You're grasping at straws here, Gully. I'm aware of that definition, but you're still using the term incorrectly. Unless you consider "Television Show" an ad hominem attack, you have no case. I'm sorry if the words "Television Show" offend you. I'm also sorry that you're so adverse to people advertising their personal opinions on the internet (even when they are backed by evidence). My entire post was directed toward Rama Set, who is the author of his post and his own personal view, and in no way did I personally attack him or his credibility.
Evidence that Mythbusters is backed by the conspiracy exists, so trying to play that point off as an "ad hominem" is a desperate move, not to mention a low-blow with no basis in logic.
You're confused.
You've declared that you won't believe anything they say. The only reasons you list are irrelevant to the evidence: 1) TV Show and 2) Complicit with liars. So your post meets the definition of the fallacy.
The validity of your personal attack (Here: does the Conspiracy back the MBers?) is irrelevant in determining your failure in using the fallacy. You really should learn to debate the words not the person, with exception. For example of an exception, EnaG clearly shows that Rowbotham cannot argue using simple physics. His background fails him, and I dismiss him as unqualified and wrong.
That evidence exists for your outlandish claim is insufficient. In addition to providing citations for your outlandish claims, you need to show that the preponderance of the evidence supports your outlandish claim.
You're making some assumptions here, and they're all wrong. Next time, just pick the right fallacy. Just because you don't accept the evidence for my claims doesn't mean I'm making things up or using an ad hominem fallacy. You are stretching the definition of the phrase considerably to meet your argument, and it's obvious. Stop it. Just because you use big words doesn't mean you're a grown up.
^ You can call that an ad hominem and I won't argue.
It's also interesting how whenever I get into a conversation with you you start arguing semantics. Are you over compensating for your lack of knowledge on the subject? Wikipedia is just a few clicks away from where you are now.