There is physical evidence to support the theory. It's not just pulled out of thin air.<br /><br />-MJ left the hospital 48 hours after a supposed 3rd degree scalp burn which typically requires weeks of hospital stay.<br />-MJ appeared at the Grammy awards ceremony 14 days later with no apparent problem wearing a wig over what appears in the video to be a very large and severely burned area that should have required several extensive reconstructive surgeries (think Dave Dave) to heal.<br />-on the burn video, MJ was attended first once falling to the ground by Miko Brando, MJ's loyal friend, who co-stared with Dave Dave on LKL. Miko seemed to be at the exact right spot at the exact right time, yet he was not supposed to be in the commercial, why was he there?<br />-MJ's hair appeared completely different when compared pre and post burn on the video; pre-burn he has a very tight, heavily gelled afro, post-burn he has a very dry, very full afro. It's almost laughable.<br />-it is possible to light hair on fire even with an accelerant applied (hair gel), using live special effects, without injury to the actor.<br />-the burn occurred on the 9282nd day of MJ's life. With the very next day after the burn being day 1, he died the 9282nd day later.<br />-most importantly, as a jump off point for his career, the burn incident generated a great deal of media attention and resulting fame for MJ.<br />-the burn incident generated a huge donation to a children's hospital<-- 'It's All For Love'.<br />-the burn directly led to the verified media hoax in which MJ was photographed inside a hyperbaric chamber.<br />-the burn allowed a perfect explanation for the foundation of MJ's alleged drug addiction.<br />-Klein spoke to the media at length about surgeries MJ incurred as a result of the alleged burn, which violates HIPPA laws but only if what he said is true. If it's a hoax it doesn't violate anything. Klein has not been cited.<br /><br />I pulled all that directly off the top of my head. I have extensive notes on this I haven't reviewed in months. There is more, including some pretty damning photographs, but there's another thread for that.
@Gina, I posted 3 pieces of evidence relating to the video itself.<br /><br />
-on the burn video, MJ was attended first once falling to the ground by Miko Brando, MJ's loyal friend, who co-stared with Dave Dave on LKL. Miko seemed to be at the exact right spot at the exact right time, yet he was not supposed to be in the commercial, why was he there?<br />-MJ's hair appeared completely different when compared pre and post burn on the video; pre-burn he has a very tight, heavily gelled afro, post-burn he has a very dry, very full afro. It's almost laughable.<br />-it is possible to light hair on fire even with an accelerant applied (hair gel), using live special effects, without injury to the actor.
<br /><br />As far as what we saw on the video, I believe, after viewing the video dozens of times, that MJ put on a "burned scalp" head piece when he dropped to the ground. Miko being right there would have provided him with the cover to do this. Miko himself said he placed something over MJ's head (forget what, was it a towel? Like in coroner van video? lol) to "put out the fire" and that was a mistake because it stuck to the wound. Someone else said MJ's hands went to his head when he dropped to ground. Natural reaction perhaps, sure, or was it a slick magician's light of hand trick to *quick* put on the head piece? Either way, it could be done, even in front of a live audience like that. Watch the video again, perhaps you'll see what I mean. The hair looks quite fake.<br /><br />New possible supporting evidence in this week's news:<br /><br />
Larry D. Woodard, an ABC News columnist, and CEO and president of Graham Stanley Advertising, called the campaign "innovative."<br />"Pepsi and Frank Cooper [its chief marketing officer of global consumer engagement] are not afraid to try new things," he said. "He's not afraid to try new and broad and big and bold strategies."
<br />Pepsi Announces Michael Jackson Ad Campaign | ABC News Blogs - Yahoo! News<br /><br />I don't know if someone at Pepsi knew about the hoax or not back in 1983, the quote in this article simply caught my eye.<br /><br />There's a reason this video was "leaked" in July of 2009. Our attention was drawn to this incident very early on in a very very BIG way. Obviously it's important for some reason or another.
<br /><br />I pulled all that directly off the top of my head.<br />
<br /><br /> :LolLolLolLol: I love your choice of words here Bec! :icon_rr:<br /><br />EDIT: I'm depressed now - went to TMZ to re-watch the video and stupidly started reading the comments. It's horrible to see people so judgemental, opinionated and full of hate.
