use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. reddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
reddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
see the search faq for details.
advanced search: by author, community...
1,061 users here now
Welcome to r/atheism, the web's largest atheist forum. All topics related to atheism, agnosticism and secular living are welcome here. Please read our FAQ.
Please link directly to any images or use imgur to avoid being flagged as blogspam
Recommended reading and viewing
Thank you notes
Related Subreddits <--the big list
Chat: #reddit-atheism on irc.freenode.net
Watch: #/r/atheism on reddit.tv
Read The FAQ
Submit Rage Comic
Submit Facebook Chat
Submit Meme
Submit Something Else
reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›
Science Patrol (i.imgur.com)
submitted 9 months ago by cinnamontoastPUNCH
[–]TheJack38 28 points29 points30 points 9 months ago
"Santorum canon"
The mental image is priceless.
[–]randomhero98 18 points19 points20 points 9 months ago
This is my mental image
[–]frayjoker 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
Wow. I gagged. :X
[–]Crowd_of_Gods 7 points8 points9 points 9 months ago
Can I just say that again? I'm gonna say it again.
SANTORUM CANNON
Bwaaahahahahaaa
[–]ShockedSystem 20 points21 points22 points 9 months ago*
Oh my gravy, the amount of science education radiation those three put out by being in such close proximity...
30 Sagans...400 Sagans...9000 Sagans! It's off the charts!
[–]YoureAMessy 40 points41 points42 points 9 months ago
They must be Super Sagans.
[–]JakeCameraAction 7 points8 points9 points 9 months ago
That was...well...
[–]Aavagadrro 4 points5 points6 points 9 months ago
9000+ Sagans boosted by 200 Newtons and a couple Tysons, the chart goes higher, you just need the right parameters.
[–]teuast 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
How does this measuring system work?
[–]sharthappens[] 5 points6 points7 points 9 months ago
Don't ask questions, just take it on faith!
[–]teuast -2 points-1 points0 points 9 months ago
I see what you did there. XD
[–]sharthappens[] 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
Shhhhh. I'm trying to pull the wool over their eyes.
Man, I just can't get any of this forced ignorance right!
What can I say? They taught me young.
[–]Aavagadrro 1 point2 points3 points 9 months ago
Just like religion.
Incomprehensibly and illogically, I see. XD
[–]Aavagadrro 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
Dont forget completely made up on the spot like 37% of all statistics.
[–]teuast 1 point2 points3 points 9 months ago
Just like I always say. There are three types of people in the world: those who can count, and those who can't.
Just like there are 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary, and those who dont.
Awesome! I totally get the whole thing now!
[–]xoBehTkcuF 1 point2 points3 points 9 months ago
Billions and billions and billions...
[–]bojang1es 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
If you think that's impressive you should check out the scientific education real scientists are doing.
[–]Isayimanatheist 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
No it can't be it must be malfunctioning(rips off science radiation scanner, crush in hand)proceed to say impossible IT'S OVER 9000!!!!!
[–]tweak4ever 6 points7 points8 points 9 months ago
When in doubt, C4...
[–]Keiichi81 7 points8 points9 points 9 months ago
Wow. Bill Nye and the Mythbusters all in one place? Where was this and why wasn't I there?
[–]Ch3t 2 points3 points4 points 9 months ago
The Real Science Patrol
[–]spaceturtle1 13 points14 points15 points 9 months ago
the use of the word "cracker" is what ruined this for me
[–]SpiritoftheTunA 1 point2 points3 points 9 months ago
why?
[–]Kale187 3 points4 points5 points 9 months ago
Kinda unnecessary. Guy would have been better.
[–]spaceturtle1 2 points3 points4 points 9 months ago
because it is a derogatory term for white slave whip"crackers" used by afro-americans. It is kinda weird that 3 white dudes sit there and are supposed to call somebody on stage a cracker.
this is an explanation, not an opinion. please keep that in mind. I am aware that there are other meanings for "cracker", but the first impression already causes the damage.
[–]SpiritoftheTunA 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
I actually didn't know the origin, thanks!!
[–]Theemuts 1 point2 points3 points 9 months ago
Ehr, explanation please?
[–]ace00909 14 points15 points16 points 9 months ago
As for what I got from it: those are 3 of the most popular atheists around: Bill Nye, Adam Savage, and Jamie Hyneman. They are making fun of an individual speaking out against teaching evolution in schools. Adam is saying wait for Jamie to finish the Santorum-cannon because Rick Santorum is a pile of dung who spouts out useless, meaningless information.
[–]MormonAtheist 35 points36 points37 points 9 months ago
Or the the canon uses actual santorum for ammunition. You know, for science. Frothy science.
[–]TheJack38 6 points7 points8 points 9 months ago
Upvoted for "frothy science", and mildly disgusting mental images.
[–]Vigil 5 points6 points7 points 9 months ago
Page 2 of Google image search for "frothy science". Fitting.
