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.
What myth would the Mythbusters most like to investigate but lack the means to do so?
Mythbusters is a great show! Oh, yeah I should ask a question.
I understand completely why you guys warn us to "not try this at home". But who warns you guys?
Ok all joking aside. You guys do some really dangerous stuff on the show. What has been the scariest/ most hair raising moment on the show so far, a time when you might have thought "this is really going to hurt"?
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
What is Kari's phone number, and whats her favorite restaurant?
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?
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
Dear Mythbusters-
It seems like it must be tempting to definitively call a myth "busted", even though the reality is that you just couldn't duplicate the results. Whether something is fact or fiction, scientifically a myth probably shouldn't be considered "busted" unless you have empirically show it to be implausable.
You guys generally do a good job of this, though on occasion I've seen an episode where you seemed a little premature. What can you say about where you draw the line, and do you feel like you generally do a good job of following the scientific method to get your results?
Also, can you get me that redhead's phone number?
Are Kari and Grant a couple? I noticed Grant let Kari use his TI-30Xa calculator. I can't imagine such a sacrifice would be made lightly.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
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
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?
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.
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
BA Baracus or Angus MacGyver?
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.
Is it true that Athena really came out of Zeus' head? I find that really hard to believe because we all...oh, what's that? Not that type of myth?
Never mind then...oh, and great show!
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
I love the show, and maybe this would ruin the show's mainstream appeal, but I'd LOVE to have a couple of resident Physicists and Engineers advising them to get more rigorous results. Things get waaaaay too oversimplified.
To add to your jet engine example, my biggest gripe was always their "windows down vs. AC" gas-mileage test. All their test could possibly show was that at the one tested speed in the one tested vehicle, that's what happened. Even their retraction and correction later was oversimplified-- they explained that at some point, the speed of a vehicle becomes great enough that the AC wins over the windows-- but they acted like that number is the same for all cars regardless of all the other variables. (engine size, AC design, window size and position, and overall aerodynamic shape, to name a few)
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?
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 feel when you've finished exploring a myth in front of the cameras, knowing that your results are being closely scrutinized by geeks worldwide, and, in a lot of cases, by experts in their respective fields?
Behold the glorious bragging rights
Yep, here's the website of the guy that can break a crystal glass with his voice (without an amp). http://www.thevoiceconnection.com/ There's lessons and stuff there in case you're interested in singing.
What's the naughtiest/kinkiest thing you've ever molded with Ballistics Gel?
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
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?
In the test MythBusters did, they created a machine to fire the arrows following the human archer test, so that adjustments could be made to velocity, trajectory, etc. This was the device they used to put the tip of the broadhead against the nock of the arrow already in the target. As stated in my parent, all attempts at "splitting" arrow failed.
The one arrow they were able to somewhat damage, the problem was the arrow split following the wood grain of the shaft. Since all wood arrows have wood grain, they conclude that even if there was a direct tip to nock impact, there wouldn't be a "perfect" split.
Please watch Mythbusters Episode 36 "Killer Tissue Box", which will be re-broadcast Nov. 25, 2005 on the Discovery Channel @ 10am(EST). This is the episode that they "bust" this myth.
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.
It's too bad this chat transcript was not linked in the story, because it covers a lot of the more common questions.
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
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?
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
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've always wondered if Coconuts really migrate or if a swallow could carry one. Maybe if two of them carried it on a sort of line...
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
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)?
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"?