Spontaneous Human Combustion

A

Anonymous

Guest
RE:Cattle Mutilation.

Having seen CM at first hand i would say no,CM is to clean and hygenic(the neat hole in the spine, where it goes into the creaneum and the way the anus is reemed out ,as though a laser was used)
Let us meditate on this a bit,it is a good point.
Good ol Bill.
 

RainyOcean

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
1,146
Reaction score
25
Points
54
I have recently begun reading a book called "Spontaneous Human Combustion" by Jenny Randles and Peter Hough, and I was just wondering, what does everyone think about spontaneous human combustion? Does it actually happen? What causes it? etc...
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
12,957
Reaction score
7,756
Points
314
Good question :). Fortunately, there's a thread about it, so have tacked your question onto the end.
 

ArthurASCII

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Feb 26, 2002
Messages
1,534
Reaction score
43
Points
79
Case Closed?

Here's an interesting article from the BBC news site

Spontaneous Human Combustion



Sometime in 1951, an elderly woman by the name of Mary Reeser sat down on an overstuffed chair, and mysteriously burst into flames. All that was left was one slippered foot, a pile of ashes, and a burnt chair and adjacent end table. Strangely enough, the rest of the room was unmolested.

A familiar story, maybe?

The Spontaneous Human Combustion Phenomenon

Spontaneous human combustion (SHC) is defined as the process of a human body bursting into flames without outside interference, as a result of incredible heat supposedly generated by an internal chemical reaction. If this phenomenon is not already in itself strange, its mysterious nature is enhanced by the fact that it is only the victim that seems to combust; nearby furnishings are usually untouched, or the damage is contained within a very small radius.

The History of Spontaneous Human Combustion

There have been many stories written in the course of literary history concerning the mysterious - and even horrifying - combustion of corpses. There are those who assert that the first documentation of this phenomena appeared in the Bible1; however, their accuracy may be disputed as these accounts are much too old and based on second-hand knowledge to be considered reliable evidence.

As far back as medieval literature there have been numerous stories concerning the spontaneous combustion of corpses, including the combustion of a knight named Polonus Vorstius2 sometime during the reign of Queen Bona Sforza in Milan, but it was not until the 17th Century that a story was written about a German man who'd drunk far too much brandy for his own good and burst into flames. However, the first reliable documentation of SHC dates back to 1763 when Frenchman Jonas Dupont compiled a casebook of SHC cases in a book called De Incendiis Corporis Humani Spontaneis, having been compelled by the Nicole Millet case, which involved a man who was acquitted of the murder of his wife when the court ruled that the unfortunate woman's death had been due to spontaneous combustion.

Nicole Millet was the wife of the landlord of the Lion d'Or in Rheims, who was supposedly found burnt to death in an unburnt chair in February, 1725 (on Whit Monday). Her husband was accused of her murder and arrested; however, a young surgeon named Nicholas le Cat managed to convince the court that her death was caused by SHC. The court ultimately ruled her death as 'by a visitation of God.' However, the investigative author Joe Nickell stated in his book, Secrets of the Supernatural, that Millet's body was not actually found in the chair, but that a portion of her head, several vertebrae and portions of her lower extremities were found on the kitchen floor, the surrounding ground of which had also been burnt. Three accounts were cited: Theodric and John Becks's Elements of Medical Jurisprudence (1835), George Henry Lewes's Spontaneous Combustion from Blackwoods Edinburgh Magazine No. 89 (April 1861) and Thomas Stevenson's Principals and Practice of Medical Jurisprudence (1883). Strangely, there was no mention of Nicholas le Cat.

Many hacks continued in this vein in the 1800s, dramatising these mysterious deaths in 'penny dreadfuls', the 19th Century equivalent of comic books. Of course these were mass works of gruesome fiction intended to deliciously terrify the reader; however, two well-known writers incorporated the SHC phenomenon into their works, which caused the audience to sit up. The first of these was the novel Jacob Faithful by Captain Marryat, in which the main character's mother is reduced to 'a sort of unctuous pitchey cinder' – the details of which Marryat had apparently nicked from an article in an 1832 edition of the Times of London.

The other author was – surprise surprise – Charles Dickens, who in 1852 used SHC as a device to eliminate the character Krook in his novel Bleak House. Because Krook was a heavy alcoholic, and the belief of the time was that SHC was attributed to excessive drinking, Bleak House caused quite a stir in the literary world. The philosopher and critic George Henry Lewes debunked Dickens's novel as impossible and being mired (propagating, even!) in uneducated superstition. Dickens countered this unflattering review in the preface of the novel's second edition, stating that the story was not written without prior research, that he knew of about 30 cases. He reckoned that Krook's death was modelled after the death of the Countess Cornelia de Bandi Cesenate3. Interestingly, the only other case that was cited in detail was the Nicole Millet account.

Types of Spontaneous Human Combustion

Spontaneous Human Combustion cases may be divided into two categories: fatal and non-fatal, the former category being more common.

Fatal SHC

Most of these so-called SHC cases are fatal. The victim is usually found reduced to a pile of ashes except for the odd limb or portion of the head/body. Only objects associated with the body are burnt; the fire apparently does not spread to the surroundings. A greasy soot deposit is found on the walls and ceiling, usually stopping within four feet from the floor; and only objects above this line are damaged by the heat. Most of the time the victim is alone, and nobody realises that something has gone wrong until they stumble upon the victim's charred corpse or ashes; however, in a small fraction of fatal SHC cases, there are testimonies by witnesses that they had indeed seen the victim go up in flames, and that there were no possible sources of ignition; the flames had mysteriously broken out on the victim's skin. These cases, however, are poorly documented, and there is little to substantiate the claims of these witnesses.

Occasionally, 'selective burning' takes place, whereby objects associated with the victim that should have by rights combusted as well (eg, the victim's clothing) mysteriously remain undamaged. Again, poor documentation makes these cases hard to investigate.

