Bear Grylls strikes again !

I think all of the people who hate Bear because he has stayed in hotels / does crazy unrealistic things while shooting the tv show need to chill out...

Its his job how he supports his family and if the production crew told him they were all staying in a hotel for the night what is it of your concern its a TV SHOW relax its like you are jealous or think if you had a TV show you would be able to make all your own decisions on what you did or how you did it. Its entertainment from Discovery Channels standpoint. I am sure we all have faults in the way we deal with wilderness & emergency situations no one is perfect we all have our own style.

Im sure he has had more survival/life experiences out in the wild than most other people out there including this members of this forum and cant demonstrate them exactly how he wishes.

Gerber is smart for teaming up with him on a business stand point everyone knows his name thus giving them more profits...its a no brainer.
 
lukeeson111 said:
Its his job how he supports his family and if the production crew told him they were all staying in a hotel for the night what is it of your concern
Click to expand...

Because when he clearly states on film that he is staying "out in the wild", when he isn't, it's called lying............

When he claims on film to find and catch a "wild horse", when in fact they trucked in horses wearing metal shoes, it's called lying.......

When he claims he is traversing a dangerous lava field in the wilderness of Hawaii, when in fact he's across from a hotel parking lot, it's....whats that word we're looking for????? :)

The reason this is important, even in a show presented in the manner his is, is that he also claims to be giving examples of things that directly deal with human safety and survival, when in fact several times he has shown things that are unsafe and stupid.
 
Bear Claw Chris Lappe said:
Because when he clearly states on film that he is staying "out in the wild", when he isn't, it's called lying............

When he claims on film to find and catch a "wild horse", when in fact they trucked in horses wearing metal shoes, it's called lying.......

When he claims he is traversing a dangerous lava field in the wilderness of Hawaii, when in fact he's across from a hotel parking lot, it's....whats that word we're looking for????? :)

The reason this is important, even in a show presented in the manner his is, is that he also claims to be giving examples of things that directly deal with human safety and survival, when in fact several times he has shown things that are unsafe and stupid.
Click to expand...

I understand its missleading when he makes those statements...:)

Its reality TV since when is this a new concept of having scripts , the crew manipulates the way the show is played out to make it entertaining, non of these shows are completely honest with the viewers for multiple reasons, even though its supposed to be "REALITY" it seldom is unless its more of a documentary type show and even then im sure honesty lines are crossed with the viewers

Its his job to entertain the viewers and Im sure is paid damn well for saying or doing whatever the script of the show calls for even if its not completely true.
 
I got two girls in training to be little Moose ladies, they and I know who Justin Bieber and Bear Grylls is. Unfortunately. They watch as much survival shows as I do.

You can say what you want about BG, but he is one tough sonuvagun to do SOME of the things he has, but DUMB about others too. Eh, I call it a wash, for everyone one thing he gets right, he gets one wrong as well.

Moose
 
I don't hate Bear Grylls, in fact I find his show entertaining. Man vs. Wild is like cross between Les Stroud's Survivorman and Johnny Knoxville's Jackass. His program is certainly not the only "reality" show out there that is unrealistic, but I find it more enjoyable than most and there is some practical content sprinkled in with the showmanship.

My issue with Bear Grylls/Man vs. Wild is not with the fabrications, but rather the potential effect his theatrics will have on impressionable viewers that might actually come to believe something like leaping across a rocky chasm in order to dine on some fresh bear scat with a urine chaser is something to be emulated when faced with a true survival situation.

I will watch his shows, but I don't see myself ever buying and/or using anything that has his name on it, but good for him for capitalizing on his popularity. I could see myself maybe buying some Craghopper gear, but definately not with BG logos on it.
 
Last edited:
I guess if Bear is raising awareness about preparedness and survival, it can't be all bad. Have to wonder who will follow with their own line? I can see it now Paris Hilton with a line of pink knives and machetes.
 
