Mermaids: The Bodies Found is a "docufiction" that premiered on Animal Planet this summer and has since been shown on the Discovery Channel. This Documentary explores the Aquatic Ape Theory and focuses on a story of a team of NOAA scientists who recover the body of a mermaid in the stomach of a shark.
The documentary involves testimony of NOAA scientists involved in the discovery, examines the evidence found, and shows two amateur videos of alleged mermaids. The documentary goes on to expose a navy cover up of evidence, due to the fact naval testing is killing these creatures.
The catch? The documentary is based on a fictional story. Other than the Aquatic Ape Theory (which is a real, albeit not widely accepted scientific theory), and a recording of "the bloop" (an unidentified sound recorded in the ocean) everything presented in this documentary is fictional. Although Animal Planet Issued the following press release
it is unclear in the show's actual content whether or not this is a genuine documentary. To further muddy the waters, a website associated with the program is claiming to be blocked by Homeland Security, although this is merely a graphic on the website, and the site itself is exactly what it is... just a graphic making it appear that the site was blocked.
Naturally, this has created a group that thinks the documentary is genuine, and are dedicated to believing that mermaids exist.
So, my question to the TL community:
Is this merely a creative way to examine a scientific theory, or is it intentional manipulation of viewers in an attempt to increase viewer counts and get publicity.
Poll: What do you think of this documentary?
Intentional Manipulation (169)
87%
Clearly science fiction with the intent of examining scientific theory (25)
13%
194 total votes
Your vote: What do you think of this documentary?
(Vote): Intentional Manipulation (Vote): Clearly science fiction with the intent of examining scientific theory
From the description in the OP, along with the "blocked" website, it sounds like they were trying to cash in on the viral ARG groove that lots of game companies have been using for their marketing before major title releases. Just as a way to spin up public notoriety about their channel.
Discovery channel / Animal planet have the same ownership and same gameplan in different market subdivisions.
hahah that website is a nice touch. This seems like a supremely dumb ratings grab by Animal Planet but at least its marginally more creative than the dumb shit they air on TLC/History lately.
On August 13 2012 05:21 heyoka wrote: hahah that website is a nice touch. This seems like a supremely dumb ratings grab by Animal Planet but at least its marginally more creative than the dumb shit they air on TLC/History lately.
The whole aquatic ape thing is moronic anyway.
Take that back you, leave my imaginary friends alone!
It's so sad to be old enough to remember the history channel before it became the hitler channel (Which was before it became Aliens, Rednecks and Pals!).
Same with TLC only midgets and strange or dysfunctional people.
Same with Discovery only ... mermaids.
They used to be my bastion of entertainment as a teenager. Now they're just gone, replaced with reality TV rubbish like this. Sad, sad, sad.
Edit: Oh, I actually caught about 3 minutes of it last night during one of IPLs many super long breaks. It was just as stupid as you imagine it is.
On August 13 2012 05:21 heyoka wrote: hahah that website is a nice touch. This seems like a supremely dumb ratings grab by Animal Planet but at least its marginally more creative than the dumb shit they air on TLC/History lately.
The whole aquatic ape thing is moronic anyway.
Not that I have any knowledge about the subject but I was always under the impression that our ancestors evolved from some form of aquatic type creature. doesnt that explain the webbed feet gene that pops up now and then in people today and the way our hands have webbings between the fingers?
On August 13 2012 05:21 heyoka wrote: hahah that website is a nice touch. This seems like a supremely dumb ratings grab by Animal Planet but at least its marginally more creative than the dumb shit they air on TLC/History lately.
The whole aquatic ape thing is moronic anyway.
Not that I have any knowledge about the subject but I was always under the impression that our ancestors evolved from some form of aquatic type creature. doesnt that explain the webbed feet gene that pops up now and then in people today and the way our hands have webbings between the fingers?
To add to your argument, 2 people in my friends family were born with gills.
On August 13 2012 05:21 heyoka wrote: hahah that website is a nice touch. This seems like a supremely dumb ratings grab by Animal Planet but at least its marginally more creative than the dumb shit they air on TLC/History lately.
The whole aquatic ape thing is moronic anyway.
Not that I have any knowledge about the subject but I was always under the impression that our ancestors evolved from some form of aquatic type creature. doesnt that explain the webbed feet gene that pops up now and then in people today and the way our hands have webbings between the fingers?
While we did evolve from creatures that left the water at some point, there is hundreds of millions of years between that and when humans and apes diverged.
hahaha pretty much what heyoka said. Pretty creative there with the site being closed down LOL. Somewhere in the world somebody is putting on a tin foil hat and snorkeling gear. :D Obvious fake, though I suppose if they made it unobvious, it might actually be illegal.
On August 13 2012 05:36 Manit0u wrote: Department of Justice has closed the site. There may be some truth out there.
please read my original post
They should actually get into alot of trouble for misrepresenting a Federal Agency.
yeah, I was actually thinking the US Navy probably has some grounds for a lawsuit against Animal Planet because they were basically directly attacked by this documentary that was based on a fictional story, yet presented as a genuine documentary.
I didn't bother with the documentary but the OP mentioned "the bloop". I heard about that before so I looked into it again and for fuck's sake, why can't I get all the answers? It's killing me now. Loud sound picked up under water by microphones 5000 km apart?
I can't believe I'll probably die without my answer
On August 13 2012 05:21 heyoka wrote: hahah that website is a nice touch. This seems like a supremely dumb ratings grab by Animal Planet but at least its marginally more creative than the dumb shit they air on TLC/History lately.
