I'm really getting soft in my old age!

Dewman · 12-04-2014, 02:53 AM

For the past month, I've been getting the National Geographic Wild channel as a free promotional to entice me to up-grade my Dish Network package. I really enjoy it, but I find that it's becoming increasingly more difficult to watch the programs where lions kill the young gazelles and hyenas begin eating the little gnu calves even before they're dead. Pretty gruesome stuff, to be sure! I know, I know..... it's just a part of life and the predators have to eat, too.... but, just sayin'...

The Military Channel is another one I really enjoy. History has always been a favorite subject of mine and that channel is right down my alley. When the History Channel first came about, it was pretty good, but most of their programing is pretty sorry stuff, IMHO. Same with most other channels. The Discovery Channel used to be pretty fair, too.... but, alas, it has slipped into the "barely viable" category.

Dewman
SW Idaho, USA

**PJ1** · 12-04-2014, 05:16 AM

That's nature - "red in tooth and claw". But I know where you're coming from. It's not the way the way many people imagine it to be (or the way they think it should be). We were looking after about 200 sheep for a friend a few months ago. They had about 25 lambs out of season. In two nights all the lambs and some of the ewes were killed by dingoes (the Australian wolf, often just referred to as a "wild dog"). Only a couple were eaten. The rest were just run to exhaustion and severely bitten. Most probably died of shock. It is hard to look at, either on television or in the flesh.

History channel and discovery are OK at times. But it annoys me when a five minute message gets dragged out to an hour by repeating the same thing over and over. Maybe we just don't suffer fools gladly as we get older. ("Grumpy old men" forum perhaps?)

Military is one of my interests too although I am not familiar with the military channel. Writing a book about my father's WWII experiences at the moment. I reckon it would make pretty fair TV.

flaviopetrone · 12-04-2014, 09:01 AM

Maybe I'm a little younger than you, Dewman, but I feel the same.

Dewman · 12-04-2014, 12:30 PM

Originally posted by PJ1

That's nature - "red in tooth and claw". But I know where you're coming from. It's not the way the way many people imagine it to be (or the way they think it should be). We were looking after about 200 sheep for a friend a few months ago. They had about 25 lambs out of season. In two nights all the lambs and some of the ewes were killed by dingoes (the Australian wolf, often just referred to as a "wild dog"). Only a couple were eaten. The rest were just run to exhaustion and severely bitten. Most probably died of shock. It is hard to look at, either on television or in the flesh.

History channel and discovery are OK at times. But it annoys me when a five minute message gets dragged out to an hour by repeating the same thing over and over. Maybe we just don't suffer fools gladly as we get older. ("Grumpy old men" forum perhaps?)

Military is one of my interests too although I am not familiar with the military channel. Writing a book about my father's WWII experiences at the moment. I reckon it would make pretty fair TV.

I understand natures way of "survival of the fittest, and agree that natural selection is the overall best way to manage things.... but, like your dingoes in Oz, we have our Canadian Wolf problem here in Idaho. Not far from here, there's a town called Council... a major sheep-raising area.... and they have an on-going battle with wolves.... not just killing for survival, but killing for the fun of killing. One particular incident saw over 100 head of sheep, young and old, killed in a SINGLE night. Not a single one had been fed upon! They were killed for the fun of killing. I have lived in a mountainous area of Idaho where wolves were a constant threat to our stock and pets and I know first-hand, the danger they pose. I won't get into an argument with those who are in favor of their re-introduction, because it's like arguing politics or religion.... it's a no-win situation. Most of those in favor of their reintroduction are the folks who live in millionaire havens of Ketchum and Sun Valley. They think the wolves are "cute" and have never had first-hand dealings with them. I'll leave it at that. Opinions vary.

I too am a writer, PJ1. I'd be very interested in your book on your father's WWII exploits when it comes to fruition. Good luck on it. It's a long, difficult journey, isn't it? I would highly recommend the Military Channel. Some excellent programming.

