Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Mar 23, 2007
- 13,804
- 10,336
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
Hey guys, Turns out Evan has contacted several folks here on this forum section.
And regarding supposed media soliciting T'net members: There were many threads where someone comes on to T'net alluding to "casting calls" for md'rs, as we all know. And when those threads turned into doubters critical of them, T'net made clear that the rules forbid casting negativity on them. Ie.: they are welcome to post and solicit or whatever. That's fine.
So I will not cast doubts on Evan's authenticity as "someone from Hollywood", blah blah blah.
But wanted to share that after some prodding, he did admit that shows don't sell unless they have the cliff-hanger type sensationalism. As such, a dissenter's (skeptic's) viewpoint isn't likely to be on such shows. So much for "balanced viewpoint" and analytical-critical thinking, eh ?
Hence notice that the only people who get interviewed for shows like America Unearthed, or Oak Island, etc... are starry eyed believers. Ghost story chasing coat-hanger wielding types. And immediately a discerning mind watching these shows sees "more plausible explanations" to the yarns spun (supposed evidences, stories that point you to such & such, etc...). But nnneeeoohhh, that wouldn't "sell" to viewers, eh ?
To use American Unearthed as an example: There was an episode, profiling "certain viking remains in the desert southwest" blah blah. But a mere 60 seconds on google showed that that entire thing had been debunked decades ago (but sure, some believer's will always be waltzing about) . And does the show have anything to offer those other explanations to the objects they were profiling ? Nope. *Certainly* they have access to google, and could find what I did in 60 seconds, right ?
And regarding supposed media soliciting T'net members: There were many threads where someone comes on to T'net alluding to "casting calls" for md'rs, as we all know. And when those threads turned into doubters critical of them, T'net made clear that the rules forbid casting negativity on them. Ie.: they are welcome to post and solicit or whatever. That's fine.
So I will not cast doubts on Evan's authenticity as "someone from Hollywood", blah blah blah.
But wanted to share that after some prodding, he did admit that shows don't sell unless they have the cliff-hanger type sensationalism. As such, a dissenter's (skeptic's) viewpoint isn't likely to be on such shows. So much for "balanced viewpoint" and analytical-critical thinking, eh ?
Hence notice that the only people who get interviewed for shows like America Unearthed, or Oak Island, etc... are starry eyed believers. Ghost story chasing coat-hanger wielding types. And immediately a discerning mind watching these shows sees "more plausible explanations" to the yarns spun (supposed evidences, stories that point you to such & such, etc...). But nnneeeoohhh, that wouldn't "sell" to viewers, eh ?
To use American Unearthed as an example: There was an episode, profiling "certain viking remains in the desert southwest" blah blah. But a mere 60 seconds on google showed that that entire thing had been debunked decades ago (but sure, some believer's will always be waltzing about) . And does the show have anything to offer those other explanations to the objects they were profiling ? Nope. *Certainly* they have access to google, and could find what I did in 60 seconds, right ?