The whole aquatic ape thing is moronic anyway.
Not that I have any knowledge about the subject but I was always under the impression that our ancestors evolved from some form of aquatic type creature. doesnt that explain the webbed feet gene that pops up now and then in people today and the way our hands have webbings between the fingers?
The theory is that some of our ancestors took to becoming sea-dwellers. It's pretty much accepted as fact that our ancestors spent a good amount of time in water. The evidence they mentioned was true (such as our breathing, our fat (which they failed to mention how it keeps us floating), our movement, and our webbing).
---
The made up videos and cover up story seemed like a pathetic, low-budget science fiction movie. I didn't even think for a second that it was possible that any of it was real. The only thing that I found slightly interesting was the aquatic ape theory, but even that seemed to be inneffectively covered/explained (or maybe the theory is just stupid, idk). It was not worth staying up another 2 hours to watch
It's funny to see how the public reacts to things like this. I knew a guy in a movie about a school shooting that was shot entirely using handheld camcorders and security cameras. They made a website to go along with it and for the longest time there were people constantly writing in to ask if it really happened and condolences to the families and such.
It's getting harder and harder to tell the line between CG/media in general and reality and I find it interesting to see where these guys go with it. I'm certain the mermaid story isn't real, but how long before we get a district 9 esque documentary that people legitimately think happened?
Not trying to derail the thread in any way, so sorry if that happened. The movie was Zero Day if anyone's curious. I know one of the guys who plays a shooter. It's on netflix if you're interested.
Aren't mermaids completely taken from thin air? Sirens and all that? At least "documentaries" and ancient mythology about giant squids, seaserpents and all that jazz has got some connection to reality. This feels like Monster Quest :/
On August 13 2012 05:36 Manit0u wrote: Department of Justice has closed the site. There may be some truth out there.
please read my original post
They should actually get into alot of trouble for misrepresenting a Federal Agency.
yeah, I was actually thinking the US Navy probably has some grounds for a lawsuit against Animal Planet because they were basically directly attacked by this documentary that was based on a fictional story, yet presented as a genuine documentary.
I don't know if your being sarcastic (Cause I didn't waste my time watching the documentary) but the whole "let's fake that our site is being taken down by the Feds!" should be against some sort of rule. It'd be like me impersonating a police officer.
Even the press release is misleading and manipulative. The one sentence editor's note says it is fictional, but the press release itself only mentions it once with: "The film is science fiction, using science as a springboard into imagination and centering the story on the following real-world events: In the early 1990s, the US Navy began a series of covert sonar tests, which were linked to mass die-offs of whales, which washed up on beaches throughout the world. For years, the Navy denied they were responsible for these beachings. In 1997, scientists at the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) recorded a mysterious sound (called “The Bloop”) in the deep Pacific, which was thought to be organic in nature. It has never been identified. These are facts." Those are the only facts? Weak.
The rest of the press release is littered with phrases such as "Animal Planet’s Mermaids: the Body Found Paints a Wildly Convincing Picture of the Existence of Mermaids", "Mermaids: The Body Found makes a strong case for the existence of the mermaid", and "Mermaids: The Body Found is so compelling with evidence and so credible, audiences can see it a second time when it repeats".
On August 13 2012 05:36 Manit0u wrote: Department of Justice has closed the site. There may be some truth out there.
please read my original post
They should actually get into alot of trouble for misrepresenting a Federal Agency.
yeah, I was actually thinking the US Navy probably has some grounds for a lawsuit against Animal Planet because they were basically directly attacked by this documentary that was based on a fictional story, yet presented as a genuine documentary.
I don't know if your being sarcastic (Cause I didn't waste my time watching the documentary) but the whole "let's fake that our site is being taken down by the Feds!" should be against some sort of rule. It'd be like me impersonating a police officer.
What are you implying?
EDIT: to make myself more clear, why would you think I'm being sarcastic?
On August 13 2012 05:36 Manit0u wrote: Department of Justice has closed the site. There may be some truth out there.
please read my original post
They should actually get into alot of trouble for misrepresenting a Federal Agency.
yeah, I was actually thinking the US Navy probably has some grounds for a lawsuit against Animal Planet because they were basically directly attacked by this documentary that was based on a fictional story, yet presented as a genuine documentary.
I don't know if your being sarcastic (Cause I didn't waste my time watching the documentary) but the whole "let's fake that our site is being taken down by the Feds!" should be against some sort of rule. It'd be like me impersonating a police officer.
What are you implying?
EDIT: to make myself more clear, why would you think I'm being sarcastic?
I'm not implying anything.Just a misunderstanding. I'm talking about the website that supports this film. If you go onto the website it says it has been seized by the Department of Homeland Security, but that's completely fictitious.
On August 13 2012 05:36 Manit0u wrote: Department of Justice has closed the site. There may be some truth out there.
please read my original post
They should actually get into alot of trouble for misrepresenting a Federal Agency.
yeah, I was actually thinking the US Navy probably has some grounds for a lawsuit against Animal Planet because they were basically directly attacked by this documentary that was based on a fictional story, yet presented as a genuine documentary.
I don't know if your being sarcastic (Cause I didn't waste my time watching the documentary) but the whole "let's fake that our site is being taken down by the Feds!" should be against some sort of rule. It'd be like me impersonating a police officer.
What are you implying?
EDIT: to make myself more clear, why would you think I'm being sarcastic?
