Folow on from the last clip

http://www.videosift.com/video/How-to-Do-Macro-Eye-Photography-Mr-British

* beg

*beg

Begging is only available for videos in your personal queue - ignoring beg request by westy.

*beg

Begging is only available for videos in your personal queue - ignoring beg request by westy.

Cool Westy. I added this to my private homeschool playlist for my kids. thanks

I'm calling bullshit. Where did he get these "facts?"

I was buying into it until he said "it's impossible to sneeze with your eyes open" because Adam Savage busted that myth on Mythbusters (and his eyes didn't pop out).

My guess is just a bunch of interesting sounding stuff he's heard crammed into a metacafe video to make money.

I knew one! How do I get my money back?

lucky760

saying you cannot sneeze with your eyes open is difrent to saying you cannot sneez with your eyes open because your eyes fall out . it probably means you cannot keep your eyes open when you sneeze unless you used your hands.

>> ^lucky760:
I'm calling bullshit. Where did he get these "facts?"
I was buying into it until he said "it's impossible to sneeze with your eyes open" because Adam Savage busted that myth on Mythbusters (and his eyes didn't pop out).
My guess is just a bunch of interesting sounding stuff he's heard crammed into a metacafe video to make money.


Yes and no. Many things occur when you sneeze, a lot of face muscles come into play AND there is a reflex that will close your eyelids the moment you sneeze. Called the sternutatory reflex. A lot of pressure takes place the moment you sneeze, enough to make your eyes uncomfortable so as a reflex, they close. Because imagine what a bunch of pressurized oxygen will do to the eyes which are thin layers of tissue filled with fluid if we kept them open for every sneeze we had. My guess is if this were the case they would eventually deform or fall out of place.

The error here is to say 'impossible' it is possible to fight reflexes.

But here is the thing, we are talking about a reflex, meaning that yes, mythbusters proved we can fight the reflex but the very act of mythbusters trying to prove this affects the outcome, for Adam WAS EXPECTING a sneeze. When it becomes 'impossible' is those times where the sneeze occurs suddenly. I am pretty sure there are times where you know a sneeze is coming and others where it gets you and you were not expecting it.

As for the other facts, well those are generalized averages, etc. I found most of them acceptable enough. (for an internet video)
But then again these are the sort of facts that are half informative, half 'meh'
kind of like a cow can go up the stairs but not down

PS: I'm a pre-Optometry student =P

[citation required]

Really, this is a lot of bullshit.

24 Million images over a lifetime? I'm saying that's really, really low... What do you consider an 'image'? Even if we take it down to movie frames, which occur far less frequently than the eye can process, we get... for an 80 year lifespan 24frames*60secs*60mins*24hrs*365days*80yrs = 60,549,120,000, or 60.5 BILLION images. (Or 60.5 thousand million as it should actually, correctly be known... but I digress).

And 24 images a second is a seriously low call.

2 Million working parts? By what measure? Cells? Actual, individual, identifiable pieces? If you're talking photo receptor cells... "The human retina contains about 120 million rod cells and 6 million cone cells" (wikipedia).

36,000 bits an hour? Oh for fuck's sake... less than 36Kb of info an hour? My ZX Spectrum can do better than that, what unmitigated bullshit.

'All babies are born colour blind'. Actually, this used to be thought to be true:

"In the past it was thought that babies were born colour blind and only developed the ability to view colours as they developed. Recent studies have proven this incorrect and it is now widely accepted that infants can distinguish colours and patterns at birth, and continue to hone this skill for many months."

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Eyes, Facts, Photography, Body, Knowledge, British, Interesting' to 'Eyes, Facts, Photography, Body, Knowledge, British, Interesting, false, illresearched' - edited by spoco2

*lies

Adding video to channels (Lies) - requested by spoco2.

>> ^spoco2:



well those are mostly averages and vague sentences so ...

Found the possible source
http://www.izonlens.com/consumer.php (check right column)
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_/ai_n16547755

As for the 36.000 bits of info

http://www.aeyeclinic.com/about.html
http://www.aeyeclinic.com/trivia.html

^So we're getting our scientific information from salespeople now, both those sources are not doctors, not medical centres, they are selling lenses and laser correction stuff... they are NOT medical resources.?

Really, I trust 'facts' like that in ads about as far as I can throw them. (which, considering I'm viewing them on my pc... isn't far)

So, basically the person who did this video was shopping for eye surgery, saw these 'facts' and threw together a video without doing ANY kind of fact checking?

Those sites list the same 'facts' without backing them up with ANY logic at all.

Look, from an ACTUAL MEDICAL SCHOOL (University of Pennsylvania)...

The investigators calculate that the human retina can transmit data at roughly 10 million bits per second.

"The eye is composed of more than 2 million working parts"
Found this:
http://www.midlandeye.co.uk/#/eyefacts/4527384105
http://www.midlandeye.co.uk/#/midlandeyeinstitute/4527640354

>> ^spoco2:
Look, from an ACTUAL MEDICAL SCHOOL (University of Pennsylvania)...

The investigators calculate that the human retina can transmit data at roughly 10 million bits per second.

But you said 'As for the other facts, well those are generalized averages, etc. I found most of them acceptable enough. (for an internet video)'

Which... they are not, by any stretch of the imagination. The 2 million working parts claim is ridiculous, you either clump the receptors together, and then you have just a handful of working parts (the Retina, the Cornea etc.), or you include them individually and you get 126 Million... 2 Million isn't near either camp (plus, saying 126 Million working parts would be far more impressive in the video anyway).

>> ^spoco2:
But you said 'As for the other facts, well those are generalized averages, etc. I found most of them acceptable enough. (for an internet video)'
Which... they are not, by any stretch of the imagination. The 2 million working parts claim is ridiculous, you either clump the receptors together, and then you have just a handful of working parts (the Retina, the Cornea etc.), or you include them individually and you get 126 Million... 2 Million isn't near either camp (plus, saying 126 Million working parts would be far more impressive in the video anyway).


Crap I did say that. I take it back. Like 3 or 4 "pass". The others, don't.

LOL 36000 bits of information.

What is a "bit". Your optic system is so parallel, some parts are registering movement, some patterns, some face recognition, some looking for colors, some looking only at which "pixels" have changed.

Anyone know how many fibers are in the optic nerve bundle? Yes neurons fire slowly, but the raw data processed is staggering.

The simple example is watching TV. Or certainly anyone will agree you probably see as much as a webcam and even if you closed your eyes and only open them once a second, certainly you are far exceeding some bullshit 36000 bits. That's even treating things as "pixels" with "bits" of color.

In fact you see in analog colors mixing the receptors, so you can see an insane number of "bits" of resolution of color and that isn't even covering perception, who knows what your brain ignores or considers close enough.

ya sad n' sorry types what don't see it, spoco loves westy

Yup, the "24 million images" and "36,000 bits of information per hour" are pretty clearly bullshit. Lame.

nO xAX-yER lAME.

aww, so I shouldn't put this on my homeschool playlist? Aww, no one lets Westy have any fun

i too hate the "x images per day" bullshit, and videos that are designed to be amazing rather than educational. i don't think saying "10 million bits per second" is any less bullshit. i am sure the eye doesn't work like a CCD chip.

put it on your homeschool playlist as a factchecking/logic exercise.