Lol @curls, I didn't catch that for a second.<br /><br />One more thing, in that Pepsi video, we never actually see MJ's hair on fire. There is only smoke. Is "on fire" an ASSumption fed by a suggestion? In the videos I reviewed of people setting their hair on fire as a joke/stunt, there is no smoke, only flames. On MJ's head, where would the smoke come from?<br /><br />This theory cannot be casually dismissed. It continues to strengthen as time passes if you look at the evidence critically and, most importantly, wipe clean any emotional reactions and consider critically the witness statements. As far as those witnesses, what is their motive, bias, and track record of behavior? If they have acted in a manner which is contradictory, you must consider their testimony as questionable. <br /><br />Again, you can link the presence of smoke with the actualization of fire and draw a logical conclusion of burn just because that's what "they" said... or you can filter out all of that hearsay and look at the video critically with your own eyes backed up with a direct pathway to your brain, unencumbered by suggestion and propaganda to decipher what the truth is.
Another little thing to support the pepsi fire hoax - the footage was released 21 days (including end date) after June 25...on July 15th....and it was MJ alone who was reported to have had this footage.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. It's also about your perspective. I don't see things like the way you see. To me Michael's hair doesn't look like a fake and the incident looks so real as well. The pain in his eyes was so real when they were taking him to the hospital. I don't believe Michael's entire life is a lie created by him. And the things I read till now about this "accident" being a fake, didn't change my mind about it as they don't make any sense to me. I understand that we try to prove that our opinion is the truth but I don't think that we need to push it so hard, if you know what I'm saying ...
<br />To converse is not to push unless you are unsure about your own perception of events.<br />
<br /><br />I'm 1500% sure of my perception of events bec, no worries. :icon_e_wink: It just makes me feel like the person who insists about his/her opinion, is just repeating himself/herself with the same things and there's no need for that. That's what I was trying to say. I respect your opinion of course, and conversing is all so good but at some point it starts to be pushy. It's like "I see it this way, why don't you see it too?"
<br />Everyone is entitled to their opinion. It's also about your perspective. I don't see things like the way you see. To me Michael's hair doesn't look like a fake and the incident looks so real as well. The pain in his eyes was so real when they were taking him to the hospital. I don't believe Michael's entire life is a lie created by him. And the things I read till now about this "accident" being a fake, didn't change my mind about it as they don't make any sense to me. I understand that we try to prove that our opinion is the truth but I don't think that we need to push it so hard, if you know what I'm saying ... <br />
<br /><br />I agree with PureLove that the incident was real. There are some pictures on the internet that show Michael in hospital after the burn incident. He looks ill and therefore I do not wish to post them here out of respect.
<br />To converse is not to push unless you are unsure about your own perception of events.<br />
<br /><br />I'm 1500% sure of my perception of events bec, no worries. :icon_e_wink: It just makes me feel like the person who insists about his/her opinion, is just repeating himself/herself with the same things and there's no need for that. That's what I was trying to say. I respect your opinion of course, and conversing is all so good but at some point it starts to be pushy. It's like "I see it this way, why don't you see it too?" <br />
<br /><br />You enjoy conversation, do you not?<br /><br />Why is my presentation of this theory threatening to your perception of reality?<br /><br />If you feel it is pushy, then you may chose to not read what I have written. I am not prying open your eyeballs and thrusting the printed words under your nose.<br /><br />Choices.<br /><br />Perception.<br /><br />I have gathered solid evidence to support the theory. You can refute it if you like, but simply being uncomfortable about it is not proof of anything.
