4 ms·

Glad you asked - https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/on-tap/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/on-tap/ This is demonstrably bullshit. It does work. Many years ago

by goldcd 8y ago

Glad you asked - https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/on-tap/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/on-tap/ This is demonstrably bullshit. It does work. Many years ago I got a bee-in-my-bonnet over this and tried to correct them - and got told to ~"piss off". God, I'd almost manage to push this out of my mind, until your post.. Just to address the article (to you, another uncaring audience) - "However, tapping does nothing to reincorporate the carbon dioxide into the solution, the key element to preventing the dread foam-out." First part true, second part not. Foaming is caused by the CO2 bubbles expanding when pressure is released and taking liquid above them out the top of your can. Few hard taps on the bottom detach the CO2 bubbles and cause them to all go to the top (no re-absorption - that will simply take time). So few hard taps on the bottom (not the side), then opening your can, will still cause a loss of CO2 - but not the foaming. Somebody must have 2 cans near them to try this with right now. Shake both for as long as you want, few hard taps on the bottom of one (finger-tip with almost painful force) - and then just open them both and compare. It Works.

joshuamorton 8y ago
So you're arguing that saying "tapping the side of a soda can will not prevent bubbles" is bullshit because thwacking the bottom of the can as hard as you can will? This feels like you're being unreasonably uncharitable.
- goldcd 8y ago
  I'm getting flashbacks (and yes, I know this shouldn't be important, and I should let it go) - but I can't. That -3 rating is causing flashbacks... I did not say "as hard as you can" - my approach is similar to a finger-flick you might have inflicted on a fellow child in your youth. Speed not force. Backing up a bit. I think most people who come across this topic want to know "I've got a shaken can - and I don't want to open it as it'll go everywhere. Is there anything I can do?" My take is that "Yes there is" - and whilst that snopes article is out there, a lot of people think there isn't. Snopes is a little opaque and whilst there are many issues with peer-reviewed articles - their complete lack of desire to engage really annoys me. I don't expect them to be faultless - but maybe just having somewhere you could submit a comment, a video, something would be a move in the right direction.
  - zaksoup 8y ago
    Wait. Your issue with snopes is that they said "there is no meaningful evidence that [x] is true" and you're mad that when you said "but I have anecdata" they weren't interested? that's not how this works...
    - goldcd 8y ago
      I'm not saying Snopes is maliciously preventing "the truth" from being discovered. I love Snopes. I've sent countless "You're wrong because snopes links" to people. My humble concern is that if you find yourself disagreeing with something as trivial as "shaking a soda can" there seems to be no actual way of addressing the issue. And then if I can't address the pathetically mundane and boring... well how do they handle the complex?
      - zaksoup 8y ago
        That seems even less reasonable to me. You're saying that you use snopes regularly, presumably because of their dedication to accurate reporting, and are frustrated that you can't correct on "something as trivial as 'shaking a soda can'" because the only thing you were able to provide them was anecdata? It sounds like the reasons why you happily send "you're wrong because snopes" links are the reasons why you're unable to correct them and to me this sounds like the system is working correctly.
RobAtticus 8y ago
So if I do something different than what is described ("tapping the side"), I will get the desired effect? So they aren't wrong, they just decided not to exhaustively try out every method of tapping on a soda can? Tapping-on-the-bottom-with-near-painful-force is definitely not what people mean when they colloquially claim tapping on a soda can settles it down.
- goldcd 8y ago
  Hold on. You're right. They say side, I say bottom - and it might make a difference. To the average reader it reads the same. I'd be fine if both approaches were covered and compared. Googling provides results all over the place - I was using hyperbole for the 'nearly painful tap', but just to differentiate the methodology for tapping once lightly. Also results seem to vary massively when looked at some people say it works, some people say it doesn't, some people say aspartame surface-tension is related (maybe it is, I was using Diet Coke). My annoyance was just that there was a statement out there that says "This topic is false". No way to query, qualify, anything.
  - jawnv6 8y ago
    It might? Your OP was very specific on the subject and you seem aware that the side is inappropriate: Few hard taps on the bottom detach the CO2 bubbles and cause them to all go to the top few hard taps on the bottom (not the side), few hard taps on the bottom of one (finger-tip with almost painful force) The actual claim on the site: Claim: Tapping the side of a soda can will prevent its contents from foaming over when you open it. I don't think you're as vehemently committed to rigorous fact-checking as your little anecdote would have us believe.
    - goldcd 8y ago
      Well on your basis we could open an infinite number of variations. Tap on the bottom or the side. Tap on the side, whilst facing North. Tap on the side, whilst facing North, using a finger with red-nail-polish. Tap on the side, whilst facing North, using a finger with red-nail-polish, on the left hand of a woman born under the sign of The Dragon. My point is that the specificity of the OP is down to Snopes, and I can't change that. They don't even provide these details. Maybe the side-tapper was born in the year of the pig, and that matters. My issue is mainly that they wish to be perceived as the source of all truth - and seemingly have NO interest in being corrected. Snopes never publishes any statement limiting their results, asking for further input, etc etc. Their 'thing' is just publishing absolutes. Nobody else does this.
goldcd 8y ago
Right. You've made me do it. Tomorrow I'm buying Coke-Zero cans, chilling them, I will shake together, toss coin tap heads on the bottom, and open simultaneously (providing I can work out how to hold my phone and two cans at the same time) and will post unedited results on a youtube link. ALL I ask is whoever downvoted me, at least checks back. F'it - I really don't care. I've been an oppressed minority for so long it doesn't even matter. :) (I can't believe how wound up I'm getting over this - but baby-steps. I will build your trust until you elect me your benevolent dictator. It'll all work out in the end)
- nkurz 8y ago
  I've upvoted rather than downvoted you because I appreciate your passion, but I'm eager to see your results. Posting here to remind me to check back tomorrow.

