Jump to content

boogie hands

Premium Member
  • Posts

    6,012
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by boogie hands

  1. GRYLLS' THRILLS BOGUS: EXPERT

     

    SURVIVALIST CHARGED WITH CUSHY SHORTCUTS

     

    news003a.jpg

     

    IN THE MUCK: Bear Grylls shows off his survival skill on "Man vs. Wild," but an expert who says he worked on the show claims some stunts are faked.

     

    July 24, 2007 -- Discovery Channel he-man Bear Grylls, the host of the survival-skills show "Man vs. Wild," is barely the man he seems to be on TV.

     

    On the program, Grylls appears to camp out in quickly-built shelters deep in the wilderness while battling hypothermia and dehydration. But when the cameras stop rolling, Grylls has actually moved to luxurious hotels.

     

    In the last two seasons, he and producers have contrived other scenes to make it appear as if Grylls is more skilled than he really is, a consultant for the show told The Times of London.

     

    "If you really believe everything happens the way it is shown on TV, you are being a little bit naive," said Mark Weinert, an Oregon-based survival consultant, who said producers hired him as an adviser for the show.

     

    Discovery Channel officials declined to comment, but in the U.K., where the show airs with the title "Born Survivor," stunned network officials at Channel 4 said they are conducting an internal investigation.

     

    "Discovery Communications has learned that isolated elements of the 'Man vs. Wild' show in some episodes were not natural to the environment, and that for health and safety concerns the crew and host received some survival assistance while in the field," a spokeswoman for the network said.

     

    "Moving forward the program will be 100 percent transparent and all elements of the filming will be explained up-front to our viewers. In addition, shows that are to be repeated will be edited appropriately."

     

    According to Weinert, while filming in California's Sierra Nevada mountains - an episode in which Grylls, 33, is seen biting off the head of a snake for breakfast - Grylls actually spent some nights with the show's crew in a lodge outfitted with television, stone fireplaces, hot tubs and Internet access.

     

    The Pines Resort at Bass Lake is advertised as "a cozy getaway for families" and is a luxurious hotel with its own spa on a lake.

     

    In another instance, where Grylls was supposed to be surviving on a desert island, he was actually in Hawaii and spent nights at a motel, Weinert said.

     

    The same episode had Grylls building a Polynesian-style raft using only materials around him, including bamboo, hibiscus twine and palm leaves for a sail. Weinert said he actually led a team of builders to construct the raft.

     

    It was then taken apart so that Grylls could be shown building it on camera.

    In another episode, viewers watched as Grylls tried to coax what seemed like a wild mustang into a lasso in the Sierra Nevada.

     

    "I'm in luck," he told viewers, apparently coming across four wild horses grazing in a meadow. "A chance to use an old Native American mode of transport comes my way. This is one of the few places in the whole of the U.S. where horses still roam wild."

    In fact, Weinert said, the horses were not wild but were brought in by trailer.

    don.kaplan@nypost.com

     

     

    other things that are staged would be EVERY SINGLE REALITY SHOW THAT HAS EVER EXISTED. oh, and wrestling.

     

    ps - i still find man vs wild enjoyable, even after confirmation of what i suspected.

  2. probly the most clever lyricist right now:

     

    "i jack off on books and give life to words"

    "dont jerk me around cause my name is not masturbation"

    "im leavin the past, like an abused wife wit the kids leavin your ass"

    "humanity's gone, smoked up in a gravity bong by a democrat republican cheech and chong"

     

    exactly why my collection of hip-hop vinyl stops in 1999.

     

     

    garbage.

  3. Funny thing!

     

    How are you gonna go and make a threat and the guns still havent even been delivered to your house?!

     

    its like that terrorism suspect in england who was pulled over for reckless driving prior to being able to detonate the bomb in his car. some people are really that hopelessly stupid.

  4. im sorry dawood, but from those two examples, coupled with your post directed at russell jones, i can tell you have no grasp on the very probable theory of evolution.

     

    please dont take this as a personal jab (although i imagine it will be hard not to) but the fact that you practice what is possibly the most archaic of our current religions leads me to believe you do not care to look at the world from another perspective. what, outside of fear for your soul, would cause this i do not know but it seems to be your case and is certainly the case from millions of others. as hard as it may be for you to believe, i have been to church, had (at one point) christian friends and had spent the early and most impressionable part of my life contemplating the existence of god. i have done all of this and realized that it is not only a waste, but, when followed as the religion is meant to be (as opposed to the selective, religious cherry picking of moderate muslims and christians), extremely harmful to the lives of other human beings. the banning of marriage amongst certain groups of people, the restrictions of the reproductive rights of women, stoning of women for various (relatively minor) public and private acts, civil wars and genocide, even 9/11, can all be strongly connected to religion. in different time these things that you believe may have actually been conducive to developing some semblance of a society but as it currently stands, the hatred and suffering that religion is producing is completely overshadowing any good it is perpetuating in the world. you dont need religion to be a good person but when it comes to oppressing others it seems to be a primary factor in many cases.

     

    again, you may be a good, well meaning person, but the beliefs you are attempting to perpetuate are, in my eyes, very unhealthy to you and those around you. its hard to have a frank conversation about religion without insult and it may seem i have crossed that line but i hope you understand thats not what i am going for here. i just want to share my views because they are as important to me as yours are to you. anyway, i think that just about does it for me as far as this conversation is concerned. i doubt all the back and forth in the world is going to sway either of us.

  5. here is the thing. honest, untainted science is not developing an understanding about god. god is the antithesis of science. god requires you to ignore the development of our science and adhere to a view of the world that is thousands of years old. its baffling to me that people cannot see god for what he is. god is an answer to dilemmas, creations and phenomena that cannot be understood by humans. anywhere you see god you will also find a lack of scientific understanding. as our scientific understanding grows the role of god changes (in many instances, god is diminished) and you see religious people divided into categories such as theists and deists. if anything, this human reaction to scientific development proves that god is a filler. a temporary fix to provide comfort to a society that cannot fully grasp what forces are working around them.

     

    as far as the topic of faith that had dominated this discussion, i feel that there is a lack of understanding of the fact that there are different types of faith. as it is understood, religious faith is the ability to believe in something in face of total improbability. religious faith does not require a single, tangible fact. scientific "faith" on the other hand does require fact which which takes our belief from the realm of faith to the realm of probability. it is true that macro evolution is not 100% provable. there is no play by play fossil record that exists that makes this theory fact. what does exist, however, is enough evidence to make macro evolution more believable than not. science is not putting their faith in this theory, they are weighing their options based on the available evidence and reaching a conclusion based on probability.

     

    this is what is irking me when comparisons are made between faith in religion and "faith" in science. there is no relation as faith requires no proof while a belief in science does. when looking at cold, hard fact, neither god nor science is hitting 100% but from looking at those numbers i can tell you that the idea of a god, especially the idea of a god that has an active roll in our universe, is an insanely ludicrous belief to hold in the 21st century.

  6. i hate to say it but graff hos tend to be more of the lower quality and sluttish chicks.

     

    seriously, show me a smart girl that sleeps with writers simply because the write and ill show you a numetal band that doesnt suck.

     

     

    simply stated, its not happening. groupies make me want to puke.

×
×
  • Create New...