I'm not implying anything.Just a misunderstanding. I'm talking about the website that supports this film. If you go onto the website it says it has been seized by the Department of Homeland Security, but that's completely fictitious.
ah okay, for a second I was worried you were suggesting the Department of Homeland Security actually seized the page, and this was indeed some kind of government cover up
Now, we just need to know, who made this website. Is it independent, or did the documentary makers create it as I am currently not sure of it. But wouldn't this be illegal to use that seal, even though the seal used is slightly different?
There are most likely no mermaids, but it's always interesting. Still hope someday a huge monster comes out Loch Ness etc. . But then again lots of sea not explored yet
On August 13 2012 06:03 Xcobidoo wrote: Aren't mermaids completely taken from thin air? Sirens and all that? At least "documentaries" and ancient mythology about giant squids, seaserpents and all that jazz has got some connection to reality. This feels like Monster Quest :/
To be fair if i remember correctly, Monsterquest was actually like the highest rated show the history channel has produced
This show was kinda, eh didnt know about that "bloop" being real though
Now, we just need to know, who made this website. Is it independent, or did the documentary makers create it as I am currently not sure of it. But wouldn't this be illegal to use that seal, even though the seal used is slightly different?
I don't know that using the seal is illegal, as you pointed out picture's name is suspicious. I'm sure they made sure it was legal before they pulled it off.
Now, we just need to know, who made this website. Is it independent, or did the documentary makers create it as I am currently not sure of it. But wouldn't this be illegal to use that seal, even though the seal used is slightly different?
According to the Snopes website, the site www.believeinmermaids.com is held by Discovery Communications, the parent company of Animal Planet. Snopes won't let me copy paste, but it's in the NOAA response at the bottom of the page.
I just saw this last night; it was pretty interesting. I found the idea that millions of years ago some early hominids branched out of terrestrial lives and took to the seas, gradually developing more sea-faring characteristics such as larger eyes, protruding spinal cords, and echolocation. The scientists hypothesize that humans have long been attached to the water because of things like partial webbing between our fingers, and that human babies can instinctively hold their breath if submerged underwater. At the end the documentary proposes that mermaids and dolphins work together to hunt fish and can communicate with each other (for instance mermaids are intelligent and can conceal weapons on their bodies). Can't say how much is true, but definitely interesting stuff. On the other hand, the CGI was pretty atrocious.
On August 13 2012 06:35 KhAmun wrote: My GF's mother, after seeing this was insistent on their existence. I facepalmed for like an hour.
=/ People are going to latch hard on the idea that "it's not scientifically impossible therefore it's true". It's so sad that those TV people are willing to outright lie to the masses. They know damn well that some folks aren't equipped with a healthy amount of skepticism and will just eat that shit up.
It's so sad to be old enough to remember the history channel before it became the hitler channel (Which was before it became Aliens, Rednecks and Pals!).
Same with TLC only midgets and strange or dysfunctional people.
Same with Discovery only ... mermaids.
They used to be my bastion of entertainment as a teenager. Now they're just gone, replaced with reality TV rubbish like this. Sad, sad, sad.
Edit: Oh, I actually caught about 3 minutes of it last night during one of IPLs many super long breaks. It was just as stupid as you imagine it is.
On August 13 2012 06:35 KhAmun wrote: My GF's mother, after seeing this was insistent on their existence. I facepalmed for like an hour.
Yeah one of my best friends started talking about aliens after watching the history channel shit.. I wish schools were better at teaching scepticism :/
On August 13 2012 06:35 KhAmun wrote: My GF's mother, after seeing this was insistent on their existence. I facepalmed for like an hour.
Yeah one of my best friends started talking about aliens after watching the history channel shit.. I wish schools were better at teaching scepticism :/
while people who believe in "ancient aliens" are annoying, people who believe in mermaids after watching this is just... baffling. It would be like the History Channel admitting all the evidence in ancient aliens is completely made up, and still have a dedicated following supporting the idea. But, hey, throw in a government conspiracy to any made up bull shit and people are willing to jump on the anti-authoritarian band wagon before even doing the most basic of research.
Saw this on TV the other day as I was flipping through channels. I knew it was to good to be true I don't know about their website being shutdown by the government, but it's not like they are actually trying to pass this off as real. In the beginning of the linked clip, the text/subtitle(in Chinese) states that this program is based on scientific theories and does not represent facts.
On August 13 2012 06:35 KhAmun wrote: My GF's mother, after seeing this was insistent on their existence. I facepalmed for like an hour.
=/ People are going to latch hard on the idea that "it's not scientifically impossible therefore it's true". It's so sad that those TV people are willing to outright lie to people. They know damn well that some folks aren't equipped with a healthy amount of skepticism and will just eat that shit up.
Sadly not a lot of people have the ability to think about the information they take in. They assume that all information is good information, and that more of it is better. More information intake overloads our ability to process it, and so we have to digest it faster to make room for the next batch of information. In todays world, where information is abundant, this plagues all of us.
It begs the question: Is all this information we can gather from the internet, facebook, twitter, 24hour news, ect. a good thing, or is it the quality and not the quantity that matters? In other words, are we taking in too much bullshit because we don't have the time to realize that it's bullshit?
History channel, discovery, and TLC have all been really bad, progressively getting worse over the years. All these "reality" shows have ruined them. Right now NOVA on PBS is your best bet for solid documentaries. The "Planet Earth" series was damn good, but I've been impressed with little else in recent times.There are so many interesting places in the world, historical events or periods, and epic battles. It's sad these channels have strayed so far from their roots.
