Mythbusters, I propose this as your next assignment.

I want to see two "Buster" dummies with hydraulic arms swinging real chainsaws at each other!

*edit: Oh, and I *love* the title!

Then they could just do the ol Mythbusters shtick and lather the zipper in catnip. MYTH BUSTED? not yet

I don't. Maybe it disintegrated on impact, but there's still a hole in the paddle.

While I don't think this is what happened in this video, pressurized air alone could punch a hole in a ping pong paddle. Surely those dorks at Mythbusters have blown shit to bits this way.

Reminds me of a story my retired-Navy uncle told me of a guy he served with that worked in the boiler room on a ship. As he was working on a high-pressure steam pipe he saw something fall to the floor. It was his thumb. An invisible jet of pressurized steam escaping a needle-thin leak in the pipe cut it off.

When mythbusters did this for the 3rd time, they found that by putting netting up in front of the soldier you could aim the beam through the netting and at the object, much like a gun sight.

Mythbusters insurance company says, "Noooooooooooooo!"

Tags for this video have been changed from 'molten lead, hand, burn, water, leidenfrost effect, steam, protective shield' to 'molten lead, hand, burn, water, leidenfrost effect, protective shield, mythbusters' - edited by lucky760

The mythbusters' empirical (not theoretical) data showed that you get wetter (as measured by weight of fluid on/in your clothing) by running. Walking kept you dryer.

Mythbusters did this for real not just drawings. It depends if it's a downpour or if its a drizzle. Account for that parallelogramowizardfiend.

Mythbusters did it twice: once with Vodka and once with Steak.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO077nu2m5E

Although I don't think this clip has the part where they tried to eat it . . . with a professional chef cooking it. They resulted to using a pressure sensor to actually see how much pressure it took to slice through because the taste tests came back all wonky for some off reason.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcP8VVB8R1U

Nerdgasm alert for me! Two of my favorite shows (Good Eats & Mythbusters) essentially combining together for some Thanksgiving *cooking goodness!

Television is just a hole, generally. Not that I was ever their main market, but at least I could flip it on at three in the morning and catch some REALLY bad but amusing B-movie being run to fill time in their programming. Now they just put infomercials on in those time periods. On every station.

They used to play actual documentaries on the History Channel. Now it's usually something like "History's TOP TEN BIGGEST EXPLOSIONS" or Wrestling if I give it a go.

The success of mythbusters, dirty jobs and reality television was not kind to Discovery channels programming.

Holy shit nicole stop complaining you don't even have a tvOK SIGNING OFF

Mythbusters did an episode on that one...

The most important thing the pedestrian did was the jump. They did a test on some car show (can't remember what it was, could be mythbusters?) that if you jump straight up, the impact is much safer. It's to do with the friction of your feet making the impact happen horizontally, ie the car pushes you forward. Where as just lifting both feet off the ground, it becomes a tumbling motion and lot less inertia is transferred, ie you stay in the same place. Also if both feet are on the ground you have the awful possibility of being dragged under the car.

It is the infantilizing of the woman that bothers me. The guy doesn't sound like a college cheerleader, with coy body language.

I actually get a bit nauseous when women do this, fakily. When it is genuine, at least if I perceive it to be genuine, I have no problem. It is the playing into that saccharine stereotype that gags me.




In reply to this comment by Deano:
>> ^bareboards2:

Is anybody else annoyed by the fake enthusiasm and "cutesy" of the woman?


That's the contrived bit. Contrived enthusiasm and energy, very common in these sorts of shows particularly when they have multiple presenters each of which need to have a "personality". I blame Top Gear :

>> ^bareboards2:

Is anybody else annoyed by the fake enthusiasm and "cutesy" of the woman?


That's the contrived bit. Contrived enthusiasm and energy, very common in these sorts of shows particularly when they have multiple presenters each of which need to have a "personality". I blame Top Gear