"In July 2012, a guest received a shock as a result of an indirect lightning strike while visiting the SeaWorld theme park. She was inside the Shark Encounter exhibit when the building was struck by lightning during a thunderstorm. Since the Shark Encounter exhibit is located well within the claimed protection zone of an ESE lightning rod, the Prevectron 2 Millenium S6.60, this incident provides direct evidence that ESE lightning rods are unsuitable for the protection of theme parks and other recreational grounds."
No, it provides anecdotal evidence.
A rigorous study using hypothesis testing will show to some level of certainty that this system does or does not:
provide better protection than just standing in a open field
provide more protection than other systems
provides nothing at all
Of course, finding an entirely independent, unbiased & knowledgeable org. to do this study may be a problem.
No, it provides anecdotal evidence.
A rigorous study using hypothesis testing will show to some level of certainty that this system does or does not:
provide better protection than just standing in a open field
provide more protection than other systems
provides nothing at all
Of course, finding an entirely independent, unbiased & knowledgeable org. to do this study may be a problem.