On August 13 2012 06:35 KhAmun wrote: My GF's mother, after seeing this was insistent on their existence. I facepalmed for like an hour.
Yeah one of my best friends started talking about aliens after watching the history channel shit.. I wish schools were better at teaching scepticism :/
while people who believe in "ancient aliens" are annoying, people who believe in mermaids after watching this is just... baffling. It would be like the History Channel admitting all the evidence in ancient aliens is completely made up, and still have a dedicated following supporting the idea. But, hey, throw in a government conspiracy to any made up bull shit and people are willing to jump on the anti-authoritarian band wagon before even doing the most basic of research.
Well, they make a lot more money this way, and it isn't really hurting anyone.. It's still depressing that they're so low on actual content that they have to make shit up.
On August 13 2012 06:35 KhAmun wrote: My GF's mother, after seeing this was insistent on their existence. I facepalmed for like an hour.
Yeah one of my best friends started talking about aliens after watching the history channel shit.. I wish schools were better at teaching scepticism :/
I actually found that "Chariot of the Gods" book at the public library on sale for 25 cents and bought it with a quarter off the floor. It's pretty hilarious.
I watched the entire documentary and I must say I find the message that they drive home at the end to be absolutely disgusting. Primarily because it says that human beings cannot coexist with nature and even suggests we cannot coexist with eachother and that we are unable to overcome our basic nature to destroy each other. Shouldn't the discovery channel/animal planet be trying to say that we should strive to do the opposite and one of the best ways to do that is by understanding things better? The second part that I found to be disgusting by it is it basically suggests that we should adopt a philosophy of ignorance because somehow its better that we don't know about it. Absolutely disgusting messages being thrown out in a mad grab for ratings. If animal planet continues with garbage like this it'll be even worse than the bad joke that the history channel has become.
On August 13 2012 06:35 KhAmun wrote: My GF's mother, after seeing this was insistent on their existence. I facepalmed for like an hour.
Yeah one of my best friends started talking about aliens after watching the history channel shit.. I wish schools were better at teaching scepticism :/
I actually found that "Chariot of the Gods" book at the public library on sale for 25 cents and bought it with a quarter off the floor. It's pretty hilarious.
Hehe, found that book laying on the floor in which I've picked it up.
To talk candidly, it is more plausible than the majority of religions out there.
My favorite part is how they manage to draw out the next-to-nothing that they actually have out for an hour and a half. It was interesting in the exact same way the X files was interesting. Pity they didn't just cut the shit and get Mulder and Scully to lead the investigation.
Watched the documentation. I really liked it until l the scene with the police: "They took everything and nothing but the sound is left." I am not able to believe this... Theoretically I cant say that they are wrong, but I would really want to see more pics and VODs from the body parts and that stuff. Any information?
On August 13 2012 08:06 Big-t wrote: Watched the documentation. I really liked it until l the scene with the police: "They took everything and nothing but the sound is left." I am not able to believe this... Theoretically I cant say that they are wrong, but I would really want to see more pics and VODs from the body parts and that stuff. Any information?
Umm.... There is no other information because it's not real. Way to read the OP. As the press release briefly glossed over, "The film is science fiction". It's not a real documentary.
I watched the entire thing and I have to say that I find it extremely disgusting that they would air this. It's obviously produced in a way to appear as real as possible, and the only thing even hinting that it all is fake is the message in the end that said "Though certain events in this film are fictional". Certain parts.. REALLY? The entire fucking film is completley faked and made to seem as fact presenting and real as possible.
For them to even air this there should be a huge disclaimer saying "THIS IS COMPLETLEY FICTIONAL" every five minutes imo.
What strikes me as odd is that this airs on Animal Planet. Same with the alien BS on History channel.. Now I haven't watched either of these for a long time. Maybe like 10 years or so, but I recall animal planet was... a nature channel.. they had documentaries about the rain forest and lions and stuff. That's a pretty far from star trek mermaiks. Mixing sci fi and documentaries only serves to give the network a bad rep I think.
On August 13 2012 11:08 CajunMan wrote: Since man first laid eyes on the sea was it not his first dream to bang hot underwater chicks?!?!
Amirite?
Maybe captain kirk went back in time in the star trek film to actually get some of that mermaid action and the whole "save the whales" thing was just an excuse? We'll find out in the next part of the documentary!
So I grew up without cable (It's what drove me to PC gaming really) and used to love to go to friends houses or vacations where I could watch the History Channel with my dad. However many years later ( I'm 24), I just moved in with my girlfriend and got cable because she wanted it. WTF happened to the History Channel? Its all sensationalist bullshit! Makes me really sad
On August 13 2012 06:35 KhAmun wrote: My GF's mother, after seeing this was insistent on their existence. I facepalmed for like an hour.
Yeah one of my best friends started talking about aliens after watching the history channel shit.. I wish schools were better at teaching scepticism :/
I had to explain to a friend of mine why the idea that we're an alien-ape genetic hybrid is fucking stupid. The history channel shouldn't be allowed to be called that anymore...
On August 13 2012 05:21 heyoka wrote: hahah that website is a nice touch. This seems like a supremely dumb ratings grab by Animal Planet but at least its marginally more creative than the dumb shit they air on TLC/History lately.
The whole aquatic ape thing is moronic anyway.
Not that I have any knowledge about the subject but I was always under the impression that our ancestors evolved from some form of aquatic type creature. doesnt that explain the webbed feet gene that pops up now and then in people today and the way our hands have webbings between the fingers?
