|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
CSI Miami throws science out the window, again
On Oct 30, 4:07 pm, "Mac Breck" wrote:
wrote in ... In rec.arts.tv Chris L Peterson wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:17:07 -0700, Larry Bud wrote: A pretty good job? I mean, I like the show. Pretty graphics, cool special effects, but science? No way. I disagree. I rarely see serious scientific errors on CSI (Las Vegas). I think they do a remarkable job. They use the right techniques, and they Well, in one early (possibly first) season episode I saw CSI (LV) get the function of a GFCI totally wrong, and the murder plot depended on that. They also got the acceleration due to gravity confused with terminal velocity (IIRC. Can't find my tape of the ep., and don't have S2 on DVD yet.) in #26 "Overload". I had a physics teacher that told us if a 1" ball bearing were dropped off the Empire State building it would go 7 feet into the ground. He didn't understand the concept of terminal velocity. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
CSI Miami throws science out the window, again
"RichA" wrote in message
ups.com... I love it. SNIP predictable Rich rant You watch a T & A show for science? Sheesh! -- Rick Evans --------------------------------------------------------------- Lon -71° 04' 35.3" Lat +42° 11' 06.7" --------------------------------------------------------------- Webcam Astroimaging http://mysite.verizon.net/hiltonevan...troimaging.htm --------------------------------------------------------------- ChemPen Chemical Structure Software http://www.chempensoftware.com |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
CSI Miami throws science out the window, again
In rec.arts.tv Mac Breck wrote:
wrote in message ... Well, in one early (possibly first) season episode I saw CSI (LV) get the function of a GFCI totally wrong, and the murder plot depended on that. Well, everybody screws up now and then. The key is to have more than one science check and not to screw up all the time. The original CSI is pretty good, but not perfect. It would not have bothered me nearly so much if the whole plot of the main murder mystery didn't hinge on it. That's really the only reason I remember it at all. I agree, original CSI is pretty good most of the time, that one just hit me over the head. Bill Ranck Blacksburg, Va. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
CSI Miami throws science out the window, again
wrote in message ...
In rec.arts.tv Chris L Peterson wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:17:07 -0700, Larry Bud wrote: A pretty good job? I mean, I like the show. Pretty graphics, cool special effects, but science? No way. I disagree. I rarely see serious scientific errors on CSI (Las Vegas). I think they do a remarkable job. They use the right techniques, and they Well, in one early (possibly first) season episode I saw CSI (LV) get the function of a GFCI totally wrong, and the murder plot depended on that. They also got the acceleration due to gravity confused with terminal velocity (IIRC. Can't find my tape of the ep., and don't have S2 on DVD yet.) in #26 "Overload". In fact, they spent time on it and had Grissom (the supposed expert) explain it. Brain fart among the writers and tech. experts. It was as blatant as the time in "Lethal Weapon" when Riggs explained he had a special bullet to kill himself with, one "...with a hollow point", and a showed a massive closeup of an 9mm FMJ round (ball ammo., clearly NOT a hollowpoint). In other words, what they depicted as happening could not have happened in the way they described. I don't know how well they handle the lab stuff, I know electrical things much better, but my wife is a chemist and she always drools over the equipment they use. I've never heard her complain about the science techniques. Well, everybody screws up now and then. The key is to have more than one science check and not to screw up all the time. The original CSI is pretty good, but not perfect. -- Mac Breck (KoshN) ------------------------------- "Babylon 5: Crusade" (1999) Durkani: It doesn't matter if they believe us. Sooner or later the truth's going to come out. The truth is... Kendarr: Out of fashion. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
CSI Miami throws science out the window, again
"Rich" wrote in message oups.com... On Oct 30, 4:07 pm, "Mac Breck" wrote: wrote in ... In rec.arts.tv Chris L Peterson wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:17:07 -0700, Larry Bud wrote: A pretty good job? I mean, I like the show. Pretty graphics, cool special effects, but science? No way. I disagree. I rarely see serious scientific errors on CSI (Las Vegas). I think they do a remarkable job. They use the right techniques, and they Well, in one early (possibly first) season episode I saw CSI (LV) get the function of a GFCI totally wrong, and the murder plot depended on that. They also got the acceleration due to gravity confused with terminal velocity (IIRC. Can't find my tape of the ep., and don't have S2 on DVD yet.) in #26 "Overload". I had a physics teacher that told us if a 1" ball bearing were dropped off the Empire State building it would go 7 feet into the ground. He didn't understand the concept of terminal velocity. I used to hear the same sort of rumors about a penny dropped edge-first. In truth, it might bend the penny, although I don't think a steel ball bearing would be damaged. Don't doubt, however, that a bullet fired into the air, especially at an angle, can kill someone. Hmm, possibly even the ball bearing could do it; it'd sure smart like hell. I'm guessing 200 fps plus. And what, 120 grams? (Anyone know the density of steel off the "top of your head"?hahhaha) |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