Non-fatal SHC

A small percentage of SHC cases involve a victim who survives the mysterious phenomenon. They most commonly involve the sudden eruption of mysterious flames or smoke on the victim's skin when there is supposedly no identifiable external source of fire. A small proportion of these fall into the category of 'mysterious burns' - the victim develops unexplained burn marks on their skin (which commonly begin with small discomforts that grow into large painful burn marks), for which there is no known external cause.

Theories on SHC

Initially, it was believed that Spontaneous Human Combustion was caused by a 'visitation from God' (no doubt Moses's burning bush had something to do with this); however, out of the ashes of the Dark Ages, scientific reasoning arose and with it, the search for a scientific answer to this phenomenon.

Alcohol Consumption

In the 1700s and 1800s it was believed that SHC was caused by excessive drinking, the rationale being that a body saturated with such combustible fluids would be prone to combustion at the slightest spark. It was based on this hypothesis that Dickens wrote the novel Bleak House, which elicited an uproar and annoyed Lewes. However, investigation yielded evidence that many of these SHC victims were not alcoholic to begin with; physicians argued that the said victims would have succumbed to alcohol poisoning or liver cirrhosis long before they became fire-fuel.

The reason is this: the concentration of alcohol in a body would never be high enough for ignition to occur. Dilute alcohol will neither burn nor spontaneously explode in an anaerobic condition – there is no chance of the person combusting unless he has been liberally doused with alcohol and is standing too close to the hearth. In fact, the chemist Justus von Liebig demonstrated in 1850 that tissue soaked with diluted alcohol would not burn to ashes, even when an external flame was applied. Furthermore, the fact that grossly burned corpses still maintain largely preserved internal organs, serves to fortify the argument that the immolation could not possibly have started from within the body.

Bacteria

As it is common knowledge among farmers that haystacks sometimes burst into flames for no apparent reason, there were some who attempted to explain the SHC phenomenon by the same logic. It is now known that conditions for growth are optimal for bacteria growing in the middle of a haystack, to the extent that they occasionally reproduce at such incredible rates that their collective body heat causes the dry straw to catch fire. For a while it was speculated that similar processes in the human body might cause it to ignite; however, it has been shown that such conditions are not achievable in the human body4. In the event that there was an uncontrolled burst of microbial growth, the human being would succumb to massive infection even before the body became hot enough to combust.

Electricity

When the late Professor Robin Beach of the Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute theorised that people, under certain conditions, could build up enough static charge to accidentally ignite combustible material, little did he know how horrendously misconstrued his hypothesis would become in connection with SHC. The authors of Strange Stories, Amazing Facts devoted almost an entire chapter discussing Professor Beach's theories; and while neither the professor nor the authors correlated this natural build-up of static charges with SHC5, many people took this to imply that static electricity was at least one of the contributing factors of human combustion. Others, who had apparently not been wearing their glasses while reading these research papers, further speculated that the electrical fields within the human body might be capable of short-circuiting, causing a chain reaction that produced incredible internal heat.

Explosive Diets

Might SHC be caused by a poor diet and explosive combination of chemicals in the digestive tract? At least Jenny Randles, who wrote Strange & Unexplained Mysteries of the 20th Century, thinks so. She points out that the majority of SHC occurs in European and American societies, and that the marked lack of cases of spontaneous combustion in animals and people of non-European descent is attributed to the difference in diet. (Apparently European people eat plenty of foods that can readily ignite their bodies). While it may account for flatulence, people in the Western world should not take this explanation too seriously. After all, when was the last time you saw somebody combust because they'd just eaten a steak?

Other Theories

Among other hypotheses that believers of SHC have come up with to explain this phenomena, is the pyrotron theory, which involves a supposed subatomic particle that can ignite a combustible source; the theory that these victims had built up considerable amounts of methane in their gastrointestinal tract, which had been subsequently ignited by enzymatic processes; maser (microwave amplification by stimulated emission of radiation) induction, geomagnetism, and even kundalini (a form of yoga/mystic body heating). Perhaps the most preposterous suggestion is that stress can cause a person to burst into flames (perpetuated by Larry Arnold), or that hydrogen and oxygen remain as gasses in human cells and are thus highly ignitable – in which case the reader would do well not to inhale.

Occam's Razor Says...

Of two equivalent theories or explanations, all other things being equal, the simpler one is to be preferred. Rather than seek far-fetched answers to explain why Spontaneous Human Combustion occurs, why not look for perfectly commonplace ones?

Bear in mind that cremations are traditionally carried out at an incredible 920°C (1,700°F), which is why these funeral ovens are constructed with bricks – so that the whole funeral parlour doesn't go up in smoke along with the body. A minimum temperature of about 250°C (480°F) alone is required to burn a body. A raging bacterial infection, no matter how severe, would cause at most a high fever of 43°C or so (that's about how hot your hot water supply at home is) – hardly high enough to do more than turn the victim's brain to mush, let alone set him on fire. Therefore, if a person combusts, there must be an external factor.

The clue to the SHC mystery is this: there is always a period of a few hours between the time a victim is last seen alive, and the time he or she is found immolated. The question is: what happens during those few hours?

Source of Fire

The opinion that a man can burn of himself is not founded on a knowledge of the circumstances of the death, but on the reverse of knowledge - on complete ignorance of all the causes or conditions which preceded the accident and caused it.
- Justus von Liebig (1855)
Consider this. Despite witnesses' claims that there was no identifiable source of ignition, the victims were almost always found close to a fire source. Despite retellings of the legend, Nicole Millet was actually found only 'a foot and a half' away from the kitchen hearth (and not on a chair), where she usually went to warm herself when she couldn't sleep; furthermore, according to historical documentation, she was an alcoholic who 'got intoxicated every day'. Countess Cornelia di Bandi was found on the floor of her bedroom, thoroughly immolated; an oil lamp was mysteriously found on the ground, drained of oil. On a table were two candlesticks which retained their wicks, but whose tallows were gone, with a suspicious moisture gathered around the feet of the candlesticks. 60-year-old Grace Pett, the wife of a fishmonger in Ipswich, ignited on 9 April, 1744; her daughter found her lying on her right side across the hearth, burned 'like a log of wood consumed by fire', her torso 'like an heap of charcoal covered with white ashes'. Madame De Boiseon, an octogenarian, was found by her waiting-maid seated in a chair by the fire - burning.