Bachmann bit me!
[–]cinnamontoastPUNCH[S] 2 points3 points4 points 9 months ago
You are perfectly correct, and I apologize for any confusion. I was of course using the word 'santorum' to refer to its true definition. I'm not sure who this Pennsylvanian gentleman is that people keep mistaking for ass-foam, but whoever he is, I wish him nothing but the best.
[–]kragmoor 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
i like you friend
[–]simon_C 1 point2 points3 points 9 months ago
came to comments for this. left happy.
Came to this comment to expect this comment on this comment, not dissapointed
[–]alexanderlmg -2 points-1 points0 points 9 months ago
explanation
[–]Elementium 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
Wait is bill nye back on TV?
[–]jjmiv 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
And pray tell, how would someone go about loading this cannon?
[–]crshbndct 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
Basically, You get a bunch of people to be the loaders, and a bunch of people to load prime them. All the loaders should be "turtling" and them the primers should fuck them up the ass and drop a load in their ass. Sometimes you need 3 or more loads of cum in their ass to achieve perfect consistency.
Then they should shit the cum+poop combo into a container which used to load the cannon.
You know that the combination is right when it looks like this
When those three come in close proximity, you know shit's going down.
[–]aardappelen 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
He better be careful or the Santorum canon might overshoot and go through a nearby neighborhood...
[–]gliff159 -24 points-23 points-22 points 9 months ago
While its not a popular opinion mythbusters and these two have almost no relation to science, the show doesn't even use the scientific method . They are special effects artists. While I think that it is good that TV stars can be atheists like you and me, I see no reason to elevate them to 'science patrol'.
[–]zda 25 points26 points27 points 9 months ago
relevant xkcd: http://xkcd.com/397/
[–]Omahunek 18 points19 points20 points 9 months ago
They don't use the scientific method? Very often they establish control groups, hypothesis, perform experiments, compare their data, etc.
How are they not using the scientific method? Sure, they're not curing cancer and on a not infrequent basis they simply blow shit up for the hell of it, but to say they have no relation to science is far and away EXCESSIVELY ignorant.
[–]beason4251 4 points5 points6 points 9 months ago
But that's not the point of Mythbusters or their potential value to current society. While this is a broad overgeneralization, the average American does not understand that in order to prove or disprove something, it requires more than hearsay - someone actually has to do something and record the results.
While the Mythbusters are not anywhere near the scientific rigor required to publish papers or make astounding discoveries for humanity, they do not aim to. They merely try to figure out if something is possible. In this it is not the content of their 'discoveries' or their methodology that matters. What matters is that they advertise a thought framework for testing your beliefs and assumptions for consistency with reality. This is a kind of science; one which in my opinion is more accessible (and more likely to influence) the average American.
Imagine a show about actual scientific research. It would be mindbogglingly boring to the average American. The Mythbusters meet this in the middle and bridge a gap of sorts, being entertaining but also encouraging a healthy mindset with regards to trying to determine truth.
[–]DasWood 1 point2 points3 points 9 months ago
Science requires statistics.
[–]beason4251 2 points3 points4 points 9 months ago
That's the thing about Mythbusters. They only try to figure out if something is possible. The only statistic required to see if something is possible is one: it happening.
Admittedly their scale (busted, plausible, confirmed) suggests that they prove certain things to be impossible (something which is extremely difficult to prove), in the name of entertainment they had to make some concessions in order to appeal to the public.
[–]zda 6 points7 points8 points 9 months ago
They have that too.
Not all the time, but sometimes. Pretty good for being a very entertaining show.
[–]brownstoned 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
Way to take the fun out of science.
[–]Falconhaxx -6 points-5 points-4 points 9 months ago
Nope. Drawing conclusions requires statistics, their experiments just generate scientific data.
[–]Rano_Its 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
Why do they infer anything from their experiment then ? Gathering data is still subject to statistic, the whole processus of experimental method is.
Besides "myth busted, possible, etc" is their way of drawing conclusion.
[–]Falconhaxx 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
You must remember that what they do is very different from usual science.
In the case of the "myths" they test, they usually know the circumstances, objects involved and expected results of the experiment. Disproving the expected result requires a minimum of one test, which means that you usually don't need statistics for the science involved(As one test does not constitute statistics).
This is the important part: The point of Mythbusters is to see if a certain phenomenon is POSSIBLE, which means that when they "confirm a myth", it just means that the phenomenon may be possible. They never try to find out if the phenomenon is universal, the whole range of circumstances under which the phenomenon is possible nor do they try to discover specific details about the phenomenon.
What they do is science, it's just not exact science.
I get the feeling that most people have a twisted view of what science really is.
[–]Rano_Its -1 points0 points1 point 9 months ago
Sorry but this is a tautology that is the problem here.
Proving that something does exist is important of course. And requires statistic anyway to prove it afterwards.
