MythBusters - The Lost Experiments 362
theLorax writes "From Discovery: "If you like the MythBusters here are some videos they just posted of some of the out takes and things that didn't appear on the show. Cola bits (cleaning things with cola), water torture, otter ping pong, live power lines, cement build up and plywood flight."
Here is the interview we did with these guys in December.
Reason (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong, I love watching them, I just prefer to keep that squishy feeling in my heart that they really love us, and the interview they did here helped that along, with this pushing it further.
What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (Score:5, Insightful)
However, what I've been hearing now is that the Discovery Channel is moving away from their specialty programming, more towards content that will appeal to a wider range of people. This change does being a decrease in quality, according to my cousins.
I think I know what they mean. Shows like American Chopper and American HotRod, which I have watched over here in the UK, are more like soap operas than educational, enlightening shows. The two or three minutes of engineering in each episode is overshadowed by 57 minutes of workplace drama and commercials.
While a show like Mythbusters isn't as bad, it still lacks the quality that previous shows on the Discovery Channel had. None of the hosts have much engineering or scientific experience, and it shows. Even watching just one episode, one will hear numerous factually incorrect statements (especially when it comes to chemistry or physics). Perhaps it is entertaining, but educational it is not.
Re:Video summaries. (Score:5, Insightful)
They tested it on Kari... since there's no physical torture (other than being restrained), and they were obviously going to let her go when she had enough, it's not much of an issue showing it on TV.
Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (Score:5, Insightful)
discovery channel can only show whats being produced. if shit is being produced then shit is all they have to air. people seem to think they know exactly what is available for discovery channel to purchase for broadcast. keep in mind that junkyard wars, the program discovery channel fanatics always bring up as an example, (aka scrapheap challenge) was a purely accidental find.
if you know specific programs discovery channel should be airing, tell them.
Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (Score:2, Insightful)
As the latter has been confined to channel 273 (on Comcast) whereas the Discovery Channel is still in the 70's, that should say something about how many people watch programming on both channels.
An "Entertainment" disclaimer? (Score:2, Insightful)
Many people mistakenly think that the MythBusters present the proper way of performing scientific experiment, and that they present verified scientific information. Indeed, watching even a single episode shows that they have very little scientific or engineering background.
Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're arguing that Mythbusters isn't educational, you haven't watched enough episodes. Yes, they make mistakes. So do over half of all peer-reviewed scientists' papers, last I read. But it's still a very educational show, and more importantly, one that gets the watcher thinking instead of passively being entertained.
Even if the show contains a greater proportion of entertainment to education than some might like, I think it educates more than some of the old dry shows, because more people watch them. Just to use some silly math, if a show is 90% educational and is watched by 100K people, let's say it has provided 90K education-people worth of education to the world. If a show is 60% educational and watched by 1M people, it's provided 600K education-people worth of education! How's that for a Mythbusters-style estimate?
Re:Reason (Score:5, Insightful)
Mythbusters is Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (Score:4, Insightful)
With the proliferation of cable / sat TV networks it is increasingly difficult to draw in the ratings needed to pay the bills. 10 years ago Discovery channel didn't have much competition in its niche market. Now on digial cable or satellite service you might have 4 or 5 networks that devote at least part of their programming to somethign appealing to Discovery's core audiance. So The Discovery Channel has to go off and bring in more viewers, and that means shows with broader appeal: ie Mythbusters. It's still science, and still informative (somewhat), but it's mostly about people blowing things up and hurting themselves.
Science (Score:5, Insightful)
The mythbusters discuss the theory of the myth & then generate a hypothesis weather it is plausible or not, then conduct an experiment to find out weather their hypothesis is correct.
What is not science about that???
It may be basic science, but its still science.
From what I have seen it is getting a lot of people interested in science so that has to be good doesn't it.
Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (Score:5, Insightful)
These folks never pretended to be Great Scientists. They can and do, however, come up with clever ways to perform experiments that would otherwise be expensive or dangerous.
They sometimes do the dangerous stuff anyway.
I think it's a superb show. I like the way they often go back and revisit things that people say they got wrong. You know, kinda like scientists are supposed to.
I have an extensive science and engineering background, and I think they do a terrific job. Do they get everything right? No. Who cares?
Re:An "Entertainment" disclaimer? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What do these experiments entail? (Score:5, Insightful)
The cement truck was the most disappointing one in a long time. Everyone who has ever even seen explosives in action knows that you drill a hole in the material (the cemet block in this case) and drop the TNT down the hole before detonating it. They just hung a stick of dynamite above the cemet, and gave up when it didn't do anything.