I watched the video again. <br />To me Mike's pain looks genuine and also his surprise of what was going on. He looked confused right after the accident. But from what I've been reading, he regained his lucidity soon after, in the ambulance, when he asked for the glove, in order to be photographed with the glove, for the press.<br />What I do think it could be a hoax is the severity of the burns. I for one (I might be wrong) do not believe that short moment could have created 3 degree burns. I mean the fire was stopped right away. Again, maybe I am wrong but this is my impression. <br />It is possible that MJ exaggerated it a little. I also think he used the moment to "victimize" himself and to make the press believe he became addicted to pain killers.<br /><br />You guys burned yourselves? I did, it is very painful for the first 2-3 hours but it passes. The difference is I didn't get burned on a big area like Mike did. Maybe he really needed so much pain killer but ...I still think it was exaggerated. Well, I might be wrong.<br />
@Bec.... you are blowing my mind, I don't know if the Pepsi burn was real or fake but there are three aspects that don't add on in this story:<br /><br />1st: Why did the burn on Michael's hair draw a perfect circle without hair??<br /><br />2nd: Why is Michael wearing his famous sparkly glove (famous MJ's cliché) outside the sheets while he is being transported on the stretcher to the hospital??<br /><br />3rd: Why would MJ's State want to make a deal with Pepsi, If MJ got injured at Pepsi's commercial taping caused by the fire which was so close to him?? :affraid:
<br />Hmmn. A deal with the devil? I'd say yes considering there are 12 to 15 teaspoons of sugar in one of these cans. It can clean a penny if soaked in it. What is that going to do to a person's insides? :icon_e_confused: <br />
<br />bright side if you are collecting them you are not drinking the content :penguin:
<br />Hmmn. A deal with the devil? I'd say yes considering there are 12 to 15 teaspoons of sugar in one of these cans. It can clean a penny if soaked in it. What is that going to do to a person's insides? :icon_e_confused: <br />
<br /><br />Let alone Pepsi uses aborted fetuses in their "taste receptor tests". Even though there are many other natual ingredients they can use to test receptors in humans on what makes the person "like the taste of pepsi:". They are in lawsuits all the time over the use of aborted fetuses...yes aborted fetuses!
<br />Lol @curls, I didn't catch that for a second.<br /><br />One more thing, in that Pepsi video, we never actually see MJ's hair on fire. There is only smoke. Is "on fire" an ASSumption fed by a suggestion? In the videos I reviewed of people setting their hair on fire as a joke/stunt, there is no smoke, only flames. On MJ's head, where would the smoke come from?<br />
<br /><br /><br />There is a flame and it is getting larger and feeding off the hair (or wig). <br />The amount of smoke during the spin however is not explainable to me other than the hair (or other smoke developing medium) burned.<br /><br />Michael Jackson Pepsi Ad Accident 1984 (July 16, 2009) - YouTube<br /><br /><br /> In order to extinguish a fire, one has to block oxygen supply (like with a fire blanket). The spin was thought to have a similar effect like blowing out a candle.<br /><br /><br />This hairdresser uses fire and there is a flame and some smoke.<br /><br />Burning Hair - YouTube<br /><br /><br />Youngster prank videos on youtube where the prank went wrong (probably using barbecue gelled paste or liquid) show mostly some smoke and the persons were left with burns afterwards.<br /><br />The videos showing illusion flames do not show any smoke - therefore it is not the hair burning but only the professional liquid or gelled paste applied to it.
I have recieved burns A LOT of burns over my 14 years, mostly 2nd degree but on the top of my left leg I have a huge burn/scar over my leg (kids never play with fire) from when I was about 6 (can't wear bikinis :over-react-smiley: :icon_e_biggrin:) but anyways it HELL HURTS, I immediately fell over on my back, all I can remember is seeing my skin peeling off and freaking out but long story short I was in hospital for a month I don't know how MJ got out in 2 days, BUT the pain he is in does look real to me
<br />Everyone is entitled to their opinion. It's also about your perspective. I don't see things like the way you see. To me Michael's hair doesn't look like a fake and the incident looks so real as well. The pain in his eyes was so real when they were taking him to the hospital. I don't believe Michael's entire life is a lie created by him. And the things I read till now about this "accident" being a fake, didn't change my mind about it as they don't make any sense to me. I understand that we try to prove that our opinion is the truth but I don't think that we need to push it so hard, if you know what I'm saying ... <br />
<br /><br />I agree with PureLove that the incident was real. There are some pictures on the internet that show Michael in hospital after the burn incident. He looks ill and therefore I do not wish to post them here out of respect.<br />
<br /><br />I revised the video ... :icon_cry: :icon_cry: I agree totally with you
I believe Michael’s hair and scalp was burned. Never thought that was a hoax. It is always covered now with wigs and pieces. Before then, he didn’t have to wear either. I don’t believe that Michael would wear them just for show. His hair was beautiful and it had to be psychologically depressing to lose it like that. To me, that was tragic, but not out of the norm for all the other tragedies that seemed to follow him. Vitiligo. lupus and Joe being the major ones.
