saizo0070 said: Yup. Mythbusters busted that myth.
Mythbusters get 99% of their results wrong according to the United States Society for Scientific Study. Using the Mythbusters as your proof in any scientific argument will get you laughed out.
grand_zero said: Mythbusters get 99% of their results wrong according to the United States Society for Scientific Study. Using the Mythbusters as your proof in any scientific argument will get you laughed out.
While you don't want to use the mythbusters results as definite proof for scientific arguments, you'd do better citing their experiments than the non-existant "United States Society for Scientific Study".
Closest search result was "Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality" and, though interesting, very likely doesn't affect the credibility (or lack thereof) of the mythbusters.
As for the goldfish experiment, goldfish do have memories longer than 3 seconds. There have been a couple more experiments besides theirs. http://abcnews.go.com/story?id=4803721 is a story about someone who trains goldfish pets and sells kits on how to train your own goldfish.
Usually it's the methodology of MythBusters that's criticized, in that they take the criteria for scientific experiments rather lax: the experiments are not often strict, quantified, or repeatable, and documentation isn't their strong point, nor is amassing a statistically large enough dataset. Which isn't that much of a problem, since they aren't meant to be rigorous, they're meant to be entertaining and as accurate as they can manage in their time slot (minus the commercial breaks).
Their results are accurate, even if they aren't exactly verifiable, and unless you set up some crazy contrived circumstances (which they often try, the one about exploding gas canisters comes to mind, where they fired at the cylinders with a Walther PPK, rifles, shotguns, and practically anything that shoots bullets to make them explode, finally resorting to a big-ass gatling gun with INCENDIARY ammunition to achieve the desired effect), the results do match up with reality.
m3mn4rch said: While you don't want to use the mythbusters results as definite proof for scientific arguments, you'd do better citing their experiments than the non-existant "United States Society for Scientific Study".
The 'US-S3' is a DBA of a semi-obscure non-profit/non-charitable Think Tank/Consulting Firm, thus they're not on any federal registry or list, you won't be able to find them that way. Over the years they’ve called themselves everything from ‘Ice-9’ to ‘Braniac’ to ‘The Men who Stare at Goats’ (after the movie)… I don’t think anyone remembers what their original name was. Regardless, they’ve been called in to consult by everyone from the Department of Defense to the FDA to the Department of War (in the early 1900s). Basically, they’re what happens when a bunch of rich nerds get together and ponder the questions of the universe. We all know the type of group I’m talking about, so let’s not act like we don’t.
Aside, I was well aware that Goldfish can have more than a 3-second memory, I was just making a joke originally and got a little miffed that the Myth-busters would be the down-voting argument.
ThunderBird said: -stuff-
I’ll agree with you with only a few changes. Their results are only mostly accurate and they only match up with reality most of the time. Otherwise they wouldn’t have to revisit their ‘busted’ myths.
Also, they do tend to disregard the ability of the Human Being to adapt and overcome.
For instance, the Bare-Handed Blade Catch issue: I’ve done it in a ‘real fight’ vs. a drunken Kenjutsu enthusiast wielding a Shinken and I still have both hands not permanently harmed from it. Of course, my objective was to knock him out/disarm him and not kill him, who knows what he was thinking. Would I want to do it again? NO. It was a moment of desperation and my life was on the line. However, it still says that it’s possible. That and I’ve seen other people do it in S. Korea. I actually can give semblance of scientific evidence that backs my claim of possibility (not occurrence), but the chances of it being recreated in RL? 1/1,000,000,000,000… somewhere there about, I think it was.
I’ve also seen a Buddhist Monk catch an Arrow out of the air when fired at his chest. Note that this was a Japanese style bow fired at about 55-60lbs draw weight (about average for a Yumi), given the obvious overdraw there was no way that the shot was weakened.
What I’m saying is that the Myth-Busters are interesting entertainment value, and they do make some good points, but the accuracy of what they claim is scientific is… well, at best they’re inspiration for scientific study on a topic, not the completion of it.
Is the title of the first strip some sort of joke based on the anime Mitsudomoe?
Agh...you!I heard your name from Satori-sama...
You're Soda-ko!She flubs "Sadako" as "Su-dako", where "酢蛸 (sudako)" means "(sliced and) pickled octopus".Well… Satori-sama said to bring Okuu here…3-Way StruggleThe Customary EventBy the way, what are you really doing here?.... What is wrong with them...?Just where does this butterfly always come from?Such a cruel mistake for a first meeting!Is it really all right to just leave them alone?Ah...yeah. It'll probably follow the usual pattern.