MythBusters
Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
Junior Member
Registered: 10-08-09
|
I am new here and this is just a thought. Should there be an area for testing method suggestions or am I so new here that I just haven't found it yet. Thanks
|
Junior Member
Registered: 10-11-09
|
Good question...
I see lots of process on the show that make cringe from a basic engineering viewpoint.
Just saw the food calories segment (cereal less healthy than the box) - the measurement of calories using that mail order kit... sheesh any thermo student probably did a bomb calorimeter experiment. No cheese down that MB tube.
Stuff that is very entertaining would probably be eliminated by a couple of quick calculations.
Take the fun right out of it I suppose.
|
Senior Member
Registered: 09-22-06
|
By intent, I think that includes all areas here. Proposing a 'myth' should include not only the idea but also suggest the methods and parameters for testing. quote: Originally posted by StevephD:
Stuff that is very entertaining would probably be eliminated by a couple of quick calculations.
Take the fun right out of it I suppose.
Like the "Polish the Turd" episode ? A lot of the discussions you'll find here deal with that angle in mind. "Because the 'myth' can/can't be proven in theory... it doesn't belong on the show. " Problems that are easily solved using theory can still provide spectacular demonstrations. What they're running out of, is ways to cloak these demonstrations as 'myths'.  |
Junior Member
Registered: 10-08-09
|
I think it is a great idea to propose a testing method when you submit a myth but what if you are not submitting a myth but just see a way that may be an easier or better way of testing on a myth that has already been proposed? Again, this is my second post to this discussion and I have probably not spent enough time in here to be competent to be posting. I just didn't see an easy way to submit testing ideas. Please, if I am making a fool of myself and am missing a simple answer to this let me know. I just enjoy the show and after many times thinking "But what if..." I finally logged on. This is a very evolved site and I have certainly not spent enough time on it to be close to competent at this point.
|
Senior Member
Registered: 10-28-07
|
Charzanka,
At one point the researchers used to request that any myth proposals for testing should be as detailed as possible, including links to information and possible testing methods and the whole 9 yards. Their aim was to have the "meat" of the idea as soon as possible, and not have to dig though 38 pages of useless banter to find a decent and noteworthy post.
Obviously very few posters follow this.
If you've seen a myth suggested that you'd like to offer a testing method for, or an alternate method for, just add to the existing thread where you've seen the myth suggested.
Or, since posting on existing threads isn't enforced anymore, if you find the myth suggestion you want to respond to is several pages long and you're worried the researchers will miss or overlook your test methodolgy suggestion, just start a new thread starting with a recap of the myth and then your test suggestion(s).
If any senior members start giving you the "Use Find", just take it with a grain of salt and remember that the more information and detail you can include, the more likely it will catch a researcher's eye.
After all, catching their attention and possibly seeing the idea tested on the show is the whole reason you're posting, right?
|
Senior Member
Registered: 10-28-07
|
quote: if you find the myth suggestion you want to respond to is several pages long and
I left a few words out. I meant to say "if you find the myth suggestion you want to respond to is several pages long and discussion has drifted away from the original post, and... |
Senior Member
Registered: 07-26-08
|
quote: Originally posted by roofingguy:
Charzanka,
At one point the researchers used to request that any myth proposals for testing should be as detailed as possible, including links to information and possible testing methods and the whole 9 yards. Their aim was to have the "meat" of the idea as soon as possible, and not have to dig though 38 pages of useless banter to find a decent and noteworthy post.
Obviously very few posters follow this.
If you've seen a myth suggested that you'd like to offer a testing method for, or an alternate method for, just add to the existing thread where you've seen the myth suggested.
Or, since posting on existing threads isn't enforced anymore, if you find the myth suggestion you want to respond to is several pages long and you're worried the researchers will miss or overlook your test methodolgy suggestion, just start a new thread starting with a recap of the myth and then your test suggestion(s).
If any senior members start giving you the "Use Find", just take it with a grain of salt and remember that the more information and detail you can include, the more likely it will catch a researcher's eye.
After all, catching their attention and possibly seeing the idea tested on the show is the whole reason you're posting, right?
The researchers used to request that? Wow, must have been beyond time. No offense intended to the mods, but I don't know how the researchers go about shifting through everything now. |
Senior Member
Registered: 04-28-09
|
quote: Originally posted by roofingguy:
If any senior members start giving you the "Use Find", just take it with a grain of salt and remember that the more information and detail you can include, the more likely it will catch a researcher's eye.
I won't give you the Nazi Find'r routine if you say you're posting a new one because the other post has too much blah blah blah in it.  |
Senior Member
Registered: 10-28-07
|
quote: The researchers used to request that?
Oddly enough, almost every post about that has been deleted. quote: I don't know how the researchers go about shifting through everything now.
Well, in one of their words: quote: That is a failing of these boards, way too many repeats of the same (often pointless) thing, too many drive by one liners that are not worth looking at let alone following up, too much arguing, etc. The gems are too few and far between, looking for them is definitely not fun.
|
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
|
advertisement
|