More recent cases? The 'cinder woman', Mary Reeser was last seen by her physician son sitting in a big chair, wearing flammable nightclothes and smoking a cigarette when she should have been in bed, having taken two 'Seconal' sleeping pills (and intending to ingest another two); she was found roasted, along with the chair and an adjacent table and lamp. Dr John Irving Bentley was found consumed by fire in 1966, in the bathroom of his home; only his lower leg was recognisable. One might be tempted to call the case 'unexplainable', until you throw in the fact that the 90-year-old man was a pipe-smoker, and had the tendency to drop matches and hot ashes upon his robes (whose burn-marks affirmed Bentley's sloppy smoking habits). Even more suspicious are the broken remains of a water pitcher found in the commode.

So many more cases may be referred to; however, these only serve to highlight that, despite witness testimonies, it is clearly documented in official reports that there was always a source of ignition close to the victim, and this explains how the victims had caught fire in the first place. Many of these aftermath scenes suggest that the victim had been trying to light the hearth, a candle or some other source of fire, or had been smoking in bed when they unwittingly set fire to themselves.

Fuelling the Fire

One popular argument in favour of the spontaneous combustion explanation is that (1) human bodies, being largely composed of water, aren't readily combustible (and there isn't much else to burn other than methane gas and fatty tissues), and (2) crematoria traditionally carry out cremations of human remains at over 1,700°F for three hours; therefore a victim who perished due to SHC would burn at much higher temperatures because the immolation takes less time than traditional cremation; surely such incredible temperatures are not achievable under ordinary circumstances?

The answer to this argument is this: yes, the body is actually quite readily combustible, and no, shorter periods of burning do not mean higher temperatures. The high water content in the human body does not quench fire; it boils off before fire consumes the body, and thus does not impede the burning process. In fact, this fortifies the argument that the victims could not possibly have spontaneously combust – there is no way that fluid-saturated tissue could possibly self-ignite. Furthermore, the authors of Medicolegal Investigation of Death (1980) asserted that a body can be reduced to ashes in a mere hour and a half at temperatures of 1,600 - 1,800°F (although in most cases it isn't as thorough as funeral parlour cremations), although the longer a body has to burn, the lower the temperature requirement. Similarly, according to Douglal Drysdale:

In a crematorium you need high temperatures - around 1,300°C, or even higher - to reduce the body to ash in a relatively short period of time. But it's a misconception to think you need those temperatures within a living room to reduce a body to ash in this way. You can produce local, high temperatures, by means of the wick effect and a combination of smouldering and flaming to reduce even bones to ash. At relatively low temperatures of 500°C – and if given enough time – the bone will transform into something approaching a powder in composition.
In addition, the German forensic scientist Burkhard Madea, has determined that corpses of children can be completely destroyed at temperatures of 500°C in two hours, and that it only takes an hour for a fire of 800 - 1,000°C to reduce corpses of adults to less than 1kg of crumbly substance. NF Richards reported from his observations of adult corpses cremated at about 680°C that it took only ten minutes to heavily char the arms, 14 minutes for the legs, and 15 minutes for fire to reveal the skull and bones of the upper arm. In fact, it has been determined that these burning bodies will attain temperatures of up to 500 - 600°C – made possible by the fat content in the human body. And in the wonderful spirit of experimentation, Dr John de Haan of the California Criminalistics Institute wrapped an entire pig carcass in cotton and set it ablaze6, with gasoline used as an accelerant to mimic a blaze ignited by a cigarette. Liquefied fat from the carcass leeched into the cotton, causing the pig to simmer in pork heaven for hours; within five hours, the bones were steadily being destroyed.

The slow consumption of a body by fire at lower temperature may be explained by the 'candle effect', a term coined by DJ Gee in 1965. Think of the body as a candle, and the clothing as a wick. The wick provides the initial fuel for combustion; when the body ignites, fat from the body provides further fuel for the fire to continue burning. Indeed, many a plump corpse has caused damage to a cremation oven when it burned too fiercely. Liquefied fat seeping into the armchairs or carpet in contact with the victim would cause the fire to attack the said objects. In a room that is poorly ventilated, oxygen is quickly exhausted by the fire; henceforth the body smoulders, producing a heavy smoke thick with grease from the burning body fat and soot from clothing and body tissues, which would drift upwards and coat the walls and ceiling, starting at a point several feet above the floor. This is because the smoke would tend to dissipate and escape at lower levels before it can coat any given surface.

Furthermore, the 'multiple wick effect' helps explain why clothed parts of the body are generally reduced to ashes whereas exposed limbs and other regions generally survive the inferno – because these items of clothing serve as multiple wicks, soaked in liquefied fat, and thus sustain flames for a considerable period of time. O Prokop, Germany's leading authority in forensic medicine, stated:

The liquefied [body] fat of the subcutaneous layer can soak into the clothing, causing it to act like a wick, which maintains the fire. Only this mechanism can explain the most severe combustions which are observed in persons who, for example, fall asleep whilst smoking.
In fact, it has been demonstrated that although liquefied human fats will burn at roughly 250°C (480°F), a cloth 'wick' placed in the liquefied fat will burn even when the temperature has dropped to a mere 24°C (75°F); such was the case of the immolation of a woman in 1854, beneath whose body 'was a hempen mat, so combustible, owing to the melted human fat with which it was impregnated, that when ignited it burnt like a link (ie, a pitch torch)'.

Interestingly enough, in cases where the victim wasn't reduced to a pile of ashes, their organs were usually found to be intact or minimally damaged, despite the gross destruction of the whole body. This is because the there is a steep temperature gradient between the outside of the body, which is burning fiercely, and the body cavity, where fluids in the various organs help prevent their incineration. Although, of course, given enough time and fuel, these will also be consumed by fire.

It is worth noting that higher temperatures are achievable owing to the additional objects burned along with the victim – usually adjacent furniture, or flammable rugs. Nickell and Fisher have established that in cases where damage to the body was minimal, there was little else but the victim's body to fuel the fire; where there were adjacent flammable objects present, the victim's body was considerable or severe.

