The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: panicp on February 23, 2020, 12:12:13 PM
-
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mike-hughes-death-rocket-launch-crash-mad-daredevil-flat-earth-video-a9353091.html
I find it genuinely baffling that nobody from the FET community didn't strongly counsel and/or advise Mike Hughes to NOT fly a home made rocket to his death.
I get that ultimately, it was his decision, I get that had he gained sufficient altitude, he would have disproved his own beliefs but seriously, did nobody within the FET community advise against him risking his life in such a foolhardy and ultimately counter-productive (for FET) scheme.
Despite the disagreements between heliocentrists and deluded FET fantasists, the death of someone in the vain pursuit of exposing their own indoctrinated nonsense should remain forever on the conscience of those who urged him on. Many heliocentric astronauts and cosmonauts have died in the pursuit of REAL science - on the ground, during launch, descent from orbit etc. These deaths were not a joke. They were really people who were trying to better mankind's understanding of all manner of problems. Way beyond some nonsense FET. Likewise Mike Hughes' tragic death. The tragic difference here is that he was duped into a ridiculous and unnecessary proof of something that is already beyond requiring any further evidence.
Effectively, he was duped by FET (theory and theorists) into recklessly risking his life. A risk that was too high.
For shame on you all.
RIP Mike Hughes
-
Ohhhhhh. Well I'm regretting my last statement on the matter. :-[
No such thing as bad publicity, mate. Its more Twitter followers, more forum activity, more Facebook likes, more power. I couldn't give a monkeys if this guy is boiled alive in that thing. He painted 'flat earth' on the side of it, and that's headlines.
But I do have a couple of things to note.
1) It looks like someone cut the strings to the parachute. This doesn't look like an accident at all.
2) What kind of a TV company rocks up to film a man killing himself? Don't they perform health and safety checks?
Rest In Pieces, Mad Mike. He died doing what he loved. :'(
-
1) It looks like someone cut the strings to the parachute. This doesn't look like an accident at all.
Conspiracy theories abound ...
2) What kind of a TV company rocks up to film a man killing himself? Don't they perform health and safety checks?
The kind that covers public events every day of the week. One day the film crew is covering a marathon, the next a protest outside a council building, the next Mike Hughes. Why would they be responsible for H&S in this circumstance?
-
The kind that covers public events every day of the week. One day the film crew is covering a marathon, the next a protest outside a council building, the next Mike Hughes. Why would they be responsible for H&S in this circumstance?
TV shows have a duty of care to the people who are on them. For example in the UK there was a very famous TV show where they got a guy to do a reverse bungee https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk/news/noel-edmonds-quit-tv-show-following-tragic-death-in-stunt/
It looked like this.
https://youtu.be/9Wry3GQGwq0?t=14
The article clearly says
“Mad” Mike Hughes, who hoped to prove the Earth was flat by going into space, died on Saturday near Barstow, California, after attempting to launch his steam-powered rocket for a new television series called Homemade Astronauts on the US Science Channel.
IE they were makign the show with him. Not just observing. They have a duty of care.
-
meh... I would give him and the media a break. If he didn't talk about FE theory, he would have been just another daredevil with a rocket like Evel Knievel. Johnny Knoxville was almost killed in a rocket stunt during one of the Jackass movies. If he had died, it would have been for the cause of low brow entertainment. This guy really believed in a cause.
Anyone could have told him that his rocket designs were stupid and dangerous (I'm sure many did) but I don't think he would have stopped. If I was there I would have told him it was dangerous but if he insisted on doing it anyway, I would have definitely been in the front row, recording with my cell phone.
-
Hughes had already done one launch in 2018.
If the TV co had not been involved, he was still going to do the second, and the third, if he had survived. I would suggest it was his project, not the TV company's.
-
I'm going to ignore OP's inability to write a forum post with any substance, his inability to contain his "erth rund!" shitposting, or to even find the right board for his thread. The subject is important enough to make an exception, and the serious slanderous allegations within the OP deserve some exploration.
I find it genuinely baffling that nobody from the FET community didn't strongly counsel and/or advise Mike Hughes to NOT fly a home made rocket to his death.
So, what exactly does the FE community have to do with this? Mad Mike had experimented with home-made rocketry long before he even heard of the Flat Earth Theory, and he was unlikely to stop even if he hadn't developed an interest in FET. He repeatedly explained that his passion for rocketry was not directly linked to FE, even if he saw a connection between his two interests and was looking forward to combining the two.