Go back to the monster thread and draw mermaid monsters! No time for you to linger here!! Give them a propeller at the end of the tail and torpedoes shooting out from docks in their chest. Better replace the arms with enormous crab-like clams as well. I leave the choice between shark-mouth or pretty girl face to you.
Also, I don't believe in nonsense like mermaids, as they would swim under the ice at the end of the flat earth and fall off.
I think the most frustrating thing about this is the scores of people who think this is a real documentary, and are now mermaid rights activists on youtube comment sections. The amount of sheer stupidity is staggering.
On August 13 2012 05:15 Antisocialmunky wrote: I think it just failed all around. It is a bad fauxumentary, a silly subject matter, and has both crappy CGI and a terribad story.
Atleast the dragon one had a freaking dragon fighting a T-Rex.
I remember the dragon one, dunno about the t-rex tho. Still, this mermaid documentary thing was just silly and boring.
Omg, first the dinosaurs series, then this entire story with the neanderthals and now mermaids... People will believe in any fictional being as long as it's presented as "science" it seems... No wonder the children of today grow up without proper values for right and wrong.
On August 13 2012 14:17 Cascade wrote: Omg, first the dinosaurs series, then this entire story with the neanderthals and now mermaids... People will believe in any fictional being as long as it's presented as "science" it seems... No wonder the children of today grow up without proper values for right and wrong.
I'm not familiar, what did they do to dinosaurs and neanderthals ?
I can't believe that this show is still being talked about and debated. All this debate has, for the most part, done exactly what it was intended to do: make the show popular. It also did something else: it showed us all of the stupid people we may have missed. I'm serious, I had some well respected friends who saw the commerical and took it as a factual documentry about how they discovered a mermaid body, and then they tried to convince me after the show that it was all possible. Gaaah, my head is going to explode.
Also, 'the bloop.' Now, I don't know what the show said about it, but being big into Cryptozoology I've heard about 'the bloop' a lot. It's actually a pretty interesting topic, and a very curious noise, but I don't understand what it has to do with mermaids. The reason the bloop became famous because of this story (correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't brushed up on my bloop history in awhile.)
US ship/sub picks up a sound, a "bloop" on their radio/sonar equipment. They analyze and and determine that it is biological in nature (produced by some sort of animal, similar to a whale I guess), only whatever animal created the sound would have to be the largest animal on the planet. And it came from the depths.
So, I wrote all that and then went to wiki and realized I could just do this BLOOP BLOOP
I thought spreading information was based upon evidence and concreteness, not a theory backed by no actual science. Especially with a title like "Mermaids: The Bodies Found." Which is the exact fucking opposite of what they have lol.
Want me to respect you again, Animal Planet? Find some mermaid bodies... Come on, back your claim.
On August 13 2012 14:42 dudeman001 wrote: I thought spreading information was based upon evidence and concreteness, not a theory backed by no actual science. Especially with a title like "Mermaids: The Bodies Found." Which is the exact fucking opposite of what they have lol.
Want me to respect you again, Animal Planet? Find some mermaid bodies... Come on, back your claim.
All went down hill because of that goddamn sting ray, man. No Steve Irwin, no respect.
On August 13 2012 14:47 AlphaWhale wrote: Where's the third option that says "Sly way to build hype for the blu-ray re-release of "The Little Mermaid"?
omg, is discovery communications owned by disney? that would be hilarious
On August 13 2012 14:47 AlphaWhale wrote: Where's the third option that says "Sly way to build hype for the blu-ray re-release of "The Little Mermaid"?
omg, is discovery communications owned by disney? that would be hilarious
It wouldn't really be that surprising, ESPN is owned by Disney after all...
On August 13 2012 10:56 Euronyme wrote: What strikes me as odd is that this airs on Animal Planet. Same with the alien BS on History channel.. Now I haven't watched either of these for a long time. Maybe like 10 years or so, but I recall animal planet was... a nature channel.. they had documentaries about the rain forest and lions and stuff. That's a pretty far from star trek mermaiks. Mixing sci fi and documentaries only serves to give the network a bad rep I think.
my girlfriend is smart, good student, etc, but brace yourself: she believes in mermaids with all her heart. she got real excited about this, and in the first minute of looking it up i found out it was fake.
I was working with someone the other day and they told me about this. Once he finally got the message that I didn't believe at first thought, he then went on to tell me that he had seen a UFO. Hokay. It's all cool, people can be stupid but still good people.
On August 13 2012 16:09 Mordanis wrote: I was working with someone the other day and they told me about this. Once he finally got the message that I didn't believe at first thought, he then went on to tell me that he had seen a UFO. Hokay. It's all cool, people can be stupid but still good people.
This is a "double-edged knife".Some of us are ignorant and blind...but still good people.
On August 13 2012 15:09 KurtistheTurtle wrote: my girlfriend is smart, good student, etc, but brace yourself: she believes in mermaids with all her heart. she got real excited about this, and in the first minute of looking it up i found out it was fake.
Man, fuck the Dragon one they made all those years ago. Me and my Dad were watching TV and we flipped to the channel where it was running, like 15 minutes or so after it started. I assume they tell you at the start that the entire thing is a 'docufiction.' So we're watching this fake documentary, and its all legit sounding and we're FREAKING THE FUCK OUT because OH MY GOD DRAGONS WERE REAL THEY EXISTED OH MY GOD THIS IS THE FUCKING GREATEST DAY OF MY LIFE.
