If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Entertainment Weekly)   "Mythbusters" settles Titanic debate. Spoiler alert: Lots of things sink at the end   (popwatch.ew.com) divider line 69
    More: Followup, Mythbusters, Titanic, Jamie Hyneman, motor controls, buoyancy, Adam Savage, hypothermia, body temperatures  
•       •       •

8732 clicks; posted to Geek » on 08 Oct 2012 at 4:27 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



69 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-08 04:53:22 AM
I loved James Cameron making fun of himself by sweeping floors.
I am also digging Kari's flotation devices/brains.

/Science!
 
2012-10-08 04:55:23 AM
dsc.discovery.com

"Sooooooo........coooooolllldddddddddd...."
 
2012-10-08 06:35:34 AM
FTFA: So the movie had that right: Jack would have drowned.

Except Jack froze to death.
 
2012-10-08 06:46:32 AM
There are myths about the Titanic that needed to be busted? They sure are starting to scrape the bottom of the barrel if that's all they have left to go after.
 
2012-10-08 06:52:48 AM
Next time: will sex in a model T fog the the windows?
 
2012-10-08 06:53:41 AM
More junk science from the kings of junk science. Watch that trash for the entertainment value (and Kari's eye candy), but dont take any of their "conclusions" as scientific fact.

"Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable!" You are poor scientists, Adam and Jamie.
 
2012-10-08 06:54:09 AM
Actually this was a good episode. First good one in a while.
 
2012-10-08 07:16:52 AM

Dick Gozinya: More junk science from the kings of junk science. Watch that trash for the entertainment value (and Kari's eye candy), but dont take any of their "conclusions" as scientific fact.

"Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable!" You are poor scientists, Adam and Jamie.


This is just your way of saying you'd never let Jack drown without you, right?
 
2012-10-08 07:18:17 AM
www.andysowards.com

Dammit! I was kind of hoping someone would get eaten!
 
2012-10-08 07:20:17 AM

Dick Gozinya: More junk science from the kings of junk science. Watch that trash for the entertainment value (and Kari's eye candy), but dont take any of their "conclusions" as scientific fact.

"Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable!" You are poor scientists, Adam and Jamie.


imgs.xkcd.com
 
2012-10-08 08:00:22 AM
Plot lines of movies that don't claim to be anything but fiction are myths?
 
2012-10-08 08:01:37 AM

Dick Gozinya: More junk science from the kings of junk science. Watch that trash for the entertainment value (and Kari's eye candy), but dont take any of their "conclusions" as scientific fact.

"Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable!" You are poor scientists, Adam and Jamie.


I've always hated how they tend to take only one data point and rarely publish in peer reviewed journals.
 
2012-10-08 08:05:27 AM
So it was just a poorly shot scene.
 
2012-10-08 08:12:29 AM

Dick Gozinya: More junk science from the kings of junk science. Watch that trash for the entertainment value (and Kari's eye candy), but dont take any of their "conclusions" as scientific fact.

"Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable!" You are poor scientists, Adam and Jamie.


Thank you! Oh my god i finally found someone who doesn't go mouth to arse on the Mythbusters lads. Even worse are people who are sexually aroused by that oversized blowhard goof Penn Gillette and his closet queen midget buddy Teller with their little tell-all expose format show. All of them are just TV show entertainment, nothing more. May as well believe everything you read on teh internet.

Dick Gozinya is my Farker of the Day!
 
2012-10-08 08:30:31 AM
Next: does the chewing gum lose its flavor on the bedpost overnight?
 
2012-10-08 08:32:28 AM

KrispyKritter: Dick Gozinya: More junk science from the kings of junk science. Watch that trash for the entertainment value (and Kari's eye candy), but dont take any of their "conclusions" as scientific fact.

"Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable!" You are poor scientists, Adam and Jamie.

Thank you! Oh my god i finally found someone who doesn't go mouth to arse on the Mythbusters lads. Even worse are people who are sexually aroused by that oversized blowhard goof Penn Gillette and his closet queen midget buddy Teller with their little tell-all expose format show. All of them are just TV show entertainment, nothing more. May as well believe everything you read on teh internet.

Dick Gozinya is my Farker of the Day!


How do you know for sure that Dick Gozinya is your Farker of the Day? There's still a lot of day left and someone could conceivably make a comment that registers higher with your standards. Besides, 14 comments off of one article is a small and questionable sample size. Some other threads span hundreds of comments and should be carefully reviewed before jumping to your conclusion.

