well, im watching man vs wild, which i LOVE, annnnnnd he just said his christian faith is what keeps him going through the lonely nights. and. honestly, religion is just the most horrible system on this earth, responsible for so much destruction and brainwashing. anyone i find that is devoutly religious... i just can't look at in the same light.
there is no god. jesus is not real. it's an age old allegory for the astrological signs in the night sky. people implement their grip of control to these stories in order to control the society they are governing. uneducated people who don't understand the workings of the universe, will very quickly believe in outrageous stories, because it means a simple answer.
Oh wow. You are so controversial. You don't believe in God?!?!?! Gasp. Get over it. A lot of people don't. You're not special. This board is for Bear loving, Bear hating and Les bashing. No one cares about your stupid views. You don't like Bear for his religion? Fine. You want to tell the world how indie and cool and unique you are. Not fine. Go away. Unless you have a story about how large Bear's peen is because you saw it in the Vietnam episode, you need to bounce and find a different board.
You really don't think the original poster was trying to ram anything down anyone's throat? What he said didn't make me uncomfortable acutally. I am not religious. I do not believe in heaven, hell, God, etc. I didn't once say in my post that I was or I did. If the original poster had started spouting about Jesus and how we must accept Him as our savior, I would have said the exact same thing. I can't stand when either 'side' tries to convince everyone else of their views. The one thing that annoys me most about atheists, or whatever the original poster is, is that they constantly need attention for their views. They're looking for someone to gasp and shake their head. They desperately want to argue with a religious person so they can point out why the other person is so wrong and they're so right. Both sides are just insecure about their own views and what would happen if they happened to be wrong about it.
Basically what I'm trying to say is if you want to argue with someone about religion, great. This just isn't the place to do it. Clearly the OP had a motive for posting what he did. He wanted to start a big religion war, and I don't think he quite accomplished it. Sars OP.
And I never said the person's post wasn't 'valid'. I said he should talk about it somewhere else.
ahh. makes perfect sense. he did it because he was becoming exposed. i honestly couldn't be more happy to see the larger parallel here though.
so.... bear does something miraculous right... he shows people how to 'survive' right? he inspires them with courage that if something were to go wrong; what to do... and then when they find out he's fudging the details a bit... they turn on him... so he weakens their hearts with sentiment. HA.
the message board is for discussing issues. i felt like stating my opinion to hear if people agreed or not. why do i have to catch flak for that? to be expected though.
You say things like " there is no god. jesus is not real. it's an age old allegory for the astrological signs in the night sky. people implement their grip of control to these stories in order to control the society they are governing. uneducated people who don't understand the workings of the universe, will very quickly believe in outrageous stories, because it means a simple answer"
And now act surprised when people get aggitated in their responses? Clearly you are looking to invoke these responses and get people riled up, or are just extremely dim. That said, religion has no place being discussed on a message board of a survival show, and I suggest you drop the argument.
And how exactly is he a fraud? It's a "how to" show, not a "here's me in some crazy *** situation and a documentary of what i did to make it out alive!". Yes, he plays up and stages some situations to show people WHAT TO DO if they are in the same place, there is a disclaimer for this, assuming you can read, you would notice it in the episodes where this takes place.
If you can't watch the show knowing the host is religious and some situations may be artificial without throwing a hissy fit or letting a bunch of random strangers on the internet what your religious standing is, maybe you should find a different show to watch.
Oh boy, another nerd rager caught up on minor details that have no impact on the show whatsoever.
You seem to think this show is trying to be a survival documentary.
It's a how to show, whether or not he stayed in a wilderness shelter or in a resort has no impact whatsoever on the theme of the show, sorry buddy.
Does it matter if he's an SAS member or if he was the youngest person to climb Everest (you're honestly disgruntled about that?)? No, because it bears no relevance to the show, which is the base of this argument.
Or to voice over the parts where he claimed to be doing something he supposedly wasn't?
Unless you were directly involved in this case or consulting those that were, I have a hard time believing they simply voiced back over these episodes because of bad advice.