What happened to RE'ers' self-proclaimed love for facts? Did you just discard them all to express your unsubstantiated feelings, or did you not think to look into the man's history before launching this tirade? Or, perhaps, as always, it's a complete sham? For shame, indeed.
For what it's worth - when I was in touch with Mike, we did talk about safety. He knew the risks, and wasn't looking to be swayed away from what he loved.
Please reconsider the ethical implications of your hot take. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
As a personal hint: this is one of those rare occasions where you should probably apologise.
[300 edits later, I think I caught all the spelling errors, missing words, and sentences that didn't really sound like English. Posting while upset doesn't work very well for me.]
-
Thork is right. Mike was being paid by company to produce a television show on "homemade astronauts", which was profiting from the event. Under OSH law it is an employer's responsibility to perform health and safety checks, regardless of if Mike was going to do it anyway.
https://www.osha.gov/as/opa/worker/employer-responsibility.html
Employer Responsibilities
Under the OSH law, employers have a responsibility to provide a safe workplace. This is a short summary of key employer responsibilities:
Provide a workplace free from serious recognized hazards and comply with standards, rules and regulations issued under the OSH Act.
Examine workplace conditions to make sure they conform to applicable OSHA standards.
Make sure employees have and use safe tools and equipment and properly maintain this equipment.
Use color codes, posters, labels or signs to warn employees of potential hazards.
Establish or update operating procedures and communicate them so that employees follow safety and health requirements.
Employers must provide safety training in a language and vocabulary workers can understand.
Employers with hazardous chemicals in the workplace must develop and implement a written hazard communication program and train employees on the hazards they are exposed to and proper precautions (and a copy of safety data sheets must be readily available). See the OSHA page on Hazard Communication.
Provide medical examinations and training when required by OSHA standards.
OSHA, in fact, has sections on guidance and standards for technologies related to rockets and missiles, which they work with government agencies on.
-
I hope they do something cool with his remains, like turn his ashes into a firework or something. :-\
-
Thork is right. Mike was being paid by company to produce a television show on "homemade astronauts", which was profiting from the event. Under OSH law it is an employer's responsibility to perform health and safety checks, regardless of if Mike was going to do it anyway.
You need to show he was in an employer/employee relationship, though. Without access to the contracts between them, I seriously doubt you can do this.
-
RIP Mike Hughes. It was tragic and regardless of his belief of the earth's shape I get that he most likely loved doing this kind of stuff, knew the risks and was happy enough to take them anyway. To that end I do hope he died happy and without regret. I doubt anyone could have convinced him not to do the stunts.
-
Maybe he really didn’t believe the earth was flat but he just wanted an excuse to launch himself.
-
Thork is right. Mike was being paid by company to produce a television show on "homemade astronauts", which was profiting from the event. Under OSH law it is an employer's responsibility to perform health and safety checks, regardless of if Mike was going to do it anyway.
You need to show he was in an employer/employee relationship, though. Without access to the contracts between them, I seriously doubt you can do this.
You can't claim that you are exempt from OSHA by recatgorizing relationships. That is not a legitimate response. You need to ensure safety in your projects and operations, and Discovery, Inc. was definitely involved.
Do you think that Discovery, Inc. can just pay people to walk on the lip of a volcano without proper safety precautions by calling them something else? No. If they could do that, everyone would do that, in many dangerous fields. They don't let employers and organizations get away with that. Lets see evidence for your claim that they could bypass federal laws for human safety willy nilly. Because that is an absurd argument.
Lets see details on the one simple trick employers can do to not be responsible for human safety in dangerous situations. Show us.
-
An incredibly brave man who died pursuing his dreams. But hopefully it is learned that experimenters will think to their own safety first.
-
Lets see evidence for your claim that they could bypass federal laws for human safety willy nilly.
Let's see your evidence that he and they were in an employee/employer relationship as defined by OSHA for the legislation. You claimed first, I rebutted.
-
You want me to prove you wrong that employers can play tricks so that they can avoid federal safety laws and are not responsible for the health and safety of those they pay?
Funny, but no. They are responsible. It's the law. I already gave you a source. The evidence is already there on their responsibilities. My claim is actually established. Employers are responsible for health and safety precautions. It is you who would need to show your claim that employers have a trick to where they can put people in dangerous situations without concern of safety.