I used to be concerned that the advice given on his show would get people into trouble if they ever found themself in a sticky situation. But it was pointed out to me that anyone who thought copying Bear Grylls was a good idea wasn't likely to get much further than the carpark anyway.
You don't tend to find people on multiday offtrack trips who think that free climbing a waterfall is the safest way to survive.
 
Bare Rib said:
GB000698.jpg

And this design is a sore wrist waiting to happen not to mention a big loss in cutting efficiency. If the handle came in instead of back (think traditional Golok) it would have the possibility to be a good chopper/machete.
Click to expand...

I think that while it would lose a bit of "oomph" due to the trailing blade profile, it would be excellent for cutting plants, grasses, brambles, and light brush. By having the cutting edge trail back that much, the natural arc of the swing will cause the edge to align with the cutting medium, producing a slicing action, or "draw cut" without requiring any modification of technique. A similar design feature can be seen on the Turkish style of sword known as a kilij. And who knows--maybe the breadth of the blade is enough in order to put the chopping power back into it for those harder targets.

Of course, the only way to find out for sure is to take one for a spin. I, for one, am not going to knock it until I try it. ;)
 
Not a fan of the guy. Figured it was going to be an add for his favorite hotel chain, or fancy coffee pot.

Wouldn't take his advice on gear.
 
will62 said:
I guess if Bear is raising awareness about preparedness and survival, it can't be all bad. Have to wonder who will follow with their own line? I can see it now Paris Hilton with a line of pink knives and machetes.
Click to expand...

Rumor has it ...

.
oldpony45032a.jpg
 
It bothers me that a good portion of the population will except dishonesty because it is "just a TV show". If someone states something as fact and then it is later proven that it was not, that person is a liar, whether they are an entertainer or not. And based on that alone, I will not buy anything he endorses regardless of price or quality. Chris
 
August West said:
It bothers me that a good portion of the population will except dishonesty because it is "just a TV show". If someone states something as fact and then it is later proven that it was not, that person is a liar, whether they are an entertainer or not. And based on that alone, I will not buy anything he endorses regardless of price or quality. Chris
Click to expand...

Cody Lundin and Dave Canterbury have to be grouped with Bear then because Dave has admitted that much of their show was staged for dramatic effect !
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
By having the cutting edge trail back that much, the natural arc of the swing will cause the edge to align with the cutting medium, producing a slicing action, or "draw cut" without requiring any modification of technique.
Click to expand...
I would submit that it would probably do the opposite, as the curve is forcing the edge away from the material being cut, rather than forcing the material into the edge(like a recurve).
On the plus side, it would not be likely to get hung up when the blade gets caught up in stuff where you take in more material in a swing than can be cut, and might make for a smoother rhythm, even if the cutting action is less efficient.
 
pitdog said:
Cody Lundin and Dave Canterbury have to be grouped with Bear then because Dave has admitted that much of their show was staged for dramatic effect !
Click to expand...

Yes they do and they admitted it from the beginning, I have no problem with that and actually think it adds to the show. Bear on the other hand, had to be forced to admit that his show is staged.

A lot of people say that everyone should know that the show is fake because it is on TV, I disagree totally and would like to believe that their are still honest people, actors, athletes or just ordinary joes. Chris
 
OwenM said:
I would submit that it would probably do the opposite, as the curve is forcing the edge away from the material being cut, rather than forcing the material into the edge(like a recurve).
On the plus side, it would not be likely to get hung up when the blade gets caught up in stuff where you take in more material in a swing than can be cut, and might make for a smoother rhythm, even if the cutting action is less efficient.
Click to expand...

On a more resistant target like saplings and thicker, definitely. On lush thin materials like I was referring to I think you'd notice the slicing draw cut affect quite noticeably. As a whole it's not the world's best design even for that, since a longer blade is better for those targets. Still, I think it would be a fun piece to play around with. :)
 
Cpl Punishment said:
Yes.

A flask of gasoline and a road flare work much better. :p
Click to expand...
I'll always prefer to flick my bic-that being said, I have been known at times to take my dandy Bear Grylls survival knife, and fashion a flint mine. Then after mining the flint, I fashion a make shift fire steel. But I am not one to boast.

:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top