The documentary was so well made (or seemed so at the time), man. They went over each detail about dragons and explained it. The different types of dragons; european mountain dragons and chinese dragons and sea serpents. Their ability to fly. Their alleged ability to breath fire -- which they claimed was possible, citing some creatures currently alive that do things that are comparable.
I was so sad at the end when they finally started talking about how its not real. Something about "although dragons could have existed, they did not."
Mermaids arent nearly as cool as dragons. And these guys seem to be trying much harder to actually make people believe this shit, whereas the dragon one made it clear (eventually... and possibly at the start) that it was all a "what if" scenario. So fuck them.
Sorry about being sorta offtopicy ... I've wanted to share that story for a while.
Haha I remember seeeing that dragon documentation. Eventually I figured out it was fake when they explained how dragons mated. That was too stupid to be true
I remember seeing the dragon one....half of the stuff i believed at the start casue of the platinum fire breathing thing? didnt know about platinum all too well so i took what they said....than came the retardedness...would have been cool if it was real, but meh..i have skyrim for my dragons
I dont understand how they can cite this as a documentary, i wrote my bachelor thesis on what is and what isn't a documentary and how fiction affects it and this isn't even close. I'd even call this fraud or false marketing if they are truly marketing this as a documentary. I understand mockumentaries but for a "science" channel like discovery and animal planet to get behind this is just so bad its unreal.
I know a guy that constantly swears to me up and down with the most absolute stone cold seriousness that when he was a kid he was in the woods and he seen a big foot crashing through the woods chasing after a deer. he says it tackled the deer at a full speed run and snapped its neck and threw it over its shoulder and walked away with the deer on its shoulders. he swears up and down that its true.. and Im pretty damn good at detecting bullshit. I dunno if he seen bigfoot or not but he sure thinks he seen bigfoot.
Hes obseessed with bigfoot.. has websites and shit about the "hunt for bigfoot"
On August 14 2012 01:04 Coagulation wrote: I know a guy that constantly swears to me up and down with the most absolute stone cold seriousness that when he was a kid he was in the woods and he seen a big foot crashing through the woods chasing after a deer. he says it tackled the deer at a full speed run and snapped its neck and threw it over its shoulder and walked away with the deer on its shoulders. he swears up and down that its true.. and Im pretty damn good at detecting bullshit. I dunno if he seen bigfoot or not but he sure thinks he seen bigfoot.
Hes obseessed with bigfoot.. has websites and shit about the "hunt for bigfoot"
I dunno.... man.
Could be a dream. Kids don't develop tangible cognitive abilities until the age of 5. So he may be camping one day in the woods with his parents and then BAM! it hits him.
But a big foot does sounds more plausible than Christianity.
My initial reaction was that this is a cool way to market a sci-fi mockumentary. But if it's designed so that people will actually believe this shit.... I don't know. Part of me doesn't think creativity and interesting types of media should be stifled just because people are stupid, and I know stuff like Blair Witch was marketed virally as "real", so it's not like this type of thing hasn't been done before.... Is it just that people expect real things from the Discovery Channel rather than science fiction-type movies?
A bad fictional documentary about mermaid advertised by the government in the most funny way, except it's made to be look serious. I wonder how many people could believe that this documentary shows proof of the existence of mermaid.
I hope they'll do the flying unicorn in their next show !
On August 14 2012 01:04 Coagulation wrote: I know a guy that constantly swears to me up and down with the most absolute stone cold seriousness that when he was a kid he was in the woods and he seen a big foot crashing through the woods chasing after a deer. he says it tackled the deer at a full speed run and snapped its neck and threw it over its shoulder and walked away with the deer on its shoulders. he swears up and down that its true.. and Im pretty damn good at detecting bullshit. I dunno if he seen bigfoot or not but he sure thinks he seen bigfoot.
Hes obseessed with bigfoot.. has websites and shit about the "hunt for bigfoot"
I dunno.... man.
This might be a dumb question, but coming from a semi-believer in BigFoot/Sasqutch, I have to ask where he claims this occured at (state/country)?
I say semi-believer because I believe that 1) Something USE to be there, but pretty solid chance it isn't anymore. And 2) IF there IS something, I don't think it's in the United States (with the exception Alaska), but more likely to be a Yeti or an Oreng-pendek (which is most probably an Orangutan). Suuuper remote places in the world are still revealing all sorts of crazy things. I read a story of a Tiger researcher in, I believe, India who had been in a particular forest for over 10 years and had seen 1 Tiger in that entire span, even though he was 100% certain they were there. And he never saw an elephant, which were also present in the forest.
Personally, I live in a pretty 'wildernessy' place, with very high Moose and Bear populations, as well as a high Bobcat population and a Low mountain lion population. I've spent and do spend a lot of time in the woods, fishing, following streams and rivers, and whatever else, and can honestly say that I have seen 1 bear in all my years of stomping around the woods and drving through them.
My point is that we have LARGE animals that we know exsist that, given the right conditions, can disappear and not be seen for years, so when you mutiply that by, like, 1 thousand in regards to a jungle or one of the more remote forests on Earth, it becomes a little more likely that some sort of large unknown primate does exsist.
And then you times in by a million and you have the ocean, which still have zero chance of mermaids, but I bet some scary shit lurks down there we've never seen before. Giant Squid and Colossal Squid are scurry enough :\
On August 13 2012 15:09 KurtistheTurtle wrote: my girlfriend is smart, good student, etc, but brace yourself: she believes in mermaids with all her heart.