Before Mythbusters, I've never wanted to reach through my TV and smack people for being so stupid. With Mythbusters, it's a regular occurance. It almost seems like they go out of their way to make their tests complete nonsense.
Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (Score:1, Insightful)
This reminds me of the folks I hear complaining about all the ads before the trailers (i.e. more ads) before the movies (with their product placements, i.e. more ads). If you find it intolerable, don't go. Only when the numbers drop off will the industry stop insulting us with that crap. Remember, when you go to a movie theater, you think you've simply bought the right to see a movie; true, but the more important transaction is that an advertiser has bought the right to assault your senses. *You* are the product. (This is perhaps more true with TV.)
Lordy, I needed to get that off my chest. (Geeks read Adbusters, too.)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What do these experiments entail? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (Score:3, Insightful)
I know I've learned a few things on that show, mostly just bits of trivia such as how emergency elevator brakes are triggered (antique ones at least) but a less knowledgable person such as an elementary school student would learn things like what a Faraday cage is, how lightning works, and why putting a vaccum cleaner motor on your face is a bad idea.
But there is no doubt that sometimes they get things wrong. Once I watched them "disprove" a myth that I know for a fact to be true, which was rather dissapointing.
Re:An "Entertainment" disclaimer? (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, a lot of the time they call in experts. I think that's a pretty good lesson to be teaching people, about both science and life.
Re:a step removed (Score:3, Insightful)
The same day they deal with the myth that C++ is as productive as Java.
Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (Score:3, Insightful)
I find out all sorts of interesting factoids from it, and I am not having my intelligence insulted while I watch it either (like the horrendous English version 'Braniac'... What a completely disgusting show that is. "Let's disguise some random violence and tits as science").
Just because it's not some intensely specialised, narrow focus, boring as hell to most, monotone narrated documentary, does not make it uneducational. Do you equate 'popular' with uneducational do you?
Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think you need to worry. The History Channel will be showing "The Last Days of Hilter" from now until the end of time.
Screw Mr. Wizard (Score:4, Insightful)
Mr. Wizard always bugged me, because it was targeted toward children as actual scientific experiments, but it was really obvious even when I was young that they just took existing facts then had these kids do rigged and generally flawed experiments to demonstrate them.
There was one that I still remember from when I was young where he had a kid test whether vision or hearing was more sensitive. They had the kid match a tone using a generator that had 1000 different tones, and was off by one. Then they had her match a shade of blue out of a range of a hundred cards. Again, she was off by one. Since 1/1000 is more exact than 1/100, obviously hearing was more sensitive.
I got really upset about that one and went huffing off to tell my mother how they didn't use an equivalent sample set or use the same gradation of sound/light frequency between the two experiments (not in so many words, of course). The way Mr Wizard told the kid that the results demonstrated her hearing was more sensitive than her vision really irked me and turned me off the show completely.
At least with the Mythbusters there's that general sense of "Huh, well this seemed to work," and they're open to retesting a theory if people call them on it. Personally I think incorrect conclusions and an open, experimental mindset are better science than established facts and weighted demonstrations. For kids these days, it's easy to look up information, but the inquisitiveness and cleverness in experimentation they demonstrate is a lot more compelling to young minds.
Re:An "Entertainment" disclaimer? (Score:2, Insightful)
The other important thing the Mythbusters do is to get people thinking scientifically. If you watch an episode and think of ways to blow holes in their design, or ways it could have been done more generally, congratulations -- you're thinking like a scientist. You don't need years of meticulous training in an ivory tower to learn how to do science, and saying otherwise is contributing to the already substantial image problem researchers have.
Re:a step removed (Score:3, Insightful)
their IQ is at least a double digit number, which puts them many a step from jackass
Re:Mythbusters is Good (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm going to make some big assumptions about the grandparent poster, but I bet they are someone mired in acedemia. I can see how it would burn up someone like that to see people actually can get meaningful results without all the bullshit that acedemic research entails, and without the cushy welfare money that educational researchers get.
I think mythbusters is better than higher education research in some ways too, because they show you their methodologies in clear terms and not jargon designed to make it inaccessible to most people outside a certain field.
While they are guilty of lots of non-scientific practice, it's easy to see that right away. If some bogus acedemic study comes out, we get stupid headlines based on the study and then a month later someone else writes a journal article challenging the results and methodology. With mythbusters it's all laid out in the open, you get to see how scientific or unscientific they were right from the start.
Re:a step removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Or allow them to blow something up.
Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (Score:2, Insightful)