-
My guess is that it's probably under the same procedure/guise used for all sorts of dangerous entertainment types of ventures. Redbull and GoPro, for example, probably have all of the athletes/daredevils they feature and pay as their sponsor and/or for events sign hold harmless/limited liability agreements/disclosures. It's a pretty standard practice.
As for Mike, a tragedy for sure. I've seen a couple of interviews with him. Quite the character, very committed and I guy I would have liked to grab a beer with and listen to his stories. He lived large for sure.
-
The Red Bull Stratos jump was a 30 million dollar project, where they did take responsibility for safety. Certified, state of the art equipment was provided with the necessary flight engineering expertise. Highly trained professionals ensured necessary health and safety checks. There were medical professionals involved, a mission control, and even scientific summits to discuss the scientific data from the tools on the suit and balloon.
How is this anything like that?
Even circuses have safety regulations that need to be followed. Tethers, harnesses, nets.
Can you please tell me how an employer can legally put people into dangerous situations? What kind of liability contract overrides federal safety laws?
-
The Red Bull Stratos jump was a 30 million dollar project, financed by Red Bull, where they did take responsibility for safety. State of the art equipment was provided, and highly trained professionals ensured necessary health and safety checks. There were medical professionals involved, a mission control, and even scientific summits to discuss the scientific data from the tools on the suit and balloon.
How is this anything like that?
Even circuses have safety regulations that need to be followed. Tethers, harnesses, nets.
Can you please tell me how an employer can legally put people into dangerous situations? What kind of liability contract overrides federal safety laws?
Redbull did and has done a lot more than just the Stratos jump. But if you want to use that as an example, cool. How do you know that Discovery didn't do as Redbull did and took responsibility for safety?
And even so, Felix could have easily died. Due to no fault of those responsible for safety.
At this point, I'm not sure what your point is. We don't know what Discovery did or didn't do and it's a little murky as to what they would be required to do. But for all we know, Discovery could have been all over every aspect of the event and it still went awry.
-
How do you know that Discovery didn't do as Redbull did and took responsibility for safety?
Pay attention to the thread. The assertion made by your camp is that we are responsible. Implicating the TV station is five notches of crazy down from that. The point is to see just how much you lot will double down on your lunacy, and so far you're exceeding expectations.
-
How do you know that Discovery didn't do as Redbull did and took responsibility for safety?
Pay attention to the thread. The assertion made by your camp is that we are responsible. Implicating the TV station is five notches of crazy down from that. The point is to see just how much you lot will double down on your lunacy, and so far you're exceeding expectations.
Not an assertion made by my camp. To say that FET is responsible is laughable at best.
I was merely responding to assertions made around OSHA rules, employer/employee relations, safety and otherwise as well as infotainment/daredevil relations. By disagreeing with the "OSHA argument" does not mean I agree with the "FET is to blame" argument. Learn to parse.
-
The arguments were presented in contrast with one another. You failed to declare that you're responding to the issue out of context. Either you failed to parse, or you failed to present your argument appropriately (and your argument was irrelevant to the thread in the first place).
-
The arguments were presented in contrast with one another. You failed to declare that you're responding to the issue out of context. Either you failed to parse, or you failed to present your argument appropriately (and your argument was irrelevant to the thread in the first place).
Actually, aside from you and the OP, no one, myself included, seemed to partake in this argument you suggest. Maybe you should read back through and gain a little bit more context before you start running off others who were privy. And I don't see how my argument against the "OSHA rules" argument is irrelevant. It's probably the reason why OSHA rules weren't followed.
-
I'm going to ignore OP's inability to write a forum post with any substance, his inability to contain his "erth rund!" shitposting, or to even find the right board for his thread. The subject is important enough to make an exception, and the serious slanderous allegations within the OP deserve some exploration.
Wow, I see you haven't become any less aggressive and hysterical Pete Svarrior. Just to pick you up on a few points:
1) it's quite clear that whether or not his interests in home made rocketry initial stretched to FET, by the time he died, they most definitely did: "He envisions the launch as just one step toward eventually getting himself into space, at which point he plans to take a photograph "to prove once and for all this Earth is flat," he told his interviewer" (source www.npr.org).
2) following point 1), I regarded this misadventure part of an ongoing FET investigation/experiment - thus, I posted it in "investigations".
3) Slander? Oh dear. It is clearly beyond your education to realise the difference between slander (oral defamation) and libel (written word) - which is what I presume you meant? Except that you're wrong about that too. It's an inappropriate use of the term in this instance.
Additionally, what I wrote would never be found to be slanderous since claiming defamation for FET's would be legally dismissed for want of evidence that a flat earth exists. This is a legal argument you would lose - after the judge had stopped sniggering.
Going back to my OP, and given that Mike Hughes patently developed a secondary aim of proving a flat earth, I genuinely think that any FET's that knew him and had an opportunity to advise him had a duty of care to warn him that his ill-advised (FAA UNAPPROVED) "rocket" launches carried an extremely high chance of death - and given he had advertised FET by plastering "FLAT EARTH" over the side of his "rocket" to cause personal injury to himself and obvious damage to the reputation of flat earthers (assuming that's even possible - see above legal info) I suggest there was a duty of care.
To be blunt, if the whole preposterous FET movement didn't make such absurd claims which offered Hughes the perfect opportunity (as he saw it) to combine his conflicted interests in aeronautical engineering with disproving heliocentric physics, perhaps he might not have aimed to get as high as seeing the curve demands and therefore might have tempered his aims.
But as I said in my OP, ultimately, it was his call, and his responsibility. Perhaps if he had had better guidance from friends, colleagues, FET's - and even the film company, he MIGHT still be here.
-
But as I said in my OP, ultimately, it was his call, and his responsibility. Perhaps if he had had better guidance from friends, colleagues, FET's - and even the film company, he MIGHT still be here.
Do you genuinely think that someone brave/crazy enough to build a steam powered rocket and strap himself into it would have listened had someone said "Um, you know fella, that might be a bit dangerous...". I'd be amazed if no-one pointed out to him the potential folly of doing what he did, I'm sure plenty of people did. And he must have known he was taking risks. Ultimately, he's a grown up. If he wanted to do crazy things like this then no-one was going to stop him.
-
Yea I wouldn't place blame on FE'ers just as I wouldn't place blame on regular people when an astronaut dies in an accident. Mike was an adult and I think regardless of what excuse he used to make/ride rockets it was ultimately his choice to do so and he would probably have found another reason/cause if he weren't a flat earther IMO. Obviously I didn't know the guy personally but from what I saw of his character he was doing it for enjoyment.
-
But as I said in my OP, ultimately, it was his call, and his responsibility. Perhaps if he had had better guidance from friends, colleagues, FET's - and even the film company, he MIGHT still be here.
Do you genuinely think that someone brave/crazy enough to build a steam powered rocket and strap himself into it would have listened had someone said "Um, you know fella, that might be a bit dangerous...". I'd be amazed if no-one pointed out to him the potential folly of doing what he did, I'm sure plenty of people did. And he must have known he was taking risks. Ultimately, he's a grown up. If he wanted to do crazy things like this then no-one was going to stop him.
Yes. I agree. As I said quite pointedly. But the ridiculousness of his secondary aim - to photograph a flat earth - was in my opinion a potential conflict of interests for the crazed cultists who believe such nonsense. Were they intentionally or unintentionally "egging him on"?
I'm simply asking that rhetorical question. I propose that many/most FETs would NOT have attempted to dissuade him from risking a high chance of death because it served their agenda for him attempt to get their so-called "proof".
I also propose, that any selfless FET would/should have seen the extreme risk of his actions, and visibly pulled their support from his actions (e.g. Pete Svarrior et al) But they didn't. Nobody "officially" appeared to dissuade him.
And that's the essence of my particular beef.
If FET had publically stated that they do not condone reckless acts such as this, then maybe they could have retained a shred of integrity. But they (and many others) let him carry on regardless.
Do you not think FETs pulling their official/tacit sanctioning of this tragedy would have been the least they could have done.
I think the FET organisation very much should have categorically called this a very bad idea. Maybe this might have made him reconsider. Maybe not. But at least FET humanity might have taken a moral higher ground.
-
Wow, I see you haven't become any less aggressive and hysterical Pete Svarrior
Refrain from further insulting other members in the upper. If you want to talk about how hysterical you find it that I don't appreciate you mocking the dead, especially someone I knew, take it to AR.
1) it's quite clear that whether or not his interests in home made rocketry initial stretched to FET
Indeed, it is quite clear - he was working on the rocket many years before any involvement with FET. To imply that we suddenly became responsible for him when he developed this interest is callous, and defies logic.
I regarded this misadventure part of an ongoing FET investigation/experiment - thus, I posted it in "investigations".
I really don't care what you "regard" things as. Read the "read before posting" threads before posting. If in doubt, ask for help.
