Lightning strikes Vatican After Pope Resignation

NetPen

Scholar
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
71
http://news.uk.msn.com/blog/trending-blogpost.aspx?post=9b41f8c0-6434-42c6-8112-ac16a6f40891&_nwpt=1

Several questions that I have are:
How often does lightning occur over the Vatican City?
And
Is the top of that building made out of any particular materials, let's say metal, to make it more susceptible to lightning strikes? In which case, were there any weather reports of any electrical current buildups, or whatever it's called, during or before the day when the Pope resigned?

Posts and comments are appreciated
 
Can't wait for the Onion headline:

"Lightning strikes house moments after Eddie had a wonderful nap"
 
I was not aware that lightning struck the Vatican the day the pope said nope to being pope. It is certainly an odd coincidence. It would be very interesting to know if lightning hitting the Vatican is a common occurrence. It would be astounding if the last time that happened was approximately 600 years ago. Which would make it the last time a pope quite.

I was baptised Catholic when I was a child but I do not follow it today. Even so, it did bother me somewhat when the cardinals elected Ratzinger ( the pope who said nope) as he was a member of the Nazi youth during world war 2. He said he was obligated to and that all children in Germany at that time had to be Nazi youth, but that sounds to me a lot like the "I was just following orders" excuse that didn't excuse Nazi war criminals for their actions during the trials that occrued after the war.

I am not a religious man, but to me, it shows just how false the papacy is if they could elect someone tainted with anything to do with the Nazis. How can anyone believe that such a man is the representative of God on this earth?
 
well, in his defense, if you were a kid, you either went in Nazi Youth, or your family didn't get the same rations as everyone else, and you might get harassed and all sorts of bad things.
 
I was not aware that lightning struck the Vatican the day the pope said nope to being pope. It is certainly an odd coincidence. It would be very interesting to know if lightning hitting the Vatican is a common occurrence. It would be astounding if the last time that happened was approximately 600 years ago. Which would make it the last time a pope quite.

I was baptised Catholic when I was a child but I do not follow it today. Even so, it did bother me somewhat when the cardinals elected Ratzinger ( the pope who said nope) as he was a member of the Nazi youth during world war 2. He said he was obligated to and that all children in Germany at that time had to be Nazi youth, but that sounds to me a lot like the "I was just following orders" excuse that didn't excuse Nazi war criminals for their actions during the trials that occrued after the war.

I am not a religious man, but to me, it shows just how false the papacy is if they could elect someone tainted with anything to do with the Nazis. How can anyone believe that such a man is the representative of God on this earth?

BBM.

It sounds to me like the truth. Membership of the Hitler Youth was legally mandated from 1935 onwards, and I think its a bit silly to compare a 14 year old boy living under a totalitarian regime to a Nazi war criminal. Of all the criticisms that could be made of Ratzinger, that one doesn't hold up to any kind of scrutiny.
 
"Nazi"pope

I could be wrong, but I think that he has a fairly good record as a young man.
Wasn't he involved with rescuing concentration camp survivors etc.

As to membership in the awful Hitler Youth, that wasn't optional.
Working in a concentration camp,however, was.
 
Last edited:
Someone here mentioned that there was a lightning rod installed on top of the Vatican, is that true? Also, how good are we (as a collective) in predicting the chances of lightining or thunderstorms and from how far back in time can we make such a prediction?
 
Someone here mentioned that there was a lightning rod installed on top of the Vatican, is that true? Also, how good are we (as a collective) in predicting the chances of lightining or thunderstorms and from how far back in time can we make such a prediction?

We can't predict things that have already happened.

I have never seen a church steeple or tall building without a lightening rod. I am sure the vatican gets struck on a regular basis.
 
We can't predict things that have already happened.

I have never seen a church steeple or tall building without a lightening rod. I am sure the vatican gets struck on a regular basis.

That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about weather predictions and all that. How accurate can we be on predicting thunderstorms at a X% of occurrence within an Y number of days?
 
Almighty Thor is angry...or happy.

Hard to tell.

Reminds me of an episode of "Drawn Together":

Capt. Hero: Lord, what should I do? Give me a sign!

(A fiery ram-beast crashes through a window and runs through the room, exiting the other side.)

Capt. Hero: OK...now tell me what it means!
 
That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about weather predictions and all that. How accurate can we be on predicting thunderstorms at a X% of occurrence within an Y number of days?

