INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

Darwin Awards

Enter here for humour and irreverence.
Message
Author
Compassionist
Posts: 3487
Joined: July 14th, 2007, 8:38 am

Darwin Awards

#1 Post by Compassionist » September 1st, 2007, 5:22 pm


lewist
Posts: 4402
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 8:53 pm

#2 Post by lewist » September 3rd, 2007, 11:51 pm

Much to be recommended, Compassionist. Sick... but really funny! :hilarity:
Carpe diem. Savour every moment.

Compassionist
Posts: 3487
Joined: July 14th, 2007, 8:38 am

#3 Post by Compassionist » September 4th, 2007, 7:18 pm

:)

User avatar
Alan C.
Posts: 10356
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 3:35 pm

#4 Post by Alan C. » September 20th, 2007, 11:55 am

THIS YEAR NOMINEE IS:
The Arizona Highway Patrol came upon a pile of smoldering metal imbedded in the side of a cliff rising above the apex of a curve. The wreckage resembled the site of an airplane crash, but it was a car. The type of car was unidentifiable at the scene. The lab finally figured out what had happened.

It seems that a guy had some JATO bottles ( Jet Assisted Take Off ), actually a solid fuel rocket used to give heavy military transport planes extra "push" for taking off from short airfields. He had driven his Chevy Impala into the desert and found a long straight stretch of road. He attached the JATO unit to his car, jumped in, built up some speed, and fired off the JATO!

The facts as best could be defined are that:

1. The operator of the 1967 Impala hit the JATO ignition at a distance of approximately 3.0 miles from the crash site. This was determined by the scorched and melted asphalt at that location.
2. The JATO would have reached maximum thrust within 5 seconds, causing the chevy to reach speeds of 350 MPH ( 560 KMPH ). JATO thrust would have continued for 20-25 seconds, insuring maintenance of that speed for that time.
3. The driver, soon pilot, would have experienced G-forces usually reserved for dig-fighting F-14 jocks under full afterburners, causing him to become insignificant for the remainder of the vent. The automobile remained on the straight highway for about 2.5 miles ( 15-20 seconds ) before the driver applied and completely melted brakes, blowing tires and leaving thick rubber marks on the road surface, to no avail, then becoming airborne for an additional 1.4 miles before impacting the cliff face at a height of 125 feet, leaving a blackened crater 3 feet deep in the rock face.
4. Few of the drivers remains were recovered. Small fragments of bone, teeth, and hair were extracted from the crater, and a fingernail and bone shards were removed from a piece of debris believed to be a portion of the steering wheel.
Abstinence Makes the Church Grow Fondlers.

Don Alhambra
Posts: 30
Joined: September 2nd, 2007, 10:17 pm

#5 Post by Don Alhambra » September 25th, 2007, 12:17 pm

Snopes says FALSE.

:)

Fred
Posts: 111
Joined: July 13th, 2007, 3:33 pm

#6 Post by Fred » September 25th, 2007, 12:21 pm

Don Alhambra wrote:Snopes says FALSE.

:)
Fred says FUNNY

:grin:
Fred

User avatar
Heurismus
Posts: 224
Joined: November 10th, 2007, 8:04 pm

Our own Darwin awards?

#7 Post by Heurismus » November 22nd, 2007, 2:05 am

I was admiring Alan H's Mediascan and I couldn't help notice this little slide show from TimesOnline. (Alan, you must have noticed it yourself)

Ursa Victorix?

I'm glad to see this 'poacher' is still alive, but that's all I can say honestly as I think the bear had every natural 'right' to do what it did.