You need to stick to one story, friend.
I can fully believe them being found out to have lied and said he was doing something he wasn't, thus pulling the episodes temporarily, fixing the areas where he said he was doing what he wasn't. That makes sense.
However now, you are claiming that they were pulled so he could redo the voice overs to give better advice?
Hmmmmm. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but are you just someone with a personal vendetta against the show? Because I can assure you I have no interest in listening to you recite your neat little factiods about the show being false at times, however entertaining your struggle to prove yourself to random internet goers may be.
I see you ignored the bulk of my post and pulled things out that you could critique out of context, alrighty.
"Another moron who never saw the show in its original format but wants to argue and defend it."
I'm defending nothing, and yeah, god forbid I wasn't there for the original airing, I do have other hobbies, I'm sorry kiddo.
"There's no story, just the truth and I'm sticking to it. "
...Right, let me dumb this down for you: You're simply spewing out what will sound the best for your adamant "BEAR GRYLLS DUM STUPID HE LIE" argument, that's nice, A for effort. My point being that first you claimed it was to fix his false statements, then later claimed it was to fix his "bad advice". Your story, the truth, whatever you want to call it, going back and contradicting yourself is generally the fastest way to destroying your own argument.
"Who said it was to give better advices?"
You, in almost those exact words.
"Then don't come here and pretend that those so-called factoids are false."
I'm not, I'm merely questioning your habbit of contradicting yourself and getting so completely worked up over something that doesn't have the smallest effect on you or your life. You're simply looking to troll people who enjoy a show which you are incapable of enjoying yourself, which is fine, you don't have to like it, but perhaps that means you should do something else with your time then try to invoke arguments among people that simply *gasp* disagree with you.
"Where do I say the voice-overs were done to give better advices? "
And I quote:
"Yeah, the show being pulled off the air because it was full of bad advices has nothing..."
And to address your pathetic first statement:
"Nice try. You were wrong, kept on talking BS and now your way out of it is: "I have other hobbies" ?
That's fcking lame. Especially since you've spent a good amount of time arguing with me. "
I'm not sure what exactly is wrong with your thickheadedness, at no point have I argued that he DIDN'T lie about those things, not once. In fact, I'm quite okay with it, because instead of acting like a child about it like you are, I continue to enjoy the show, because a few falacies that bear no relevance to the shows content really don't affect me, nor you for that matter.
Having other hobbies isn't my "way out" of anything, you're giving me crap for not knowing about the initial airings some 3 years ago. My reasoning for this being that I wasn't so eager to catch the first airing of a TV show I knew nothing about, unlike you aparently were, or what you've read has told you.
That's a nice link, but as I said, I have no interest in listening to people bicker about lies on some TV show. I've said it once, and I'll gladly say it again since you appear to have a selective reading issue: If you don't like it, you don't have to watch the show. Further, you don't have to try to harass people who do watch the show, just because they can have fun watching it is no reason for you to get so worked up.
I suggest that rather than shove your fingers in your ears and scream 'NANANA CAN'T HEAR YOU' every time I say something logical, you actually read it in it's propper context.
"And did I say that the bad advices were gonna be replaced by good advices given during the voice-overs? No."
No, but when you are discussing the revoicing of previous episodes, it's implied that it is what you are talking about. I'm sorry for assuming you were staying on topic and not going off on mindless tangents kiddo.
"Sure, giving bad advices has absolutely no relevance on the show's content. Especially when you have said it's "how-to" show on survival."
Please state these "bad advices", that will kill the viewer, I'm not arguing that they do not exist, but I'd like to hear what about them caused you to be so childishly against the show.
And yes, I am talking about contradictions, which I have yet to make about myself. You're talking about him not being the youngest person to climb everest, among various other things that don't even concern the show. And what's hilarious is that you're actual upset enough to actually be arguing about them online, that's nice that he wasn't the youngest to climb Everest, but the fact is that he did it, among many other amazing things that I'm willing to wager you yourself haven't, yet here you are mindlessly bitching :D
"Oh because now I only mentioned the voice-overs? Refer back to my first reponse to your post. Are you gonna keep doing the yo-yo between my first two posts aimed at you? Pathetic."
