History Channel

[Hemidakota]

Same here, why?

[Couple years ago claim missing link story] Using a nearby [Africa] volcano in determining an age of a claimed human remains missing link just doesn’t cut it. Nor, being a grandson of a known 19th century fraud who did the same by following the same path.

[HoosierGuy]

I like the History channel but consider it "popcorn" history - sort of entertainment history, not down to earth boring real history. If you want to know about a topic for real - read books on the subject, don't watch the History Channel.

What I find funny is when a new big movie comes out at the theaters like - King Kong. Then you will see on History Channel documentary on - In Search of the Real King Kong! Big blockbuster about giant killer stakes? History Channel - In Search of Giant Killer Snakes in The Amazon!

Most of their science shows seem to have an undertone of impending doom - They always leave that "Could civilization be wiped out by a big comet from space?" question in peoples minds.

Funny how they have all those Da Vinci programs on right when those books became popular. lol.

[dazed-and-confused]

LOL...i know exactly what you mean....and i think "popcorn" history is very appropriate.

[MarginOfError]

Bewary of the History Channel, for sometime now many of its shows have tried to make God, Christianty and religion very secular.

This statement could very well make my head explode.

why's that?

The History Channel is trying to make religion secular?

"secular: of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal"

So the History Channel is trying to make religion non-religious. Creates a bit of a paradox.

[Hemidakota]

Agreed MOE.

Anyone following the America and us history series? What are your thoughts of reality being presented here?

[dazed-and-confused]

LOL....funny thing is, i have been aware of american propaganda since i was a kid, first hearing about it when i saw old shows on TV about WWII and the "German prpaganda machine". It was so obvious, even to this kid, that the U.S. was doing the exact same thing and it continues today.

During the cold war, there was the communist propaganda machine, and any american who spoke up against or questioned the american propaganda machine was branded a communist and anti-american.

I rarely watch TV (execpt for the history channel.....) for that very reason. Do i imagine it, or is it true, that freedom of speech has come down to which flavor of BS you find most palatable, that is, unless your BS meter is finely tuned. Even then, how can one be sure?

Hey, isn't this a great spot to talk about REAL truth....and the blessings of the barer of truth?

[rameumptom]

I think the History Channel's function is not to promote religion, but to describe how it functions within history. And it does a decent job of that. There's nothing wrong with looking at things from a somewhat scientific/historical viewpoint, as long as that is the intent of the program (and it should be).

I think that much of the modern American/European history portrayed on the History Channel is rather well done and well documented. Occasionally, some of their programs will go off the deep end (such as UFOs involved in the Nazca lines), but then we're not talking historical times. That is prehistory, and sadly there are as many ideas on what the Nazca lines mean as there are crack pots and real scientists. Prehistory requires a lot of interpretation of little evidence, to try and figure out what was going on. And sometimes the crackpot has the right answer.

For instance, science used to believe the earliest Americans came over the Bering Strait ice bridge about 12,000 years ago. However, there were many anomalies in the data, which most key scientists ignored. Then, about 15 years ago, a few main archaeologists did go down to Chile to review the work being done at a site that claimed a civilization dating to more than 15,000 years ago. They returned from the site convinced it was legitimate, and now had to figure out how it fit into the big picture. Others had been here prior to Clovis man. Suddenly, scientists began looking into museum basements for anomalies and came up with many. A Caucasoid man's skull in the northwest of the USA predating Clovis; African woman skulls in Brazil and South Carolina, etc. Suddenly, it seemed like everyone found their way here anciently. Now the crackpots didn't seem so strange, but were leading the pack!

Remember, the History Channel survives because it attempts to provide what the people want. And some people want to hear about the conspiracies, etc.

Yet, I would prefer to have a lineup of History Channel-like stations from my cable provider than to have only one or two such learning channels, and then 5 sports channels, 2 "music" channels, 7 or 8 home shopping channels, and the rest showing "reality" or sex shows.