Spreading Like Wildfire

'But if the body were ignited by an external source, surely the fire would have spread?' defenders of the spontaneous combustion theory cry. If the victim had been burnt to death by fire from the hearth, why didn’t the house burn down along with the victim?

The common misconception amongst SHC fans is that a normal fire, once ignited, will spread to consume everything; hence the external fire explanation must be wrong. However, a fire, no matter how devastating, is only a fire – one whose spread is limited by a variety of factors.

Those of you who took science in school will surely know that there are three factors influencing the burning of a flame: there must be (1) a source of ignition, (2) oxygen, and (3) fuel for the fire. Remove the first factor, and the fire will never burn; remove the remaining factors and a fire will cease to burn. And then of course, there is the nature of the material to consider. An object with a large surface area to mass ratio will ignite and burn more quickly than one with a lower ratio. Materials that are thermoplastic and melt when heated will retard flames. Objects that are vertically aligned will burn faster and more easily than those that are horizontal – which is why fire on a carpet will not spread as readily as on a curtain. (If you doubt this, go and light a match. You will find that the fire spreads more readily when the matchstick is held vertically, but slowly when it is held horizontally. Do not immolate yourself in the process).

Given these factors, it is easy to explain why the fire that consumed all those victims did not spread too far. The majority of these combustion cases took place in badly-ventilated rooms; therefore there was no steady input of oxygen to fan the flame and the fire had, in most of these cases, died down to a smoulder, causing greasy soot to coat the surfaces in the room. The oxygen supply in the room would have been even more quickly depleted by the number of combustible objects close to the victim – their clothing and, very often adjacent, furniture. While plastic and other heat-labile, flammable objects would have readily combusted in the fire, they are unmolested by the smoke that follows. If the walls and floors were made of concrete or brick, the fire would have been unable to spread – which is what contained the fire that immolated Mary Reeser. The fact that fires have difficulty spreading laterally accounts for why there are body parts left over in most of these combustion cases – once the victim collapsed to the ground, limbs laid parallel to the ground would have not burned readily. (Limbs that are extended, for example, on footstools are similarly spared.)

Anyway, there are plenty of cases where whole houses caught fire, and the occupants burned with them. Such cases are normally known to fire-fighters as 'household fires'.

Why Did These Victims Burn?

There is one last psychological hurdle to cross before a person can become convinced that human combustion is not a paranormal phenomenon. If these people had burned when their clothing had caught fire, why didn't they do anything to smother the flames? A person, even when transformed into a human torch, will have precious seconds to douse himself, to throw himself upon the ground and roll out the fire. Why is it that these victims did not take actions to save themselves? Ask yourself – how many people will act reasonably when they find themselves on fire? How often do you hear accounts of immolated persons rolling themselves on the ground to smother the flames, instead of streaking a blazing path until the fire consumes them? It may be what fire-fighters have taught us; yet when panic strikes, many will lose all sense of reason. Ironically, those who do take measures to put themselves out never seem to be numbered among the Spontaneous Human Combustion victim ranks; they are simply identified as those who had sustained first/second/third-degree burns in an unfortunate accident.

Then there is the consciousness factor. Take a look at the human combustion cases and their victims' backgrounds, and an answer emerges. Nicole Millet was intoxicated on a daily basis. Mary Reeser had been smoking in a chair after taking two sleeping pills. In fact, a full 40% of 75 people who had burned to death in closed rooms in Cologne between 1964 and 1973 and 54% of 87 Oslo fire victims had a blood alcohol level greater than one part per thousand. In an altered state, a victim – especially one who fell asleep while smoking – may not necessarily be sufficiently aware of what is happening, or his/her reaction responses may have been dampened by alcohol or medication for the victim to take actions quickly enough to avoid death by immolation. Forensic investigations on the fiery deaths of the aged have revealed that some of these people had suffered a stroke or heart attack prior to pitching headfirst into the hearth – many forensic textbooks discuss these cases in detail.

Sometimes it is not the victim's mental state but his physical one – Dr Bentley had certainly tried to put himself out when he caught fire, as his broken water jug testified, only his advanced age and agility had worked against him. Elderly people who are similarly plagued with severe arthritis or Parkinson's Disease will hardly be able to move fast enough, or to coordinate their movements sufficiently well to extinguish fire – as was in the case of the elderly woman who suffered involuntary spasms in her hands and thus was unable to save herself when her cigarette fell from her twitching hands.

Endnote

Mankind has always been fascinated by the unknown. In a world where mystery fans the flame of curiosity, there is a tendency for people to speculate on strange occurrences and phenomena, fuelled by the blazing fires of their imagination. Alas, at the end of the day the romantically fiery supposition of Spontaneous Human Combustion, like many other branches of pseudoscience, is all too easily quenched by the spring of science and reason.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The first time I read about SHC, my initial thought was pyrokenesis. At that time (I was about 12 I think) I did not know the correct term for it, or even if it was an acknowleged form of ESP/A.

I'm still convinced that it's either pyrokenesis or something very much like it (differences in details, not the basic mechanism).

There's so much difference in the cases of SHC, the only common thread is that they happen to humans. What is the same in every single human? They have a mind. So it's the mind that's doing it.

A weak theory, I'm sure, but that's my story and I'm sticking to it. ;)
 

ArthurASCII

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Feb 26, 2002
Messages
1,534
Reaction score
43
Points
79
What do you think of the conclusions drawn in the article I posted above Fallen Angel?
 

giantrobot1

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Nov 18, 2003
Messages
549
Reaction score
19
Points
34
Here's a really interesting piece, which talks about the BBC program on SHC:

alternativescience.com/spontaneous-human-combustion-burning-issue.htm
Link is dead (as is the website). The MIA webpage can be accessed via the Wayback Machine:
https://web.archive.org/web/2004092...pontaneous-human-combustion-burning-issue.htm


Seems that the phenomena is a very fast one, given the eyewitness reports and survivor's stories. I vote for some kind of odd, violent chemical reaction
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Anonymous

Guest
A message for Alternative Science

Someone there should get a full time job as an undertaker,then you get real people(not pigs) and just once in a lifetime you may go through the experence that i did(read about it on this thread)
People do go through melt downs!!!!!!
EX:Undertaker Bill.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Arthur ASCII said:
What do you think of the conclusions drawn in the article I posted above Fallen Angel?

