Sky admits its science show faked explosions
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.To viewers of the science programme Brainiac, the exploding bath seemed spectacular proof of the potency of what the presenter described as "the two dog's nuts of the periodic table".
In fact the blast was not the result of a meeting between water and rubidium and caesium, but the triggering of a bomb, Sky television confirmed yesterday.
The artifice was spotted by Dr Ben Goldacre, who runs the Bad Science website dedicated to exposing pseudo-science.
The programme promises viewers that the experiments on the show - ranging from blowing up caravans with different gases to seeing if a mobile phone ignites petrol vapours - arebased on proved science.
But in a 2004 episode, the producers compromised. Explaining what happened when the metals were put in the bath, a crew member said: "Absolutely bloody nothing. The density of caesium ensured it hit the bottom of the bath like a lead weight. The volume of water then drowned out the thermal shock. They could not go home empty-handed. So they rigged a bomb in the bottom of the bath."
Sky said its viewers would be aware when the effects of any experiment had been exaggerated. Those responsible were longer part of the production team.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments