I got this spammed to my Yahoo account today from my friends back in the U.S. - testament to the combination of speed / power and stupidity.

Don't try this at home kids.


Story:

Witnesses say the cyclist was going faster than 100 miles per hour when he crashed into the back of a semi truck between 81st and 91st Street at about one o'clock Tuesday morning.

Investigators say evidence shows the cyclist was going about 120 miles per hour at the time of the impact. It took the truck driver more than a quarter of a mile to come to a stop. When he did, he stepped out of his rig and found the motorcyclist dead at the back of the truck.

"The truck driver was not hurt," says Captain Matt Kirkland. "He said that the impact was so strong that he thought he was hit from behind by another truck."

Officers said there was no indication that drugs or alcohol played a factor in the accident.

Need somewhere to host the picture files, they are too big to submit here... can't resize the images.


Fixed.
VVVV

~~~

~~~

~~~

~~~

~~~

I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees...

looks like he read that one too often

sounds fake, but good pics none the less.

cool

skyline5k wrote:sounds fake, but good pics none the less.

What ? You think the pictures are photoshopped ?

Seem pretty real to me... even sounds real, dumbass kids in the U.S. with too much time and money on their hands.

Thoughts ?

I don't know, but seems real to me....

If the bike was traveling at 120 and the truck was doing on average 70 / 80... the impact speed of the 'collision' would be around 50 or so.... seems like fairly reasonable crash site image(s).

I'd like to see the other side of the truck though to be sure (left rear).

The bike looks like a GSXR 1000 (I modded one with a buddy of mine that was almost exactly like this make / model) but the tank says: Kawasaki.... I don't know of any Kaw's that are silver like that though ?

His left ankle looks broken, and the skin coloration has a slight blue tint to it so it looks fairly real. I am wondering why there is no blood trail if his feet has been dragging on the concrete rd for a couple of hundred of meters. Maybe his shoes finally fell off as the truck was coming to a stop.

Where did they say this happened?

Idiot.

MoonOverMiami wrote: Where did they say this happened?

It's in the U.S. somewhere, but I can't make out the Ambulance or Police car writing / sign(s).... the truck plate won't matter, b/c of interstate hauling - if I had to guess it's California maybe ? Dunno.

I believe this was a real accident that happened a while ago. Saw it all over the car forums I frequent a few months ago and it was never debunked.

One... Lack of blood trail, as Moon said.

Two... If he were dragged, not only would his sock be just a bit more off, it would probably be shredded. Both his feet would be completely gnarled considering the distance the driver claimed to have traveled before stopping. A quarter of a mile dragged would shred your feet up pretty good.

Three... Google any sentence in the "article" and you won't find a single reference to a real news source. Only forums & such. And one article says 140 mph, and not 120.

Consider it debunked.

it's a case for the shanghai mythbusters.....

skyline5k wrote:One... Lack of blood trail, as Moon said.

Two... If he were dragged, not only would his sock be just a bit more off, it would probably be shredded. Both his feet would be completely gnarled considering the distance the driver claimed to have traveled before stopping. A quarter of a mile dragged would shred your feet up pretty good.

Three... Google any sentence in the "article" and you won't find a single reference to a real news source. Only forums & such. And one article says 140 mph, and not 120.

Consider it debunked.

Turns out it's actually true:

http://www.snopes.com/photos/accident/tulsacrash.asp

I'll be damned. I expected Snopes to pop up on a google search too. Since it didn't...

Consider myself debunked.

skyline5k wrote:I'll be damned. I expected Snopes to pop up on a google search too. Since it didn't...

Consider myself debunked.

Really? Were you just putting in stuff from the "article"?

I just typed in: motorcycle crashes into back of truck, and snopes was the second link down.

Sure. When people used to submit work to me, if it looked suspicious, I'd type in the first sentence into Google, and that would usually reveal that all they did was copy something from the 'net. I could find out where and basically give them hell for plagiarism.

Not too many people are smart enough to rewrite something they want to steal.

skyline5k wrote:Sure. When people used to submit work to me, if it looked suspicious, I'd type in the first sentence into Google, and that would usually reveal that all they did was copy something from the 'net. I could find out where and basically give them hell for plagiarism.

Not too many people are smart enough to rewrite something they want to steal.

Too true. J gives out homework to research countries for his geography class sometimes, and one student just printed out the page from the CIA World Fact Book, and didn't even bother to remove the URL! He had fun embarrassing the kid in class though.

I suppose the problem with doing that for some forwarded articles is they get so mangled along the way that it's hard to match them to the original.

Still scary to know that that guy actually did a horrendous face plant into the back of that truck!

Megs wrote:
Too true. J gives out homework to research countries for his geography class sometimes, and one student just printed out the page from the CIA World Fact Book, and didn't even bother to remove the URL! He had fun embarrassing the kid in class though.

that was always my approach at uni, which is probably why i did not last very long... rather a good copy then a bad innovation...