Groups

    Man struck by lightening twice within 5 min Caught on security camera

    Man struck by lightening twice within 5 min.... Caught on security camera.


    tinypic.com/pla…s=7

    40 Comments

    went down like a sack of ****

    Was I wrong in laughing?

    Most likely fake. I like the quote on one website:

    However, experts say the video is likely fake as the chances of surviving a direct bolt of lightning are essentially zero… where as the chances of a YouTube video being fake are approximately 50 percent.

    Are those 2 puddles of pee when he gets up from each strike?
    Edited by: "ChrisUK" 12th May 2011

    ChrisUK

    Are those 2 puddles of pee when he gets up from each strike?



    I wondered that, but I presume it is "scorch marks".

    well fake, nice but obvious flaws

    Alfonse

    well fake, nice but obvious flaws



    such as?

    DragonChris

    I wondered that, but I presume it is "scorch marks".



    I get them in my bed sometimes.

    maddogb

    such as?



    keep freeze framing the lightening strike and check the light dispersion and the second scorch mark is a clone of the first. Also see the tutorials on VideoCoPilot website...............


    Edited by: "Alfonse" 12th May 2011

    Banned

    great fake anyway

    btw, it's Lightning, not Lightening

    csiman

    great fake anywaybtw, it's Lightning, not Lightening



    soz thank you lol

    Search for a guy called Roy Sullivan... Think he was hit by lightning 10 times... and for real!
    Edited by: "baffledsalmon" 12th May 2011

    Alfonse

    keep freeze framing the lightning strike and check the light dispersion … keep freeze framing the lightning strike and check the light dispersion and the second scorch mark is a clone of the first. Also see the tutorials on VideoCoPilot website...............




    only using mpc and media player and due to the low res, really can't confirm the scorch marks, they look different to me, certainly not identical,
    the flashes appear to occur over 1 maybe 2 frames of 100fps per sec so difficult to ff and fairly accurate with actual strikes.
    light dispersion looks ok, a bit localised but low cloud cover would do that.
    the nice part is the single strike, a lot of fakes use forks which don't occur at that level due to the polar influence.
    given statistics it prob is a fake but cant really count on it from your fault finding.

    maddogb

    only using mpc and media player and due to the low res, really can't … only using mpc and media player and due to the low res, really can't confirm the scorch marks, they look different to me, certainly not identical, the flashes appear to occur over 1 maybe 2 frames of 100fps per sec so difficult to ff and fairly accurate with actual strikes.light dispersion looks ok, a bit localised but low cloud cover would do that.the nice part is the single strike, a lot of fakes use forks which don't occur at that level due to the polar influence.given statistics it prob is a fake but cant really count on it from your fault finding.



    meh

    Makes me laugh when you have a go at a certain conspiracy theorist on here and then as soon as something like this comes up. FAKE FAKE FAKE!! X)

    Adam2050

    Makes me laugh when you have a go at a certain conspiracy theorist on … Makes me laugh when you have a go at a certain conspiracy theorist on here and then as soon as something like this comes up. FAKE FAKE FAKE!! X)




    Lightening also causes violent muscle contraction, not a stumble to the ground

    Check the shadows on the left............tthat would be lit up not still having the same shadow..........


    so obvious........

    http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/4492/unledsy.png

    shadow issues........

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/04/30/article-0-0BD8D4F400000578-587_634x342.jpg

    Edited by: "Alfonse" 12th May 2011

    regardless of wether its fake or not, i nearly pmsl

    maddogb

    only using mpc and media player and due to the low res, really can't … only using mpc and media player and due to the low res, really can't confirm the scorch marks, they look different to me, certainly not identical, the flashes appear to occur over 1 maybe 2 frames of 100fps per sec so difficult to ff and fairly accurate with actual strikes.light dispersion looks ok, a bit localised but low cloud cover would do that.the nice part is the single strike, a lot of fakes use forks which don't occur at that level due to the polar influence.given statistics it prob is a fake but cant really count on it from your fault finding.



    fail

    Looks like he's wearing trainers to me, if so, how would the electricity earth through him?

    I worked in a burns unit a long time ago and we had a man in who had been struck by lightning. Everyone wanted to come in to see him because he actually had a brown scorch mark across his back! oO

    Noob CGI

    dcx_badass

    Are you genuinely asking that? What a stupid question, so you think the … Are you genuinely asking that? What a stupid question, so you think the lightning is powerful enough to jump from the clouds to the ground, but then can't jump past 1cm of rubber, dear god.