Hmm... seems like someone doesn't follow their own advice. I've got three words for you: sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.
 
2012-10-08 08:42:58 AM

Dick Gozinya: More junk science from the kings of junk science. Watch that trash for the entertainment value (and Kari's eye candy), but dont take any of their "conclusions" as scientific fact.

"Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable!" You are poor scientists, Adam and Jamie.


But the kids love 'em!
 
2012-10-08 08:46:50 AM
No, their methods wouldn't hold up to strict scientific scrutiny, but they're not supposed to. What they do is introduce people to the basics of the scientific method (a bit mangled but still there). They come up with a theory, design an experiment, perform testing, and reach a conclusion.

The point to to get people excited about science and learning through entertainment.

/more scientific than 80% of what's on Discovery
//more learning than 100% of what's on TLC
///would like to experiment with Kari
 
2012-10-08 09:19:34 AM

TheMysteriousStranger: Plot lines of movies that don't claim to be anything but fiction are myths?


Want to know how I know you have never sen Mythbusters?
 
2012-10-08 09:26:41 AM
Some of their shows are pretty good. Like the ones where they blow something up.
 
2012-10-08 09:29:22 AM

ampoliros: No, their methods wouldn't hold up to strict scientific scrutiny, but they're not supposed to. What they do is introduce people to the basics of the scientific method (a bit mangled but still there). They come up with a theory, design an experiment, perform testing, and reach a conclusion.

The point to to get people excited about science and learning through entertainment.

/more scientific than 80% of what's on Discovery
//more learning than 100% of what's on TLC
///would like to experiment with Kari


i309.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-08 09:59:17 AM
FTA: "In the second hypothermia test, ThermoMan was warmed back up to 98.6°, dressed in his wet clothes, and set hovering above the freezing water in 29° F air."

Since he's wearing cotton clothes, he'd be better off just striping naked. One thing almost every hiker knows is cotton sucks heat out of the body when soaked.
 
2012-10-08 10:05:25 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: FTA: "In the second hypothermia test, ThermoMan was warmed back up to 98.6°, dressed in his wet clothes, and set hovering above the freezing water in 29° F air."

Since he's wearing cotton clothes, he'd be better off just striping naked. One thing almost every hiker knows is cotton sucks heat out of the body when soaked.


In the water it doesn't matter. It's the cold air moving through wet clothes the wicks the heat of the body.
 
2012-10-08 10:16:19 AM
Titanic was a great movie because the hero died young and the villain got to live a nice long life.
 
2012-10-08 10:24:18 AM

KiplingKat872: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: FTA: "In the second hypothermia test, ThermoMan was warmed back up to 98.6°, dressed in his wet clothes, and set hovering above the freezing water in 29° F air."

Since he's wearing cotton clothes, he'd be better off just striping naked. One thing almost every hiker knows is cotton sucks heat out of the body when soaked.

In the water it doesn't matter. It's the cold air moving through wet clothes the wicks the heat of the body.


Don't mess with Sudo's fantasy of having Jake get naked while coming out of freezing cold water.
 
2012-10-08 10:26:27 AM

ampoliros: No, their methods wouldn't hold up to strict scientific scrutiny, but they're not supposed to. What they do is introduce people to the basics of the scientific method (a bit mangled but still there). They come up with a theory, design an experiment, perform testing, and reach a conclusion.

The point to to get people excited about science and learning through entertainment.


No kidding. I'm not sure where all the insane hate comes from. The show's fun and funny, and my seven year old wants to make bombs and can talk about them with relative intelligence. It's a win in my mind.
 
2012-10-08 10:26:50 AM

zipdog: Titanic was a great movie because the hero died young and the villain got to live a nice long life.


How long did the iceberg survive?
 
2012-10-08 10:29:25 AM

TheOther: zipdog: Titanic was a great movie because the hero died young and the villain got to live a nice long life.

How long did the iceberg survive?


Rose is the villain. She went on to have a nice long life, marry a guy, start a family. At the end, we see that she ditches the guy she lived her life with to spend eternity with some guy who she knew for all of a couple days 70+ years ago.
 
2012-10-08 10:31:06 AM

stuhayes2010: Next time: will sex in a model T fog the the windows?


I volunteer to help Kari with that experiment. I know it's a sacrifice, but it's one I'm willing to make.
 
2012-10-08 10:41:16 AM

ManateeGag: stuhayes2010: Next time: will sex in a model T fog the the windows?

I volunteer to help Kari with that experiment. I know it's a sacrifice, but it's one I'm willing to make.


