Mythbusters Results

This was already posted. By you. http://www.neatorama.com/2007/03/23/results-of-all-mythbusters-episodes/

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

Now, can you please just arrange for me to be given Tory as a Christmas present? I'll take VERY good care of him. Thank you.

This show is crap.

Not science.

Wow at the comments on that page. I sincerely hope they were all written by 8 year olds.

Hm - After nearly 15,000 posts, I don't even remember what's on Neatorama anymore. You've got a great memory, Sal!

Mythbusters is a fun show, but don't dare rely on it.

Agreed with clinton labombard: its really fun to watch, but has nothing to do with the scientific method. They are special effects artists without scientific or engineering training, and it often shows.

@Alex: I only remember the least important details in life.

on the show, it used to be fun to watch, but it's hard to tell how much longer it'll last. Consider the time gaps in between episode airings. Nothing between February 20, 2008 and April 30, 2008(and those were 'specials'), and no new shows since. Next episode listed is sheduled for Shark Week, on July 27th. Repeats got old.

Ah, I always wondered about that myth:
"If a dog retrieves a stick of dynamite thrown onto a frozen lake and gets underneath an SUV, the dynamite will blow a hole in the ice that will cause the SUV to sink."

What the heck does that mean?

Is it really necessary to point out that Mythbusters science isn't actually science? That's a bit like calling attention to the fact that reality TV isn't real. And clinton labombard says "don't dare rely on it"; thanks, hopefully I'll recall your sage advice before staking my life on a sausage-powered rocket.

The thing is, it doesn't matter if it's really scientifically rigorous or not. The best thing about the show is that it teaches kids (and adults too) about interesting physical concepts in an engaging way. They could be held to a higher scientific process, sure, but it would be a lousy show to watch.

Ted, it's based on a myth that some guys went to go ice fishing and threw a lit stick of dynamite across the ice, with the idea that the explosion would create a hole to fish in, but one of the guys dogs ran after the dynamite to fetch it. I forget why the dog supposedly ran under the SUV with it. Maybe the fisherman had jumped inside it to protect themselves from the soon to explode dog.

@ gladeye and Ted:

I seem to remember that, in order to not get blown up themselves the putative fisherman in the story decide to shoot the dog. They miss and the dog is scared into hiding under the truck.

One of the funnier urban legends IMO.

...a sausage-powered rocket... given spicy enough sausage can a person fly on sausage alone?

c-dub: it really doesn't matter whether they use the scientific method or not. The only problem I have is that they often call what they are doing science; talking about "science in progress" and whatnot. I think we have enough of a problem in this country with public understanding of what science is (global warming, stem cell research, funding for physics experiments: lots of confused debate on these subjects because the public often cannot distinguish between scientific-sounding language and the actual scientific methodology)

They come up with great ideas to investigate; I think people would find it much more interesting if they brought in real science/engineering. Science isn't boring if presented creatively; it would only add to the show.

Personally the show bores me.

there already was a fan-site that listed the results, it's called wikipedia

Watch all 6 season of mythbusters online:

http://watchmythbustersonline.net/