[dorave]

I think the History Channel's function is not to promote religion, but to describe how it functions within history. And it does a decent job of that. There's nothing wrong with looking at things from a somewhat scientific/historical viewpoint, as long as that is the intent of the program (and it should be).

I think thats being naive.. Its more trying to diiscredit religion and replace god with the science industry to hold power of influence over the people.

I saw a HC doco once about the saviour and how he was the Osama Bin Laden of his time.

[Hemidakota]

Ram, try 950 channels to view from....

[rameumptom]

I think thats being naive.. Its more trying to diiscredit religion and replace god with the science industry to hold power of influence over the people.

I saw a HC doco once about the saviour and how he was the Osama Bin Laden of his time.

Well, I happen to have a Master's Degree in history and have been a student of ancient Israel for over a quarter century. You are welcome to have your conspiracy theory (or is this a hypothesis, Snow are you there?), but it doesn't fly. Many of their religious shows are faithful to the Bible and Christ. Others are balanced between the Bible and archaeology. And that's how it should be.

Anything else would not be history, but would be a religious promotion/propaganda.

Let me give you an example. Lucy Mack Smith and other "historians" of Joseph Smith's life were not historians. Their books are not historical, although they have history in them. History hits all the events, not just the faith-promoting stories that make us all feel warm fuzzies inside concerning the Prophet Joseph.

A true history book on Joseph Smith is Richard Bushman's Rough Stone Rolling. It hit many of the faith promoting events, yes. But it did not neglect the gritty events of Joseph and the early Church. I get a very different feeling from RSR than I do from Lucy Mack's propaganda. Both have value in their own way, but Lucy Mack's story is not true history.

The History Channel seeks the historian route, which includes viewing things from all angles. Being historians, they cannot judge if a miracle really happened, unless it was faithfully recorded from an outsider. You don't see Jesus' mortal miracles recorded outside of the New Testament by contemporaries (the Romans, for instance). The same goes with his resurrection. Miracles and resurrection are issues of faith, not history. The History Channel is about history, usually and hopefully backed by scientific evidence.

If you want a warm fuzzy Jesus story, then I suggest you watch the BYU channel during Easter or Christmas.

[rameumptom]

Ram, try 950 channels to view from....

I can't count that high. And I'd wear out my remote flipping through that many channels....

[dorave]

Well, I happen to have a Master's Degree in history and have been a student of ancient Israel for over a quarter century. You are welcome to have your conspiracy theory (or is this a hypothesis, Snow are you there?), but it doesn't fly.

I will bring you examples from the HC itself my friend, for your to dispell. I wasnt making it up.

[deseretgov]

I love the Ancient Alien programs! I don't believe most of what they say is factual but they do present some interesting explainations for things. They're kind of all over the map too. In one show the aliens come here to mine. Next episode they came here to have huge wars with atomic weapons. I think they should get their theory straight.

It's nice to see an alternative view once in a while.

But what I think this program really is saying, to me anyway, is that we aren't even close to having all the answers.

[Moksha]

The History Channel is trying to make religion secular?

Perhaps it was meant as a Buddhist koan that one could meditate on till one is in the Zone. Only stay in the Zone for 24 minute ( six minutes for commercials) unless it is a back to back episode.

[Hemidakota]

Ok, after a few minutes of 'ANCIENT ALIENS,' switch the channel to watch Sponge Bob Square Pants. :)

[James_Fryman]

Now theres a good show!

[annamaureen]

I don't believe in any of the "ancient aliens" theories, but I do find them interesting. Anyone see that guy's wild hair on that show?

[Hemidakota]

Or UFO hunters. Each person is seeking 'five seconds of glamoring media fame.'

[dazed-and-confused]

lol...i can't figure out at ALL why UFO Hunters is even on the air.

[Hemidakota]

Same as Ghost hunters. I have yet, seen any ghost. Have you? I just gave up after the third time.