A new thought on the survival shows oln Discovery

Cpl Punishment

Cpl Punishment

Joined
Jan 28, 2006
Messages
7,035
OK, here's a homework lesson:

Next time you find yourself watching one of Discovery's survival shows, in stead of looking for things that they do wrong, look for what they do right. Or, what do they do, that will at some level give the couch potato adventurer an idea that will stick with them, and maybe help save their life.

I already mentioned how all of the survival shows have the character with a good knife, no matter what else they carry. IMO that sends a message, if you don't have much to go on, then make sure you can make what you need, and bring a tool that will go the distance.

A lot of people don't realize you CAN eat a lot of the crap that Bear Grylls eats (although eating the actual, ummm crap, that he eats may be a no-no). Even Les Stroud made scorpion ka-bobs.

Maybe drinking that stagnant water means you live long enough to be rescued and have the flaming trots at home, rather than die of dehydration, depending on the circumstances.

One thing I've learned from these shows, is that some of the things that I think are the wrong way to do things, end up being just a different way of doing them.

That's one great thing about Dual Survival. You have people with opposite viewpoints on survival. My bet is that while one may be riskier than the other, both methods will work, whether we like it or not.

So, let's see what we can actually LEARN from these shows, instead of trying to show how much smarter than anyone else in the known universe is?
 
Wow CP you've just showed the first priority of survival, PMA positive mental attitude.
I agree enjoy and learn from people in places most of us may never visit. Instead of rude comments on Hawke's wife, take what is being put out there. His company Spec-Ops has been around for some time now, heck I first heard of it in American Survival Guide in the mid '90's. If people tend to be this critical or nasty in their homes in front of a computer what are they gonna be like in the timber with the wind howling and the rain pouring down?
 
harpoon41 said:
If people tend to be this critical or nasty in their homes in front of a computer what are they gonna be like in the timber with the wind howling and the rain pouring down?
Click to expand...

You're not referring to me are you ? :mad:

1004%20jim%20nerd.gif


:D
 
i like these shows... and you always end up learning new things...

the fire by friction with teh strings attached to your thumbs... that was new to me... :)
 
I tend to notice both things, even if I am not trying. Although I really try to look over things that don't seem right. There IS still great information in the show, even if some isn't the best.

Good post :thumbup:
 
TheGame said:
There IS still great information in the show, even if some isn't the best.
Click to expand...

Even with all the bashing his show receives Bear Grylls provides some good bits of shelter and trap making info as well as firestarting.
 
KuRUpTD said:
Even with all the bashing his show receives Bear Grylls provides some good bits of shelter and trap making info as well as firestarting.
Click to expand...

Yes, there is. Many people seem to overlook that though, because they rather bash him. One of his shows is actually what got my 5 year old nephew wanting to learn more about bushcrafting, or survival as he called it at the time. :thumbup:
 
You are so right CP.

This may sound funny, but when I watch TV and shows like this, I keep a pen and paper next to my little table to take notes, both good and bad, and web sites I want to check out as well. I read over them later on and take time to just think about what was said and ponder it if you will. I have always said, a dull pencil is better than a sharp mind.

Take the hanging meat from the tree in Africa when animals came in the night and ate it. At first, it sounded foolish to hang meat eight feet off the ground where animals can still work to get at it.

I started thinking about that the next day. Then it hit me, yes they lost the food, but at least they lived through the night to be pissed about it the next morning. I thought what if the meat was completely out of reach of the animals......hungry animals?? Would they have come after me in the night for a meal?? Better to make the animals work all night for a meal that is NOT me.

There are different ways to look at what happenes to you in a survival situation, and maybe somethings that happen are a true Blessing from God if you think about it.
 
I agree, I don't like that people interested in survival put down shows about survival. These shows should be promoted by the community and supported. OR they will get cancelled and we will not have these shows anymore, it is simple. I for one would rather promote them and these types of shows than nitpick little details that mean nothing overall.
 
Cpl Punishment said:
OK, here's a homework lesson:

Next time you find yourself watching one of Discovery's survival shows, in stead of looking for things that they do wrong, look for what they do right. Or, what do they do, that will at some level give the couch potato adventurer an idea that will stick with them, and maybe help save their life.

I already mentioned how all of the survival shows have the character with a good knife, no matter what else they carry. IMO that sends a message, if you don't have much to go on, then make sure you can make what you need, and bring a tool that will go the distance.

A lot of people don't realize you CAN eat a lot of the crap that Bear Grylls eats (although eating the actual, ummm crap, that he eats may be a no-no). Even Les Stroud made scorpion ka-bobs.

Maybe drinking that stagnant water means you live long enough to be rescued and have the flaming trots at home, rather than die of dehydration, depending on the circumstances.

One thing I've learned from these shows, is that some of the things that I think are the wrong way to do things, end up being just a different way of doing them.

That's one great thing about Dual Survival. You have people with opposite viewpoints on survival. My bet is that while one may be riskier than the other, both methods will work, whether we like it or not.

So, let's see what we can actually LEARN from these shows, instead of trying to show how much smarter than anyone else in the known universe is?
Click to expand...

AMEN!!!

I enjoy all these shows and I have learned a lot of different takes on stuff I already knew something about. I can honestly say that I have read some of Bear Grylls's books and found them, not only entertaining, but to contain some pretty good info that ALL the survival show hosts say. He even says that climbing down some of the cliffs you see him climb on his show is a big No-No in a survival situation.
 
what I have learned, is that a lot of stuff they suggest and showcase, will get you killed.

