I think it's telling about the audience that the same who were at first discounting "why do people think military training is such a big deal, their survival and woods skills aren't exactly the best?", are the same ones who now completely discount him having any skill because he doesn't have the military resume.
Nobody is discounting his having any skill. Nobody here said, "I don't believe he knows how to start a bow-drill fire." Sure I believe he knows how... because I've seen the YouTube vid. People are discounting him because he's a lying scumbag who stole valor from Army Rangers and took food out of the mouths of widows and orphans whose fathers actually earned that right.
I often see this attitude in all walks of life that you can't learn anything on your own. "I thought it up myself" is not an acceptable answer, rather many people will only accept that you know something if Professor "I can't do, so I teach" tells them so. You'll even have a subset of those who won't accept it if they don't like the guy who taught you.
I guess I'm the exact opposite. Whenever I'm talking to a learned, experienced, highly educated person who is a expert in his field, I perk up and listen to him because he might know what he's talking about and might have something to teach me. Whenever I'm talking to someone who is "self-taught," I might praise him or keep a sly eye on him, depending on the circumstances. If he taught himself to extract his own teeth, I'd praise him. If wants my money and tries to get me to pay him to extract *my* teeth, then I've got a problem. Hence I don't take my car to self-taught mechanics. And hence when my tooth hurts, I don't go to self-taught dentists. But all this is beside the point. No one is discounting Dave Canterbury because he's self-taught. People are discounting him because he's a lying scumbag who stole valor from Army Rangers and took food out of the mouths of widows and orphans whose fathers actually earned that right.
For people who should be about being SELF-reliant to shun someone being SELF-taught is, humorous at best. I've no doubt that it was this attitude that put the pressure on Mr. Canterbury to lie on his resume to get the lucrative Discover paycheck.
If you've researched this and read all the evidence against him, you'll see that he was lying for years before Discovery came along. No one forced him to. He's always done it. And always for the same reason: to create an image so he can scam people out of money. And it was always a big, fat lie.
Did he make the wrong choice? Yes. Is anyone here any better? You won't know until you are in that position.
Actually, some of us have been in that position. And I, for one, have never lied on my resume or pretended I was something I wasn't in a professional setting. Does that make me the exception? I really, really hope not. I may have told a white lie or two to a pretty girl in a bar or to my parents, but on a resume or in a job interview? Never. I have to shrug if you are suggesting that everyone lies on their resume. Other folks here have also made that suggestion. I don't know who they are talking about, but I don't do it, and I don't associate with people who do it. If I'm not qualified, then I'm not qualified and I just don't apply for that job. If I want the job that bad, I need to go get the qualifications. Seems pretty black-and-white to me.