Haha, it's pathetic because I'm refferencing claims you made earlier? You're right, I should just ignore your retarded previous statements. You crack me up.
And honestly, you're really bent out of shape for these things?
"- Running away from a grizzly bear and diving from a cliff into water of unknown depth to escape it "
I'd gladly take my chances with water if I was being pursued by a grizzly bear, I'm sure aware of the mess they could make with a flimsy human body. A possibility of shallow water is much better than taking the 100% chance of getting your face ripped off by a bear ;)
"- Using paracord to abseil down cliffs"
If you had to get down the cliff and you had the paracord on hand, you'd be a fool not to utilize it.
"- Swimming under a log jam that you can't see the end of "
Did you watch this episode? He checks how long it is, always making sure he has enough breath to get back, then does so, claims that he can make it to the end, and does so. There is nothing wrong with this bit.
"- Using your backpack to float down freezing white-water rapids to travel faster"
Again, if you had to do it, then you'd be a fool not to use every possible advantage, using the closest thing you have to a flotation device is hardly bad advice.
"- Taming wild horses to ride back to civilization"
If anyone took this bit to heart and tried it, I can comfortably say the earth is a better place without them. I'm sorry if you thought you could ride horsies back to town.
"- Using a shirt as a gas mask against sulfuric and hydrochloric acid fumes, carbon monoxide, asphyxiating carbon dioxide, etc... "
Yes, because he should have just inhaled the fumes with no protection whatsoever... An improvised gas mask is better than no protection at all in my book.
"It does concern the show. His Everest claim (and his SAS claim) were one of the first things he said in the opening sequence of Man vs Wild. "
Yes, it's in the intro, but did you watch him trekking through the amazon and say to yourself "GOLLY THIS IS STUPID, HE CAN'T EVEN CLIMB EVEREST AT A YOUNG AGE, HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE HE CAN WALK THROUGH A JUNGLE?". No? Then it is indeed irrelevant, as much as you want to say over and over that it isn't.
"Good luck because you're doing the exact opposite of what every professional would advise: "
His advice being that "IF YOU ARE BEING CHASED", not "Hey, if a bear is looking at you, sprint for the nearest cliff :D". You've simply provided a situation which works for your argument, my point stands, if I already was being pursued, I'd take my chances, you're welcome to sit and duke it out with the bear.
"You'd be a fool to use it. Paracord has low breaking strength and it isn't made to sustain any abrasion damage that would occur when rubbed against a rock ledge. The most common paracord is Type III which has a breaking strength of 550lbs. I will not bore you with the calculations but a 100kg weight just needs to drop 2 feet to snap the Type III cord."
My point stands, while it wouldn't be the greatest rope material, if you needed to scale down the cliff and all you had was the paracord, I'd wager that even you would make some use of it rather than shrugging and saying "Welp i guess I'll just sit and rot instead".
"You're asking ME? You're the one who said you never saw the original airing and this is one of the episode that are no longer available since 2007: The Moab Desert. He's in a funnel canyon with nothing but a log jam in front of him and he doesn't want to track back. So what does he do? He swims under the log jam without knowing if there's a way on the other side. "
I have a torrented version of the episode, I've seen the situation you've brought up, if that's the original airing, awesome. That aside, you really make a poor argument. If he can swim down, look, see there's a route out, come back up say "I see a way out" then go down and do it again, where in there is he in ANY danger? He knows the way back, he knows the way forward, he never once presses on recklessly without enough air to get himself back to where he started. It's not even bad advice, hell it's not advice. If there's an object in your path, look to see if you can get to the other side, can you? Problem solved.
"Since when does a porous polyester backpack is a flotation device? Try it in a swimming pool. Grylls knew it was bullsit and hid a lifevest and wetsuit under his clothes. He also got out of the water every minute to get warmed up before returning in the water.
