"Mostly True Stories"

How not to buy a brick in a box off the back of a truck.
Nyarlathotep
Posts: 49281
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 2:50 pm

"Mostly True Stories"

Post by Nyarlathotep »

Being an afficianado of urban legends, I caught a show called Mostly True Stories on TLC yesterday, a show where they discus urban legends and try to find some little bit of truth that may have inspired the story. I have caught it a few times before and while it sometimes seemed to stretch reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally far to try to find some tiny little nugget of truth in the urban legends it talks about, I had never caught it (until yesterday) drifting into full blown woo-woo territory. Most of the time their explanations are of the "Okay, something vaguely resembling this legend, if you think about it right, happened once" variety, but this particular episode dealt with a ghost trying to warn a woman about a dangerous psycho hiding in the abck seat of her car.

So after showing the legend, and talking a bit about what psychology might cause people to beleive such a legend, the announcer says to the effect of "but do ghosts exist? Can they communicate with the living? This man says they can." And who is the "this man" in question? Why, none other than our old buddy James VanPraagh. Followed by a completely unskeptical, unrebutted segment where Mr VanPraagh goes on aboout how the dead can sometimes contact the living but it takes years of hard work to become a medium :roll: I suppose he is right though, it probably takes a lot of practice to become proficient enough at cold reading to be able to charge people for the privelige of seeing it.

What is wrong with the folks at TLC? I thought TLC stood for "The Learning Channel", Learning being the key word. Is unquestioningly accepting crap like VanPraagh spews learning? I don't think so.

User avatar
Hexxenhammer
Posts: 3863
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 10:56 pm
Location: Minnesota

Post by Hexxenhammer »

We'll always have Myth Busters...
"I'll have the roast duck with the mango salsa."

User avatar
Nigel
Posts: 7987
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 1:33 am
Location: Brinsby

Post by Nigel »

Hexxenhammer wrote:We'll always have Myth Busters...
Have they made new Mythbusters? I saw on the Discovery website they added a new host (female) along with Jaime and Adam, but I haven't seen a new episode in 6 months. They were showing reruns up until the end of April or May, and I've lost track of it after that, because I'd seen them all.
If you can't laugh, what good are you?

I thought I won't submit this...but who cares...let it roll. -Pillory

User avatar
RedShift
Posts: 1057
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 9:55 pm
Location: Desolation Row

Re: "Mostly True Stories"

Post by RedShift »

I suppose he is right though, it probably takes a lot of practice to become proficient enough at cold reading to be able to charge people for the privelige of seeing it.
Not even that. Van Praagh isn't even a very good cold reader. I've seen quite a few Beyond episodes recently and even edited to show him in the best light, he sucks.

I always thought there were three options
1) Psychic ability exists
2) It doesn't exist but the medium thinks it does
3) It doesn't exist and the medium knows it

but I'm going to add a fourth:
4) It exists but offers nothing meaningful so who cares

If he's genuine, Van Praagh definately falls in category four.
Random chance seems to have operated in our favour.

[color=red]If I wanted something your thumb touched, I’d eat the inside of your ear.[/color]

User avatar
Andonyx
Posts: 660
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:47 pm

Post by Andonyx »

Nigel wrote:
Hexxenhammer wrote:We'll always have Myth Busters...
Have they made new Mythbusters? I saw on the Discovery website they added a new host (female) along with Jaime and Adam, but I haven't seen a new episode in 6 months. They were showing reruns up until the end of April or May, and I've lost track of it after that, because I'd seen them all.
That pisses me off! One of the things I like about that show is that the hosts are unaplogetic, unabashed geeks. They probably had some brainless network exec say "Hey let's spice it up! Add a hot female, and make the editing more MTV like!"

Idiot.

Now the show is gonna descend into another Discovery channel crapola fest where the producers try to goade scientists and academics into trying to act hip and edgy and the whole thing just becomes embarrassing, like (gulp) that stupid fantasy animal match-up show. Wathcing nerdy scientists try and trash talk was a new low in so called educational television.

Oh well another great show ruined by being dumbed down for the masses, and the even dumber TV producers.

User avatar
roger
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 6:15 pm
Location: USA

Post by roger »

Andonyx wrote:That pisses me off! One of the things I like about that show is that the hosts are unaplogetic, unabashed geeks. They probably had some brainless network exec say "Hey let's spice it up! Add a hot female, and make the editing more MTV like!"
What? Females can't be nerds? For a show to be serious, it has to be all male? I'm sure you don't really mean that.

Anyway, here is the "hot" female:

http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythb ... rlain.html

User avatar
Andonyx
Posts: 660
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:47 pm

Post by Andonyx »

roger wrote:
Andonyx wrote:That pisses me off! One of the things I like about that show is that the hosts are unaplogetic, unabashed geeks. They probably had some brainless network exec say "Hey let's spice it up! Add a hot female, and make the editing more MTV like!"
What? Females can't be nerds? For a show to be serious, it has to be all male? I'm sure you don't really mean that.

Anyway, here is the "hot" female:

http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythb ... rlain.html
You caught me! That was an unfounded assumption on my part, and to Mrs. Chamberlain, she has my apologies.

But it has certainly been my experience to see many of my favorite shows ruined by network "re-tooling," and considering the examples of other Discovery Channel shows, I just assume this would go the same way.

Rest assured this assumption had more to do with my predjudice towards TV producers and developers than against women geeks.

I don't deal well with change.

User avatar
Vic Daring
Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 8:39 pm
Location: Anvilania

Post by Vic Daring »

Andonyx wrote:...and to Mrs. Chamberlain, she has my apologies.
Sorry I called you hot. You're definitely not hot. Won't happen again.
Victim of the SBN (Search Button Nazis)

User avatar
Keneke
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:03 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Post by Keneke »

Andonyx wrote: But it has certainly been my experience to see many of my favorite shows ruined by network "re-tooling," and considering the examples of other Discovery Channel shows, I just assume this would go the same way.
{macho BS}
Of course, if the woman was in a subservient role like that girl on Tool Time, everything will be okay.
{/macho BS}

User avatar
Andonyx
Posts: 660
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:47 pm

Post by Andonyx »

Keneke wrote:
Andonyx wrote: But it has certainly been my experience to see many of my favorite shows ruined by network "re-tooling," and considering the examples of other Discovery Channel shows, I just assume this would go the same way.
{macho BS}
Of course, if the woman was in a subservient role like that girl on Tool Time, everything will be okay.
{/macho BS}
Are you making a joke, or suggesting that was my subtext?

Because that's exactly the kind of thing i DON'T want in the show. I assumed, somewhat incorrectly it seems they were going to leave in the regular geeks and hire a "round-card girl" to pop-up in front of the camera every now and again.

thatguywhojuggles

tlc

Post by thatguywhojuggles »

The Learning Channel is a joke.