|
1-7 of 7 messages
|
Page 1 of 1
|
|
"survivor" snake
|
Reply
|
|
by boomslang on July 10, 2001
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
during the first edition of "survivor" a snake was shown and one of the participants threw it back into the ocean. he said it was a sea krait, i believe...it looked like a mangrove snake. does anyone know what it really was?
|
| |
|
RE: "survivor" snake
|
Reply
|
|
by ian on July 11, 2001
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
gotta love the accuracy of entertainment TV when it comes to reptile species and proper locality. I wonder what the statistics are on that.
|
| |
|
RE:
|
Reply
|
|
by wcellen on July 11, 2001
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I loved some of the trailers for Survivor II that showed footage of American Alligators and tried to pass them off as "deadly, man-eating crocodiles in the Australian outback." Sadly, a similar misrepresentation happened on The O'Rielly Factor that could adversely affect conservation efforts. Coming on the heels of the attack in Tampa, the program showed footage of 12-14 foot Indo-Pacific Saltwater Crocodiles lunging at cameras (Croc Hunter footage) to illustrate the behavior of American Alligators.
|
| |
|
RE: misrepresentations
|
Reply
|
|
by boomslang on July 11, 2001
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
thanks, wcellen, for the confirmation of the mangrove.
it's too bad that people seem to feel that they've got to respond with an answer, ill-advised or otherwise in this day and age. i find it in the workplace, in sales situations, the media...everywhere. nothing wrong with saying "i don't know..." or "i believe..."
it leaves our kids with a lesson that you need to blow smoke when in doubt and pretend you know what you're saying. as was said, the sad part is the misrepresentations lead to fear and destruction, figuratively and literally. one scary thought that comes to mind is though we've been fortunate to have been exposed to many fine hours of tv footage of reptiles, what might be coming through is the elaborate glamorization of the "power" of reptiles, either their potent venom, their strength and stealth, all of which i'm sure leads to their destruction due to fear and "bravado" reactions. fortunately, steve, jeff, o'shea and the others appropriately emphasize their beauty and stake in the whole ecological system.
|
| |
|
RE: misrepresentations
|
Reply
|
|
by Snakeman1982 on July 13, 2001
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Another problem that I found with Survivor 2 was there questions that they were asking the wanna be survivalists. I have only watched about ten mintutes or less of both shows but what I saw on the second one while at one of my professors houses was that they asked the question ("How many of the world's ten most deadliest snakes are found in the outback"). I don't remember what the first two numbers were but the last choices were 9 and 10. I said nine because to my knowledge all ten are in Australia but one of them is a seasnake and I wouldn't consider that as being part of the "outback". However, if I had been a contestant on that show I would have gotten it wrong because they said that all ten lived in the outback. I think they should have said "how many of the world's ten most deadliest snakes live in Australia and then I would have gotten it right. They really need to spend less money securing the place from reporters and people and spend more on their research about the places they are at because I can't stand their ignorance that makes me look like I get snake questions wrong.
|
| |
|
RE: misrepresentations
|
Reply
|
|
by SnakeFreak2k1 on July 31, 2001
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Actyually, I think the question was, "Out of the the ten most deadly snakes in the outback, how many of them live in Australia", a trick question. I remember laughing that I had been fooled too.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