Furthermore do you even know what white-water rapids are to even suggest attempting that idiotic stunts? "
With your terrible grammar aside, a person will know within seconds if their backpack is a reliable flotation device. Nobody is stupid enough to take a heavy, waterlogged backpack, sink to the bottom and hold on saying "BEAR DID IT, WHY ISN'T IT WORKING", except maybe you of course. I believe (along with every other viewer with half a mind) that he was implying that if you have a device that is even someone bouyant, that you should utilize it, if you have a backpack that is capable of staying afloat, that works, if not, use something else.
"Didn't you say that Grylls teaches people what to do if they end up in the same situations? And now you say that people shouldn't take it to heart?"
Yes, I did. If you're capable of using a wild horse, that's just super, I'm pretty sure an individual will be able to make this decision. It was a ridiculous scene that I agree should be ripped from the episode, I'm not saying the show doesn't have flaws, it takes a mature person to set these flaws aside and have a good time regardless. However it takes a nitpicky child to pick out every minor flaw and completely discredit a show for it. From the hours of quality and sound advice he gives, yes, he apparently gave a few bad instances of advice, the network fixed the issue and now has a show acceptable for self declared critics such as yourself. Mistakes happen, they recognized them and fixed them, but morons like you are still hung up on something that is effectively non existant.
"Having a shirt in front of your face is not gonna do anything. A cotton shirt is porous, the weaves are too big and the fibers are inert and won't react with any toxic gas."
Whether you would like to believe it or not, it does act as a (albeit very minor) filter, you'll notice how filthy his shirt gets afterwards, meaning it caught some of the materials he was breathing in itself, aka not going into his mouth. It's a minor benefit, god forbid his T shirt isn't the fully functioning gas mask you want.
And please, spare me the "HE HAD A WETSUIT AND STAYED OVERNIGHT IN A RESORT" stories, those are neat little factoids, but they really do not matter, at all. So what? Should he risk life and limb just to please pathetic viewers like you who need everything to be 100% authentic otherwise it's completley implausable? No, he's not going to scale down a cliff without at least some insurance for his safety, but he's showing you what you could do if you absolutely had no other choice BUT to get down that cliff. Again, Man Vs Wild isn't a survival documentary, it doesn't matter if he had a wetsuit on, why should he be balls cold when he can achieve the same image in a comfortable setting?
"Funny cause he was never chased in that episode. He thought he heard some grizzly near his camp (actually a crew member wearing a bear costume), ran out of his camp and jumped off a cliff."
My god you are dim witted. He was going about the show, came to the cliff, checked the depth (possibly had the crew do it for him, as I stated, there's no reason for him to risk breaking his legs to please you.) and jumped in, once he was already out, he stated that it's a method of escape, not once did he or I (as you seem convinced) state that he was actually being chased by a bear, but please, keep putting words in my mouth :)
"And of course only morons won't think about walking the way they came and try to find a way around."
Of course! I mean, god forbid they might not be able to go back the way they came :). Please keep providing situations that work for your argument. He provides solutions to possible situations, not actual ones, when you can accept that, let me know.
"He only swam because his crew scouted the area. Nobody's gonna swim under a log jam and possibly get trapped by all the debris just because there might be a way on the other side. He even says something like: "Oh I can see a way out, it's so close but I have no more oxygen". But enough oxygen to turn around and swim all the way back. Please."
Again, you are avoiding my perfectly logical argument in favor of one that makes you look like less of a close minded moron. The scene wasn't providing bad advice, if he can check to see the other side, yeah, he's going to check rather than say "darn, a pile of wood, time to turn back".
"To get a waterlogged backpack you would have to be in the water. By then it's already too late to improvise another flotation device. "
Yes, assuming you were moronic enough to leap straight into the fastest moving part of the river, rather than simply laying it on top of the water. But again, props again on providing a situation that works for your dimwitted argument.
