> I'll grant that it may be the writer's slant that made the article 
> that way,
> but the comparison between holding the phone, and holding a two-iron 
> was
> made, in the sense of attracting lightning.

> That's what people will pay attention to.

It may (or may not) even be that there is a closer link than is 
initially obvious. Quite possibly not, but it's useful to at least 
keep a thought open in the back of one's brain about such unknowns. It 
may be that some of the circumstances which. in the past, people have 
deemed made it more likely to cause you to be struck by lightning, 
rather were causes of increased probability of mortality or severe 
injury when a strike did occur. If they are right that an 
'unaugmented'  person tends to suffer flash burns rather than 
penetration *(and they may not be right) then anything that attracted 
penetration is more likely to attract subsequent notice. It may be 
that eg a 2 iron increases mortality rather than lightning strike 
rate.


        RM

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist