Topic: First Irish case of death by spontaneous combustion
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg started this discussion 15 years ago #12,267
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15032614
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2011/09/23/irishmans-death-ruled-spontaneous-combustion/
I'm surprised they would record the death this way rather than just saying it was unexplained.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2011/09/23/irishmans-death-ruled-spontaneous-combustion/
The death of a 76-year-old Irishman has been ruled a case of spontaneous combustion, the BBC reported.
Michael Faherty died in his home in December 2010. His body was badly burned, but a fire in the nearby fireplace did not cause the blaze, forensic experts said. Scorch marks on the ceiling above the body and the floor below, and no trace of accelerant, led the coroner to return the controversial verdict, the first of its kind in Ireland, according to the BBC.
“This fire was thoroughly investigated and I’m left with the conclusion that this fits into the category of spontaneous human combustion, for which there is no adequate explanation,†West Galway coroner Dr. Ciaran McLoughlin told a court Thursday.
Michael Faherty died in his home in December 2010. His body was badly burned, but a fire in the nearby fireplace did not cause the blaze, forensic experts said. Scorch marks on the ceiling above the body and the floor below, and no trace of accelerant, led the coroner to return the controversial verdict, the first of its kind in Ireland, according to the BBC.
“This fire was thoroughly investigated and I’m left with the conclusion that this fits into the category of spontaneous human combustion, for which there is no adequate explanation,†West Galway coroner Dr. Ciaran McLoughlin told a court Thursday.
I'm surprised they would record the death this way rather than just saying it was unexplained.
(Edited 11 seconds later.)
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later[^] [v] #220,924
You post the most interesting news articles becky
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 13 minutes later, 21 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,927
> lying on his back with his head closest to an open fireplace.
Always the best place to take a nap.
Always the best place to take a nap.
(Edited 30 seconds later.)
Freecode !!4IKKtS9GG joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 23 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,928
And with this tragic tale a Hollywood epic is inspired.
"Where's the bomb? Where's the fucking bomb?!"
"...You're the bomb."
"Where's the bomb? Where's the fucking bomb?!"
"...You're the bomb."
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 27 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,931
Also I don't know why it's being called the first case of spontaneous combustion in Ireland; it's not.
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 58 seconds later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,933
@previous (C)
It's not the first case to be recorded as such? I just took the headline from the BBC article.
It's not the first case to be recorded as such? I just took the headline from the BBC article.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 59 seconds later, 29 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,935
It's interesting that there were scorch marks on the floor and ceiling. In all of the cases I've read about, nothing beyond the victim's body and in some cases clothing was burned. Mind you, there isn't a lot of hard data on spontaneous human combustion, so it could vary from case to case.
Freecode !!4IKKtS9GG replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 33 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,936
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
The difficult with spontaneous human combustion is that it is by deFWOSH
The difficult with spontaneous human combustion is that it is by deFWOSH
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,938
@220,933 (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
Nope. It was in 1997, he was called John O'Connor and they also ruled he died of 'spontaneous human combustion'.
Nope. It was in 1997, he was called John O'Connor and they also ruled he died of 'spontaneous human combustion'.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 38 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,941
Spontaneous human combustion always seemed a bit silly to me. I think it's more likely that the coroner fucked up, or the scene was improperly analyzed by the forensic science guys.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 40 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,942
> irish
> no accelerant
This is a lie, you know he was saturated with alcohol.
> no accelerant
This is a lie, you know he was saturated with alcohol.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 43 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,945
@220,941 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
The most reasonable theory I've heard for SHC is that a violent chemical reaction within the body triggers the combustion. The human body does after all contain many different chemicals, and it's not inconcievable that some that were never meant to meet do just that and react violently.
But again, there's not much hard data on it, I'm just speculating.
The most reasonable theory I've heard for SHC is that a violent chemical reaction within the body triggers the combustion. The human body does after all contain many different chemicals, and it's not inconcievable that some that were never meant to meet do just that and react violently.
But again, there's not much hard data on it, I'm just speculating.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,946
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I guess that would be a plausible hypothesis. Have any studies been done to test it?
I guess that would be a plausible hypothesis. Have any studies been done to test it?
