NationStates Jolt Archive

I LOVE this show. It's awesome because not only is it hilarious, but everything they say is true. They've changed my opinions about some things even, like recycling. So, anyone else watch this show?

I LOVE this show. It's awesome because not only is it hilarious, but everything they say is true. They've changed my opinions about some things even, like recycling. So, anyone else watch this show?
I own the first 3 DVDs.

Well, they're still continuing it, though I find myself somewhat disappointed that they're taking so long to do so. I rarely watch any television, but this, along with both Stargates, is what saves my TV from the trash.

everything they say is true.

Now there's some bullshit!

Now there's some bullshit!
You do know that by that I merely meant that the debunking is totally accurate, and not every last little thing, right?

If, however, you meant that occasionally they debunk something that is actually true in and of itself, then by all means point out where they are wrong. I'd love to know.

Well, they're still continuing it, though I find myself somewhat disappointed that they're taking so long to do so. I rarely watch any television, but this, along with both Stargates, is what saves my TV from the trash.
You don't watch Battlestar?

They take something they disagree with, come to a conclusion about it before the beginning of the show, and proceed to set up strawmen to dismantle.

They take something they disagree with, come to a conclusion about it before the beginning of the show, and proceed to set up strawmen to dismantle.

No, not really. I thought that too, at one point. Then I realized, as I went and researched every subject they went after, I found that they were constantly and consistantly accurate about everything. Really. Amazed me too, on some things, especially recycling.

Pantless: Nah. I used to like the old Battlestar Galactica, but I couldn't get into this new version. Dunno why. =/

It's good, but you have to take their stuff with a grain of salt. Many of their attacks are more looking at how good marketing and persuasive techniques can fool people into accepting just about anything. Which in itself is an important lesson to learn, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the thing they're going after is inherrently false.

I prefer 'Myth Busters', cause they put a lot of time and effort into scientifically proving or disproving something.

It's good, but you have to take their stuff with a grain of salt. Many of their attacks are more looking at how good marketing and persuasive techniques can fool people into accepting just about anything. Which in itself is an important lesson to learn, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the thing they're going after is inherrently false.

I prefer 'Myth Busters', cause they put a lot of time and effort into scientifically proving or disproving something.

You've got a good point here. I guess I like it more due to the enjoyment factor rather than the learning bit, though it's always fantasitic to learn stuff. I never get a chance to watch anything on the Discovery channel though, which pisses me off. >_O

Pantless: Nah. I used to like the old Battlestar Galactica, but I couldn't get into this new version. Dunno why. =/
Really? The new one has more depth and emotion, and has excellent rendering and action.

I love it. I used to get it through Netflix, but I had to re-do my budget when my car broke and netflix was the first thing to go :( I should be able to pay off the new car in April so then I can watch it again.

I prefer 'Myth Busters', cause they put a lot of time and effort into scientifically proving or disproving something.
Ahh Myth Busters. Now that's a good show.

Ahh Myth Busters. Now that's a good show.
yes. I enjoy Myth Busters, but I don't think it's the same type of show as Bullshit! it's like comparing apples and oranges. ;)

I love it. I used to get it through Netflix, but I had to re-do my budget when my car broke and netflix was the first thing to go :( I should be able to pay off the new car in April so then I can watch it again.

If you where a real member of the religious right,,,,,,,,,,


You'd be boycotting the show.

how's that?

how's that?
They go after the religious right a LOT, to say the least.

I never took it that way, I think they go after idiots and people who are trying to do things that are idiotic a lot, but not me personally.

I thought maybe you guys were talking about how they are "against religion" which I don't see either, they basically say "we think it's crap, but if it makes you feel good to believe it, then go ahead" which is fine with me.

The show is crap.

In the first place, they bring on so-called "experts" whose scientific work is discredited and who insist that the rest of the scientific community is wrong... and then they do one of two things (often both) with their opposition. Instead of getting one of the many respected scientists who would be happy to tell them about global warming, deforestation, or why recycling is beneficial, they bring on a policy advocate with significantly lower credentials than their first "expert." Then they misquote and malign their opponents anyway.

I was going to post my own point-by-point critique of the show, but I found this Skeptical Blog (http://home.houston.rr.com/skeptical/arc20030401.html) that does most of the work for me, with excellent references to source material.

If, after reading that, you are still convinced that Penn & Teller are "debunking" bullshit rather than spreading it, you are just as biased and uninterested in objective research as they are.

Finally, I would just like to add that Mythbusters is a much better show. Not only are they very careful to run objective tests, but they are also generally quite honest about the reliability of their tests. More importantly, they are always willing to be surprised, which is truly the mark of a good scientist.

I LOVE this show. It's awesome because not only is it hilarious, but everything they say is true. They've changed my opinions about some things even, like recycling. So, anyone else watch this show?

I love P&T, but don't buy everything they are selling. You should be as cynical about them as they are about everything else.

The recycling show is a good example of where they got bogus experts to make invalid claims. The show was itself Bullshit!

