfect!

My hat is off to you sir, continue to spread the good word about the lie that is spontaneous combustion!

Who the fuck cares about what you are or are not convinced of? I certainly don't and I wasn't attempting to convince anyone of anything... just giving my opinion.

And, BTW, It also shouldn't take much convincing that this is totally impossible and unbelievable unless you have no ability to use common sense. Don't think about it too hard though... you may spontaneously combust. :rolleyes:

[Psychonautical]

I'm looking around, and came across a few accounts in which the people actually survived for a little while. They seem to also fit into the wick effect theory.

These are just a few of the many hundred reported cases of "spontaneous human combustion":

In 1938, a 22-year-old woman named Phyllis Newcombe was leaving a dance at the Shire Hall in Chelmsford, England. As she descended the staircase of the hall, her dress suddenly caught fire with no apparent cause. She ran back into the ballroom, where she collapsed. Several people rushed to her aid, but she later died in the hospital. Although the theory was that Newcombe's dress had been ignited by a cigarette or a lit match thrown from the stairwell, no evidence of either was ever found. Coroner L.F. Beccles commented on the incident, "From all my experience I have never come across a case so very mysterious as this."

In 1951, a 67-year-old widow named Mary Reeser was at home in St. Petersburg, Florida. On the morning of July 2, a neighbor discovered that Mary's front door was hot. When she broke into the apartment with the help of two workmen, they found Mary in an easy chair with a black circle around her. Her head had been burned down to the size of a teacup. The only other parts of her that remained were part of her backbone and part of her left foot. Other than Mary's charred remains, there was very little evidence of fire in her apartment. A forensic pathologist, Dr. Wilton Krogman, said of the incident, "[It's] the most amazing thing I have ever seen. As I review it, the short hairs on my neck bristle with vague fear. Were I living in the Middle Ages I'd mutter something about black magic." But the police report cited a far less supernatural explanation for the cause of death: a dropped cigarette, which ignited Mrs. Reeser's highly flammable rayon-acetate nightgown.

In 1982, a mentally handicapped woman named Jean Lucille "Jeannie" Saffin was sitting with her 82-year-old father at their home in Edmonton, in northern London. According to her father, a flash of light caught his eye. When he turned to his daughter, he saw that her upper body was enveloped in flames. Mr. Saffin and his son-in-law, Donald Carroll, managed to put out the blaze, but Jeannie died of her third-degree burns about a week after entering the hospital. According to Carroll, "the flames were coming from her mouth like a dragon and they were making a roaring noise." There was no smoke or fire damage in the room. Some have wondered if an ember from her father's pipe ignited Jeannie's clothing.

[Jayy]

Originally Posted by FuckYourAccount ↗

Like others have allready said, these photos are not fake.

Correct... I also already said that the pictures are real. And absolutely nothings been proven about this nonsense... unless you're privy to conclusive proof that nobody else knows about.

[Psychonautical]

Originally Posted by Jayy ↗

Who the fuck cares about what you are or are not convinced of? I certainly don't and I wasn't attempting to convince anyone of anything... just giving my opinion.

And, BTW, It also shouldn't take much convincing that this is totally impossible and unbelievable unless you have no ability to use common sense. Don't think about it too hard though... you may spontaneously combust. :rolleyes:

After reading your posts, I can tell that there is no use in arguing with you.

But, if you actually used your common sense that you hold so highly you'd realize that there are multiple theories on this, ranging from ridiculous to plausible.

Spontaneous Human Combustion is not what you seem to think it is. I'd suggest you do some research before marching in waving your common sense like some sort of badge that gives you the right to be an ignorant prick.

[Jayy]

Originally Posted by Psychonautical ↗

After reading your posts, I can tell that there is no use in arguing with you.

But, if you actually used your common sense that you hold so highly you'd realize that there are multiple theories on this, ranging from ridiculous to plausible.

Spontaneous Human Combustion is not what you seem to think it is. I'd suggest you do some research before marching in waving your common sense like some sort of badge that gives you the right to be an ignorant prick.

No need to argue... the following article I just found is good enough for me (common sense was good enough but I thought I'd add some info for you).
Whatever... it's like believing in God: You either do or don't regardless of a complete lack of any scintilla of proof.

http://media.www.thetriangle.org/med...t-954397.shtml


"I swear, with your gods as my witnesses, that there is no such thing as Spontaneous Human Combustion. It's yet another urban legend that, somehow, has been enshrined in pseudoscientific canon for years. Basically, the story goes that, due to some crazy internal chemical reaction, a person can just burst into flames for no reason at all. I'm not saying that people don't burn, I'm just saying that people don't burst into flame for no reason at all. Think about it: The human body is almost entirely water.

That's why cremating a corpse requires thousands of degrees for a couple of hours to get it reduced to ashes. I suppose maybe someone who's eaten a lot of beans may have a few percent of various flammable gases circulating in their bodies, but no, the average person doesn't burn without some sort of accelerant.

