i just watched the history channel one life after people, was cool.
downloading this one now. i really enjoy anything related to this topic so i'm
looking forward to see this one too.
i'll post my opinion on which was better...to contribute to the great doco wars
of '08.
[#83764]
Written by: Zank [12/03/2008, 02:35]
Quote by rahsten
i just watched the history channel one life after people, was cool.
downloading this one now. i really enjoy anything related to this topic so i\'m
looking forward to see this one too.
i\'ll post my opinion on which was better...to contribute to the great doco wars
of \'08.
i\'ll have to download the other one and compare also but i do feel
the title of this one is much better no matter how the rest compares :d
[#83770]
Written by: Harry_Q_Hammer [12/03/2008, 03:07]
yeah, when you quote a message that has already quoted a message, the system
hammers the nested text markup codes. to make it display properly, you need to
manually fix the codes then "preview post" before "submit post" to ensure you
have got it right.
[#83791]
Written by: genesis [12/03/2008, 06:51]
history channel is insulting.
virtually every show does a what we will talk about after commercial (like
entertainment tonight) and then a what we talked about before last commercial.
some of us have short term memories that work. get rid of all the
self-advertiseing in a hour-long history channel docu and it's 35 mins long.
[#83802]
Written by: borisborkem [12/03/2008, 08:20]
just watched this, and i have to say it kind of sucks. it's heavily western
centric. i skipped through it, but i didn't hear any mention of anyone other
than europe and north america. it's a bit sensationalist too. i don't need to
listen to 10 minutes of how the eiffel tower and statue of liberty will fall
down, but i'm not american or french, maybe they would feel differently.
[#83828]
Written by: waster [12/03/2008, 10:44]
if all humans would disapear at once, right..
verry unlikely we would vaporize all at once and pets be still alive.
i meen this isnt even pluasuable.
they even fail to specify some cases why it would happen,
its just some wilds kids dream if you ask me.
nothing wrong with quality tho execelent even. but the show defently rates 16y
and younger losts of bangs and fiction. it has no grab to it, if it has its like
&^5 is this show going about.
if you had some school you realize soon its just insane what they sugest here
[#83836]
Written by: JimFritzMI [12/03/2008, 12:03]
i won't get into which is better, but i believe no one ever even did any
research before producing this. it is over flowing with flat out lies,
misinformation, and over hyped sensationalism. i am very disappointed in
national geographic.
[#83855]
Written by: TigerBiTS [12/03/2008, 15:42]
national geographic history channel and discovery channel are the holy trifecta
of educational television
natgeo has its nature science focus
history has its... duh
discovery has its own stuff also
--not sure how you would classify shows like deadliest catch, mythbusters, and
dirty jobs
sure there is crossover, they are all compeating networks, i mean look at
history when they started airing the universe, a great series that really is out
of place on their channel
so to call one channel better over another is sorta null since they really have
their own main overall focuses
---
all that said, the history channel version "life after people" was better then
this version
[#83864]
Written by: Zank [12/03/2008, 18:07]
Quote by tigerbits
all that said, the history channel version "life after people" was better then
this version
over all i agree but some stuff in the ng version was better also. the history
channel version did have better graphics for sure though
[#83912]
Written by: Snakemaster82 [13/03/2008, 01:32]
