All Comments for this Record Category

• response to this attempt

  Whores With Oars

  Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:23:34 GMT

  What a conundrum. When we did the feat in 57 seconds the cameraman was in the boat- and you really can't see the figure 8 being done. However, when all the footage was taken from the dock, you can't really see us- or our stashes and eye patches. That's why I edited the footage- so you could see everything. Does the witness not count for anything? Are you calling Oliver DiCicco a liar? Should I re-send the footage shot from the dock only?

  LIKE (1) · REPLY
• response to this attempt

  Dan Rollman

  Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:47:05 GMT

  Soo - we've done as you requested and changed your record to 57 seconds. That said, the whole purpose of submitting media is to provide unquestionable evidence of a feat. Claiming a time without providing proof simply isn't acceptable. Unless you're able to submit such evidence, I don't think we can verify this feat.

  LIKE (1) · REPLY
• response to this attempt

  Whores With Oars

  Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:20:09 GMT

  Yes- this is correct. The Figure Eight was done in 57 seconds- Honest! I edited it longer for dramatic purposes- exactly Eratosthenes- Thank You :)

  LIKE (1) · REPLY
• response to this attempt

  Alexander Paul Kleinschmidt

  Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:01:18 GMT

  The 57 seconds we're talking about is the time shown on the stop watch at the end. The timer also announces the time at the very end. The reason given for possibly trusting that over the video is that the video itself contains obvious editing (due to the multiple cameras used) and even with the most accurate of editing will be at least slightly off. In this case, assuming honesty and integrity from all involved, I think that in the editing process the attempt was made longer than it really is for both illustrative and dramatic purposes.

  LIKE (1) · REPLY
• response to this attempt

  Rob Birdsong

  Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:13:08 GMT

  Thanks Ty for pointing out the typo in the blurb. We have fixed it. Soo, can you explain to me the 57 second time you came up with? We are going by the video you submitted and from that we measured 1:44.97 seconds. Is there something we are missing here?

  LIKE (1) · REPLY
• response to this attempt

  Alexander Paul Kleinschmidt

  Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:56:28 GMT

  Wait, the record it has is 45 seconds, the description is 1 minute 45 seconds, and it's really 57 seconds? I think one of the times is going by the video's clock (and since the video's been edited that can't be trusted), one's a typo, and the real one (57 seconds) is the one in the video...wow.

  LIKE (1) · REPLY
• response to this attempt

  Whores With Oars

  Sat, 27 Jun 2009 09:38:55 GMT

  Yeah- the official time was 57 Seconds.

  LIKE (1) · REPLY
• response to this attempt
  Sat, 27 Jun 2009 02:19:57 GMT

  The description and caption times for this record do not match.

  LIKE · REPLY