"It takes somebody who knows about those kind of stuff to recognize the sheer amount of BS this show contains. Of course some people are not nitpicky and it's because they don't know anything about survival and will believe anything they see on TV. "
If you're looking for the negative, you can find it everywhere, especially when it's nonexistant. You seem to be under the impression that he has never spent a night outside, never actually floated down a river, or even done any of his own stunts. As a biased viewer, you are of course not going to like or believe anything you see because you are so heartset on finding every possible (and nonexistant) flaw you can. However, those that can laugh at the obviously fake parts and still have a good time will be doing just that.
"Hey you asked why he's a fraud. I told you. You didn't believe the show had been reedited. I proved it to you. You asked me what were those bad advices. I showed you some. "
Again, you are putting words in my mouth. Never did I say "the show was never reedited!", I even stated that I accept that fact. Yes, I asked for the "bad advice" he gave, you gave me some pathetic list of farfetched "bad advice" and I responded accordingly, you simply don't like that not everyone is so bent out of shape over it ;).
"How am I hung up on them?"
Are you kidding me? Look at your message board history, it's almost entirely spent on these boards posting your moronic factoids about how the show is fake. If you were anything but hung up on it, you would shrug it off and find something that doesn't upset you so much.
"If it doesn't matter why does he say things like "Oh my god I had a terrible night outside in my shelter" when he was comfortably lodged at the nearby resort? He's just a liar. He thought people would admire him more if he played it up for the cameras. "
Because he doesn't spend every night in a lodge, most of the time he is in fact staying in his shelters, whether you want to accept this or not is a completely seperate issue. And yeah, people admire him, you mad about that? What he does is admirable, if you can't get over a few lies then I suggest you avoid other human beings, we tend to lie sometimes, surprise.
"He's showing what you could do? Why would a hiker carry parachute cord? Why do you have to go down a cliff and not walk the way you came from? Even if a skydiver was lost after a jump the pilot would probably know where to look for.
Because he has to make a grand entrance by skydiving into every locations he has to keep going with the most ridiculous and implausible scenarios. You're obviously so short-sighted that you can't even see this. "
Yes, he's showing you what you could do, sometimes parachuters don't land in ideal conditions, go figure. Please, go on about how I'm short sighted when you can't even see why he would stage scenarios for the sake of education.
Continue to smother your arguments in passive aggresive insults, it doesn't draw away from the fact that you're simply some brat on a nerd rage because a TV show lied. If you don't like the show buddy, you don't have to come to the boards to make an idiot of yourself, believe it or not, you're allowed to simply let it go and watch the cooking show. I mean granted you'd probably have an issue with them having the premade product already in the oven rather than doing it right in front of you. Perhaps you should just sell your television, it seems to be a large stress factor in your life.
Keep going with your insults it's not gonna make you look smarter.
Oh the irony.
He was going about the show? He was in his camp at night and abandoned it because he thought the grizzly bear was "playing with him". He runs through the forest and jumps from a cliff to "break the scent trail".
Interesting, I seem to recall him jumping in broad daylight.
You're the one making up situations to prove your argument:
Yes, because they were implied, if not stated completely outright on the show.
What about him being the survivor of a plane crash and using the plane debris to help him survive? A mountain biker being lost in a national park and using his bike, energy bar and water bottle to survive? A guy who fell into the water when he was rafting and has to survive with nothing but a paddle, a lifevest and his helmet? A guy driving his car and getting stuck in a snowstorm in the middle of nowhere? A cruise passenger who accidentally fell overboard and somehow managed to reach an island shore and has absolutely nothing but his clothes to survive?
You're picking at scenarios that he easily could do or have done, not to mention the fanatics who would tear him apart because they have been done on survivorman. He's simulated several scenarios already, just because you think he should do others is no grounds to judge the show upon.
Not everybody who is lost in the wilderness is carrying paracord, a parachute canopy, a flint, a knife and a canteen.
Tip: When quoting someone use ["quote"]Text to be quoted.["/quote"] without the quotation marks ("") That way its easier to define your post from whoever you're quoting. (in this case PhoChris)
His advice being that "IF YOU ARE BEING CHASED", not "Hey, if a bear is looking at you, sprint for the nearest cliff :D". You've simply provided a situation which works for your argument, my point stands, if I already was being pursued, I'd take my chances, you're welcome to sit and duke it out with the bear.
