• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Mythbuster's sux

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: SVT Cobra
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Number1
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: SVT Cobra
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: esun
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I am not talking about any type of wrapping around, I am talking about a cable whipping around and slicing through someone. Go read about early aircraft accidents.</end quote></div>

Maybe you got confused by the crappy quoting scheme, but the remark about the differences between a cable wrapped around someone and a cable slicing a person in two was directed at the individual that did have trouble telling the difference.

And I would love to read about those aircraft accidents involving a cable slicing someone in two. Do you have a link? If not, then I'll have to accept the conclusion that is cited in Wikipedia (which I'm sure a watching of the episode would corroborate), which is that "a 5/8" cable at 30,000 lbs of tension was unable to cut a pig in two (or even cut into it), but did cause potentially lethal injuries."

It's really easy to fight evidence with more evidence. You've provided much less than Mythbusters at this point.</end quote></div>

You realize the size and strength and tension an aircraft cable is subjected to when pulling in a jet right and the speeds involved? You cannot duplicate that on mythbusters (and they cut it). You want evidence you go search your beloved wikipedia that is all knowing, because you know guys in the Navy aren't subjected to this stuff all the time.


The person that said the IQ of mythbusters fans is well funny, I agree.


Stupid mythbuster fanboys, these are the types that actually write into the show.</end quote></div>

Where are your evidences? You can't find it because it doesn?t exist. Just stick to writing essays on how to wash cars.

</end quote></div>
Go do a google search fool.
Click to expand...

Keep writing car washing stories, idiot.
 
Originally posted by: Number1
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: SVT Cobra
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Number1
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: SVT Cobra
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: esun
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I am not talking about any type of wrapping around, I am talking about a cable whipping around and slicing through someone. Go read about early aircraft accidents.</end quote></div>

Maybe you got confused by the crappy quoting scheme, but the remark about the differences between a cable wrapped around someone and a cable slicing a person in two was directed at the individual that did have trouble telling the difference.

And I would love to read about those aircraft accidents involving a cable slicing someone in two. Do you have a link? If not, then I'll have to accept the conclusion that is cited in Wikipedia (which I'm sure a watching of the episode would corroborate), which is that "a 5/8" cable at 30,000 lbs of tension was unable to cut a pig in two (or even cut into it), but did cause potentially lethal injuries."

It's really easy to fight evidence with more evidence. You've provided much less than Mythbusters at this point.</end quote></div>

You realize the size and strength and tension an aircraft cable is subjected to when pulling in a jet right and the speeds involved? You cannot duplicate that on mythbusters (and they cut it). You want evidence you go search your beloved wikipedia that is all knowing, because you know guys in the Navy aren't subjected to this stuff all the time.


The person that said the IQ of mythbusters fans is well funny, I agree.


Stupid mythbuster fanboys, these are the types that actually write into the show.</end quote></div>

Where are your evidences? You can't find it because it doesn?t exist. Just stick to writing essays on how to wash cars.

</end quote></div>
Go do a google search fool.
</end quote></div>

Keep writing car washing stories, idiot.
Click to expand...
Okay n00b.
 
the cable episode made me cry....they have gone downhill...gone are the days of packing 400lbs of TNT into a Cement Truck. 🙁
 
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
The OP is just bitter because he didn't get to see someone actually get snapped 'in half'.

</end quote></div>

LOL, no,I save that for my NASCAR viewing. :Q

Actually annoyed at the phony science is more to the point.
 
I saw the one where they demonstrated that you can't kill a great white shark with oxygen tanks, as they did in Jaws.
 
Originally posted by: compuwiz1
I saw the one where they demonstrated that you can't kill a great white shark with oxygen tanks, as they did in Jaws.
Click to expand...

Jaws had SCUBA tanks, which are compressed air.
Great White sharks are a protected fish and since they can't kill one anyway, their experiment is moot.
 
They're entertaining, and the redhead is hot, but that's about it. When they "busted" the myth that you could use mirrors to set a ship aflame, they conveniently didn't mention a 1970s experiment in which it was done in under 5 minutes...
 
Originally posted by: hdeck
mythbusters was testing if a cable could snap someone in half, not through an appendage.
Click to expand...

QFE

There's plenty of stories about people losing limbs. Someone being cut in half like in Die Hard 3...I haven't heard a real story of it.
 
Originally posted by: CKent
They're entertaining, and the redhead is hot, but that's about it. When they "busted" the myth that you could use mirrors to set a ship aflame, they conveniently didn't mention a 1970s experiment in which it was done in under 5 minutes...
Click to expand...

they revisited that myth in a later episode because so many people complained and they did it right, setting the ship on fire.

I saw the one where they demonstrated that you can't kill a great white shark with oxygen tanks, as they did in Jaws.
Click to expand...

they were showing that shooting a scuba tank won't make it explode, not that you couldn't kill a shark with one.
 
I think they make it obvious that they cant test and dont even know how to test all possible scenarios. They take a myth or idea, try to test it the best they can and go from there. I think you are the problem because you are taking the show too literally and as an end all be all to a potential issue.
 
Originally posted by: StartingLine
I think they make it obvious that they cant test and dont even know how to test all possible scenarios. They take a myth or idea, try to test it the best they can and go from there. I think you are the problem because you are taking the show too literally and as an end all be all to a potential issue.
Click to expand...

Nice way to make it personal, n00b.
Actually , if you read the thread, you'll see that I'm not the only one who finds fault with their methodology and that I acknowledge it's entertainment value. If anything, you took my mild rant to literally at about the same rate that they take themselves too seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top