Slashdot Mirror
Ask The Mythbusters
Who are the Mythbusters? Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman are the hosts of a unique and popular television show on the Discovery cable channel. Working from a background in the special effects industry and shooting on location at effects warehouse M5 Industries, Jamie and Adam attempt to shed light on hearsay, rumour, and myth. Along the way they usually run across a little bit of science, too. Today, you have a chance to put questions to them. We'll take the 15 best questions and pass them on to the gentlemen to be answered sometime soon after the Thanksgiving holiday. One question per comment, please, and keep things topical. We'll post their responses as soon as we get them back, so ask away.
Lets start simple -
What is your favorite Busted Myth and your favorite Confirmed one?
Have you ever been completely blown away by what you've found? Has there been an experiment where you two just sit back and say "Huh...who woulda thought?" Most of the myths are pretty easy to debunk, but I'm just curious as to whether or not there was actually one that you guys did that totally shocked you in being true.
With an unlimited budget, what "myth" would you most like to test? How about using 1960s technology to try and land on the moon?
What Myths have you tested that have never made it on the show? What about them made you and the producers decide they didn't qualify to go on the air?
My new title at the office is "Vice-President of Everything Else"
What has been your most challenging myth to bust? And is there a particular myth you feel would be a challenging one to try taking on?
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
What is the worst injury anyone sustained while trying to bust a myth?
Like Sweepstakes? Try out my service @ http://www.yourpowersweeps.com -- Free 21 day trial, no cc needed.
Can you please get rid of the build team segments? These segments are annoying and I fast forward throught them anyway. I would really enjoy more actual show. Thanks!
Have you all figured out yet that a Robin Hood (two arrows impacting the same spot) is actually possible? disgruntled archer.
--- Location Unknown
What myth would the Mythbusters most like to investigate but lack the means to do so?
I heard that an F1 racing car has enough downdraft to drive upside down at speed. True or false?
When I watch your show, it's obvious that there is a lot of fun going on. Who wouldn't like blowing up, breaking down, stinking up, falling down, and all-around destroying everything?
For those of us not of TV-land.. how long does it take for you guys to produce an average episode.. how much of it is fun vs time spent working on getting it right?
Would you consider a contest to have a guest helper? (Not that I am plugging this potential guest helper at all.. no!).
(1st sig) If this were a snappy sig, you'd be reading it right now. (2nd sig) I'm a karma whore. >Insert FUD here
Was there ever a myth you guys created be it intentional or by accident. As such, have others had to debunk this myth?
Life is not for the lazy.
Similar to a stunt in a famous James Bond film, can a person really be shot out of a submarine torpedo tube?
- Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
Did you guys come up with the idea for the show or was it presented to you? If you came up with it yourself, how?
What is the most you can spend on one myth? What is the most spent so far on one myth? Thanks, and awesome show
Ubuntu- Linux for human beings.
What was the pitch process like for the show and what myths did you propose to sell the TV execs on it?
Of all of the myths you have busted, has any one in particular stood out as changing the way much of the public thinks?
QUESTION: Is it possible to create batteries out of coconuts like in all those episodes of Gilligan's Island?
Could you take on some computer myths? Like whether or not it was ever possible for a virus to destroy old monitors? It was rumored that if a virus could change the refresh rates to a too low or too high setting, you could fry some of the internal circuitry.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
How would you address the critique that you excessively extrapolate from a single data point to a generality?
In particular I refer to a show where you were examining fuel mileage on SUVs with windows open vs. air conditioning. As an engineer, I believe that you failed to conduct adequate experimentation to demonstrate anything other than results at a single data point and you didn't make that clear to your viewers.
-- Improve Windows - Buy a Mac!
I've been a fan since your first season, and in that time, you've covered quite a few of the big, classic myths and legends. Are you ever concerned that you'll "use up" all the best source material, sort of running out of steam as it were? or is the internet such a fertile ground for kooks and bad jokes that you figure you can go on indefinitely (or at least until you accidentally cause the spontaneous destruction of the universe while trying to prove a theory about the second gunman in the Grassy Knoll)
The Digital Sorceress
Let me firstly say that I like your show as entertainment. However, I do not like it as a form of true skepticism or as science. What you do is fun and interesting, but it is not rigorous. I'm thinking particularly of the time you tried to flip a taxi with a jet engine, which failed on your show, but which actually happened in real life. So it's not obvious that a failure on your show means anything.