Here they show (not prove) that duct-tape is powerful (I loved these), that if you load a car with explosives it will blow-up, etc.
This is entertainment not science. Not even semantically are they scientist.
[–]Falconhaxx -2 points-1 points0 points 9 months ago
According to the Oxford Dictionaries:
Scientist noun a person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences
Scientist
noun
a person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences
Then the only one a bit close to this definition is Grant Imahara with his degree in electrical engineering.
[–]Falconhaxx -1 points0 points1 point 9 months ago
This has nothing to do with degrees.
Studying is simply the act of making experiments, observing and writing down the results(or more commonly, which is allowed, just observing), and most of the "myths" involve elements of chemical or physical processes.
Or are you really going to narrow down the word "study" that much?
[–]nailimixam -5 points-4 points-3 points 9 months ago
Its not that they have no relation, its that their show is not a reliable source for scientific data. But its a television show, we should all know that already. The fact is, they have to be pretty fucking smart and know alot about technology (Which, as we all know, is just the application of science.) to even be able to make the pretty explosions and cool effects people will see on their show. Also it is occasionally partially accurate.
[–]Falconhaxx 2 points3 points4 points 9 months ago
Its not that they have no relation, its that their show is not a reliable source for scientific data.
Everything they do generates scientific data, even if it mostly is in the form of how not to do an experiment.
[–]nailimixam 0 points1 point2 points 9 months ago
You are technically correct. The best kind of correct.
[–]Falconhaxx 4 points5 points6 points 9 months ago
They are technically experimental scientists.
[–]Rano_Its -5 points-4 points-3 points 9 months ago
Of course, they are not.
Putting on a scrub and playing with explosif doesn't make you a scientific, not even experimental (whatever you're trying to mean by that).
I know this is hard for all non-scientific to understand, but in order to have a proper (read publishable) study you have to respect always the experimental method.
Their show is fun and I like to think it encourages youngsters to consider working in science. But, for scientists, this is nothing more than some guys playing with fire.
[–]Falconhaxx 1 point2 points3 points 9 months ago
Experimental physicist here, you're wrong.
I never said anything about publishable science. Your view of science is way too narrow if you think publishable science is the only science.
True, the results of the experiments they do are nowhere near exact enough to be applicable or repeatable, but they do generate scientific data.
In the case of Mythbusters, the scientific data is just a different kind than what most of us are used to. For example, they frequently show how NOT to make vacuum chambers. This process, i.e "Want to make vacuum chamber, plan how to make vacuum chamber, test the plan, plan fails, conclude that the plan does not produce desirable result, make new plan, repeat" is a good example of how the scientific method works.
This is where I get to smile at the mistake you made: I never said anything about the actual "mythbusting"-process, I just said that they are scientists, which I just proved.
[–]Rano_Its -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 months ago
I didn't get that you were talking semantic.
Indeed, anyone following the simplest experimental plan possible, may say that (s)he is a scientist. In the same sense that a kid experimenting with first circular reactions (Baldwing, Piaget) are scientists, they happen to apply the prototype of a scientific method, this is true.
That doesn't make them scientists, anyway.
Why not?
Saying you are a scientist isn't worth anything in this world anyways, you have to show publications to get some recognition, so why couldn't someone making experiments(no matter the circumstance) be called a scientist?
[–]Rano_Its -4 points-3 points-2 points 9 months ago
Another pointless argument, one talking seriously the other playing with words ...
[–][deleted] 9 months ago
[deleted]
all it takes is a username and password
create account
is it really that easy? only one way to find out...
already have an account and just want to login?
login
[–]TheJack38 28 points29 points30 points ago
[–]randomhero98 18 points19 points20 points ago
[–]frayjoker 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Crowd_of_Gods 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]ShockedSystem 20 points21 points22 points ago*
[–]YoureAMessy 40 points41 points42 points ago
[–]JakeCameraAction 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]Aavagadrro 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]teuast 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]sharthappens[
] 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]teuast -2 points-1 points0 points ago
[–]sharthappens[
] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]teuast 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]sharthappens[
] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Aavagadrro 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]teuast 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Aavagadrro 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]teuast 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Aavagadrro 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]teuast 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]xoBehTkcuF 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]bojang1es 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Isayimanatheist 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]tweak4ever 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]Keiichi81 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]Ch3t 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]spaceturtle1 13 points14 points15 points ago
[–]SpiritoftheTunA 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Kale187 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]spaceturtle1 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]SpiritoftheTunA 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Theemuts 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]ace00909 14 points15 points16 points ago
[–]MormonAtheist 35 points36 points37 points ago
[–]TheJack38 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]Vigil 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]cinnamontoastPUNCH[S] 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]kragmoor 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]simon_C 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Isayimanatheist 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]alexanderlmg -2 points-1 points0 points ago
[–]Elementium 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]jjmiv 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]crshbndct 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]teuast 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]aardappelen 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] ago