- #36
Cyrus
- 3,238
- 16
first they try to recreate the myth
Yeah exactly. So you tell me, if they can’t reproduce it time and time again, but 'in theory' it should be able to be done, how is that achieving the myth, gimme a breakkkkkkkkkkk.
first they try to recreate the myth
and those myths are busted. but there are a couple that I don't think they busted, they simply showed they couldn't do them. Their experiments were flawed or they didn't explore all the possibilities.Pengwuino said:Yah but when they do it "by any means possible", that means the myth isn't correct!
Sorry it was hurting my eyes.cyrusabdollahi said:http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/view?&h=240&w=320&type=msmedia&rurl=www.eng.uah.edu%2F%7Efrederic%2FBuffer&vurl=www.eng.uah.edu%2F%7Efrederic%2FBuffer%2Fbottle%2520rocket.wmv&back=p%3Dbottle%2Brocket%26ei%3DUTF-8%26fr%3Dslv1-&turl=re2.mm-so.yimg.com%2Fimage%2F1849296965&name=<b>bottle%20rocket</b>.wmv&no=1&tt=143&p=bottle+rocket&size=1.9MB&dur=68
that looks fake as hell if you ask me.
myths like the ones on the show where they can come up with experiments to prove or disprove them have some possiblity to them or what's the point of setting up an experiment. The ones that are flat out impossible wouldn't become wide spread. There has to be a kernal of truth or possible truth in themPengwuino said:That's not true at all.
tribdog said:and those myths are busted. but there are a couple that I don't think they busted, they simply showed they couldn't do them. Their experiments were flawed or they didn't explore all the possibilities.
Entertainment and/or ratings. It seems to me if they wanted to more seriously bust myths than just provide entertaining stunts for the viewers, they'd be consulting experts on each project. With zooby's example, they should have consulted an archer, or even someone who sells arrows, about the choices of material available for both shaft and arrowhead. You're not going to use the same types of arrow to show off tricks on a target as you'll use to go deer hunting or for a novice to practice with.DaveC426913 said:I've had the same discussion in my house. What IS the philosphy of the show?
Definitely.cyrusabdollahi said:http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/view?&h=240&w=320&type=msmedia&rurl=www.eng.uah.edu%2F%7Efrederic%2FBuffer&vurl=www.eng.uah.edu%2F%7Efrederic%2FBuffer%2Fbottle%2520rocket.wmv&back=p%3Dbottle%2Brocket%26ei%3DUTF-8%26fr%3Dslv1-&turl=re2.mm-so.yimg.com%2Fimage%2F1849296965&name=<b>bottle%20rocket</b>.wmv&no=1&tt=143&p=bottle+rocket&size=1.9MB&dur=68"
that looks fake as hell if you ask me.
Then he can be retrieved by boat and untied.
Uh, well, yes. I mean secondary to that.Moonbear said:Entertainment and/or ratings.
tribdog said:you want examples:
off the top of my head they say you can't die by peeing on the third rail. I've peed on an electric fence and got shocked so I know they are wrong
the water bottle rockets obviously have enough power, they just couldn't get them all to fire at the same time so they said it couldn't be done.
Coming from someone who has to endure the countless of idiotic e-mails my mother insists on forwarding me...I would hope there is a core belief in that show's producers to hopefully educate part of the populace out there enough to realize that 99% of the stuff they see out there is BS.DaveC426913 said:Uh, well, yes. I mean secondary to that.
I'll modify the ? to say: how do they rationalize what they're doing?