I'm gonna start throwin' out my recyclin' effective this week! :)

It's funny as hell to watch (What episodes I can find on the internet anyway) But alot of what they say IS bullshit, and they often use points which are not actully for their argument for their argument.

I just love how everyone & their mothers go on about how enviromentalists are all lying, propagandising scum. Makes me feel gooood... Or something.

I'm wondering though, if our agenda isn't based on scientific predictions, why is it we bother? If we're not concerned about the environment, just what is it we're concerned about? Why have so many of us voluntarily gone back to school to learn what it is we're on about? And why, oh why are so many of us spending our time trying to impliment working sustainable alternatives to the way people currently do things?

Just what the hell sort of agenda can one have, when one spends one's time pumping money & hard work into city-organic alternatives & such?

I just love how everyone & their mothers go on about how enviromentalists are all lying, propagandising scum. Makes me feel gooood... Or something.

I'm wondering though, if our agenda isn't based on scientific predictions, why is it we bother? If we're not concerned about the environment, just what is it we're concerned about? Why have so many of us voluntarily gone back to school to learn what it is we're on about? And why, oh why are so many of us spending our time trying to impliment working sustainable alternatives to the way people currently do things?

Just what the hell sort of agenda can one have, when one spends one's time pumping money & hard work into city-organic alternatives & such?

Must be some kind of commie-hippie conspiracy to prevent capitalist growth. Imagine the nerve of suggesting that there are natural limits to anything!

Must be some kind of commie-hippie conspiracy to prevent capitalist growth. Imagine the nerve of suggesting that there are natural limits to anything!Oh! That explains it then. And here I deluded myself into think we were doing this to prevent us from exhausting our resources & ruining the eco systems - economic collapse & all...

I should have known I was just a totalitarian pot smoker. So damn obvious.. Oh well, another one left mangled on the trails of the clue-train.

Oh! That explains it then. And here I deluded myself into think we were doing this to prevent us from exhausting our resources & ruining the eco systems - economic collapse & all...

I should have known I was just a totalitarian pot smoker. So damn obvious.. Oh well, another one left mangled on the trails of the clue-train.

Damn hippies ... just let the economy and the good times roll! We'll worry about the consequences when we get there! Technology and free markets will solve all!

I will also point out (on a bit of a tangent) that far too much emphasis is placed on recycling anyways. It is the last of the three R's for a reason: because it is the most materially intensive. It is more important to convince people to reduce and reuse. Recycling should be a last resort.

Must be some kind of commie-hippie conspiracy to prevent capitalist growth. Imagine the nerve of suggesting that there are natural limits to anything!
To find steady employment? To sell books? To get bylines?
You can hardly make a career if everyone is saying "Hey, guys, nothing is happening."

It is more important to convince people to reduce and reuse.

Yes, and perhaps more important still to "convince" (or force, however it has to be) corporations to make products that are reduced--in packaging and additives, for instance, not to mention "reduced" in the sense that they do not need to be replaced/upgraded/fixed/restored in a year--and reusable or designed with multiple intended uses.

Yes, and perhaps more important still to "convince" (or force, however it has to be) corporations to make products that are reduced--in packaging and additives, for instance, not to mention "reduced" in the sense that they do not need to be replaced/upgraded/fixed/restored in a year--and reusable or designed with multiple intended uses.

Absolutely. Extended responsibility for products (cradle to grave) is important.

To find steady employment? To sell books? To get bylines?
You can hardly make a career if everyone is saying "Hey, guys, nothing is happening."
Argh. That was supposed to be directed at Similized world, but I quoted the wrong post.
So, yeah, just because an industry exists and has a lot of people in it, doesn't mean that those people are in the industry out of the goodness of their heart. Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, etc all went into fields related to "researching" poltiics, but no one would suggest that, just because there has been a movement toward punditry, that pundits are right.

Argh. That was supposed to be directed at Similized world, but I quoted the wrong post.
So, yeah, just because an industry exists and has a lot of people in it, doesn't mean that those people are in the industry out of the goodness of their heart. Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, etc all went into fields related to "researching" poltiics, but no one would suggest that, just because there has been a movement toward punditry, that pundits are right.Unfortunately I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about?

I started bitching because all sides were nagging on environmentalists. Not exactly a hobby with many opportunities for wealth & fame. Quite the opposite really.

Penn and Teller is doing the same thing Micheal Moore did with his documentaries. They take a position to promote and support it using carefully selected information devoid of anything that would call their "facts" into question.

It's really no different than watching Fox news, except the jokes are better on "Bullshit".

I was going to post my own point-by-point critique of the show, but I found this Skeptical Blog (http://home.houston.rr.com/skeptical/arc20030401.html) that does most of the work for me, with excellent references to source material.

If, after reading that, you are still convinced that Penn & Teller are "debunking" bullshit rather than spreading it, you are just as biased and uninterested in objective research as they are.