I had trouble separating out any conclusions from subsequent exceptions which would make the conclusions inconclusive.

One thing I noted which I interpreted to support my theory, was the impaired capabilities bit. If someone has a paranormal power, being drunk, stoned or dreaming might partially or fully disable the normal constraints on use of that power (i.e. disbelief in the existance of such powers, or a moral conscience that might prevent the use of such power against one's self or against another human, or even impair an unconscious ability held by the victim to block the use of such powers by others).

I found the information about the wick effect and required cremation temperatures to be interesting. But what I have read about SHC, especially regarding partial burns and burns starting internally (which was on an older SHC thread) can't be explained by the external fire/wick effect.

So I'd say: still not explained.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Re: Spontaneous Human Gallstones?

Paul Barton said:
All accounts of spontaneous human combustion follow the same pattern, and I'm surprised nobody's noticed a simple connection. Here's an experiment. Take a large dinnerplate and place a few small articles on it made of wood, plastic, paper, etc. Place a cocktail sausage in the middle. Now put it in the microwave. The sausage will eventually catch fire leaving a greasy residue around the microwave. Everything else will be unaffected.

The sausage of course represents a human body. OK I hear you ask, but how can this effect be created in the real world? Microwaves are passing through us all the time. The sun is sending out microwaves all day long. They don't harm us because just like light they need to be focused. Inside a microwave oven is a 'lens' made of Gallium Arsenide, which focuses the microwaves to create heat. A friend tells me that human gallstones are made of a similar substance (I need to get proof of this).

So if some old geyser is sitting in an armchair and there's a burst of sunspot activity, his gallstones will catch fire! I would imagine that just sitting in front of the TV could have the same effect. I wonder if it's possible to match dates of incidents with sunspot activity.

Look at the published cases and you'll recognise clear evidence of microwave activity centred round the victim's upper stomach. Sometimes their feet are left untouched, and the bed or chair they are lying on is unburned; papers and glass nearby are unaffected, but certain plastic is melted, liquids are boiled. There's a case of a British fireman finding a victim with blue sparks and flame coming out of his stomach.

I know it's gruesome but it's certainly not unnatural.

Good explanation, but I have one ( or 2) questions.

1. If the sausage is on fire AND leaving a greasy residue, wouldn't that grease ignite and catch the other stuff on fire too?

Fire is fire, whether it's coming from microwaves or not. And generally if something ignites, it ignites other stuff around it. That's how houses burn down.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
One more note on what Paul Barton suggested:

I was wondering if the micrwowave explanation was correct, so I asked a very informed individual who had this to say:


"Well...the theory is a good one,but.....I don't thing there is a lens in a microwave.In fact,I am 100% positive.There is a lens in a laser,like for laser surgery.I think he's a bit confused between laser radiation and microwave radiation."
 

fluffle9

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
May 1, 2004
Messages
673
Reaction score
25
Points
34
Redhead said:
One more note on what Paul Barton suggested:

I was wondering if the micrwowave explanation was correct, so I asked a very informed individual who had this to say:


"Well...the theory is a good one,but.....I don't thing there is a lens in a microwave.In fact,I am 100% positive.There is a lens in a laser,like for laser surgery.I think he's a bit confused between laser radiation and microwave radiation."

Microwave ovens use waveguides, not lenses, but the guy put the word in inverted commas, so perhaps he was just trying to explain it in terms people would understand. However I think that gallium arsenide would be more likely to be used to make the thing that produces the microwaves, not like a lens at all. I do not believe that gallstones are made of gallium arsenide.
 

Anome

Bibliomancer
Joined
May 23, 2002
Messages
5,548
Reaction score
677
Points
199
Location
Left, and to the Back
Another thing to note about microwave ovens is that the microwaves aren't focused. They just bounce around in there, creating numerous hotspots at various points in the oven. That's why you need the turntable, the hotspots aren't especially evenly distributed, so you need to get as much of the food to pass through them as possible.
 

Human_84

Somewhat human
Joined
Mar 30, 2005
Messages
1,319
Reaction score
154
Points
99
I've got a question:

Why are all Spontantious Human Combustion victims always found to be dead without any effort of moving? Nobody runs to the sink for water? I dont care how incredible the pain, skin burning does not inhibit your ability to run. Who in the world would just sit there and burn up? Or.... maybe for some untold reason, they are not able to move. ?
 

Timble2

Imaginary Person
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Messages
6,022
Reaction score
2,622
Points
239
Location
In a Liminal Zone
There's one account of someone who had a blue flame burst out of their leg which they managed to put out by cupping their hands over it. IIRC there's at least one case of someone bursting into flames in front of her friends and thrashing around a lot (an defying all attempts at extinguisheing her) before succumbing.


I'd suspect in most cases of presumed SHC, the person is either unconcious or dead before the fire takes hold.

*EDIT: I've just realised some of the stories I'm thinking of are a couple of pages back on this thread.

http://www.forteantimes.com/forum/viewt ... c&start=60
 

tastyintestines

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Jan 28, 2002
Messages
1,627
Reaction score
164
Points
99
Hu. One theory is that they start in the brain. So maybe one would black out before they can feel the pain or panic. The easiest way to boil something when its alive is slowly, so the reaction time is drastically cut short. maybe.
 

Human_84

Somewhat human
Joined
Mar 30, 2005
Messages
1,319
Reaction score
154
Points
99
^ ^ Good thoughts.

Also, maybe the reason objects around the victims are not burnt up is because heat rises and all that?? This was probably mentioned earlier in the thread.
 

tastyintestines

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Jan 28, 2002
Messages
1,627
Reaction score
164
Points
99
Or body fat and other viscous liquids put out the fire, before it consumes the surrounding area. I wonder if any forensic experts have studied shc?
 