My question is this: are you taking yourselves too seriously as "myth busters"? (And a suggestion: why not let a physics prof supervise some of your stunts?)
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Hey guys, love the show. I was wondering why you have not tackled the "Blasting Zone" myth. You know, were you are asked to turn off 2-way radio equipment and Cell Phones when passing through a "Blasting Zone". I ask this because several years ago there was an accidental blast in my home town and many speculated on the radio that it was caused by RF from a cellphone. Several of us amateur radio operators kind of laughed at that because there are few guys that supposedly tried to set off a blasting cap with radios, just to see if it could be done. They went so far as to even wire the blasting cap into a 100 watt VHF (low band ~50Mhz) radio's antenna jack. Nope it didn't go off. Using inverse square law, it seems very unlikely that a cellphone or 2-way radio could set off a blasting cap at any distance.
--fatboy
Have you attempted to create any myths of your own?
There is a myth that myths/new words can be created and propagated very easily, such as the famous myth relating to the Dublin origins of the word "Quiz" - similar to memes such as "All your Base" -though you tend to prefer big explosion myths (and I know why!)
So - why not see if you can create a myth (that involves explosions, and bust your own myth, and then confirm the myth of being able to create myths?!
This comment was written with the intention to opt out of advertising.
What sort of budget limits do you guys have for your show these days? I remember seeing some earlier episodes where money really seemed to be an issue (spending an extra $700 on helium for the weather baloon lawn chair seemed to cause some concern). Whereas these days you guys seem to have no problem blowing up cement trucks or catapulting a boom lift.
As a corollary: Which experiment(s) ran rediculously over budget, and which one was surpirisingly cheap to pull off?
Hey guys, great show! Just wondering, what's are the best and worst aspects of moving from behind the scenes to in front of the lens?
What is the most tedious part of busting myths? I'm sure alot of the fun and games gets on camera, but what are we not seeing and why is it still important?
Have there been any myths that were either too expensive or dangerous that you just would not do?
I agree. Actually, I'm surprised this thread hasn't been overwhelmed with drooling over this very subject. In a related but more serious note: I've noticed that Kari seems to get more and more screen time; disproportionately so. Is there a concerted effort to boost her involvement (and no one is questioning her skill or usefulness) as a way to appeal to fans who, well, want to know her (in the Biblical sense)?
Even with my harsh comments, I'm not disrespecting your show. I have it setup to record on my DVR every week. I mostly enjoy the shows but occasionally your lack of scientific method is maddening. I realize you are probably cutting a lot out for the sake of TV, but could you at least point out that there are some possibilities you aren't testing?
Still, with a plan, you only get the best you can imagine. I'd always hoped for something better than that. -CP
I'm a father of a 7 year old who absolutely loves your show. We have it on our tivo and I'm constantly pausing the show to ask him what he thinks will happen in your experiments.
You start every show with "Don't try this at home" but sometimes there are experiments that you do which you could try this at home. Have you ever considered having a show where you say, "DO Try this at home?" Its fun to see my child get such a love of science in such a fun way.
I've noticed you guys have a regard for the scientific method, and make quite an effort to try and keep things controlled with regards to how you run your experiments and derive your conclusions. Have you ever considered bringing a formally trained scientist onto the crew to make sure you're going "by the book", so to speak?
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
Over the past few seasons, you've exploded a lot of myths (please exccuse the pun). However, there can't be that many myths that can be tested using your techniques. Are you looking into new ways of testing different types of myths or do you feel the show has a limited run, once you've finished the list of commonly held beliefs that can be tested through blowing up a crash test dummy or other physical tests?
Would there be room on your show for phycological behviour myths through the use of a psychologist as example?
Are you still doing special effects for commercials and/or movies, or is Mythbusters your full time job now? Have your mythbusting experiments helped out with your special effects work?
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
In last week's episode Adam was specifically saying how the myth they were testing (tailgate up or down for better fuel economy) was one of the experiments where the result totally surprised them.