Dewman
SW Idaho, USA

**TedH42** · 12-04-2014, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by Dewman

When the History Channel first came about, it was pretty good, but most of their programing is pretty sorry stuff, IMHO. Same with most other channels. The Discovery Channel used to be pretty fair, too.... but, alas, it has slipped into the "barely viable" category.

Dewman
SW Idaho, USA

History Channel and Discovery Channel have gone so far downhill and into the woods that I can't even see them anymore. So I don't. And they certainly do work hard on dragging out < 7 minutes of material into a 1 hour program. Very disappointing.

**gaweidert** · 12-05-2014, 08:21 AM

I gave up paying for television about a year ago. It saves me $900/year and as stated above I cannot stand any more of the so called reality shows that are on every network but the shopping channels. They are already all commercials.

I am an official old fart. I am also old enough toe remember where cable TV first came about. The question was: "Why pay for TV when you can watch it for free?" The answer from the cable companies was "Because the programs will be commercial free."

I cannot even stand to watch American football anymore. The game is actually about 15 minutes of activity surrounded by 3 hours of commercials. Watching one in person is even worse. If you live up in the cold north like I do, nothing like sitting on a metal seat doing nothing while the plaers all stand around and wait for the commercials to end. Polls are now showing that fans would rather watch the game on TV than go to one in person.

Dewman · 12-05-2014, 09:23 AM

Originally posted by gaweidert

I gave up paying for television about a year ago. It saves me $900/year and as stated above I cannot stand any more of the so called reality shows that are on every network but the shopping channels. They are already all commercials.

I am an official old fart. I am also old enough toe remember where cable TV first came about. The question was: "Why pay for TV when you can watch it for free?" The answer from the cable companies was "Because the programs will be commercial free."

I cannot even stand to watch American football anymore. The game is actually about 15 minutes of activity surrounded by 3 hours of commercials. Watching one in person is even worse. If you live up in the cold north like I do, nothing like sitting on a metal seat doing nothing while the plaers all stand around and wait for the commercials to end. Polls are now showing that fans would rather watch the game on TV than go to one in person.

I hear ya'. I have my own solution to the commercials. I record EVERYTHING I watch, then I fast-forward through them! I absolutely REFUSE to watch that ignorant $h%T! Same with football. I record it and DO NOT watch any news programs.... so I don't know what the final score is until I watch the game, sans commercial interruption.

Dewman
SW Idaho, USA

**luftfluss** · 12-05-2014, 10:08 AM

Count me in as another person who's disappointed in how the programming on History, Discovery, etc have gone to the gutter.

I have trouble sleeping after seeing a goose with a broken wing.

Its not that fact that animals die that bothers me... its the consideration of the fear and misery and pain. I prefer to spend my time with the animals, anyway, so my perspective may be skewed.

**boriscleto** · 12-05-2014, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by Dewman

The Military Channel is another one I really enjoy. History has always been a favorite subject of mine and that channel is right down my alley. When the History Channel first came about, it was pretty good, but most of their programing is pretty sorry stuff, IMHO. Same with most other channels. The Discovery Channel used to be pretty fair, too.... but, alas, it has slipped into the "barely viable" category.

Dewman
SW Idaho, USA

It isn't The Military Channel anymore. It's the American Heroes Channel. And half the programming is about the Bible...

It's kind of like the Science Channel showing Firefly. History Channel is nothing but pawn shops and Aliens now.

normhead · 12-05-2014, 10:39 AM

I tend to agree... wolves eat a big meal once every 4 or 5 days, so how is the moment when they catch a small deer, on the fifth day, the only part of their existence worth documenting? On a Canadian show about the wolves in Wood Buffalo park they tracked a pack of 17 wolves, and the "kill " they recorded was of an old buffalo. The film crew couldn't figure out what was happening, a young bull and an older one separated from the herd, the wolves broke off their chase of the herd and followed them to where they stopped for a rest and then bedded down for the night. IN the morning it was obvious from inspecting the scene that the wolves had just waited for the old buffalo to die, then were feeding on the carcass. No signs of struggle, so signs the old bull had anything other than a peaceful death. And if you think about it, why would the wolves want to chance injury by attacking before the old guy was dead?