On August 14 2012 01:04 Coagulation wrote: I know a guy that constantly swears to me up and down with the most absolute stone cold seriousness that when he was a kid he was in the woods and he seen a big foot crashing through the woods chasing after a deer. he says it tackled the deer at a full speed run and snapped its neck and threw it over its shoulder and walked away with the deer on its shoulders. he swears up and down that its true.. and Im pretty damn good at detecting bullshit. I dunno if he seen bigfoot or not but he sure thinks he seen bigfoot.
Hes obseessed with bigfoot.. has websites and shit about the "hunt for bigfoot"
I dunno.... man.
This might be a dumb question, but coming from a semi-believer in BigFoot/Sasqutch, I have to ask where he claims this occured at (state/country)?
I say semi-believer because I believe that 1) Something USE to be there, but pretty solid chance it isn't anymore. And 2) IF there IS something, I don't think it's in the United States (with the exception Alaska), but more likely to be a Yeti or an Oreng-pendek (which is most probably an Orangutan). Suuuper remote places in the world are still revealing all sorts of crazy things. I read a story of a Tiger researcher in, I believe, India who had been in a particular forest for over 10 years and had seen 1 Tiger in that entire span, even though he was 100% certain they were there. And he never saw an elephant, which were also present in the forest.
Personally, I live in a pretty 'wildernessy' place, with very high Moose and Bear populations, as well as a high Bobcat population and a Low mountain lion population. I've spent and do spend a lot of time in the woods, fishing, following streams and rivers, and whatever else, and can honestly say that I have seen 1 bear in all my years of stomping around the woods and drving through them.
My point is that we have LARGE animals that we know exsist that, given the right conditions, can disappear and not be seen for years, so when you mutiply that by, like, 1 thousand in regards to a jungle or one of the more remote forests on Earth, it becomes a little more likely that some sort of large unknown primate does exsist.
And then you times in by a million and you have the ocean, which still have zero chance of mermaids, but I bet some scary shit lurks down there we've never seen before. Giant Squid and Colossal Squid are scurry enough :\
I believe it was around chicago or up north towards canada in that area.
On August 14 2012 01:04 Coagulation wrote: I know a guy that constantly swears to me up and down with the most absolute stone cold seriousness that when he was a kid he was in the woods and he seen a big foot crashing through the woods chasing after a deer. he says it tackled the deer at a full speed run and snapped its neck and threw it over its shoulder and walked away with the deer on its shoulders. he swears up and down that its true.. and Im pretty damn good at detecting bullshit. I dunno if he seen bigfoot or not but he sure thinks he seen bigfoot.
Hes obseessed with bigfoot.. has websites and shit about the "hunt for bigfoot"
I dunno.... man.
This might be a dumb question, but coming from a semi-believer in BigFoot/Sasqutch, I have to ask where he claims this occured at (state/country)?
I say semi-believer because I believe that 1) Something USE to be there, but pretty solid chance it isn't anymore. And 2) IF there IS something, I don't think it's in the United States (with the exception Alaska), but more likely to be a Yeti or an Oreng-pendek (which is most probably an Orangutan). Suuuper remote places in the world are still revealing all sorts of crazy things. I read a story of a Tiger researcher in, I believe, India who had been in a particular forest for over 10 years and had seen 1 Tiger in that entire span, even though he was 100% certain they were there. And he never saw an elephant, which were also present in the forest.
Personally, I live in a pretty 'wildernessy' place, with very high Moose and Bear populations, as well as a high Bobcat population and a Low mountain lion population. I've spent and do spend a lot of time in the woods, fishing, following streams and rivers, and whatever else, and can honestly say that I have seen 1 bear in all my years of stomping around the woods and drving through them.
My point is that we have LARGE animals that we know exsist that, given the right conditions, can disappear and not be seen for years, so when you mutiply that by, like, 1 thousand in regards to a jungle or one of the more remote forests on Earth, it becomes a little more likely that some sort of large unknown primate does exsist.
And then you times in by a million and you have the ocean, which still have zero chance of mermaids, but I bet some scary shit lurks down there we've never seen before. Giant Squid and Colossal Squid are scurry enough :\
The idea that I don't understand about big foot is mostly based on location. I assume big-foot is supposed to be a primeape, right? Because what else in the world stands on two feet and behaves basically like beefed up, furry humans?
There are no other primeapes on this side of the prime meridian, so how the hell would there be one here? It would've had to evolve from another population, so where the hell are they/their other children? I understand that we as a species migrated to the Americas, but we know exactly how that happened. If there was another species of primeapes that crossed into the Americas (which they would've had to because they would've had to evolve from the others), we would know...
So, imo, either big foot is not a primeape (and how likely is it that there would two different ecosystems that produce essentially the same creature?) or is pretty impossible
yep it doesnt make sense that there is absolutely zero fossil records to support any kind of claims of bigfoot yet we can pretty much find extensive fossil records of any and all the creatures we know for a fact exist today or have existed.
I remember he refuted this problem by saying "the most likely destroyed the bodys of their dead"
On August 14 2012 02:12 Coagulation wrote: yep it doesnt make sense that there is absolutely zero fossil records to support any kind of claims of bigfoot yet we can pretty much find extensive fossil records of any and all the creatures we know for a fact exist today or have existed.