Perhaps not a good idea for a full blown award, but I don't know. It could be fun to have such a thread with your own, or the original Darwin Awards, entries. We could then hold our own, say monthly, bi-monthly or annual vote. What say you?

edited by admin to put the long URL link as part of 'Ursa Victorix'
The most cogent reason for restricting the interference of government is the great evil of adding unnecessarily to its power. - J.S. Mill

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24062
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

#8 Post by Alan H » November 22nd, 2007, 12:30 pm

OK! Good idea. Post your suggestions here and we'll have a vote. I suggest we see how many we get and see how often it is worthwhile voting. We could perhaps do it after we get a certain number, rather than a fixed time period. Mr Khan is definitely in the running!
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

Bryn
Posts: 665
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:47 pm

#9 Post by Bryn » November 22nd, 2007, 11:48 pm

It's a idea but quite honestly I never see or read anything like this unless I'm actually reading about the Darwin awards. People doing unbelievably idiotic thinks isn't something one reads about every day - is it?

User avatar
Heurismus
Posts: 224
Joined: November 10th, 2007, 8:04 pm

#10 Post by Heurismus » November 23rd, 2007, 5:06 am

Bryn wrote:It's a idea but quite honestly I never see or read anything like this unless I'm actually reading about the Darwin awards. People doing unbelievably idiotic thinks isn't something one reads about every day - is it?
True, but we do occaisionally. As to Alan H's point about waiting a while to see how feasible it would be, numbers and frequencies that is, I agree.
I'll try and get another I came across recently which I must admit was a little disturbing, but if I find it I'll post adequate warnings, unless you decide to limit the level of...well let's call it self induced carnage, to words only. If I find it I'll post to you to see if it's acceptable.
PS. Sorry about the long link.
The most cogent reason for restricting the interference of government is the great evil of adding unnecessarily to its power. - J.S. Mill

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24062
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

#11 Post by Alan H » November 23rd, 2007, 4:31 pm

Heurismus wrote:PS. Sorry about the long link.
No problem - I just thought I'd change it before the complaints came rolling in!
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 9273
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: Our own Darwin awards?

#12 Post by Maria Mac » October 8th, 2008, 11:48 am

I hate the Darwin Awards but would nevertheless nominate this poor sod whose story appears in today's MediaScan for one:

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/world/F ... jp#3314594

A ZIMBABWEAN football player drowned in a crocodile-infested river during a ritual to cleanse his team of bad spirits before a match, a state newspaper said yesterday.
The Chronicle said 16 players from second division side Midland Portland Cement were told to swim in the Zambezi river in Victoria Falls on Sunday, but after the swim the other players noticed one man was missing.
I also hate how I found the cheap comments below the story funny. :sad:

"He was obviously snapped up by an opposing team."

"Aside from that, How did the exorcism go?"



(I've merged two existing threads into one. Even though the stories are horrible, as someone with a sick sense of humour, I think the Comedy Club is the best place for it).

Compassionist
Posts: 3487
Joined: July 14th, 2007, 8:38 am

Re: Darwin Awards

#13 Post by Compassionist » May 10th, 2009, 8:21 am

:)

User avatar
Paolo
Posts: 1474
Joined: September 13th, 2008, 9:15 am

Re: Darwin Awards

#14 Post by Paolo » May 11th, 2009, 3:15 pm

Compassionist wrote:Is it just me or is there anyone else on this forum who finds life horrific?
Horror is an emotional/behavioural response to an unwelcome situation - and that response seems to be strongly influenced by experience and personality. Life obviously contains horrific events, but it tends to be a very mixed bag, containing some quite nice stuff too. One person's horrific experience might be enjoyable to someone else.

Compassionist
Posts: 3487
Joined: July 14th, 2007, 8:38 am

Re: Darwin Awards

#15 Post by Compassionist » May 12th, 2009, 9:02 am

:)