How far back does the study of weather, or meteorology, go? I am not certain but you should be able to google that. I am sure that the forecasting, not predicting, of weather has improved greatly since the early days of the science.

I am not sure what your point is with this line of thinking as forecasting thunderstorms does not tell you exactly where lightning will strike. What we do know is that lightning is a natural and common occurrence that happens thousands of times every day.

The vatican fairly dominates it's surroundings and is probably struck several times a year.
 
It was struck a few hours later? What took the diety so long? Why lightning? If you want to express displeasure, give us an earthquake, a volcano AND lightning. Then we would get it.
 
It was struck a few hours later? What took the diety so long? Why lightning? If you want to express displeasure, give us an earthquake, a volcano AND lightning. Then we would get it.

And if you want to make a point, why not have thelightning do something that it would not do naturally? I'd be more impressed if it missed the lightning rod, the steeple, and the roof, weaved between buildings, and hit the ground just in front of the doors.

I mean, this is like claiming your rain dance works, but only when it's stormy.
 
Tall building with lightning rod in 'struck by lightning' shock. In other weather news-: Rain reported to be 'wet'.
 
What on earth would be the message anyway? Does the lightning mean he is happy about this? Sad? angry?
 
And how large a window of time before during and after the announcement does the lightning strike count as meaningful? If it hit a week later, would people still be amazed?
 
And how large a window of time before during and after the announcement does the lightning strike count as meaningful? If it hit a week later, would people still be amazed?

The only way I would be amazed is if the lightning never stopped hitting the dome.
 
At the risk of bringing the MonkeyWrath down on this thread, here's a Troi quote...

LIKO: I have no choice. I must do as the Picard wishes.
TROI: Are you sure you know what he wants? That's the problem with believing in a supernatural being. Trying to determine what he wants.
 
How far back does the study of weather, or meteorology, go? I am not certain but you should be able to google that. I am sure that the forecasting, not predicting, of weather has improved greatly since the early days of the science.

I am not sure what your point is with this line of thinking as forecasting thunderstorms does not tell you exactly where lightning will strike. What we do know is that lightning is a natural and common occurrence that happens thousands of times every day.

The vatican fairly dominates it's surroundings and is probably struck several times a year.

That's the word that I was thinking about. Sorry for any confusion.

What on earth would be the message anyway? Does the lightning mean he is happy about this? Sad? angry?

And that's another major problem with omens in general.
 
Last edited:
What on earth would be the message anyway? Does the lightning mean he is happy about this? Sad? angry?
Horny. Lightning is God's money shot.

Yes, I know lightning happens millions of times a week--that's why he's God.
 
I was not aware that lightning struck the Vatican the day the pope said nope to being pope. It is certainly an odd coincidence. It would be very interesting to know if lightning hitting the Vatican is a common occurrence. It would be astounding if the last time that happened was approximately 600 years ago. Which would make it the last time a pope quite.

I was baptised Catholic when I was a child but I do not follow it today. Even so, it did bother me somewhat when the cardinals elected Ratzinger ( the pope who said nope) as he was a member of the Nazi youth during world war 2. He said he was obligated to and that all children in Germany at that time had to be Nazi youth, but that sounds to me a lot like the "I was just following orders" excuse that didn't excuse Nazi war criminals for their actions during the trials that occrued after the war.

I am not a religious man, but to me, it shows just how false the papacy is if they could elect someone tainted with anything to do with the Nazis. How can anyone believe that such a man is the representative of God on this earth?

The pope was a mope?
 
It was struck a few hours later? What took the diety so long? Why lightning? If you want to express displeasure, give us an earthquake, a volcano AND lightning. Then we would get it.

Better aim would help.
 
BBM.

It sounds to me like the truth. Membership of the Hitler Youth was legally mandated from 1935 onwards, and I think its a bit silly to compare a 14 year old boy living under a totalitarian regime to a Nazi war criminal. Of all the criticisms that could be made of Ratzinger, that one doesn't hold up to any kind of scrutiny.

His infallible years were ahead of him.
 
"We have carried out a theoretical calculation for a building like St Peter's Basilica. The outcome is that - compared to a tolerable risk level of one in 100,000 (in any one year) - we have actually come out with a risk of one in 112. That is pretty high."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21630874
 

Back
Top Bottom