|
Post by shmumph on Apr 24, 2008 7:37:16 GMT
I thought it was just me that didn't have a clue
|
|
epona
Noob Wannabe
Posts: 1
|
Post by epona on Apr 24, 2008 8:48:10 GMT
Mr Toots - "couldn't the TV viewer stomach some proper, boring, scientific study"?
No they couldn't because unless it was on BBC4 at 2 in the morning, it'd never get on TV. No one would pay for it in today's world of commercial tv. I mean you've seen the worst of the 'lowest common denominator' stuff ('The World's top 10 most scary videos / animals / car crashes') and even things like Panorama and Horizon have gone WAAAY down hill lately. A scientific programme about ghosts / paranormal investigation would show precisely 0. Or at least, 99.9% of the time. That's why Most Haunted (which I used to love, for the entertainment value) has to whoop up every possible cracking floorboard. Sometimes it's pretty dull anyway. TV viewers want screaming and phantoms and possessions. I happen to prefer the subtler things in most haunted (I loved the wet footprints by the side of the empty swimming pool) but that doesn't seem to be enough for Antix. You might get an hour one-off programme, but even then (judging by the other science programmes on tv, what few there are) it wouldn't be very rigorous or analysed very well.
oh well.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Apr 24, 2008 9:30:45 GMT
How about Mythbusters That is a scientific show that is very entertaining and educational
|
|
|
Post by loz on Apr 24, 2008 11:02:12 GMT
But even Mythbusters has changed over the years. In the old days we used to see more of the builds and more of the science behind what they're trying to do.. now it seems to be made a bit more for the ADHD generation; big booms and less science. I still love it though.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on Apr 24, 2008 17:55:40 GMT
I guess I have been 'outed' by Admin You should have been here when i outed Kensington, all hell broke loose. So in that respect do you think it is fair for you to judge Ciaran in the way you did? I am not defending Ciaran in any way, i am one of his harshest critics, but I am a critic from the viewpoint of an average dumb Joe, you are critisising him from the point of an academic and as such you should perhaps look at things from a different view. Thats my point, Ciaran is an ACTOR employed to play the part of a parapsychologist on a TV show, what is wrong with that? You have to be really really dumb to think it is real, however there are a few people who do think it is real. But these are the same people who think Eastenders or Corrie is real, would you attack Richard Wiseman if he was to make an appearence on Eastenders? They could, and we have Mythbusters, but there is always a problem with making the boring entertaining, it can be done, it just needs some imagination.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2008 8:55:23 GMT
I used to have a lot of respect for Ciaran in the earlier shows, he was my voice-of-reason amongst some of the amateur dramatics. But then a couple of years ago he allegedly let the cat out of the bag and said to the press that some of the goings-on in MH were baseless, ill-defined or just basically made up. I was surprised he didn't walk out on the show after that, but he took the 30 pieces of gold and stayed and ever since then I jsut see him as a bogus man with bogus principles and phD which he has wasted by associating himself with a program he claims is not fit for purpose! I agree with every word you say - I worked closely with Ciaran for a while leading up to his exposure of Acorah, and thought he was a decent man. I was very disappointed that he threw his lot in with the Beatties and abandoned all pretence of scientific research.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Jon Donnis on May 14, 2008 12:17:00 GMT
There was never any scientific research on that show, not since the first episode. Ciaran is an actor employed to play the part, just like Jason Karl
|
|