You could at least watch the show and pay attention before making foolish comments. Although maybe you just got carried away by the end of your post (it happens to me sometimes). P&T go barely two minutes without constantly asserting that the viewer should not take their "bullshit" but instead research on their own and come to their own conclusions. They advocate information and cynicism more than any of their debunking arguments. This is the clearest and most often stated part of the show. Disagree with them and their methods, that is what they want afterall, but don't act like they are "biased and uninterested in objective research" when the main point of the show is simply to sow the seeds of cynicism so that its viewers become more informed.

You do know that by that I merely meant that the debunking is totally accurate, and not every last little thing, right?

If, however, you meant that occasionally they debunk something that is actually true in and of itself, then by all means point out where they are wrong. I'd love to know.

Well, their debunking isn't always exactly "totally accurate."

Yes, a lot of it is. And most of it brings things to light that a lot of people don't get. But they tend to be a bit extreme in their debunking. Of course, it's television, so they've got to put on a show.

But, well, the PETA thing for example. Yes, there are lunatics on the animal rights front. Look hard enough and you'll find a lunatic on the extreme of any position. For every hundred people who think herbs are good for you you'll find one idiot who thinks that you can cure cancer by eating dirt and cure fibromyalgia with a long walk on the beach. Penn and Teller tend to point to those loonies and then say that the whole movment is just as dumb. So PETA has some loonies in it, and loonies in any movement tend to be the only ones dedicated enough to get to the leadership. Just look at the religious right. That doesn't mean that PETA doesn't do any good, or as P&T would have it, a bunch of eco-terrorists.

That being said. I love P&T, I love their magic tricks, I love their comedy, and I love their show. I just don't look to them for my newscasts.

Well, their debunking isn't always exactly "totally accurate."

Yes, a lot of it is. And most of it brings things to light that a lot of people don't get. But they tend to be a bit extreme in their debunking. Of course, it's television, so they've got to put on a show.

But, well, the PETA thing for example. Yes, there are lunatics on the animal rights front. Look hard enough and you'll find a lunatic on the extreme of any position. For every hundred people who think herbs are good for you you'll find one idiot who thinks that you can cure cancer by eating dirt and cure fibromyalgia with a long walk on the beach. Penn and Teller tend to point to those loonies and then say that the whole movment is just as dumb. So PETA has some loonies in it, and loonies in any movement tend to be the only ones dedicated enough to get to the leadership. Just look at the religious right. That doesn't mean that PETA doesn't do any good, or as P&T would have it, a bunch of eco-terrorists.

That being said. I love P&T, I love their magic tricks, I love their comedy, and I love their show. I just don't look to them for my newscasts.

In the case of PETA the "loonies" are the founders and current controllers of the organization. This is a rather bad example. Just because people who don't take the time to research what PETA is really about support it and aren't crazy that doesn't mean that the organization isn't absolutely insane. It is.

I prefer 'Myth Busters', cause they put a lot of time and effort into scientifically proving or disproving something.

Yeah, maybe. They're not exactly scientifically rigorous most of the time.

Yeah, maybe. They're not exactly scientifically rigorous most of the time.

Yes, though they do blow alot of shit up.

Penn and Teller is doing the same thing Micheal Moore did with his documentaries. They take a position to promote and support it using carefully selected information devoid of anything that would call their "facts" into question.

It's really no different than watching Fox news, except the jokes are better on "Bullshit".

I don't know if their jokes are better. Just on purpose, so they're more well punctuated. FOX is funny in an Andy Kaufman sort of way.

I simply love the one where they circulate the petition trying to ban Dihydrogenmonoxide. That being said, I, as a engineer with some knowledge of what they speak, have on occasion found P&T to be using unsound arguments to prove their points. In the global warming show they completely ignored the open -vs- closed carbon cycle argument. There is little argument that CO2 acts as a greenhouse gas. There is no argument that the CO2 level in our atmosphere has generally increased since we have began measuring it. With a decline of vegetation worldwide, in an open carbon cycle, such as when we burn fossil fuels, there is no re-sequestering of the carbon that is produced. It seems rather simple to me that eventually the atmosphere and the oceans are going to begin heating up. I agree that this also happens to a certain extent as a regular cycle of our planet, but we do not need to help it along or make it worse.

My $.02

In the case of PETA the "loonies" are the founders and current controllers of the organization. This is a rather bad example. Just because people who don't take the time to research what PETA is really about support it and aren't crazy that doesn't mean that the organization isn't absolutely insane. It is.

But then, what's P&T's point? Don't support PETA because they'll destroy the modern world and make us all starve? Maybe if we supported them with magic wands, but they're canny enough to know that baby steps must be taken. They try to promote breast feeding in Iowa, the state with the lowest rate of breast feeding and the highest infant mortality. They try to educate people on things like fois gras and veal. They do actual good work, even if they'd like to do actual bad work. From the P&T episode on the matter one would think that their only goals and efforts are abolishing agriculture and finally doing away with that meddling do-gooder Superman.

And as for this being in the case of PETA. It's also the same case with the other loony groups like the 700 Club and the Moral Majority.

Yes, though they do blow alot of shit up.
Damn right. And along with the setting fire to things and shooting things is what makes it really cool. That and the babe on their crew.