Anyone see the ridiculous show on History Channel yesterday?

About Black Holes ON the earth?

They had their "theorist" John Hutchison on to talk about how the Bermuda Triangle is actually a black hole on earth.... They even had the gall to label him "Dr. John Hutchison".

This man is a QUACK, and is not a DR. of anything.. It's unbelievable the crap that gets passed off as science on the TEE VEE...

Google John Hutchison. You'll be amazed that the History Channel calls this quack a Dr. of anything.

/me pukes.

It turned out to be nothing more than a sick joke.

..."The Search for Noah's Ark" type religious hooey most of the time on that channel. When it's not acting like an antique version of the Military Channel, that is.

In Search of Nazi Gold
Nazis in Color
Nazis In America
Nazis In South America

...Nazis on Ice. I loved that one. :rofl:

:hi:

Same film clip, presented in 5000 shows about Hitler.

"Honey, come quick! It's Eva Braun on the veranda!":popcorn:

"Heil Honey, I'm Home!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbj9otRPdiM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnord5ZSM2M

Now that's what I call poorly judged.

but had no idea they were so ahead of us in breakdancing!! That could have been scary - good thing we invaded before they had time to Bring It or we may have been Served!

No matter how - 'out there'.

But, I also assume those watching are intelligent enough to distinguish fantasy from speculation from theory from fact.

And, it wasn't like there weren't opposing points of view presented.

Thought do not kill. People do.

and presented it as a scientific theory. Would you be so sanguine about the rubbish being billed as science?

Just because it's not presented with a religious agenda doesn't make it any less pernicious in the way it gives people a false sense of science.

In science, not all points of view have an equal "right" to be presented as science.

I also strongly object to the producers' use of creative editing and misleading narration in distorting the statements of the scientists they did interview. For instance, one interviewee was giving a litany of the natural disasters we might expect to see from global warming, but those were edited to give the impression that he was saying these calamities might result from the (imaginary) black hole.

It wasn't merely presenting an unconventional view - the entire program was completely dishonest.

The man is a fraud, and a quack, and doesn't even have any scientific education, yet they labeled him "Dr. John Hutchison".

In addition I am going to guess that no actual authorities on black holes where referenced right?

It was the toilet at the back of the Beatlemania tour bus, the one we named "Rolling Auschwitz".

They should at least have someone who got a B- in Earth Science advise them.

It's Mythbusters with an even poorer underlying concept, and with half the science quality and none of the host appeal. It's a random group of pretty faces brought together to break things and blow stuff up, with a paper-thin layer of science on top to justify its presence on Discovery Channel. Unlike Mythbusters, it lacks that genuine feeling of a few people getting together to try out things that really interest them, and reeks of a blatant ratings grab.

The only more blatant attempt at the same thing recently is History Channel Shockwave. It's just home video clips of things blowing up, most of which have been posted to YouTube and Break for years.

..in the add at the bottom of the thread must have been distorted by a BLACK HOLE!!!!

In the Earth, maybe. At the center of the planet, sucking up liquid iron and nickel. But not "on" the Earth.

And it seems a *touch* unlikely that there has been a black hole down there for any length of time without it either evaporating or swallowing everything.

Yeah, yeah, I know. But pedant is my middle name.

Some of it is good, or at least interesting, but a lot of it is useless speculation by people less qualified than me to be doing any kind of science.

The UFO Files, especially, and I have high hopes for Monster Quest. It's ludicrous, and I don't know what it's doing on the History Channel, but I enjoy it.

Perversely, the History Channel often has better science programming than the Science Channel does.

History International is becoming our channel of choice.

I like it because it seems like they are trying to look at actual evidence and judge it on the merits of the evidence. No real surprises, but it's neat to see some light on lesser-known aspects of cryptozoology, such as giant birds and such. The Orang Pendek episode was especially good - send the track off to an expert in the evolution of bipedalism in hominids, and he very quickly ID'd the track as from a bear. I like that they show the results of analysis, instead of, you know, not reporting on a negative finding.

The History Channel doesn't seem to think much of its audience's intellect. About half of their programming lately seems to be about whether the Rapture will be tomorrow, or later.

Tucker

but their desire to put so many pseudo science shows on for ratings always leaves me wondering if their "real" history shows are factual.