OldTimeRadio

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
5,524
Reaction score
206
Points
114
SHC

What I'd like to know is what happens (if anything) when a microwave or cosmic ray particle passing through the human body hits the nucleus of an atom dead-on.

Could there be any sort of chain reaction?

I've been informed that since there is so much space between atoms that the possibility of an atomic nucleus actually being struck in this manner is like firing a rifle inside New York City's Grand Central Station and killing a specific fly.

On the other hand, so many such particles pass through the human body every day that those flies must get hit on as fairly regular basis.
 

OldTimeRadio

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
5,524
Reaction score
206
Points
114
Does the "Burning Death" Strike Other Mammals?

I am unaware of spontaneous combustion striking other animals than man. True, there are number of accounts of mutilated cattle in which the sexual organs seem to have been removed through the aid of some type of electrical cutting torch, but these are all marked by the surgical precision of the cut-line.

So IS there SMC (Spontaneous Mammalian Combustion), and if not, WHY NOT?
 

uair01

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
3,866
Reaction score
6,521
Points
239
Location
Rotterdam
Re: Does the "Burning Death" Strike Other Mammals?

OldTimeRadio said:
So IS there SMC (Spontaneous Mammalian Combustion), and if not, WHY NOT?

I think it's because only humans mess with fire using matches, lighters, pipes, cigarettes and candles. Normal mammals usually tend to flee from fire.
 

RainyOcean

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
1,146
Reaction score
25
Points
54
Or because only humans drink alcohol ;)
 

dreeness

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
980
Reaction score
23
Points
34
:)
or because if a squirrel notices one of his pals has burst into flame and been reduced to powder, he can't usually write a letter to the Fortean Times about it...

just a few incendiary musings

The Wick Effect -- tests with pieces of pork, pieces of dead pig -- a piece of dead pig, is also a piece of bled pig, that is, the blood has mostly drained out of it, and rightly so, you wouldn't want to throw a freshly-hacked, still-pulsing pig leg onto your barbecue, it would smell bad and taste worse because of all the blood, all the wet blood steaming and hissing on the coals. Try the "wick effect" on a pig who has only been dead for a minute, or on a living pig if you are a mean person, see how well it works.

... but people have been burning for all sorts of reasons for centuries, what reduces them to dust? What are a few methods that won't give the desired results?

-- A casual hosing with a flamethrower, won't do it.
-- Napalm, one application will cook 'em, you would need repeated applications to powderize 'em.
-- Phosphorus, might do nicely, but only if you use plenty.
-- Gasoline, kerosene, diesel, again the same shortcoming, crispy on the outside but tender and juicy on the inside.
-- Burning inside an armoured vehicle, partially satisfactory, you get something that looks like a skinny charcoal mannequin, but you still have some work with a mortar and pestle to reduce it to powder.

and what will work?

-- Burning at the stake, works great, theatrical and evocative, needs rather a lot of wood however.

-- A firestorm, Dresden or Tokyo intensity, would do the trick.

-- Chucking someone into a steel factory's blast-furnace, they would go up like a firecracker.

and there are surely lots of other methods. Anything that delivers large amounts of energy very rapidly would do the trick.

Or you could just wrap a side of pork in a diaper, keep soaking it with petroleum and work it over with a propane torch for hours, and call that spontaneous, if you wanted to.
:roll:
 

Quake42

Warrior Princess
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
9,281
Reaction score
3,803
Points
219
Does spontaneous human combustion exist?
WHO, WHAT, WHY?
The Magazine answers...


Witnesses say flames erupt from the skin
A character in Charles Dickens' Bleak House burns to death without any apparent reason. Human spontaneous combustion is a belief which has been around for centuries but does it really exist?


Viewers following Andrew Davies's adaptation of Charles Dickens' Bleak House on BBC One have just seen the dreadful moment when alcoholic Krook - played sinisterly by Johnny Vegas - finds his gin warming his stomach more than usual, and suddenly bursts into flames.


As his charred remains are found, Dickens lets the awful scene unfold: "Here is a small burnt patch of flooring; here is the tinder from a little bundle of burnt paper, but not so light as usual, seeming to be steeped in something; and here is - is it the cinder of a small charred and broken log of wood sprinkled with white ashes, or is it coal? Oh, horror, he IS here!"

Dickens is unequivocal in ascribing the death to spontaneous human combustion (SHC), the alleged burning of a person's body with no identifiable source of ignition. "It is the same death eternally - inborn, inbred, engendered in the corrupted humours of the vicious body itself, and that only - Spontaneous Combustion, and none other of all the deaths that can be died," he writes.

When the story was first published, Dickens was accused of legitimising superstitious nonsense and there was a minor uproar. But the author responded by saying he had researched the subject and knew of about 30 cases. "I have no need to observe that I do not wilfully or negligently mislead my readers and that before I wrote that description I took pains to investigate the subject," he wrote in the preface to the second edition.

It is thought part of his source was a collection of cases published in 1763, 90 years before Bleak House, by Frenchman Jonas Dupont.

SHC TRADEMARKS

Body more severely burned than one caught in a fire
Torso is most burned and extremities are least
Fire does not spread away from the body
Soot on ceiling and walls

So is spontaneous human combustion something of fact or fiction?

Modern cases have usually come about when police and fire investigators have found burned corpses but no burned furniture. Bafflement at how a body can be reduced almost to ashes, which requires temperatures of about 3,000 degrees, without any of the rest of the room being affected has driven some of the theories.

One of the most notable cases was Mary Reeser who was found in her home in 1951, reduced to a pile of ashes save her shrunken skull and her left foot which was entirely intact. Damage to the flat in Florida was small, only soot on the ceiling and walls.

The police report claimed the 67-year-old widow's dressing gown had caught fire, perhaps due to a cigarette, although no flame source or accelerant was found.

Wick effect

In 1982, SHC was offered as a cause of death at the inquest into the death of Jean Saffin, 62. Relatives said they saw her burst into flames in her north London home but coroner Dr John Burton said there was "no such thing" as SHC and recorded an open verdict.