Both situations you're dead. If you run (which your instincts will tell you to.) the Bear CAN catch you and will attack you since you gave him the impression of being prey. If you make it to the cliff and jump you could: a)land on dry land and suffer injury or die. b)hit shallow water and suffer injury or death. c)hit deep water but there's a rock tha you hit and suffer injury or die. c)hit deep water and you make it.
you can't jump and hope for d) when options a) b) or c) are more likely to happen.
My point stands, while it wouldn't be the greatest rope material, if you needed to scale down the cliff and all you had was the paracord, I'd wager that even you would make some use of it rather than shrugging and saying "Welp i guess I'll just sit and rot instead".
scaling a cliff with a rope that could hold your weight is not a good idea. Why? Just because the rope could hold your weight it doesn't mean it can hold your weight if you're falling.the added momentum from the fall exerts more strenght on the rope. If the rope breaks it's injury or death.
I have a torrented version of the episode, I've seen the situation you've brought up, if that's the original airing, awesome. That aside, you really make a poor argument. If he can swim down, look, see there's a route out, come back up say "I see a way out" then go down and do it again, where in there is he in ANY danger? He knows the way back, he knows the way forward, he never once presses on recklessly without enough air to get himself back to where he started. It's not even bad advice, hell it's not advice. If there's an object in your path, look to see if you can get to the other side, can you? Problem solved.
How could he see to the other side in that murky water? you NEVER swim under any obstruction in the water. There is an enormous chance of getting snagged and not able to make it out, or not having enough air to make it to the other end/return.
With your terrible grammar aside, a person will know within seconds if their backpack is a reliable flotation device. Nobody is stupid enough to take a heavy, waterlogged backpack, sink to the bottom and hold on saying "BEAR DID IT, WHY ISN'T IT WORKING", except maybe you of course. I believe (along with every other viewer with half a mind) that he was implying that if you have a device that is even someone bouyant, that you should utilize it, if you have a backpack that is capable of staying afloat, that works, if not, use something else.
Bear had a lifevest beneath his clothes. That's more worrysome than the backpack making a great flotation device. Also attacking people's grammar yet yours is not the best.(see the bold section of your quote.) Nice case of pot calling the kettle black. The thing is that one should avoid getting wet unnecessarily.
Yes, I did. If you're capable of using a wild horse, that's just super, I'm pretty sure an individual will be able to make this decision. It was a ridiculous scene that I agree should be ripped from the episode, I'm not saying the show doesn't have flaws, it takes a mature person to set these flaws aside and have a good time regardless. However it takes a nitpicky child to pick out every minor flaw and completely discredit a show for it. From the hours of quality and sound advice he gives, yes, he apparently gave a few bad instances of advice, the network fixed the issue and now has a show acceptable for self declared critics such as yourself. Mistakes happen, they recognized them and fixed them, but morons like you are still hung up on something that is effectively non existant.
It still is bad advice. Also Bear failed at taming/riding tame horses. A stunt like that could increase the chance of getting injured.
Whether you would like to believe it or not, it does act as a (albeit very minor) filter, you'll notice how filthy his shirt gets afterwards, meaning it caught some of the materials he was breathing in itself, aka not going into his mouth. It's a minor benefit, god forbid his T shirt isn't the fully functioning gas mask you want.
But the shirt is NOT filtering the poisonous gases. It's only catching some of the dust and Bear was putting it on to protect himself from the deadly gasses.
And please, spare me the "HE HAD A WETSUIT AND STAYED OVERNIGHT IN A RESORT" stories, those are neat little factoids, but they really do not matter, at all. So what? Should he risk life and limb just to please pathetic viewers like you who need everything to be 100% authentic otherwise it's completley implausable? No, he's not going to scale down a cliff without at least some insurance for his safety, but he's showing you what you could do if you absolutely had no other choice BUT to get down that cliff. Again, Man Vs Wild isn't a survival documentary, it doesn't matter if he had a wetsuit on, why should he be balls cold when he can achieve the same image in a comfortable setting?