Listen buddy, if anybody is fogging up the windows of a Model T with Kari it is going to be me. Got it?
 
2012-10-08 10:57:07 AM

KiplingKat872: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: FTA: "In the second hypothermia test, ThermoMan was warmed back up to 98.6°, dressed in his wet clothes, and set hovering above the freezing water in 29° F air."

Since he's wearing cotton clothes, he'd be better off just striping naked. One thing almost every hiker knows is cotton sucks heat out of the body when soaked.

In the water it doesn't matter. It's the cold air moving through wet clothes the wicks the heat of the body.

 
2012-10-08 11:01:08 AM

zipdog: TheOther: zipdog: Titanic was a great movie because the hero died young and the villain got to live a nice long life.

How long did the iceberg survive?

Rose is the villain. She went on to have a nice long life, marry a guy, start a family. At the end, we see that she ditches the guy she lived her life with to spend eternity with some guy who she knew for all of a couple days 70+ years ago.


Plus she probably bankrupted the entire expedition by tossing off that stupid necklace. Hey but whatever, their hearts went on.
 
2012-10-08 11:02:01 AM

Aidan: ampoliros: No, their methods wouldn't hold up to strict scientific scrutiny, but they're not supposed to. What they do is introduce people to the basics of the scientific method (a bit mangled but still there). They come up with a theory, design an experiment, perform testing, and reach a conclusion.

The point to to get people excited about science and learning through entertainment.

No kidding. I'm not sure where all the insane hate comes from. The show's fun and funny, and my seven year old wants to make bombs and can talk about them with relative intelligence. It's a win in my mind.


The hate is probably just coming from people who wish THEY had that kind of following because they do "hard" science and not pop science like Mythbusters.

IMO, the xkcd comic captures it perfectly- they may not perfectly isolate every variable and test against control groups before submitting things for peer review, but the show does show the scientific method (even a primitive form of it) at work. That's a very, VERY good thing even if the science isn't as pure, hard, or perfect as some might wish. But then, this is TV, not a farking university research lab. They need to get an audience and their method works (trying it as fabled, then turning it up to 11 to blow some shiat up) to get that audience.
 
2012-10-08 11:08:11 AM

akula: Aidan: ampoliros: No, their methods wouldn't hold up to strict scientific scrutiny, but they're not supposed to. What they do is introduce people to the basics of the scientific method (a bit mangled but still there). They come up with a theory, design an experiment, perform testing, and reach a conclusion.

The point to to get people excited about science and learning through entertainment.

No kidding. I'm not sure where all the insane hate comes from. The show's fun and funny, and my seven year old wants to make bombs and can talk about them with relative intelligence. It's a win in my mind.

The hate is probably just coming from people who wish THEY had that kind of following because they do "hard" science and not pop science like Mythbusters.

IMO, the xkcd comic captures it perfectly- they may not perfectly isolate every variable and test against control groups before submitting things for peer review, but the show does show the scientific method (even a primitive form of it) at work. That's a very, VERY good thing even if the science isn't as pure, hard, or perfect as some might wish. But then, this is TV, not a farking university research lab. They need to get an audience and their method works (trying it as fabled, then turning it up to 11 to blow some shiat up) to get that audience.


The hate shouldn't be directed towards Mythbusters. After all, they have a time limit in which they get to explain and perform their experiments which often does not yield scientifically valid data. The hate should be directed towards those who trust their conclusions as gospel truth (I want to cockpunch people who utter the phrase "well you must not have seen that episode of mythbusters").
 
2012-10-08 11:14:00 AM

zipdog: The hate shouldn't be directed towards Mythbusters. After all, they have a time limit in which they get to explain and perform their experiments which often does not yield scientifically valid data. The hate should be directed towards those who trust their conclusions as gospel truth (I want to cockpunch people who utter the phrase "well you must not have seen that episode of mythbusters").


It is sort of amazing isn't it? The mythbusters try to convince people to test their beliefs, and all they really end up doing is having people go from "I read about it in a fwd, fwd, fwd: email so it must be true" to "I saw it on that TV show with the science guys so it must be true."

People never change.
 
2012-10-08 11:14:03 AM

Confabulat: zipdog: TheOther: zipdog: Titanic was a great movie because the hero died young and the villain got to live a nice long life.

How long did the iceberg survive?

Rose is the villain. She went on to have a nice long life, marry a guy, start a family. At the end, we see that she ditches the guy she lived her life with to spend eternity with some guy who she knew for all of a couple days 70+ years ago.