WHO, WHAT, WHY?

A regular feature in the BBC News Magazine - aiming to answer some of the questions behind the headlines


Ask a question
The human body is mostly water and its only properties which burn readily are fat tissue and methane gas, so the possibilities of SHC appear remote. But supporters of the theory have offered alcoholism, divine intervention, obesity and static electricity as explanations.

In 1998 the BBC programme QED investigated and used a dead pig to try and present a scientific explanation called the "wick effect".

The clothes are the wick and the fat surrounding a person is the fuel source which burns slowly, like a candle, for five to 10 hours.

This theory can account for the state of the remains but it does not explain the absence of any initial flame or accelerant, both of which were required for the experiment on the pig. To compound the mystery, many of the victims in the alleged cases did not try and escape and remained seated throughout.

But Home Office pathologist Professor Michael Green thought the SHC theory had been debunked.

"The way the body burns - the so-called wick effect - seems to me and to my colleagues to be the most scientifically credible hypothesis," he said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4456428.stm
 

ArthurASCII

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Feb 26, 2002
Messages
1,534
Reaction score
43
Points
79
As a young man I was an apprentice Gas Fitter. In those days, coal gas (rather than the safer natural gas) was piped into houses. It was common to be called to a premesis where a gas leak had been reported by a passer-by, only to discover a suicide or natural death. I remember that we were once called to a house in South London. After the Police broke down the door to gain entry, we discovered a small, blackened corpse sitting in a chair in the lounge; It was about the size of an eight year old child. Although the chair was burned, it was still upright, and the corpse was obviously male. It appears that the old man who lived in the house had either died, or fallen asleep while smoking a pipe. The burning dottle had fallen out of the pipe onto his chest, and he had slowly and completely smouldered away. It was the smell of the combustion that prompted the "gas leak" call. He was seated close to the fireplace, and there was a gas poker nearby (a common method of committing suicide was to turn on a gas poker and push it under your jumper, then sit back and fall asleep), but the gas poker was not turned on, and there was still credit left in the gas meter.

The above rambling is supposed to illustrate that I've seen that a human body CAN be consumed by slow burning.
 

TheQuixote

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Sep 25, 2003
Messages
3,282
Reaction score
48
Points
69
My brother encountered a similar case where they had to break into a house where an elderly woman had died and fallen in her bedroom. She also had the bad luck of having an electric blanket on her bed that became wrapped around her as she was wedged between wall and bed.

I can't remember the full ins and outs of the tale atm (such as how long she had been laying undiscovered) but I know he said that her body was found with similar, charred injuries to those that have been recorded as SHC.

He also said that there was the oily soot everywhere and that she had smouldered although the rest of the furniture in the room was left unscathed.
 

bazizmaduno

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Feb 12, 2003
Messages
278
Reaction score
7
Points
49
SCH - a fascinating subject.

I seem to remember from my Uni days studying Biochemistry that the process which derives energy (in the form of ATP - from the oxidative phosphorylation of adenosine di-phosphate) that the body uses can be 'decoupled', and instead of producing the high-energy phosphate bonds in ATP (and ADP/cyclical AMP), the energy can be released as heat. This happens in the cells' mitochondria. Brown adipose tissue is rich in mitochondria, and is concentrated in the chest and back regions. The decoupling process is akin to an engine running without a load. I seem also to remember that the process releases hydrogen ions (radicals?). I wonder if this process has a part to play in SHC.

:?:
 

mrpoultice

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
368
Reaction score
97
Points
64
SHC...What the Dickens?

I've missed all of this adaptation of Bleak House on the BBC, But I would have been interested to see how they handled this scene. Did anyone else catch it?



Does spontaneous human combustion exist?
WHO, WHAT, WHY?
The Magazine answers...



Witnesses say flames erupt from the skin
A character in Charles Dickens' Bleak House burns to death without any apparent reason. Human spontaneous combustion is a belief which has been around for centuries but does it really exist?


Viewers following Andrew Davies's adaptation of Charles Dickens' Bleak House on BBC One have just seen the dreadful moment when alcoholic Krook - played sinisterly by Johnny Vegas - finds his gin warming his stomach more than usual, and suddenly bursts into flames.


As his charred remains are found, Dickens lets the awful scene unfold: "Here is a small burnt patch of flooring; here is the tinder from a little bundle of burnt paper, but not so light as usual, seeming to be steeped in something; and here is - is it the cinder of a small charred and broken log of wood sprinkled with white ashes, or is it coal? Oh, horror, he IS here!"

Dickens is unequivocal in ascribing the death to spontaneous human combustion (SHC), the alleged burning of a person's body with no identifiable source of ignition. "It is the same death eternally - inborn, inbred, engendered in the corrupted humours of the vicious body itself, and that only - Spontaneous Combustion, and none other of all the deaths that can be died," he writes.

When the story was first published, Dickens was accused of legitimising superstitious nonsense and there was a minor uproar. But the author responded by saying he had researched the subject and knew of about 30 cases. "I have no need to observe that I do not wilfully or negligently mislead my readers and that before I wrote that description I took pains to investigate the subject," he wrote in the preface to the second edition.

It is thought part of his source was a collection of cases published in 1763, 90 years before Bleak House, by Frenchman Jonas Dupont.

SHC TRADEMARKS

Body more severely burned than one caught in a fire
Torso is most burned and extremities are least
Fire does not spread away from the body
Soot on ceiling and walls

So is spontaneous human combustion something of fact or fiction?

Modern cases have usually come about when police and fire investigators have found burned corpses but no burned furniture. Bafflement at how a body can be reduced almost to ashes, which requires temperatures of about 3,000 degrees, without any of the rest of the room being affected has driven some of the theories.

One of the most notable cases was Mary Reeser who was found in her home in 1951, reduced to a pile of ashes save her shrunken skull and her left foot which was entirely intact. Damage to the flat in Florida was small, only soot on the ceiling and walls.

The police report claimed the 67-year-old widow's dressing gown had caught fire, perhaps due to a cigarette, although no flame source or accelerant was found.

