Quote:
Originally Posted by 101Volts
I'm gathering from the replies that Mythbusters didn't do that good of a job. I haven't watched the episode, But this isn't the first time I've heard of them not being quite correct; I'd heard discussion of an earlier episode - A bed-wetting one where if one would put a sleeping person's hand in warm water, They person sleeping would wet the bed in their sleep - And they said "Busted" On that one but I read more than a few comments saying that it does work. Perhaps that just doesn't work on every person.
For some of their episodes, I imagine they get the results right but in many, It seems the results just aren't right.
Off-topic a bit, But buying a new car will have more of an impact on the environment than using a beat up sedan from the 80s for 20,000 miles or so I read. It's food for thought, Anyway.
|
The Mythbusters commonly mess up on scientific accuracy, because they simply don't have the funding to be truly scientific on some stuff, or the motivation to be truly scientific on other stuff. I think it's a show you have to take with a grain of salt and that is difficult for me.
On another note, keeping the same car since the 80's could be a disastrous financial decision. I know I commonly cite the same source (myself), but in the first three months since purchasing my car I made my car payments plus saved $111 just based on the fuel I wasn't putting into my paid-off truck---and it was going to need ~$2,000 in work within the next six months.
I totally understand your point and to some extent it's very true, but just like hypermiling, it's situational and best left to fluid judgment.