According to various "experts," by which I mean occult enthusiasts, there have been as many as 200 cases of human beings just blowing up for no reason in the last 300 years. It's hard to look at this sort of thing scientifically, since you've got to more or less take their word for it that these cases exist, but there's a lot of similarities.

First, the occult enthusiast claims that in "cases" of SHC, the human body ignites and burns at, sometimes, tens of thousands of degrees, while newspapers or other combustible materials found as little as a foot away remain unburned. Also, only parts of the human body can burn, apparently: You're likely to find, if you stumble upon a case of SHC, an unharmed severed limb amongst a pile of ashes.

The torso is often reported to be severely burned, although not necessarily evenly burned, while extremities remain intact. But remember, this is just a trend. There are also plenty of cases where people lose their arms or legs.

That's what really strikes me the most about this phenomenon: Every site or book I've been able to find about it contradicts itself, often within the space of a few sentences. Apparently, a greasy soot will completely blacken the inside of a room where SHC occurs, yet a person that spontaneously combusts burns in a fire that does not produce smoke.

Apparently, all of the smoke damage is below a line about 3 feet off of the floor, and above that line objects (mirrors, paintings, windowsills, etc.) will show signs of extensive heat damage. At the same time, nothing but the body will appear to have been damaged by the fire. That's the sentence I like most when discussing this phenomenon: "Only the body is damaged, while other objects in the room will show signs of heat damage." And no, it's not a typo as I initially assumed. Or if it is, it's a widespread and reoccurring one.

For whatever reason, there are some trends that proponents of crazy magic mumbo jumbo self-ignition would prefer you not know. First, it seems that the 1940s were a great decade for SHC. Of every list of people succumbing to this strange and explosive disease (or whatever), the majority seem to have caught fire in the '40s.

Also, of those people that spontaneously combust, the majority seem to be elderly people, 60 years of age or more. One of the leading theories to explain SHC is that the people who "combust" were the victims of murder or robbery, and their charred remains are not indicative of some sort of paranormal phenomenon, but of a pretty good attempt at hiding the crime.

If you're going to rob and kill someone, and then try to dispose of the body, who would you rather target? The elderly, who are relatively weak, live alone, and have scads of cash laying about, or young people like myself who are ridiculously poor, live crowded together, and have good strong bones? Once again, even the smallest pawn of logic and common sense can put the entire SHC argument in check. On one website, I found two claims that I decided to look into. The first is that when a SHC event is witnessed, the witnesses report the victim bursting into flames like a firework. Recall that above, it was claimed (sort of) that these events do not damage material property. Yet, apparently, they shoot sparks and gouts of flame all over the place when they start.

Ignoring that, I decided to try and find a SHC case that had a "witness." I couldn't do it. Every single "case" that I can find has the phrase "was found by" or "was discovered by" or some variation. If there are any actual cases of SHC that have independent witnesses, congratulations occult enthusiasts. You've hidden them well. Since the claim is universally made that SHC events occur only indoors and only when the victim has been alone for a long period of time, I'm going to say I'm pretty sure that the ones that claim there are witnesses are wrong.

Some day, I tell you, I'll find some something to write about in this column where the people that believe in it can agree as to exactly what's going on. "Facts" about SHC vary about as wildly as "eyewitness descriptions" of the Chupacabra.

The other claim was there have been cases of SHC from which the victims have survived. The claim has been made that they can rule out any simple, rational explanation for the event (i.e., they weren't smoking at the time or drinking gasoline), thus shooting a hole in the skeptic's argument against them. While the effects of the event has been well documented ("Sometimes victims develop burns on their bodies that have no known external cause" is one such example, straight from the internet), the actual cases seem not to exist. I've seen the claim that there are survivors of these events that have all sorts of weird physical affects, yet never seen a name or even a specific example. They're always talked about in the most general of terms.

But not only does it seem that the majority of the important claims are unsubstantiated, to the point that they don't even include a victims name or location, but there's a strong history behind it.

In the 1800s medical professionals believed the alcoholism could lead to immolation; since alcohol is flammable, at least their theory made logical sense (at the time). But the theories of medical professionals eventually became urban legend; one person told another that they'd heard about SHC from a doctor, it spread, and eventually the mother of the cousin of the ex-roommate of the baby-sitter of the dogwalker's dentist had exploded!

There are absolutely zero reasons to believe in SHC; at least, there's no more reason to believe in it than to believe that you'll wake up in a bathtub full of ice short by a kidney.

It's the product of rumor and a desire to believe in insane, paranormal things that are outside the realm of human understanding. I don't believe in unicorns, and I don't believe in Spontaneous Human Condition. You shouldn't either. Be seeing you.

Aaron Sakulich is a senior majoring in materials science and engineering. Mr. Sakulich can be reached at aaron.sakulich@thetriangle.org."

[Psychonautical]

I can understand trying to drive a point home. But I'd like to refer back to my posts and clear a few things up for you here because it seems as though you are in need of it.

I'm looking around, and came across a few accounts in which the people actually survived for a little while. They seem to also fit into the wick effect theory.

