There used to be this TV show called Myth Busters. I would occasionally watch it and generally liked it. They would take some urban legend or myth, turn it into a hypothesis, and test it out. They would usually build fun stuff and do some experiment design along the way. As a creative person who was taking shop class and could borrow dad’s tolls and barn, the show provided some good bit of inspiration.

I’ve often heard a few criticisms of the show that are similar in theme. In my own words they are basically:

• They don’t do enough repetitions of their experiments
• Their sample sizes are too small
• They draw conclusions too hastily of of experiences that could be considered anecdotal

I’m not sure if I hear these criticisms more because I studied physics so long and am in the scientists community, or if these are widespread criticisms. They are mentioned on the wikipedia, but not very prominently. In any case, I will say that they all have some validity. Repeatability and sample size are very important, or course.

But Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Despite the valid criticisms, I still support mythbusters and think it does a lot more good than harm.

We live in an age where people believe what they hear on the radio and see on TV and social media. Science is taught as trusting and believing in the established scientific authorities. Mythbusters encouraged people to get their hands dirty and try things out. To see with their own eyes and think with their own brains.

So reading scientific papers is good and hearing about science in “the news” is fine. But none of it is a substitute for observing your world and interacting with it on your own. You can do it! 🔬🔭🔍🧠