CSI Miami throws science out the window, again
In article ,
Chris L Peterson wrote: On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:17:07 -0700, Larry Bud wrote: A pretty good job? I mean, I like the show. Pretty graphics, cool special effects, but science? No way. I disagree. I rarely see serious scientific errors on CSI (Las Vegas). Are you kidding me? They've done the "infinite zoom" thing repeatedly on the Vegas show, just like the other two CSI shows, where they take some grainy security camera footage and zoom in to read a clothing label or a note in a person's hand or some other ridiculous thing. And the Las Vegas Crime Lab seems to have a database for everything. I about fell off my couch laughing one night when Stokes took a sofa upon which a body was found and ran it through their "furniture database", which not only instantly told him the exact make and model of the sofa, but the exact store it was sold out of, when it was sold, and to whom. But the real inaccuracies in the Vegas show (as well as the NY and Miami shows) comes not in the science but in the law. The 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments to the Constitution apparently do not exist in the world of CSI. They use the right techniques, and they use the right equipment. Not really. For example, they put all their evidence in see-through plastic bags. That's not a good way to, for example, preserve fingerprint evidence: The use of clear envelopes because plastic can have an adverse affect on the future development of latent prints on items of evidence. The introduction of excessive heat and humidity and the friction of evidence against the clear plastic can have an adverse affect on latent print development. Light, which permeates the clear plastic, can also result in the degradation of latent prints. Additionally, the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors / Laboratory Accreditation Board requires that latent print evidence be stored in paper envelopes (as is the generally accepted method). |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
CSI Miami throws science out the window, again
In article ,
"Mason Barge" wrote: Don't doubt, however, that a bullet fired into the air, especially at an angle, can kill someone. That's actually how extreme long-distance snipers hit their targets. For all intents and purposes, they lob the round in an arc, like a high-velocity mortar, and the bullet comes down on the subject from above rather than hitting him straight-on. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
CSI Miami throws science out the window, again
Thanatos wrote:
In article , "Mason Barge" wrote: Don't doubt, however, that a bullet fired into the air, especially at an angle, can kill someone. That's actually how extreme long-distance snipers hit their targets. For all intents and purposes, they lob the round in an arc, like a high-velocity mortar, and the bullet comes down on the subject from above rather than hitting him straight-on. That's how *any* marksman hits a target. Gravity starts to drag on a bullet fired from a gun the instant the bullet leaves the barrel. A bullet fired dead level and a bullet dropped at the same instant hit the ground at the same time. All bullets follow some sort of arc to hit a target. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
CSI Miami throws science out the window, again
I want to know how BoaVista can tell that wolf boy's DNA is 'mutating'
from a single sample. And why did they just let wolf boy GO, when they had him for stealing the contents of the dead guy's briefcase? Who was the online chick ordering dinner for? And why didn't anybody ask the delivery guy how often he brought her dinner for 2? How did the wolf hair get into the wound? How come Eric just handled the murder weapon with his bare hands? Gotta love the conflicting instructions the cops give to the vampire* "Stop and turn around!" "Put your hands over your head!" "I'm not going to tell you a second time -- get down on the ground!" um, you didn't tell him a FIRST time, H. *and how come nobody ever mentioned they had a vampire killing a werewolf? -- Jitterbug phone works! (Third time's a charm!) |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
CSI Miami throws science out the window, again
Fred Ziffle wrote: "Mythbusters" did a show on that. Turns out, a bullet shot straight up leaves the barrel at (fatally) muzzle velocity, then slows down (duh), and accelerates downward until it reaches terminal velocity (which can hurt, but is fatal only under very unfortunate coincdences of body alignment to the falling bullet). IIRC, the difference was that the bullet shot straight up reached it's highest point and stopped before starting down. Once it started down, it was in freefall and started to tumble, losing it's rotational spin. By the time it fell to earth it was relatively harmless. A bullet shot in an arc, however, retained its spin and much of its velocity, with potentially deadly results. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Science out the window when it comes to political issues like "gun control" and Global Warming! | Benj | Policy | 524 | July 25th 08 11:38 AM |
Miami Herald calls for Resignation of NASA IG | Jonathan | History | 10 | June 20th 07 06:20 AM |
Miami Herald calls for Resignation of NASA IG | Jonathan | Policy | 8 | June 19th 07 02:30 AM |
Miami Herald calls for Resignation of NASA IG | Jonathan | Space Shuttle | 3 | June 18th 07 04:35 PM |
Where to buy a telescope in Miami? | Blurb | Misc | 2 | February 23rd 04 06:22 PM |