    Do you really think lightning jumps? Dear god.

    sorry alfonse, whilst i agree its more likely a fake your methods at proving it so are severely flawed and therefore your claim its "obvious" is pure BS
    the light source for the car shadow is pretty high intensity and could easily cause "burn" on the ccd causing a slow reaction to the sudden(ms) change from the strike.

    maddogb

    sorry alfonse, whilst i agree its more likely a fake your methods at … sorry alfonse, whilst i agree its more likely a fake your methods at proving it so are severely flawed and therefore your claim its "obvious" is pure BSthe light source for the car shadow is pretty high intensity and could easily cause "burn" on the ccd causing a slow reaction to the sudden(ms) change from the strike.



    but not slow enough to light the right hand side of the lane..............lol
    Edited by: "Alfonse" 12th May 2011

    lmao fake and gay

    Alfonse

    but not slow enough to light the right hand side of the … but not slow enough to light the right hand side of the lane..............lol



    Facepalm

    He would have massive burns and a strike at the head to a leg would probably pass the heart which would probably kill you or atleast knock him out for a lot lot longer. Plenty of people have survived lightning strikes though.

    Doubt trainers would serve as enough insolation but also the tree's are higher than he is so wouldn't those have been a "path of least resistance" etc.

    I think it is more likely fake but the whole "lightning never strikes the same place twice" is also a myth as lightning does all the time. Striking a man twice like that and him walking away is extremely unlikely.

    I'd go with fake anyway.

    Don't care if it was fake, made me laugh nice find

    Whats worse is I saw this on Channel 4 News on TV

    Banned

    I laughed the second time, looks fake. I thought the umbrellas would have made better conductors.

    Alfonse

    but not slow enough to light the right hand side of the … but not slow enough to light the right hand side of the lane..............lol



    the rh side of the lane isn't in shadow.

    maddogb

    the rh side of the lane isn't in shadow.



    whateva Mr Blindside

    http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/4492/unledsy.png

    a very quick highlight/shadow and brightness/contrast adjustment in Photoshop

    http://imageshack.us/m/90/8492/article00bd8d4f40000057.jpg

    not sure what your picture is supposed to mean i think you are just trying to give weight to your previous BS
    the pic above highlights something i had noticed from the dm website, there actually is a change to the shadowed region and it aligns with the body of the guy/ the side of the vehicle and the angle at which he is struck.
    this is actually giving credence to this being genuine, surprised me i can tell you.
    I always believe its best to form an opinion from facts not "produce" facts to substantiate your opinion.

    maddogb

    not sure what your picture is supposed to mean i think you are just … not sure what your picture is supposed to mean i think you are just trying to give weight to your previous BSthe pic above highlights something i had noticed from the dm website, there actually is a change to the shadowed region and it aligns with the body of the guy/ the side of the vehicle and the angle at which he is struck.this is actually giving credence to this being genuine, surprised me i can tell you.I always believe its best to form an opinion from facts not "produce" facts to substantiate your opinion.



    hahahahahahahahahaha

    sickly sweet

    I see your man being struck by lightening and raise you an aeroplane … I see your man being struck by lightening and raise you an aeroplane being struck by lightening

    As this flight came into Heathrow, a jagged bolt of lightning smashed … As this flight came into Heathrow, a jagged bolt of lightning smashed into the roof, right above the pilots’ heads.

    MAIA

    Looks like he's wearing trainers to me, if so, how would the electricity … Looks like he's wearing trainers to me, if so, how would the electricity earth through him?




    Pleased to know I'm in good company asking stupid questions, lol. X)

    Maybe I should have said why would it pass through him. Sorry if I am stupid folks, but I understood that lightening is attracted to the best conductor to the earth?

    dcx_badass

    Ok that makes sense, yeah it has more reason to hit one of the trees.



    there was some research done a few years back asking why lighning strikes 1 part of the ground and not others,
    they set up cameras covering different parts of the uv spectrum etc and the surprising result was the earth gave off a discharge(cant remember the details poss static).
    this rose in columns to about 3 or 4 feet and the areas where this occurred increased the chances of strikes by several thousand percent.
    The theory then was areas of least conductivity at ground level matter less than much higher up.(supposed thats why you only see conductors on very high buildings.

    This is faked! If you take still shots of both strikes, the surrounding terrain is illuminated exactly the same despite the two points of strike reference! Also, the shadow of the van doesn't get washed out during either strike, nor does the car beside the man ever cast a shadow on the other side, both impossibilities!

    crusin2nite2002

    This is faked! If you take still shots of both strikes, the surrounding … This is faked! If you take still shots of both strikes, the surrounding terrain is illuminated exactly the same despite the two points of strike reference! Also, the shadow of the van doesn't get washed out during either strike, nor does the car beside the man ever cast a shadow on the other side, both impossibilities!



    thanks for joining the site to bump this thread after 6 weeks...

    enjoy your time here
    Post a comment
    Avatar
    @
      Text
      Top Discussions
      1. How are Very for pre-orders ?33
      2. Furniture Sliders45
      3. Cheap Laptop?11
      4. Iphone 6 to which handset?712

      See more discussions