User avatar
Paolo
Posts: 1474
Joined: September 13th, 2008, 9:15 am

Re: Darwin Awards

#16 Post by Paolo » May 12th, 2009, 10:14 am

Compassionist wrote:I was crying on 10 May 2009 because a friend's 18 months old son had died.
Sorry to hear about your friend's loss - I hope they will be able to cope with such a tragic situation.
Compassionist wrote:My four year old son started laughing at me! Also, last year I slipped on a slippery floor and my son started laughing at me! I certainly didn't teach him to laugh at the suffering of others. That's why I think it's an instinctive coping response to the distress of another.
I have seen some research to suggest that laughing at the misfortune of others is a coping mechanism, but there are other factors that may also apply (see below). This is particularly in children who are still developing their emotional repertoire - for example, your son may simply be too young to be able to discern that you were sad (Borke, 1973).
Swaminath G. 'Joke's A Part': In defence of humour. Indian J Psychiatry 2006;48:177-80 wrote:Kahn identified five primary functions that humour serves for individuals and groups:

Coping. By using humour as a coping mechanism, people are able to bear the burden of suffering or misfortune. This is done by recognizing the incongruity of believing that one is the only person suffering, thus increasing one's sense of shared humanity.

Reframing. This involves looking at things in a different way, a form of cognitive reappraisal with affective elements.

Communicating. Humour can be an unobtrusive way of seeking help. If a person moans and groans continually to potential helpers, they are in fact less likely to help and will avoid the complainer. Using humour disarms their defences and also conveys the message that while help is needed, the person seeking help is essentially able to cope and will not place unbearable burden upon the helpers. Of course, this can also work in the negative sense-if humour is used to excessively play down problems, then friends may assume that no help is needed.

Expressing hostility. Humour, particularly sarcasm and irony can be very sophisticated expressions of anger and criticism and are very hard to answer, since an attack is conveyed in such a way as to circumvent logic and rational discussion. Again, this can have positive and negative consequences, depending upon the basic level of under­standing and trust operating between speaker and interlocutor. Sarcasm and irony directed at oneself can be very harmful.

Constructing identities. By expressing a sense of humour, a person gives out the message that they are fun-loving, easy-going and are good company. Too much humour however may result in people forming the judgement that they are immature and shallow. Once again a balance needs to be struck.

Compassionist
Posts: 3487
Joined: July 14th, 2007, 8:38 am

Re: Darwin Awards

#17 Post by Compassionist » May 12th, 2009, 7:36 pm

:)

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3244
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: Darwin Awards

#18 Post by Tetenterre » April 1st, 2012, 1:05 pm

The knee-jerkers are trying to blame the government for this but, I suggest, it properly resides here.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-yo ... e-17560534
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

stevenw888
Posts: 694
Joined: July 16th, 2010, 12:48 pm

Re: Darwin Awards

#19 Post by stevenw888 » April 2nd, 2012, 10:25 am

I agree TT. What type of moron dispenses petrol in a kitchen with a gas hob burning?
When we were children we mucked around with petrol, diesel, parraffin, kerosene and a whole load of other inflammable liquids. That's when I learned exactly how dangerous inflammable liquids were (especially those that give off vapours). Do people today not do this sort of thing when they're children? Could be a sad reflection of "Health & Safety gone mad" We are so protected, that no-one knows what's really dangerous any more.

On a very slightly different note, my wife is a letting agent and manages domestic properties with tenants in. She receives lots of phone calls from tenants saying "The light bulb in the hall/lounge/living room/kitchen has just gone out, can you send someone round to replace it!" These people do not know how to change a light bulb!!
"There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots." - From the film "Top Gun"

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Darwin Awards

#20 Post by Dave B » April 2nd, 2012, 11:13 am

I think there are many people who simply do not know the dangers, have never heard of such accidents or read the warning notices in petrol stations etc. I would bet that every year some idiot pours petrol on a bonfire and by the time they get a match going find out, the hard way, that they are standing in a "pool" of fumes.

I remember seeing people who should know better at work decanting flammable solvents near people using gas powered soldering irons. "Need" and "habit" can be far stronger than "thought".

At the same time Maude was being less than thoughtful and responsible when he made his remarks. He should know that people take such things literally. Any MP or politician should know that every word they utter will be analysed and used against them given the slightest excuse. But he was not responsible for that person's stupidity.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

Post Reply