Man killed by meteorite

[Toaster]

el stovey said:

Angry scenes In the science forum.

[Toaster]

V6Pushfit said:

I'm still waiting with a empty glass, come on someone...

Lager or Bitter (shouldn't use that last word as some on here are )

[anonymous-user]

Toaster said:

Lager or Bitter (shouldn't use that last word as some on here are )

Lager please, cheers. Anyway this bloke got nutted by an extraterrestrial nodule, first ever, knackered he was right there in his bus and all.

[Simpo Two]

Toaster said:

Simpo Two said:

'Killed by a meteorite' means it hits you and kills you.Not dying from kidney failure 18 years later.She was injured by a meteorite.

Your ignoring the possibility of Causal links and without confirming Erics bias Car Accidents happen all the time in this instance: Takes Pennsylvania Man's Life 50 Years After Sustaining Severe Head Injuries http://www.medicaldaily.com/car-accident-takes-pen...

There are lots of causal links for ill health and death

The meteorite may have been a 'contributory factor'. She may, of course, have got kidney stones anyway, we'll never know. But I'm impressed with your determination - you should be a claims barrister

[anonymous-user]

Ah well can't sit round here if no ones chatting I'll be off to SP&L they've got a lock-in tonight I'll tell them about that bloke hit with that stone or whatever

[Toaster]

Simpo Two said:

The meteorite may have been a 'contributory factor'. She may, of course, have got kidney stones anyway, we'll never know. But I'm impressed with your determination - you should be a claims barrister

Totally agree with you she may have had her illness and died anyway, Oh and not a claims barrister just a scientist who gets bored easily

[Boshly]

Toaster said:

On the surface of what the article said it looks very much that the Stress (Causal links) caused by the meteorite Killed Ann and they said it not me !!

If we're going to be factual here, 'he' said it, her simple "countryfolk" husband; not her GP or the coroner, or even a renowned expert of the time. "They" just reported it.

A very tenuous link by an emotional simple guy. But let's not split hairs ....

[Eric Mc]

V6Pushfit said:

Rather boring?

I liked the idea of it being the first person to be killed by a meteorite can't we just pretend? I mean it's like a pub conversation and they get mucked up by the know-all in the round.

So, starting afresh, ' hey there's that bloke on the telly got killed by a meteorite, first it's ever happened to the poor hit him harder than a dose of clap on shore leave...'

My view too.

I can imagine Toastie going to a pub armed with the Encyclopedia Britannia so that he can fact check every utterance by his drinking "buddies". I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that we may be looking at a case of Asberger's here - so I will back off. Just remind me to leave the pub if it all gets so heavy so quickly.

Talk about a conversation killer!

[anonymous-user]

Eric Mc said:

V6Pushfit said:

Rather boring?

I liked the idea of it being the first person to be killed by a meteorite can't we just pretend? I mean it's like a pub conversation and they get mucked up by the know-all in the round.

So, starting afresh, ' hey there's that bloke on the telly got killed by a meteorite, first it's ever happened to the poor hit him harder than a dose of clap on shore leave...'

My view too.

I can imagine Toastie going to a pub armed with the Encyclopedia Britannia so that he can fact check every utterance by his drinking "buddies". I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that we may be looking at a case of Asberger's here - so I will back off. Just remind me to leave the pub if it all gets so heavy so quickly.

Talk about a conversation killer!

That's the trouble with the internet and topics like this:

1. Light heated banter with no detailed knowledge = conversation
2. The same but in depth with detailed knowledge = discussion
3. Depth charge information from internet googling = pain in the ariss and the end of 1 and 2

[CanAm]

How about this quote from the original article:-

"Saturday’s death may become the first registered death from meteorite, as according to calculations by astronomer Alan Harris the person’s odds of being killed by a celestial body impact during lifetime are about 1 in 700,000."

[Eric Mc]

To be honest, that's much higher than winning the National Lottery. That can't be right, can it?

[anonymous-user]

CanAm said:

How about this quote from the original article:-

"Saturday’s death may become the first registered death from meteorite, as according to calculations by astronomer Alan Harris the person’s odds of being killed by a celestial body impact during lifetime are about 1 in 700,000."

I think the figure is wrong, I would think it meant 1 in 700 billion.

1 in 700,000 would be 10,000 people a year being hit!

[Eric Mc]

Maybe that's where Toaster got his stats?

[anonymous-user]

Eric Mc said:

Maybe that's where Toaster got his stats?

This will reduce future risk then:

[Toaster]

CanAm said:

How about this quote from the original article:-

"Saturday’s death may become the first registered death from meteorite, as according to calculations by astronomer Alan Harris the person’s odds of being killed by a celestial body impact during lifetime are about 1 in 700,000."

I think you will find the wording you have used for the quote is wrong

[Toaster]

V6Pushfit said:

That's the trouble with the internet and topics like this:

1. Light heated banter with no detailed knowledge = conversation
2. The same but in depth with detailed knowledge = discussion
3. Depth charge information from internet googling = pain in the ariss and the end of 1 and 2

So we all talk st and pretend we are the font of all knowledge I guess that makes for a simple life

[Eric Mc]

On a forum like this, I'd prefer friendly rubbish to obnoxious assumed accuracy any day.

We aren't writing a peer reviewed Phd thesis - just knocking stuff about.

[CanAm]

Toaster said:

I think you will find the wording you have used for the quote is wrong

It was cut and pasted direct from the article.

[CanAm]

PS, of course it's bloody wrong!

[Toaster]

Eric Mc said:

On a forum like this, I'd prefer friendly rubbish to obnoxious assumed accuracy any day.

We aren't writing a peer reviewed Phd thesis - just knocking stuff about.

Clearly you shouldn't be writing on a science thread and not have debate, your opinion Eric s just that opinion I never see in your writing consideration for an alternate view its just so ridged.

Going back to what I had originally said you will note I suggested the causal links ( I did not say this is fact) I was pointing out others comments which you cannot entertain for some reason there seems to be a blockage in your mind that only allows one track thinking.

A few years ago many would have denied that smoking could have anything to do with Lung cancer and other illnesses and there were a lot of individuals with views such as yours saying of course it doesn't

Fortunately Science prevailed the causal links established and laws passed.

I will repeat one last time I have not presented an argument as fact but laid out possible causal links based on comments by those around her, its a possibility and a valid one.