I remember he refuted this problem by saying "the most likely destroyed the bodys of their dead"
Actually, the best suspect for any kind of Sasquatch argument is Gigantopitchecus (linked). It's assumed they would have crossed the land bridge at some point with everything else. Plus, BigFoot to Sasquatch to Yeti to Oreng-pendek, to whatever else are all described as a pretty similar creature with slight alterations based on geographical area (yeti being white for snow, oreng-pendek being orangutan like, bigfoot browish/red [pacific northwest is probably the best spot IF there is one]).
Like I said though, half believe. At one point, sure...now..prollllly not.
On August 14 2012 02:12 Coagulation wrote: yep it doesnt make sense that there is absolutely zero fossil records to support any kind of claims of bigfoot yet we can pretty much find extensive fossil records of any and all the creatures we know for a fact exist today or have existed.
I remember he refuted this problem by saying "the most likely destroyed the bodys of their dead"
I don't believe for a second that bigfoot or sasquashs exist but you've said such a strange thing that I can't let slip.
We in fact can NOT find an extensive fossil record of all the creatures that we know to exist. Some creatures that have existed have a very limited place in the fossil record, either because there was never many of them or because fossils only occur in very rare and specific circumstances. Additionally, there are some modern animals that we know about for which we don't even have fossils, just bones (the distinction should be made).
Also "People can rationalize anything" followed by GrapeApe's hypothesis that Sasquatch might be a type of ape that went extinct 100k years ago strikes me as an amusing juxtaposition.
On August 13 2012 11:08 CajunMan wrote: Since man first laid eyes on the sea was it not his first dream to bang hot underwater chicks?!?!
Amirite?
I think you're fairly alone in the fetish of wanting to bang a girl who's a fish under the navel.
We have to find a reverse mermaid, with the fish part on top and the lady part on the bottom.
thats even worse imo.
How so? It's got all the useful parts... without the nagging.
You think so? Imagine this: You wake up in the morning and turn to face your beautiful wife. Instead you're faced by this + Show Spoiler +
sticking up under the covers. You have grossly disfigured children together than you have to nurse along with your wife, as she can't actually use her fins to handle cutlery. You go to work, and when you come back your wife is waiting for you in a sexy pose + Show Spoiler +
You slowly get more and more depressed, and one day when cleaning up goo on the floor left by your wife and children you decide to end it all and kill yourself by watching history channel "documentaries" on aliens, UFOs, mermaids, big feet, unicorns and harry potter. After mere five hours your brain melts and drips out your ears.
On August 13 2012 11:08 CajunMan wrote: Since man first laid eyes on the sea was it not his first dream to bang hot underwater chicks?!?!
Amirite?
I think you're fairly alone in the fetish of wanting to bang a girl who's a fish under the navel.
We have to find a reverse mermaid, with the fish part on top and the lady part on the bottom.
thats even worse imo.
How so? It's got all the useful parts... without the nagging.
You think so? Imagine this: You wake up in the morning and turn to face your beautiful wife. Instead you're faced by this + Show Spoiler +
sticking up under the covers. You have grossly disfigured children together than you have to nurse along with your wife, as she can't actually use her fins to handle cutlery. You go to work, and when you come back your wife is waiting for you in a sexy pose + Show Spoiler +
You slowly get more and more depressed, and one day when cleaning up goo on the floor left by your wife and children you decide to end it all and kill yourself by watching history channel "documentaries" on aliens, UFOs, mermaids, big feet, unicorns and harry potter. After mere five hours your brain melts and drips out your ears.
It's a nasty way to go man...
You went too low with the body. It has to have boobs and arms or it's a no deal. Aside from that, you make far too many assumptions homie. You assume that I wont paper bag her. You assume that I want children. You also assume that I would kill myself via brain melting by watching history channel. If I want to kill myself in such a way, I can just read your post history.
[QUOTE]On August 14 2012 02:51 Djzapz wrote: [QUOTE]On August 14 2012 02:12 Coagulation wrote:
Also "People can rationalize anything" followed by GrapeApe's hypothesis that Sasquatch might be a type of ape that went extinct 100k years ago strikes me as an amusing juxtaposition.[/QUOTE]
On August 13 2012 11:08 CajunMan wrote: Since man first laid eyes on the sea was it not his first dream to bang hot underwater chicks?!?!
Amirite?
I think you're fairly alone in the fetish of wanting to bang a girl who's a fish under the navel.
We have to find a reverse mermaid, with the fish part on top and the lady part on the bottom.
thats even worse imo.
How so? It's got all the useful parts... without the nagging.
You think so? Imagine this: You wake up in the morning and turn to face your beautiful wife. Instead you're faced by this + Show Spoiler +
sticking up under the covers. You have grossly disfigured children together than you have to nurse along with your wife, as she can't actually use her fins to handle cutlery. You go to work, and when you come back your wife is waiting for you in a sexy pose + Show Spoiler +
You slowly get more and more depressed, and one day when cleaning up goo on the floor left by your wife and children you decide to end it all and kill yourself by watching history channel "documentaries" on aliens, UFOs, mermaids, big feet, unicorns and harry potter. After mere five hours your brain melts and drips out your ears.
It's a nasty way to go man...
You went too low with the body. It has to have boobs and arms or it's a no deal. Aside from that, you make far too many assumptions homie. You assume that I wont paper bag her. You assume that I want children. You also assume that I would kill myself via brain melting by watching history channel. If I want to kill myself in such a way, I can just read your post history.
BAZINGA
If it's just a fish head it's hardly a reversed mermaid though.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.eatliver.com/2012/8549.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Fish_Head.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kzA7Q.jpg)