Wick effect

In 1982, SHC was offered as a cause of death at the inquest into the death of Jean Saffin, 62. Relatives said they saw her burst into flames in her north London home but coroner Dr John Burton said there was "no such thing" as SHC and recorded an open verdict.

WHO, WHAT, WHY?

A regular feature in the BBC News Magazine - aiming to answer some of the questions behind the headlines


Ask a question
The human body is mostly water and its only properties which burn readily are fat tissue and methane gas, so the possibilities of SHC appear remote. But supporters of the theory have offered alcoholism, divine intervention, obesity and static electricity as explanations.

In 1998 the BBC programme QED investigated and used a dead pig to try and present a scientific explanation called the "wick effect".

The clothes are the wick and the fat surrounding a person is the fuel source which burns slowly, like a candle, for five to 10 hours.

This theory can account for the state of the remains but it does not explain the absence of any initial flame or accelerant, both of which were required for the experiment on the pig. To compound the mystery, many of the victims in the alleged cases did not try and escape and remained seated throughout.

But Home Office pathologist Professor Michael Green thought the SHC theory had been debunked.

"The way the body burns - the so-called wick effect - seems to me and to my colleagues to be the most scientifically credible hypothesis," he said.

Source here

Mr P
 

Min Bannister

Possessed dog
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Messages
5,132
Reaction score
7,880
Points
314
More from The Scotsman ;)

IF YOU'RE hooked on the new BBC adaptation of Bleak House, then prepare yourself for tonight's explosive episode. In it Krook, the hard-drinking landlord, dies after spontaneously combusting.

When Charles Dickens wrote his novel in 1852 it caused a sensation. Never before had the idea of spontaneous human combustion (SHC) entered the mainstream. George Henry Lewes, a philosopher and critic, harangued Dickens for perpetuating a ridiculous superstition. Dickens fought back arguing that he had researched the subject and knew of about 30 such deaths.

Scotland's first SHC case was in 1829 when an Edinburgh man burst into flames whilst talking to his brother. Despite repeated dowsing with water the flames were only extinguished when both brothers were totally submerged.

The second case allegedly happened in Falkirk when a Gladys Cochrane was found burnt to a cinder in her armchair. The cushion and chair were untouched although all that was left of poor Gladys was ash.

SHC - where a person is burnt to ashes with no obvious trigger - has been, and still is, a contentious phenomenon. In the past 300 years only 200 cases have been documented and whilst science strives to "prove" a rational explanation, there are many who remain convinced that there is more to it than meets the eye.

When Sir David Brewster listed it in his 1832 book Letters on Natural Magic addressed to Sir Walter Scott, he described the death of Grace Pett, the pipe-smoking wife of an Ipswich fisherman who spontaneously combusted in 1744.

Brewster wrote that Pett retired to bed having "drunk plentiful gin". When her daughter opened the kitchen door the next morning, she walked in to a hellish scene:

"The trunk of the unfortunate woman was almost burned to ashes and appeared like a heap of charcoal," wrote Brewster. "There was no fire in the grate and a paper screen on the other side were untouched."

Pett's death epitomises the circumstances of SHC. It often involves drink and no obvious source for the fire, with nearby combustible items left untouched. Furthermore, like all SHC cases, the body had been incinerated and body fat was present around the room.

From earliest times science has reported on these cases. But whilst today it tries to explain, older reports sometimes hint at unease.
This drawing was used to illustrate Dr Booth's account of the death of an old Aberdeenshire soldier, as reported in the <em>British Medical Journal</em> of 1888.

This drawing was used to illustrate Dr Booth's account of the death of an old Aberdeenshire soldier, as reported in the British Medical Journal of 1888.

On 19 February 1888, a Dr Booth was called out to a hay loft in Aberdeenshire to examine the remains of a 65-year-old man, someone, he notes, "of notoriously intemperate habits." He subsequently wrote up the case in the British Medical Journal.

"I found the charred remains of the man reclining against the stone wall of a hay loft. The body was almost a cinder. " Booth noted that loose hay surrounding the body was untouched and when the body was lifted, it disintegrated. He offered no explanation.

Recently, science has "explained" SHC with the so-called wick effect. Experiments suggest that if a body is set alight and wrapped up, then body fat, burning slowly, can achieve the same effects as SHC. Not everyone is convinced.

Gordon Rutter writes for the Fortean Times and is open-minded about the subject.

"With SHC it's very much 'you pays your money and you takes your choice'," says Rutter. "I have read reports from firemen who have said it's not like a normal fire. By all accounts it is rare, so it is difficult to study."

So just what could causes spontaneous human combustion? Well, as Rutter says, you can take your choice from a number of diverse possibilities:

• Alcohol and cigarettes – blaming the demon drink was very popular in Victorian times when they were never quick to miss an opportunity to moralise. However, whilst a number of cases have involved heavy drinkers, it is not always the case.

• The wick effect – by recreating the cirumstances with a pig wrapped in a blanket, scientists reckon they have found the solution. Detractors point out that even after a number of hours in an oven at 600° Fahrenheit, bodies in crematoriums are still not burnt to ashes.

• Faulty digestive system – a bad diet could cost you more than low energy levels and raised cholesterol. It has been posited that a build up of gases in the digestive tract could lead to unstable chemicals spontaneously combusting. This has been offered to explain cases where the individual has been seen to burn from the inside out.

• Ball lightning – weird electrical fields, ball lightning, et al have been pulled out, dusted down and put forward as theories. Not many takers though…

• An act of God – or aliens, or any other weird thing that you'd like to imagine.

Because let's face it, if you've decided SHC is more than a tragic accident, then you're probably going to want to seek the explanation from as strange a source as possible.
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
12,957
Reaction score
7,756
Points
314
min_bannister said:
Gordon Rutter said:
• An act of God ...
Bets that this is precisely the line insurance companies would take?

"Sorry Sir, smoke damage to your home in this case was due to Act of God, and as such isn't covered by your all-inclusive, everything covered, no exceptions oh yes indeedy contents insurance."
 
Top