Stupid, stupid shows. Every one of them.
 
Good thread, especially after all the bashing thats been on the forum lately.

I watch all the shows - Grylls, Dave and Cody, Les Stroud and Myke - and ive picked up new ideas and techniqus from all of them.
 
You've raised a good point with this thread. I think I learn maybe one useful or t least interesting thing from each episode of Dual Survival.

Sure I may never get a chance to practice it as it may be a skill only relevant to the desert or jungle but it's still nice to know and squirrel away for a time I may get to use it.
 
I like all these shows. I just sit back and enjoy. Better then most of whats on. I would like to see some guest appearances maybe Mike roe from dirty jobs that would be fun. Or a lucky viewer like (ME) one of us. (ME) How about a season finale with all of them in one big 2 hour show.
 
I agree cpl. All good points. :thumbup:

Watch it for the entertainment, and if you should happen to learn something new or different, all the better. And maybe shows like these will inspire more people to both get out, and find good knives more acceptable to own and use. :)
 
Larry Dean Olsen was the man's name, and he's the one who really got me hooked on this stuff. Then there were several military survival schools, and just going out and doing it after I left the service. Overall, I've been into this stuff for over fifty years, yet I still watch all these shows . . . and like 'em, too.

Sure, I catch a lot of mistakes, but I've learned something from every single one of these shows, too . . . even from Bear.

You may complain that they're not all that they could be, but remember that they're TV shows, not instructional videos: they have to play to the widest audience — that's what pays for the show.

Watch it or don't; that's up to you. Personally, I'll keep watching because I get both entertainment and knowledge at the same time. That's a winner for me.
 
The thing that seems to get most people's goats are calling them so-called 'reality' shows. No tv shows are reality even if they fall into that particular genera. Mostly, the term reality refers to a lack of scrip and if you tape enough footage they will probably be able to piece something interesting in the editorial room.

Les pushed this one and still pushed this one further than anybody else by making it real in his quest to go at it alone. Of course even he had an ability to contact a nearby rescue crew if he needed it. The other shows, however, are a far cry from this. Everybody showing their immense disappointment at Bear when it turns out he was hotelling it demonstrates that. So then it became a big game to point out the cheese factor of known set-ups and edit jobs that demonstrate lack of sequence.

For example, in the Arizona episode of Dual Survivor, take a look at that rattlesnake band, taken from their kill, around Dave's hat and notice how it magically disappears on and off his hat on different scenes. Okay, that is how it goes. These guys are running around and they put on this drama music like they are in danger, when in reality there are probably 5 or 6 crew members carrying around water bottles, first aid packs and make-up for the stars. That's the reality of filming. Would it actually make the show any better to know that Dave and Cody refrained from sipping from a water bottle during the shoot? Personally, I don't think it really changes it that much, but this is effectively what people seem to be griping about. The reason Dave gets his kill every show isn't because he is such a skilled hunter. They set it up so that he will get a kill and I'm sure there are quite a few 'do-overs' to get it right.

If you are really trying to fool yourself into thinking that the show scenarios bear any reality to them then you are probably missing the point. However, if you have that mindset than I can see why it is that certain people get so fixated on edit/sequence artifacts and things that 'just don't seem quite right'.

On the other hand, if you allow yourself to suspend belief a bit and read the information as an 'what if scenario' then you might like it a bit better. Consider Ray Mears, where everything goes perfectly all the time. He makes no attempt to demonstrate 'reality tv', yet his show works quite well as an educational piece and people don't seem to hate him or call him out all the time. I truly think it is the 'reality' style that gets the hackles up.
 
kgd said:
The thing that seems to get most people's goats are calling them so-called 'reality' shows. No tv shows are reality even if they fall into that particular genera. Mostly, the term reality refers to a lack of scrip and if you tape enough footage they will probably be able to piece something interesting in the editorial room.

Les pushed this one and still pushed this one further than anybody else by making it real in his quest to go at it alone. Of course even he had an ability to contact a nearby rescue crew if he needed it. The other shows, however, are a far cry from this. Everybody showing their immense disappointment at Bear when it turns out he was hotelling it demonstrates that. So then it became a big game to point out the cheese factor of known set-ups and edit jobs that demonstrate lack of sequence.

For example, in the Arizona episode of Dual Survivor, take a look at that rattlesnake band, taken from their kill, around Dave's hat and notice how it magically disappears on and off his hat on different scenes. Okay, that is how it goes. These guys are running around and they put on this drama music like they are in danger, when in reality there are probably 5 or 6 crew members carrying around water bottles, first aid packs and make-up for the stars. That's the reality of filming. Would it actually make the show any better to know that Dave and Cody refrained from sipping from a water bottle during the shoot? Personally, I don't think it really changes it that much, but this is effectively what people seem to be griping about. The reason Dave gets his kill every show isn't because he is such a skilled hunter. They set it up so that he will get a kill and I'm sure there are quite a few 'do-overs' to get it right.

If you are really trying to fool yourself into thinking that the show scenarios bear any reality to them then you are probably missing the point. However, if you have that mindset than I can see why it is that certain people get so fixated on edit/sequence artifacts and things that 'just don't seem quite right'.

On the other hand, if you allow yourself to suspend belief a bit and read the information as an 'what if scenario' then you might like it a bit better. Consider Ray Mears, where everything goes perfectly all the time. He makes no attempt to demonstrate 'reality tv', yet his show works quite well as an educational piece and people don't seem to hate him or call him out all the time. I truly think it is the 'reality' style that gets the hackles up.
Click to expand...

Good post, Ken.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top