I just love how you dismiss everything that is not useful to you as a neat little factoid irrelevant to the issue, even when they're relevant. If he is hiding harnesses, lifevests, etc. and he is Showing you what to do when he's "surviving". How can you do it (in the rare case that you end up in the same situation) if you don't have the same tools as he does? - I can't wait for Michael Bay to direct Care Bears. Using real bears so it can be more realistic.
reply share
Tip: When quoting someone use ["quote"]Text to be quoted.["/quote"] without the quotation marks ("") That way its easier to define your post from whoever you're quoting. (in this case PhoChris)
Thanks :)
you can't jump and hope for d) when options a) b) or c) are more likely to happen.
That's entirely my point, you could very well hope for d), if absolutely every other option was asured death. You have a 100% chance of being mauled by a bear (that's chasing you) if you stay put, even if you have a 1% chance of not hitting a rock/shallow water, that's still a risk worth taking if it means saving your life.
scaling a cliff with a rope that could hold your weight is not a good idea. Why?
A perfectly reasonable point, the scenario was that if he absolutely had to scale the cliff, this is what to do, etc etc. And if that type of chord truly is incapable of supporting human weight, then don't use it. But I'm willing to wager you'd be well aware of how much it could support before scaling down (testing it perhaps?) and putting your life at stake. But if he indeed stated "This is gonna work, do it yourself" or something along those lines, it probably shouldn't be on TV.
How could he see to the other side in that murky water? you NEVER swim under any obstruction in the water. There is an enormous chance of getting snagged and not able to make it out, or not having enough air to make it to the other end/return.
Splitting hairs, if you're surviving, not everything you do is going to be 100% safe, swimming under an obstruction is of course providing the chance of getting stuck ("enormous" is quite the exaggeration), cooking meat is running the chance of attracting large creatures, but I'm willing to bet for the sake of survival that you'd do it to sanitize your meat. Not checking the other side of the pile-o-wood, which could take seconds, would mean tracing all the way back through the canyon, and finding an entirely different rout, all because you don't want to get stuck on a branch?
But of course, as the other fellow claims, it was all staged (Everything is, remember?) and was filmed in some studio or off scene... What have you. If that is the case, there really isn't an argument. But provided you could see through the water, as Bear stated he could, yes, it's perfectly reasonable to dunk under water, see if you can see the end, judge whether the risk is worth taking, and acting appropriately. I agree the water was mucky, but he still stated he 'could' see the end, he never once claims that you should swim through water that you simply cannot see the end of.
Bear had a lifevest beneath his clothes. That's more worrysome than the backpack making a great flotation device. Also attacking people's grammar yet yours is not the best.(see the bold section of your quote.) Nice case of pot calling the kettle black. The thing is that one should avoid getting wet unnecessarily.
I agree with avoiding getting wet, hence my suggestion of simply dropping or holding the item in the water =P. Also, a freudian slip hardly constitutes bad grammar.
It still is bad advice. Also Bear failed at taming/riding tame horses. A stunt like that could increase the chance of getting injured.
Again, I agree, but maybe they should keep it on air for humors sake :P
But the shirt is NOT filtering the poisonous gases. It's only catching some of the dust and Bear was putting it on to protect himself from the deadly gasses.
It still makes the situation more tolerable to minimalize harmful particles that you're inhaling, which is relevant to the shows nature, if you'd rather keep your shirt clean, then by all means, don't bother.
I just love how you dismiss everything that is not useful to you as a neat little factoid irrelevant to the issue, even when they're relevant. If he is hiding harnesses, lifevests, etc. and he is Showing you what to do when he's "surviving". How can you do it (in the rare case that you end up in the same situation) if you don't have the same tools as he does?
Because what he's spewing out honestly isn't relevant, I love that he can recite the falacies of the show on command. While interesting, it changes nothing in the argument, this isn't a banter about whether or not the show is legitimate, so hammering the "he stayed in a hotel!" statement into my head over and over is good for little more than a headache.