The same episode also had them surprised that a finger in the barrel of a gun, even though it couldn't stop the bullet, would actually cause enough pressure buildup to deform the gun barrel at the tip.
Neil
Best show on television. You guys have my dream job. I disagree with the guy that said the Mythbusters' results aren't meaningful because you aren't thorough enough - it looks like you are as thorough as it's possible to be under the circumstances, and you aren't afraid to revisit a myth if you find out more. I also agree with the guy that said you should do a show on computer-related myths (this is Slashdot, after all). But here's my personal question: How much help do you really get from assistants behind the scenes that we don't get to see on camera? It looks like you give plenty of credit to your on-camera team, but do you have other guys that routinely help you build stuff, or on-staff scientific/engineering advisors etc?
Have you ever been completely blown away by what you've found
Well, there was that one show where they had they FBI hook them up with several TONS of high powered explosives.
Then they used it to make a cement mixer truck dissappear.
Here's the video (CoralCDN to the rescue)
That pretty much blew me away.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Have you ever considered having "Guest Busters"? For example if a viewer suggests a good myth to bust and it makes the cut, they get to come on the show and help you guys out.
Hi Guys,
Has there ever been a segment that you wish had been shown, but didn't make the cut? Conversely, was there a segment that did make the final show that you wish had not been shown?
What everyone REALLY wants to know is (several questions, but one answer can nail them all):
- Would you choose to be a Super Hero duo, or a pair of villains, which would you be?
- Would they be original characters, or someone/something that already exists?
- Would you wear tights?
- WHY?
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
How often do fans question your results? Have you had any diehard science/physics freaks tell you you're wrong? Have the "redone mythbustings" occured because of these?
:) Keep up the good work.
Great fan of the show, by the way.
Last year I heard an insurance underwriter speak about the challenges of covering reality TV. I don't want to lump your program in the same category of "reality" TV, but he did mention that there were shows or specific stunts that he was not able to cover. Have you ever been unable to debunk a myth because of liability/insurance reasons?
Given that you often refer to getting "lots of angry emails" based on the show, why would you agree to do an interview with one of the websites that's frequented by the type of people that generate most of that angry email? Are you hoping that they'll waste time posting comments and that you can let the moderators get rid of them as opposed to your staff?
Oh, and can you get Discovery to show the show at some time other than 9:00PM EST on Wednesdays? I have a commitment then and always have to miss it. (Silly family.)
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
You guys should easily have enough blooper material to fill a show by now, let's have it.
So, barring, that, my question would be, what are your top 5 "oops" incidents that never made it on to the screen?
How do you recruit talent for M5? What qualifies someone to work there?
Simple question but I'm curious: do you read Slashdot?
In need of reliable and affordable server monitoring?
I've seen a lot of questions so far about myths you would like to do if you had an unlimited budget, if you were invincible like Superman, or if danger to people, property, or reality in general was no object. But is there a myth that you would NOT do even if you had all those things? Do you believe that there are myths that are better left unsolved or too controvertial (basically flamebait myths)?
10 Bits= $.25
100 Bits= $.50
110 Bits= $.75
1000 Bits= 1 byte
It seems like you guys are willing to try to bust any myth, but there have got to be some myths out there that you are too afraid to attempt to replicate. So my questions is:
What are some of the rejected myths that were too dangerous to pull off and why?
BTW - Thank you for having a great show that is both entertaining and educational.
What is the stupidest thing either of you have done for the show? or conversly what was the stupidest thing that you almost did, and at last minute were like "Hmmm maybe not such a good idea..."?
Most restaurants seem to believe that ice is free, and therefore tend to overfill the ice to save money on soda. However, the energy required to freeze water to make ice should be considered -- is the real cost of ice actually less than the cost of an equivalent volume of soda?
Deven
"Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay
What is the one myth you would like to bust, think you could bust, but the network says "NO!" for whever reason (danger, money, etc)?
San Francisco recently put a ban on hanguns in the city limit. People are not allowed to own, possess, manufacture or sell firearms within the city anymore. Several episodes involve busting firearms myths. How will this new law affect the show? Michael Scott Plano, TX
Are there any myths you would love to test/bust/confirm but it is not possible to prove/disprove it? For example, have you pondered the myth that NASA filmed the landings on the moon in a studio?