3) Slander? Oh dear. It is clearly beyond your education to realise the difference between slander (oral defamation) and libel (written word)
Your obsession with the US legal system is noted, but not all of us are Americans, and not all of us treat online forum conversations as if they were a foreign court of law.
Finally, judging an ESL speaker for using a word in a way you consider is incorrect is stooping pretty low, even for you. This has very little to do with my education, and quite a lot to do with your inability to separate your feelings from the merit of the argument.
Going back to my OP, and given that Mike Hughes patently developed a secondary aim of proving a flat earth
Once again, Mike has made it patently clear that no launch of this height would prove anything about FET.
I genuinely think that any FET's that knew him and had an opportunity to advise him had a duty of care to warn him that his ill-advised (FAA UNAPPROVED) "rocket" launches carried an extremely high chance of death
Yes, and I'm sure the dating site that paid him for advertising had a duty of care, too. After all, he had words on his rocket!
Secondly, as you were already informed, and neglected to take into account, I personally advised him of the risk. Many others did too. It's telling that you wouldn't adapt your views when information contradicting your viewpoint emerges.
Once again, the ethically sensible thing would be to retract and apologise. Not to double down. Think about that in your own time.
-
Wow, I see you haven't become any less aggressive and hysterical Pete Svarrior
Refrain from further insulting other members in the upper. If you want to talk about how hysterical you find it that I don't appreciate you mocking the dead, especially someone I knew, take it to AR.
I went ahead and gave a warning to panicp on this one as I know moderators try to avoid moderating discussions they are engaged in.
I suggest reading the rules if you plan to continue posting in the upper fora, panicp.
-
The man was building a rocket. In his garage. That kinda spells disaster. However, he by all accounts he wasn't even a flat earther, he just slapped the sticker on the side and tried to get donations from flat earthers. He even tried to sue Mark Sargent and Patricia Steere! Mark Sargent was being sued just because of his name, which he claimed as a 'company', showing how the US legal system is bonkers for allowing someone to even file a lawsuit on those grounds. Its sad that he died, but the man knew the risks, and if he was told otherwise, do you think he would have listened?
-
The man was building a rocket. In his garage. That kinda spells disaster. However, he by all accounts he wasn't even a flat earther, he just slapped the sticker on the side and tried to get donations from flat earthers.
Parallex, I posted a link earlier which related to an interview in which he categorically made his ultimate intentions to prove a flat earth about as clear as it is possible to be. Certainly, by his own account, he most certainly became a FET, publically at least.
It's sad that he died, but the man knew the risks, and if he was told otherwise, do you think he would have listened?
It's an absolute tragedy that he was actually allowed to proceed with a launch. Although, I'm quite satisfied in his OWN mind, he thought he knew enough about rockets to be safe. Clearly he was deluded and the fact he "didn't believe in science" should have set alarm bells ringing with everybody - not least the authorities, but his family, friends and FET community.
If he'd set up his rocket in upstate NY, he would have had every 911 service trying to stop him, even section him. In the desert (where he was presumably in largely clear airspace), he had nobody. Just a TV crew who MUST have known this was a suicidal and frankly ridiculous stunt.
I stand by my original post: anyone that knew Mike had a duty of care to TRY to stop him. Hell, in the end, even calling the police advising them somebody was about to (unintentionally) die, might have brought about a better outcome. Nobody did. Why?
His death remains a tragedy which, in my opinion was avoidable.
If Mike had had better counsel (and esp the tacit and vocal support from those who genuinely believed he was able to further their cause) and had someone had the courage to call BS and contact the authorities prior to his launch to advise them of a potential (unwitting) suicide, AND more protection in law (forbidding someone jettisoning themselves to an inevitable death in the desert), he might well have survived.
If he'd tried to jump the grand canyon on a bike, he'd have been refused. How on earth was he allowed to do this?
Yes it was entirely his decision, but some laws exist to protect people from themselves.
Again, RIP Mike Hughes.
-
Yes, publically he was a flat earth believer, however behind the scenes there is a lot of evidence to suggest he wasn't, and just slapped the sticker on because then he gets media attention. He was suing Mark Sargent, Patricia Steere, openly told Globebusters at a flat earth conference (allegedly) that he didn't believe it and was just using people. Now he's dead these lawsuits are too, which means people can say he was suing them without any repercussions. You can believe them or not, that's upto you of course, but it was rumoured for a long time he was never a flat earther and was just using it for publicity and donations.