What do youse guys think of MythBusters

  • Thread starter mynameinc
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation is about the popular television show MythBusters and the use of science in their experiments. The show has become more impressive in recent years by following the scientific method, but some feel that their conclusions are flawed. Examples are given of experiments that could have been improved and limitations of using a crash test dummy. Despite its imperfections, the show is praised for promoting science and skepticism among viewers. However, budget and time limitations are also acknowledged as potential factors affecting the accuracy of their experiments.
  • #71


diazona said:
I imagine they think it's too similar to the time they launched one of the production staff's kids using party balloons. I even remember them running commercials about it... "blah blah blah blah Balloon Boy blah, but did the Mythbusters beat them to it?" (in dramatic announcer voice) Although I have no doubt that if they hadn't already done so, they'd at least be strongly considering testing that hoax on the show after the news broke.
I remember that episode! I forgot how many balloons they had to use.

Well... there are a lot more people who do rigorous testing than there are Mythbusters...
But that doesn't call for the manner in which they currently allocate the emphasis of the show.

P.S. I have no doubt that the Mythbusters' experiments wouldn't hold up under standard scientific peer review, but passing peer review is not their goal. Trying to do so would probably even be counterproductive.
Lol. There would be several months, if not several years, between episodes.

I like these forums. There seem to be less (I've not encountered any!) "I'm right, you're wrong, about everything, no matter what. LALALALALALA" people on here. :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72


TheStatutoryApe said:
... I have never found many people who hate science or scientists any more than there are people who look down upon people in other professions. I find that people tend to dislike those who look down upon them. Many people though may not like to admit that they are not so bright or that the person they dislike for looking down upon them may have reason to look down upon them so they wind up targeting the knowledge and profession rather than the person and sometimes the person as well. Though reading the sorts of things people post here on PF I have no clue why anyone would think that scientists and academics look down upon them. :rolleyes:

I don't know many people who dislike science fiction. You'd think that anyone who hates science and scientists would hate science fiction and have trouble relating to or rooting for a scientist as a protagonist yet I do not see this happen. Most people seem to enjoy even shows about science and engineering so long as they are entertaining and made so that they can understand them. Really I find that if you talk to just about anyone you will find them more than happy to share and explain what ever tidbits of scientific and technological prowess that they possesses (even if it is based on myths).

As far as I can tell the vast majority of people are rather in awe of science and technology. They enjoy it, find it fascinating, wish they understood it, and get excited about things like Mythbusters which make them feel as though it might actually be somewhat accessible for them. ...

Nice post, Ape. :smile:

I should have mentioned that I grew up in an extremely religious (conservative Christian) home. Most of my parents' friends and relatives were being told in church, and amongst themselves, that science is bad. I have a very jaded, and likely stereotypical, view of "the general public." I am now 26 and am finding my experiences are becoming more like what you mention in your post. It's encouraging to see more and more people who think for themselves, and someday I'll get over my pretentious attitude towards those who don't. :wink:

Back on topic -- Mythbusters does well, as you've said, at making science and technology approachable.
 
<h2>What do youse guys think of MythBusters?</h2><p>As a scientist, I find MythBusters to be an entertaining and educational show. I appreciate how they use the scientific method to test and debunk various myths.</p><h2>What is the purpose of MythBusters?</h2><p>The purpose of MythBusters is to test the validity of popular myths and urban legends using scientific methods and experiments.</p><h2>Do scientists approve of MythBusters?</h2><p>Many scientists, including myself, enjoy watching MythBusters and appreciate the use of scientific principles in the show. However, it is important to remember that the show is primarily for entertainment purposes and may not always be completely accurate or representative of real scientific experiments.</p><h2>Has MythBusters ever been wrong?</h2><p>Like any scientific experiment, there is always a possibility of error or unexpected results. MythBusters has had a few instances where their experiments did not go as planned or their conclusions were later proven to be incorrect. However, they have always been transparent about their process and have corrected any mistakes or inaccuracies when brought to their attention.</p><h2>Can MythBusters be considered a reliable source of information?</h2><p>While MythBusters does use scientific methods and principles, it is important to remember that it is a television show and should not be solely relied upon as a source of information. It is always best to consult multiple sources and conduct further research before accepting any information as fact.</p>

What do youse guys think of MythBusters?

As a scientist, I find MythBusters to be an entertaining and educational show. I appreciate how they use the scientific method to test and debunk various myths.

What is the purpose of MythBusters?

The purpose of MythBusters is to test the validity of popular myths and urban legends using scientific methods and experiments.

Do scientists approve of MythBusters?

Many scientists, including myself, enjoy watching MythBusters and appreciate the use of scientific principles in the show. However, it is important to remember that the show is primarily for entertainment purposes and may not always be completely accurate or representative of real scientific experiments.

Has MythBusters ever been wrong?

Like any scientific experiment, there is always a possibility of error or unexpected results. MythBusters has had a few instances where their experiments did not go as planned or their conclusions were later proven to be incorrect. However, they have always been transparent about their process and have corrected any mistakes or inaccuracies when brought to their attention.

Can MythBusters be considered a reliable source of information?

While MythBusters does use scientific methods and principles, it is important to remember that it is a television show and should not be solely relied upon as a source of information. It is always best to consult multiple sources and conduct further research before accepting any information as fact.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
20
Views
8K
Replies
113
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
887
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
858
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
745
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
859
Back
Top