What Busting has had the most dramatic fallout for companies and people who've relied on the Myth being true?
And while we're out it, how many times have you been sued or threatened with lawsuits?
This is not my sandwich.
Red Bull, Monster, Rockstar, No Fear...there's tons of these so-called "energy drinks" on the market. But do they even have any tangible effects? What's really happening to me for $2.49? Is it just an overpriced can of soda?
From the look of things, your "arena" can be pretty dangerous. How close have you come to killing yourselves or someone else in one of your episodes?
I prefer a void in conversation to a vacuous one.
Also my Wife noted "boy they don't really make any bones about using Kari for sex appeal" and not that I mind one bit but I did notice that even before changes in billing and the departure of other female Mythterns, Kari was pretty much like the third host of the show. Were I to guess I'd say her increased useage on the show was Discovery's idea (since the audience is probably mostly male) - is there any concern about using her too much?
Schnapple
I remember the episode where you were trying to make the Intrepid taxi tip over using a jet engine, but were unable to use a commercial 737 jet due to "safety concerns" with your insurance company.
What is going on behind the scenes that we don't see on camera to keep all your stunts and myth busting as safe as possible? Also, after seeing you turn a hydrolic lift into a catapult (hoisted up on empty shipping cargo crates, no less), how can a commercial 737 jet be considered unsafe?
First make sure the lawyers aren't around, then answer this one: Your show is available on bittorrent networks to download and watch when/where it's more convenient. Some users, however, could download the show without paying for it via cable service. How do you personally feel about this? (Cheated\Angry\Flattered\What's A Bittorrent?)
I'm curious as to how many "You busted this myth, but my cousin's best friend's brother actually had that happen to him!" responses you get.
I have heard several times of supposed myths which were 'Busted' on your show, only to be refuted by scientists, educators, government officials, etc.
A particular incident of this which comes to mind was the 'myth' of 'Urinating on the Third Rail', which had been 'Busted' on the show, but which was later refuted by officials from a large city (I believe it was New York) who stated that several people each year are electrocuted by contact with the third rail in their subways, and felt the show had misportrayed the safety hazards of contact with a third rail.
What efforts do you take to ensure that the science of the tests you are performing is valid? Do you have any sort of outside independant review (similar to a scientific peer review process), to ensure that you are not accidentally miseducating the public (either about potential real dangers, or simply by teaching bad science)?
I think your show offers excellent scientific exposure to lay people. Unfortunately, this seems lost on reflection. Do you think your show would better promote an interest in science if it was an explicit goal and component of discussion?
or on the phone for that matter. You guys partially busted that, but I feel that the energy source that you guys used did not have the voltage or amperage that real lightning packs. What about using a Quarter Shrinker to get the genuine results? The gadget pushes over 100K Amps @ 15K Volts @ 6,500 Joules, can reshape any metallic object that you wind in a copper coil. IMHO, that is as close as you can get to the genuine article.
http://teslamania.delete.org/frames/shrinker.html
And knowing Adam, he'll be giggling like a kid in a candy store when he hears the shrinker fire the first time at 5K Joules.
First rule of holes; When in one, stop digging.
Could you take on some computer myths?
Oooh, how about Van Eck Phreaking? Not exactly a myth, but wouldn't it be cool?
Would it be allowed even?
zWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
While the idea has been "posted to death" on Discovery's message boards, I would like to know why you haven't done a show on cell phone interference. I used to travel a lot, and it always made me laugh when the pilots would put their phones on the center console in the airplane, and then would ask passengers to turn their phones off. I've talked to pilots about the idea of cell phones interfering with aircraft navigation systems, and all they do is laugh; yet the FAA wants the public to believe that a cell phone being left on or operated on a plane will cause the navigation systems to go nuts - or at worst, that a rogue cell phone could bring the plane down.
Insanity is a gradual process; don't rush it.
How much pressure do you feel to test more and more dangerous myths in the pursuit of ratings and have your safety standards changed at all for the sake of "good TV"?