Curiosity, Adam Savage, and Life-Extension

Even the youtube clips were full of conjunction fallacy and other inconsistencies.

fanfic about Savage

This was my thought as well, but heck, if I'd seen that plot summary on fanfiction.net, I'd click it.

At least the fictional "Adam Savage" character in this show seems relatively unconflicted, both morally & psychologically, about his quest to survive. He didn't articulate concerns about depriving his life of meaning or thwarting "the single best invention of life," according to Steve Jobs.

It did seem pretty arrogant, especially the part where Adam single-handedly recreates his biological arm and adds external storage to his brain (all with technology scavenged from post apocalyptic surroundings). Also, you had to laugh when switching bodies was portrayed as a translucent brain swimming between them like a jelly fish. All in all, it was about 99% cheesy sci-fi but I still found it entertaining. I'm just happy that it didn't end like most movies about immortality: the protagonist angsting over his 'lost humanity' and killing himself.

This guy's attitude seemed unscientific to me, from the beginning. He is all about special effects, more or less spectacular. They are his perspective and want to tell his story through them.

Why have we only just got this show over here in the u.k.? I agree with the comments above but would like to add the unless we can popularise science and get people interested then it will never progress.

Overall, I can't recommend this much but it might do a good job getting people aware of these issues who don't currently know anything.

Can't say I've really seen it -- not a cable subscriber here (I may correct that for this episode through other channels of media propagation) -- but this meshes with my impression of the general level of scientific expertise found in the Science Channel.

I'm curious: at any point did it mention, at all, that none of the technologies mentioned as being used on Savage for life extension are particularly radical in nature, or that they all have a basis in currently ongoing research? Obviously this holds true of the SENS project to filter senescent blood cells (interesting anecdote: I know the guy who built that particular project's first prototype device for filtering senescent cells from mice. One of the challenges they had to overcome was the small quantity of blood; he did this by designing the device to be reciprocating rather than cycling. He also keeps a neodymium magnet in his office which is weighted in pounds. It's encased in a massive block of foam. He also has a hobby of adding new heat-absorbing materials to obsolescent electronics in order to see how much overclocking he can get out of them -- he once related to me that he got an old 200 MHz up to 3 GHz... for thirty seconds. No, he isn't me.).

I'm more interested in the things like the 'cybernetic' neuroprosthesis (obviously referencing Theodore Berger's work), the cloned organs (obvious reference to multiple projects doing individual tissue cloning -- there's even a company that is now selling cloned human skin that has blood vessels, IIRC.), etc., etc..

Guys, they just make a movie out of what could happen in the future.

It's just some predictions about what could be made, based on the prototype right now. remember how fast did the phone turned into a cheap touchscreen based from old black and white phone from 2000-2011?

that is quite fast, so they made some real predictions. their predictions aren't really far from reality, it's still make-able, with an explanation of how it works. maybe, something is quite strange, that's because they really had to cover every single probabilities (they do a good job to it).

i recommend anyone to watch it, it's an eye-opener. especially for scientists and scientist wannabes. don't be cynical because everything is just a visual effects. it's just (good) predictions.