Yes, that's a quote by me. In it you can clearly see that I said that it fits into the wick theory, which is not spontaneous human combustion. It is a theory trying to explain it. So right away if you had read what I had actually typed here you'd understand that you are not trying to convince someone who believes this fanatically. But oh well, with all your common sense you knew that right?

I really am trying to understand why you've turned this into a personal vendetta, but you posting a page of information that is mere speculation by someone who considers themselves an intellectual in my books is not irrefutable proof that it does not exist.

The article was not written in a scientific manner, in fact it looks as though it's written for entertainment more than debunking a myth.

I would argue that both sides of this use intense speculation, and I'm not going to trust a few firemen or newspaper reports from 40 years ago. But at the same time I'm not going to dismiss it out of hand until I see some empirical evidence.

Something you have not provided.

On a second look, seeing that the article you linked was from;

The Triangle
"The website of the independent student newspaper at Drexel University"

I can tell that you really know what you are talking about, and that I really didn't have to defend myself at all.

[Jayy]

Originally Posted by Psychonautical ↗

I can understand trying to drive a point home. But I'd like to refer back to my posts and clear a few things up for you here because it seems as though you are in need of it.



Yes, that's a quote by me. In it you can clearly see that I said that it fits into the wick theory, which is not spontaneous human combustion. It is a theory trying to explain it. So right away if you had read what I had actually typed here you'd understand that you are not trying to convince someone who believes this fanatically. But oh well, with all your common sense you knew that right?

I really am trying to understand why you've turned this into a personal vendetta, but you posting a page of information that is mere speculation by someone who considers themselves an intellectual in my books is not irrefutable proof that it does not exist.

The article was not written in a scientific manner, in fact it looks as though it's written for entertainment more than debunking a myth.

I would argue that both sides of this use intense speculation, and I'm not going to trust a few firemen or newspaper reports from 40 years ago. But at the same time I'm not going to dismiss it out of hand until I see some empirical evidence.

Something you have not provided.

Jesus fuckin Christ man... I simply gave my opinion to start with. Evidently it irked you for some reason and you replied with that obnoxious mocking post.

Then you made the following unnecessarily obnoxious comment: "I'd suggest you do some research before marching in waving your common sense like some sort of badge that gives you the right to be an ignorant prick."

Talk about "personal vendetta"!
And you make it sound as though "common sense" isn't good enough for me to form any opinions with. It is.
Do you believe in vampires? No, of course not (I'm assuming) because common sense tells you that it's ridiculous and impossible.

Like I said, I wasn't attempting to prove anything to anyone (until you attacked me)... I was just giving my opinion.

The article that I posted may not be conclusive proof of anything but everything he said made complete sense... and at least he was ( at the time he wrote the article) majoring in materials science and engineering which (IMO) makes his opinion more valid than anyone else's who have succeeded in proving absolutely nothing.

[Psychonautical]

Alright, quote fest time.

Originally Posted by Jayy ↗

The pics are real but the premise is incredibly fuckin retarded and impossible. Nobody just bursts into flames.

Right here, immediately you come in with an angry and negative attitude. Already you are saying that it isn't valid, without backing it up with any sort of evidence, articles or even your own theories on it.

Instead you chose a completely juvenile way of replying to a thread that is pretty cool and interesting.

So, I chose to defend this article as the thread starter clearly is interested in it and I am too along with the twenty or so other posters here.

I was offended to say the least, because like I said above you didn't back it up with anything. So I chose to make a joke out of it. I don't think it was all that hostile, and it's fine if you take offense.

Originally Posted by Jayy ↗

Who the fuck cares about what you are or are not convinced of? I certainly don't and I wasn't attempting to convince anyone of anything... just giving my opinion.

And, BTW, It also shouldn't take much convincing that this is totally impossible and unbelievable unless you have no ability to use common sense. Don't think about it too hard though... you may spontaneously combust. :rolleyes:

Yet another quote, after my little joke you decided to attack my intelligence. Suggesting that if I were to think too much I may explode. An insult in my books.

And finally, I don't intend to quote the pitiful article that you posted here. And I have no doubt that you probably barely skimmed it, yet I happened to have read the whole thing after you posted it because I was willing to give you a chance, after all I wasn't saying that SCH is a real thing, but I wasn't saying it isn't.

If you had maybe quoted the article, chosen a few choice paragraphs it wouldn't have escalated like this.

Ah, yet another quote. Hooray!

Originally Posted by Jayy ↗

Correct... I also already said that the pictures are real. And absolutely nothings been proven about this nonsense... unless you're privy to conclusive proof that nobody else knows about.

Right there you say that nothing has been proven about this nonsense. I'm going to go ahead and say that it completely contradicts what you said earlier about the premise being oh.. What were your words? "Incredibly fucking retarded" I think it was.

If nothing has been proven, why are you so adamant about it being fake?

I'm getting tired of this, we've strayed off of the topic so far.

My problem was that you condemned this and didn't give any reasons, then attacked me and quoted an article that has as much, or even less merit than some of the ones posted here.

Have some respect for the people that post these things, you're entitled to your opinion, and you may not be obligated to be a nice person. But it goes a long way.