@Katie2: I'm sorry to hear about your burning accident. Thank you for your courage to share this. :bearhug:<br /><br />In "Moonwalk" Michael wrote that he had 3rd-degree burns on the back of his head and that the doctors had told him it was a miracle that he was alive. It must have hurt terribly :icon_e_sad: Michael could have sued Pepsi and they knew that, but Michael didn't and he donated the money, which he received from Pepsi, to The Michael Jackson Burn Center. :smiley_abuv: The Pepsi crew didn't even check on Michael after the accident because they were too scared of being sued and the negative commercial consequences :icon_evil:<br /><br />quote SweetsunsetwithMJ:<br />
2nd: Why is Michael wearing his famous sparkly glove (famous MJ's cliché) outside the sheets while he is being transported on the stretcher to the hospital??<br />
I read in "Moonwalk" that after the Pepsi accident when he arrived at the hospital inspite of suffering from a terrible pain and being in a shock, he asked for his glove because he was told there were news crews outside. So there's a famous shot of Michael waving from the stretcher with his glove on. <br /><br />
@Everlasting... thank you for clarifying me the glove issue.<br /><br />It must have been terrible for Michael to go through that awful experience, I wish it never happened, I'll tell you the truth I am confused about it and I feel very very sad when I hear something that hurted Michael.
Thank, Grace for at least posing a credible argument.<br /><br />
on 1336336363:
<br />
on 1336315207:
<br />Lol @curls, I didn't catch that for a second.<br /><br />One more thing, in that Pepsi video, we never actually see MJ's hair on fire. There is only smoke. Is "on fire" an ASSumption fed by a suggestion? In the videos I reviewed of people setting their hair on fire as a joke/stunt, there is no smoke, only flames. On MJ's head, where would the smoke come from?<br />
<br /><br /><br />There is a flame and it is getting larger and feeding off the hair (or wig). <br />The amount of smoke during the spin however is not explainable to me other than the hair (or other smoke developing medium) burned.<br /><br />Michael Jackson Pepsi Ad Accident 1984 (July 16, 2009) - YouTube<br /><br /><br /> In order to extinguish a fire, one has to block oxygen supply (like with a fire blanket). The spin was thought to have a similar effect like blowing out a candle.<br /><br /><br />This hairdresser uses fire and there is a flame and some smoke.<br /><br />Burning Hair - YouTube<br /><br /><br />Youngster prank videos on youtube where the prank went wrong (probably using barbecue gelled paste or liquid) show mostly some smoke and the persons were left with burns afterwards.<br /><br />The videos showing illusion flames do not show any smoke - therefore it is not the hair burning but only the professional liquid or gelled paste applied to it.<br />
<br /><br />To address your points, <br /><br />I didn't see the flame in the Pepsi footage, perhaps I missed it.<br /><br />I was referencing amateur YouTube videos, for hair on fire, you know the type: some dumb guy showing off for his friends. I looked at 3 comparable videos, all three subjects had their hair on fire for as long as, or many seconds longer then, MJ in the Pepsi footage. All three used an accelerant. So I am confident that it is possible to have your hair lit on fire for that length of time and walk away unscathed.<br /><br />Just a note: I didn't actually review professional pyrotechnics footage, because I thought it common knowledge this is possible. <br /><br />Three possible scenarios to an alleged hair on fire prank:<br /><br />-MJ's hair was truly lit on fire but a pyrotechnics gel was used in his hair to shield him from harm (1983 technology of course).<br /><br />-MJ's hair never was actually on fire, only a smoke bomb devise was activated.<br /><br />-Some combination of the above.
There are definitely flames. As MJ is going down the stairs they are licking round his whole head - it's only when he does the spin, at the bottom of the stairs, that we see all the smoke, then he drops to the ground and is surrounded.<br /><br />I'm still on the fence about this whole episode, and believe me the last thing I want is to be disrespectful if it WAS genuine BUT ..... those flames remind me of my Christmas pudding alight with brandy - and what happens there is flicker flicker flicker, flames go out, and no burnt pudding.<br /><br />
Comments