by goldcd 8y ago

joshuamorton 8y ago

So you're arguing that saying "tapping the side of a soda can will not prevent bubbles" is bullshit because thwacking the bottom of the can as hard as you can will? This feels like you're being unreasonably uncharitable.

goldcd 8y ago
I'm getting flashbacks (and yes, I know this shouldn't be important, and I should let it go) - but I can't. That -3 rating is causing flashbacks... I did not say "as hard as you can" - my approach is similar to a finger-flick you might have inflicted on a fellow child in your youth. Speed not force. Backing up a bit. I think most people who come across this topic want to know "I've got a shaken can - and I don't want to open it as it'll go everywhere. Is there anything I can do?" My take is that "Yes there is" - and whilst that snopes article is out there, a lot of people think there isn't. Snopes is a little opaque and whilst there are many issues with peer-reviewed articles - their complete lack of desire to engage really annoys me. I don't expect them to be faultless - but maybe just having somewhere you could submit a comment, a video, something would be a move in the right direction.
- zaksoup 8y ago
  Wait. Your issue with snopes is that they said "there is no meaningful evidence that [x] is true" and you're mad that when you said "but I have anecdata" they weren't interested? that's not how this works...
  - goldcd 8y ago
    I'm not saying Snopes is maliciously preventing "the truth" from being discovered. I love Snopes. I've sent countless "You're wrong because snopes links" to people. My humble concern is that if you find yourself disagreeing with something as trivial as "shaking a soda can" there seems to be no actual way of addressing the issue. And then if I can't address the pathetically mundane and boring... well how do they handle the complex?
    - zaksoup 8y ago
      That seems even less reasonable to me. You're saying that you use snopes regularly, presumably because of their dedication to accurate reporting, and are frustrated that you can't correct on "something as trivial as 'shaking a soda can'" because the only thing you were able to provide them was anecdata? It sounds like the reasons why you happily send "you're wrong because snopes" links are the reasons why you're unable to correct them and to me this sounds like the system is working correctly.

RobAtticus 8y ago

So if I do something different than what is described ("tapping the side"), I will get the desired effect? So they aren't wrong, they just decided not to exhaustively try out every method of tapping on a soda can? Tapping-on-the-bottom-with-near-painful-force is definitely not what people mean when they colloquially claim tapping on a soda can settles it down.

goldcd 8y ago
Hold on. You're right. They say side, I say bottom - and it might make a difference. To the average reader it reads the same. I'd be fine if both approaches were covered and compared. Googling provides results all over the place - I was using hyperbole for the 'nearly painful tap', but just to differentiate the methodology for tapping once lightly. Also results seem to vary massively when looked at some people say it works, some people say it doesn't, some people say aspartame surface-tension is related (maybe it is, I was using Diet Coke). My annoyance was just that there was a statement out there that says "This topic is false". No way to query, qualify, anything.
- jawnv6 8y ago
  It might? Your OP was very specific on the subject and you seem aware that the side is inappropriate: Few hard taps on the bottom detach the CO2 bubbles and cause them to all go to the top few hard taps on the bottom (not the side), few hard taps on the bottom of one (finger-tip with almost painful force) The actual claim on the site: Claim: Tapping the side of a soda can will prevent its contents from foaming over when you open it. I don't think you're as vehemently committed to rigorous fact-checking as your little anecdote would have us believe.
  - goldcd 8y ago
    Well on your basis we could open an infinite number of variations. Tap on the bottom or the side. Tap on the side, whilst facing North. Tap on the side, whilst facing North, using a finger with red-nail-polish. Tap on the side, whilst facing North, using a finger with red-nail-polish, on the left hand of a woman born under the sign of The Dragon. My point is that the specificity of the OP is down to Snopes, and I can't change that. They don't even provide these details. Maybe the side-tapper was born in the year of the pig, and that matters. My issue is mainly that they wish to be perceived as the source of all truth - and seemingly have NO interest in being corrected. Snopes never publishes any statement limiting their results, asking for further input, etc etc. Their 'thing' is just publishing absolutes. Nobody else does this.

goldcd 8y ago

Right. You've made me do it. Tomorrow I'm buying Coke-Zero cans, chilling them, I will shake together, toss coin tap heads on the bottom, and open simultaneously (providing I can work out how to hold my phone and two cans at the same time) and will post unedited results on a youtube link. ALL I ask is whoever downvoted me, at least checks back. F'it - I really don't care. I've been an oppressed minority for so long it doesn't even matter. :) (I can't believe how wound up I'm getting over this - but baby-steps. I will build your trust until you elect me your benevolent dictator. It'll all work out in the end)

nkurz 8y ago
I've upvoted rather than downvoted you because I appreciate your passion, but I'm eager to see your results. Posting here to remind me to check back tomorrow.