Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Duke 2.0]

I like watching Survivor Man more.  The feeling of isolation is the best part.

Its more real to me than Man vs Wild and was way more useful information. You know him and his wife went out and lived in the Canadian wilderness for a few months and they made a movie you should check it out.

Eeh.
 All I got from it is How to Starve For Seven Days. Good shooting for one guy in the wilderness starving for seven days, but I already knew most of what he taught. MvW had some rather out there but useful information. Information they could show off BECAUSE they set some stuff up.

[Emperor_Jonathan]

I like watching Survivor Man more.  The feeling of isolation is the best part.

Its more real to me than Man vs Wild

It literally is more real than Man vs Wild.

[Hippoman]

Cept the man vs. Wild guy is more certified.
He's a trained navy seal and such.

[JoshuaFH]

I don't watch the show, but I like to imagine that his producers are always playing pranks on him.

[PTTG??]

Cept the man vs. Wild guy is more certified.
He's a trained navy seal and such.

Ah, but Survivor-man is CANADIAN. They are only second to Australians in burliness. A Canadian is expected to wrestle a bull moose to the ground as a part of his sixth birthday party.

Sure, Mr. Grylls is a navy seal, but in my opinion the following picture pretty much sums up how Canadians deal with seals:

Spoiler: Elves advised not to look (click to show/hide)

[Duke 2.0]

Spoiler: That is Everest (click to show/hide)

He flies over Everest.

 This is all I need to present about the man.

[Eduren]

The point is that they are two different shows. Les Stroud makes a survival show, and Bear Grylls makes a show where he jumps off shit and does extremely stupid things. This is not that bad, but the danger is people that watch ManVwild are going to think that that is how you act in a survival situation. Solution? A huge disclaimer at the start saying that it is only for entertainment and that all the stuff he does is not to be attempted at all, much less in a survival situation.

[Emperor_Jonathan]

Erm. No. Man Vs Wild should NOT have a disclaimer for Entertainment, since IT IS NOT MEANT TO BE AN ENTERTAINMENT SHOW.

The key difference between the shows are:

Man Vs Wild: Bear Grylls is showing you some techniques to survive in a particular wilderness, if you were lost.

Survivor Man: Les Stroud escapes from a particular wilderness, filming how he survives along the way (along with explaining how to do it.)

The difference? Man Vs Wild can cover a broader range of topics in surviving, since some of the stunts are set up.

Cept the man vs. Wild guy is more certified.
He's a trained navy seal and such.

Les Stroud is a trained survivalist who spent a year in the wilderness making shit from scratch, using no metals or plastics. Bear Grylls is Hardcore, but he isn't more certified.

Also do you know anything about Bear Grylls? He was in the fucking British SAS, the forerunner to most modern commando units, including the Navy Seals. They're much much 'better' than Navy Seals.

He's never been in the Navy Seals.

[Eduren]

I understand that he can show what to do in particular situations. But there are many times where he demonstrates things that shouldn't be done in a survival situation. I have seen him take a deer carcass (provided of course) spend 20 minutes fashioning a sled for it, and proceed to drag it through the snow for what seemed like several miles. At which point it accidentally fell into a freezing cold stream. He proceeded to jump in after it. After wrestling with it for half a minute, he gave up and climbed out of the water, wet. While this is one example, there are many more little ones.

The fact is that people aren't too bright, and monkey-see, monkey-do.

[Emperor_Jonathan]

The fact is that people aren't too bright, and monkey-see, monkey-do.

That is why we have the Darwin Awards.

[Vester]

I understand that he can show what to do in particular situations. But there are many times where he demonstrates things that shouldn't be done in a survival situation. I have seen him take a deer carcass (provided of course) spend 20 minutes fashioning a sled for it, and proceed to drag it through the snow for what seemed like several miles. At which point it accidentally fell into a freezing cold stream. He proceeded to jump in after it. After wrestling with it for half a minute, he gave up and climbed out of the water, wet. While this is one example, there are many more little ones.

The fact is that people aren't too bright, and monkey-see, monkey-do.

They could technically call the show "Bear Grylls is tougher than you and will prove it".

[Aqizzar]

I can remember more episodes than I care to where Grylls "demonstrated" with worrying enthusiasm how to find nourishment from some pile of animal crap.  Yes, that's brilliant.  Lost in the wilderness miles from medical care, what's the best thing to do when hungry?  Root around in some bear's diseased droppings for morsels it already digested.  The man is obsessed with finding new disgusting things to pretend to consume.

And of course there's the new season trailer where he pretends to be chased through a tunnel by a train.  Yeah, that's some good fucking advice, just head on into the tunnel, whatever happens you'll make it.

The fact is that people aren't too bright, and monkey-see, monkey-do.

That is why we have the Darwin Awards.

I'd say that as long as the guy is presenting this bullshit as legitimate tips, he's responsible for anybody following them.  But honestly, anyone dumb enough to believe half that would never make it into the woods anyway.  Which is another thing the show never mentions.  Those rescue crews that come out to save his staged ass?  Yeah, in real-life, you have to pay those people afterwards.  Many's the tale of a Colorado mountainclimber rescued by airlift, only to wind up bankrupt from the $500000 bill for all those helicopter hours finding them.

[DJ]

Seriously? If that's how it works in America, I'd do my damn best to *hide* from rescue parties if I was lost, and just find my own way out.

[Aqizzar]

Well, it's kinda tricky.  If the town police just organize a searching party, I don't think that costs anything.  Ditto for like the Coast Guard and stuff.  But in places like Colorado, the number of people who get their butts lost and need finding is far greater than the equipment local law enforcement can afford with their paltry tax-base.  So there's a lot of private search-and-rescue operations the state has to contract into helping out, who can and do charge the findee for their time and trouble.

[JoshuaFH]

I think there's something similar for people that fall into the Niagara River and they have to be rescued. If it was by accident, then there's no charge, but if it was an intentional suicide attempt, then there's a huge fine.

Or maybe it was the other way around? I can't remember.