Back on topic: again, why should he risk his life just to show that you CAN do it without extra equipment? You are still capable of climbing down that 50 foot cliff without the harness, there's cases of this in episodes airing now (until the next great unveiling of how the entire show is actually filmed in Bears back yard, and that Bear is actually an alien, etc.), but why should he leave himself dangling, unsupported, 50 feet in the air just so that the 1% of the audience that is anal enough to research that exact scene and find out that he was strapped in can rest easy, knowing that he really was in life threatening danger? You can still do what he shows you, the extra props are to preserve his safety, not enhance his ability to perform.
reply share
wow, you totally pwned PhoCris. nice! it's annoying how much the dude is still complaining about how bear grylls misled the audience. that happened three years ago! PhoCris needs to get over it. clearly bear grylls moved past it by re-editing the early episodes and putting up a disclaimer. it's time to get over it and enjoy the show for what it is...entertainment.
The problem that I'm seeing with your choices is that you're either overestimating your abilities and/or underestimating the enviroment. (they're your choices, but they would put your life in jeopardy if applied.) Let's take the Bear chasing you jumping of cliff scenario. Let's say that you avoid the bear and jump the cliff, but you injure a leg. You've reduced your chances of getting out alive.
Having Bear "Teaching the viewers what to do in situations that we (the viewers) wouldn't last a day without the proper tools/skills/knowledge" yet he goes around doing stuff that shouldn't be done (way too over the top, or just wrong. Animal trap grappling hook, pole vaulting down a mountain, parkour on the desert in the middle of the day, using abandoned mines as shortcuts, etc.) because they'd reduce our survival chances if we were in those situations goes against his lines in the opening secquence of the show (teaching us what to do, blah, blah,blah).
About the harnesses and all that insurance reasons and stuff. I understand the reasons why Bear/producers,etc. insist on them, but they do affect the show. For example, the improvised flotation device. He had a lifevest on but now we can't be certain if he was floating because of the backpack or because of the vest. Another thing is that if he's doing something that requires for him to wear a harness, chances are that we SHOULD NOT be doing it. (Of course this is assuming that we were in the same situation as presentyed on the show.)
PhoC's "Factoids" may seem irrelevant at times, but they are required because of the amount of smoke and mirrors used by production and Bear as the face of the show had to go with it. The Bear Cheerleading Squad like to spout Bear's SAS skills, Youngest man on Everest, etc. "factoids" delivered from the smoke and mirrors factory too.
Bear has gone on shows claiming how he survives with a canteen a knife and a flint, yet he's got this whole network of "safety nets". He's claimed that once he had to steal from the crew's food, but on the re-editings we can hear how the crew set up food for Bear. It can be tiresome at times going through the same thing again and again, but this is normal here on the MvW boards.
- I can't wait for Michael Bay to direct Care Bears. Using real bears so it can be more realistic.
Please just quit watching the show then. Just QUIT watching the show! That way you wont get soooo freaking worked up over it. And we wont have to read your comments. There, now everyones happy.
BTW This is a board for discussing Man vs. Wild not the fansite. Negative comments are just as welcome as the fanboy/girl praise ones. - I can't wait for Michael Bay to direct Care Bears. Using real bears so it can be more realistic.
If he didn't mention it before, he must not be religious! You're right, his very first episode of his very first appearance on TV should have had the disclaimer: "Hey guys, I really am religious, just so you guys know I mean it when I say it later".
Speaking of grabbing at straws, you're trying to relate religion to the authenticity of the situations he's in? Okay bud.
First of all, by saying that you love this abysmal show, you have already proven your idiocy. As for Bear Grylls being "devotely religious", it is the reason why I am atheist. People like him are the absolute worst. They quietly claim to be religious individuals, but are actually sick monsters who have no problem with killing innocent animals. Yes indeed, religion is a cancer.
Boycott movies that involve real animal violence! (and their directors too)