Harold Squared Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Determining the origin of fires involves a variety of sciences from psychology to chemistry and physics. Virtually everyone has the means to commit such a crime, so opportunity and most importantly, motive are among the chief considerations. Among the most common indicators of arson is residue of petrochemical accelerants, such as gasoline, kerosene or diesel fuel. It is also possible to detect electrically induced fires of an intentional or negligent nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Is there anything in particular you wish to discuss? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Probably not. It should likely be closed. For context, this thread was created in response to a reply he received in a climate change discussion. His argument was that since climate change has happened naturally in the past without humans present that humans cannot be impacting climate change today. I shared with him that this is a powerfully stupid argument and is a bit like arguing that humans cannot start forest fires because we have evidence that they've started in the past without human involvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Squared Posted June 30, 2015 Author Share Posted June 30, 2015 Climate change is another topic, this is not a thread devoted to that subject. Arson must be intentional, otherwise artificial fires are classified as accidents. Malicious fires can be disguised as "accidents", as experienced investigators can frequently attest. At no time have I suggested that humans cannot set deliberate or accidental forest fires and only a complete jackass with a serious personal integrity deficiency would argue that I have. Ergo, you must be mistaken, iNow. Arson investigation is (theoretically) science in the service of justice. Unfortunately, the case of Cameron Todd Willingham seems to indicate it is a far from an exact science, with troubling implications for justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 It appears that you're also unfamiliar with the concept of an analogy. Let me help you (courtesy: Google) - a·nal·o·gy əˈnaləjē/ noun noun: analogy; plural noun: analogies a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification. "an analogy between the workings of nature and those of human societies" a correspondence or partial similarity. "the syndrome is called deep dysgraphia because of its analogy to deep dyslexia" a thing that is comparable to something else in significant respects. "works of art were seen as an analogy for works of nature" LOGIC a process of arguing from similarity in known respects to similarity in other respects. synonyms: similarity, parallel, correspondence, likeness, resemblance, correlation, relation, kinship, equivalence, similitude, metaphor, simile "there's a thinly veiled analogy between his fiction and his real life" antonyms: dissimilarity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now