Anonymous G replied with this 15 years ago, 14 seconds later, 46 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,947
!VoCaLoNunI joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 35 seconds later, 46 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,948
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 49 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,951
An explanation for SHC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wick_effect
Anonymous C double-posted this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 52 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,952
@220,945 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
> The most reasonable theory I've heard for SHC is that a violent chemical reaction within the body triggers the combustion.
The problem with that theory being that the multitude of chemicals in the body don't exist in forms susceptible to ignition. And I don't see how any other normal bodily reaction could cause one to burst into flames...
> The most reasonable theory I've heard for SHC is that a violent chemical reaction within the body triggers the combustion.
The problem with that theory being that the multitude of chemicals in the body don't exist in forms susceptible to ignition. And I don't see how any other normal bodily reaction could cause one to burst into flames...
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 57 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #220,955
I thought there was no actual evidence that SHC ever actually happened or could happen? Usually it is a cigarette that was overlooked.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #220,957
@220,952 (C)
Well, the human body is full of oxygen, which fuels fires. A reaction that causes an initial ignition which the oxygen would then feed would obviously be highly abnormal, possibly caused by an outside chemical of some kind. There's no real way of telling if this is the cause really, since the victim's charred corpse can't be easily examined for chemicals.
@220,946 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Not that I know of. The only studies they can realistically do on spontaneous human combustion would be post-mortom.
Well, the human body is full of oxygen, which fuels fires. A reaction that causes an initial ignition which the oxygen would then feed would obviously be highly abnormal, possibly caused by an outside chemical of some kind. There's no real way of telling if this is the cause really, since the victim's charred corpse can't be easily examined for chemicals.
@220,946 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Not that I know of. The only studies they can realistically do on spontaneous human combustion would be post-mortom.
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 13 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #220,964
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I guess oxygen would fuel the fire, but there would need to be an initial reactant to start things off, and I don't think there's any chemical present in the house which reacts dangerously with chemicals found in the body.
I guess oxygen would fuel the fire, but there would need to be an initial reactant to start things off, and I don't think there's any chemical present in the house which reacts dangerously with chemicals found in the body.
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 37 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #220,971
@220,957 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
@previous (C)
But keep in mind that the oxygen in our bodies is dissolved and contained in the vascular system. It is not just a large, free-floating, undissolved mass.
@previous (C)
But keep in mind that the oxygen in our bodies is dissolved and contained in the vascular system. It is not just a large, free-floating, undissolved mass.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #220,975
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #220,978
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #220,979
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #220,983
Spontaneous Human Combustion is most likely caused by ball lighting. I wish I could learn how to make it at will. There's a few people I'd just love for this to happen to.
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #220,985
@220,979 (J)
Take a glass of water, then get a pipette and add enough ethanol into it in order to raise the percentage of alcohol by volume in the glass of water to whatever BAC the spontaneously-combusting guy in the OP might have been. Try and set it alight. Report back.
Take a glass of water, then get a pipette and add enough ethanol into it in order to raise the percentage of alcohol by volume in the glass of water to whatever BAC the spontaneously-combusting guy in the OP might have been. Try and set it alight. Report back.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #220,986
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #220,987
@previous (J)
Good point, you'll have to drain your own blood. I suggest slitting your wrists, then waiting until you manage to procure at least a pint of blood to use. Go! For science.
Good point, you'll have to drain your own blood. I suggest slitting your wrists, then waiting until you manage to procure at least a pint of blood to use. Go! For science.
(Edited 39 seconds later.)
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #220,988
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #220,990
@220,987 (C)
lolthis. You'll be making a bigger contribution to science than to4str's gay sex studies.
@220,964 (C)
@220,971 (I)
True, true. The whole problem with shc is that it doesn't leave much evidence behind, and we haven't found a way to predict it, so there isn't really Amy hard evidence.
lolthis. You'll be making a bigger contribution to science than to4str's gay sex studies.
@220,964 (C)
@220,971 (I)
True, true. The whole problem with shc is that it doesn't leave much evidence behind, and we haven't found a way to predict it, so there isn't really Amy hard evidence.
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #220,993
@220,988 (J)In all seriousness, blood plasma (which makes up 50-60% of blood) consists mostly of water. If the guy had 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood (arbitrary BAC, it's just the legal limit for driving) then even with the additional ethanol his blood still would not be flammable.
But he's Irish, so who knows!