Plus she probably bankrupted the entire expedition by tossing off that stupid necklace. Hey but whatever, their hearts went on.


Did you see the deleted scene where she lets to lead guy hold it, the tosses it in with a "whhopsie?"
 
2012-10-08 11:34:03 AM
I know when I'm freezing to death after a shipwreck that I'm mentally aware enough to shove my life vest underneath the board that's barely keeping me afloat. Damn you Rose!
 
2012-10-08 11:34:21 AM

Confabulat: Plus she probably bankrupted the entire expedition by tossing off that stupid necklace. Hey but whatever, their hearts went on.


An entire expedition based on robbing a grave site for immense profit.

/not getting much sympathy from me here
 
2012-10-08 11:38:31 AM
It's funny. I actually thought it was pretty dumb that Jack didn't hop on. Guess I was wrong.
Also, despite the Mythbuster's "making it work" philosophy. There is no way that they would get a life vest to stay underneath a raft in freezing cold temperatures.
 
2012-10-08 11:42:13 AM

Fano: Confabulat: zipdog: TheOther: zipdog: Titanic was a great movie because the hero died young and the villain got to live a nice long life.

How long did the iceberg survive?

Rose is the villain. She went on to have a nice long life, marry a guy, start a family. At the end, we see that she ditches the guy she lived her life with to spend eternity with some guy who she knew for all of a couple days 70+ years ago.

Plus she probably bankrupted the entire expedition by tossing off that stupid necklace. Hey but whatever, their hearts went on.

Did you see the deleted scene where she lets to lead guy hold it, the tosses it in with a "whhopsie?"


No I have not. And I think I've seen enough of that movie for one lifetime, except the part where the guy falls off and flips into the propeller. I could watch that over and over.
 
2012-10-08 11:42:56 AM

Dick Gozinya: More junk science from the kings of junk science. Watch that trash for the entertainment value (and Kari's eye candy), but dont take any of their "conclusions" as scientific fact.

"Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable!" You are poor scientists, Adam and Jamie.


imgs.xkcd.com
 
2012-10-08 11:51:02 AM

seniorgato: It's funny. I actually thought it was pretty dumb that Jack didn't hop on. Guess I was wrong.
Also, despite the Mythbuster's "making it work" philosophy. There is no way that they would get a life vest to stay underneath a raft in freezing cold temperatures.


Except, perhaps, to tie it there.
 
2012-10-08 11:51:49 AM

TheOther: zipdog: Titanic was a great movie because the hero died young and the villain got to live a nice long life.

How long did the iceberg survive?


Here's an interesting piece about this, with photographs of two candidate icebergs. Short answer: likely only another year or so, at most.
 
2012-10-08 11:56:04 AM

TheOther: zipdog: Titanic was a great movie because the hero died young and the villain got to live a nice long life.

How long did the iceberg survive?


Its just a flesh wound!
 
2012-10-08 12:08:53 PM
tepe68.files.wordpress.com
 


/Just because
//That's why
 
2012-10-08 12:11:20 PM
Anyone else see the most recent new South Park? It was pretty meh other than the James Cameron song. I thought that bit was brilliant.
 
2012-10-08 12:42:38 PM

SpectroBoy:

/Just because
//That's why


Pretty eyes, nice smile, and she STILL knows that in such a shot most of the viewers will never notice her face.
 
2012-10-08 02:02:32 PM
Did they shoot cannon balls at it?
 
2012-10-08 02:18:36 PM

Dick Gozinya: More junk science from the kings of junk science. Watch that trash for the entertainment value (and Kari's eye candy), but dont take any of their "conclusions" as scientific fact.


Let me guess. You're also the guy who posts "This is just a lame, reskined Crush the Castle ripoff!" in every Angry Birds threads, and the guy who's quick to remind everyone that The Big Bang Theory simply can't compare to The IT Crowd.

/Geek hipsters are the worst.
 
2012-10-08 02:20:48 PM

dittybopper: seniorgato: It's funny. I actually thought it was pretty dumb that Jack didn't hop on. Guess I was wrong.
Also, despite the Mythbuster's "making it work" philosophy. There is no way that they would get a life vest to stay underneath a raft in freezing cold temperatures.

Except, perhaps, to tie it there.


I thought that it was a bit much to expect Jack and Rose to think of that. I'm perfectly willing to believe that Jamie and Adam could solve that problem on the fly, but I don't think that solution would have occurred to most people.
 
Displayed 50 of 69 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report