What is happening here?

In news:[email protected] David G. Imber
<[email protected]> wrote:

> In this video you will see people using their cell phones to
> pop popcorn:

No, you won't.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN [email protected]

---

› See More: What is happening here?

On 03 Jun 2008 18:07:27 GMT, Bert Hyman <[email protected]> wrote:

>In news:[email protected] David G. Imber
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In this video you will see people using their cell phones to
>> pop popcorn:
>
>No, you won't.

You get an A for concision, but not such a high grade for
thoroughness.

Maybe it's not clear that I'm asking for an explanation, if
you'd be so kind.

Thanks, DGI

In news:[email protected] David G. Imber
<[email protected]> wrote:

> On 03 Jun 2008 18:07:27 GMT, Bert Hyman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>In news:[email protected] David G. Imber
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> In this video you will see people using their cell phones to
>>> pop popcorn:
>>
>>No, you won't.
>
> You get an A for concision, but not such a high grade for
> thoroughness.
>
> Maybe it's not clear that I'm asking for an explanation, if
> you'd be so kind.

What you're seeing is a joke.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN [email protected]

On 03 Jun 2008 18:34:59 GMT, Bert Hyman <[email protected]> wrote:


>> Maybe it's not clear that I'm asking for an explanation, if
>> you'd be so kind.
>
>What you're seeing is a joke.

That is an explanation of a certain sort. Sorry to trouble
you, you obviously don't know the answer.

DGI

In news:[email protected] David G. Imber
<[email protected]> wrote:

> On 03 Jun 2008 18:34:59 GMT, Bert Hyman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>> Maybe it's not clear that I'm asking for an explanation, if
>>> you'd be so kind.
>>
>>What you're seeing is a joke.
>
> That is an explanation of a certain sort. Sorry to trouble
> you, you obviously don't know the answer.

Good luck.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN [email protected]

On 03 Jun 2008 20:59:33 GMT, Bert Hyman <[email protected]> wrote:

>In news:[email protected] David G. Imber
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 03 Jun 2008 18:34:59 GMT, Bert Hyman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Maybe it's not clear that I'm asking for an explanation, if
>>>> you'd be so kind.
>>>
>>>What you're seeing is a joke.
>>
>> That is an explanation of a certain sort. Sorry to trouble
>> you, you obviously don't know the answer.
>
>Good luck.

Thanks, Minnesota.Obviously I'm assuming it's a hoax, and the
answer is probably right out there and I'm blindly missing it. But
there are several instances of this on the Web, and in most cases
there are people responding "it's a hoax", as you did, but offering no
explanation. I will believe that it's a hoax when there is evidence
from which to draw that conclusion. I cannot see any. Skepticism works
in all directions.

DGI

In news:[email protected] David G. Imber
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I will believe that it's a hoax when there is evidence
> from which to draw that conclusion.

Rather than believing any magic trick they're shown, most people take a
different approach and assume it's a trick until offered proof that it's
real.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN [email protected]

On 03 Jun 2008 21:33:23 GMT, Bert Hyman <[email protected]> wrote:

>In news:[email protected] David G. Imber
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I will believe that it's a hoax when there is evidence
>> from which to draw that conclusion.
>
>Rather than believing any magic trick they're shown, most people take a
>different approach and assume it's a trick until offered proof that it's
>real.

You're not getting me, which is why I was arguing with your
initial responses (respectfully). I ASSUMED it was a trick. I'm the
most reason-based person you'll meet. But tricks have solutions. I
haven't seen one from you or anyone else. Therefore I can't call it a
trick until I see evidence of how it came to be. Right now I have a
video which, on the surface, gives me nothing (or at least I can spot
nothing) like evidence. I'm left with an assumption that it's a trick,
but an assumption with no inherent truth value.

DGI

In news:[email protected] David G. Imber
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Right now I have a video which, on the surface, gives me nothing (or
> at least I can spot nothing) like evidence.

How do you expect to find "evidence" in a low-resolution video that
shows you only what the maker wants you to see?

> I'm left with an assumption that it's a trick, but an assumption with
> no inherent truth value.

How much water is in a kernel of corn? How much energy is required to
raise that quantity of water from room temperature to boiling in the
period of time shown? How much energy can you get out of 4 conventional
cell phones? How much of that energy can you transfer from those cell
phones into a kernel of corn in the period of time shown in the physical
configuation shown?

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN [email protected]

On 04 Jun 2008 14:06:00 GMT, Bert Hyman <[email protected]> wrote:

>In news:[email protected] David G. Imber
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Right now I have a video which, on the surface, gives me nothing (or
>> at least I can spot nothing) like evidence.
>
>How do you expect to find "evidence" in a low-resolution video that
>shows you only what the maker wants you to see?

I do not. That is what prompted my request for an explanation.
Unfortunately, no one has offered any.

>> I'm left with an assumption that it's a trick, but an assumption with
>> no inherent truth value.
>
>How much water is in a kernel of corn? How much energy is required to
>raise that quantity of water from room temperature to boiling in the
>period of time shown? How much energy can you get out of 4 conventional
>cell phones? How much of that energy

[snip]

I am under no illusion that you can pop corn with a cell
phone. Nor do I believe that Mr. Mentalist can bend spoons w/his
brain. But when I see them bend I simply want to know how it's done.
That story is generally far more interesting and amusing than "magic".
I have not yet heard such a story in this case, nor any story that
makes sense. "It's a hoax" does nothing for me.

DGI

In news:[email protected] David G. Imber
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I am under no illusion that you can pop corn with a cell
> phone. Nor do I believe that Mr. Mentalist can bend spoons w/his
> brain. But when I see them bend I simply want to know how it's done.
> That story is generally far more interesting and amusing than "magic".
> I have not yet heard such a story in this case, nor any story that
> makes sense. "It's a hoax" does nothing for me.

As I sad before, when the only "evidence" you're given is a
low-resolution video produced in an environment entirely under the
control of the hoaxer, there's nothing else to say.

If you want more, the only place you're going to get it is from the
producers of the joke video.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN [email protected]