And this is the issue, people focus on random acts of violence, but ignore the vast majority of the animals existence. In that sense this is people who believe in violence forcing their view of the world on the animal kingdom. It's justification for what they do. mean while, there is a small deer fending for itself in the woods behind our house in the middle of a wolf family's territory, because the local hunters shot it's mother and sibling. The spot where it lays down is no bigger than what a medium sized dog would be. The locals would have shot it if they could, but no one got a clean shot at it. (Fawns are the best meat if you're eating deer.) I've never seen people shooting at a female deer and it's fawns on any National Geographic special. What we have here is some serious propaganda." Look how bad these animals are. We are so much better."

Ya, right.

Rupert · 12-05-2014, 11:26 AM

I'm with you guys 100%.....you asked if it is the old age? Well, Otis says it's the estrogen......get that now Norm?

Regards!

normhead · 12-05-2014, 11:42 AM

Originally posted by Rupert

I'm with you guys 100%.....you asked if it is the old age? Well, Otis says it's the estrogen......get that now Norm?

Regards!

Tell Otis I'm showing no signs of Estrogen, still have really good muscle mass, and am a pretty good shot with a 22. Ask him if he wishes to pursue that matter further.

But here's a peace offering, just in case he decides to be more reasonable.

Rupert · 12-05-2014, 02:43 PM

Norm, sooner or later...usually, and hopefully later...much later.... we all show some signs of estrogen. But....not to worry, the ladies show signs of testosterone, so it sort of evens things out!

Tess can let you wear her bra and you can help her shave her face......works for me and Mrs Rupert!

Otis passes on the challenge, he said he will wait you out until you are a little older and more "estrogen enriched" when it will be more to his advantage.

He does thank you for the great shot and asks for more, you are one of his favorite shooters here......he is always reminding me by "why can't you shoot like that!".

I wouldn't worry much about the estrogen, there are exceptions........I don't see that there would ever be an estrogen problem here.

Regards!

12-04-2014, 02:53 AM	#1
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492	I'm really getting soft in my old age! For the past month, I've been getting the National Geographic Wild channel as a free promotional to entice me to up-grade my Dish Network package. I really enjoy it, but I find that it's becoming increasingly more difficult to watch the programs where lions kill the young gazelles and hyenas begin eating the little gnu calves even before they're dead. Pretty gruesome stuff, to be sure! I know, I know..... it's just a part of life and the predators have to eat, too.... but, just sayin'... The Military Channel is another one I really enjoy. History has always been a favorite subject of mine and that channel is right down my alley. When the History Channel first came about, it was pretty good, but most of their programing is pretty sorry stuff, IMHO. Same with most other channels. The Discovery Channel used to be pretty fair, too.... but, alas, it has slipped into the "barely viable" category. Dewman SW Idaho, USA

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
So I'm really interested in the Sigma 18-35 f1.8	ZombieArmy	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	11-19-2014 10:16 AM
Finally I'm in the DSLR age....Whoo-Hoo!	guitardude	Pentax DSLR Discussion	13	05-21-2013 03:32 PM
Nature The Bigma is back and I'm getting back in the groove.	charliezap	Post Your Photos!	15	04-13-2013 11:08 AM
Misc I think I'm getting better with this whole lighting thing...	Julie	Post Your Photos!	2	01-29-2013 09:48 PM
I'm getting old	eccs19	Photographic Technique	20	11-14-2009 03:05 PM

12-04-2014, 05:16 AM	#2
PJ1 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Toowoomba, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,486	That's nature - "red in tooth and claw". But I know where you're coming from. It's not the way the way many people imagine it to be (or the way they think it should be). We were looking after about 200 sheep for a friend a few months ago. They had about 25 lambs out of season. In two nights all the lambs and some of the ewes were killed by dingoes (the Australian wolf, often just referred to as a "wild dog"). Only a couple were eaten. The rest were just run to exhaustion and severely bitten. Most probably died of shock. It is hard to look at, either on television or in the flesh. History channel and discovery are OK at times. But it annoys me when a five minute message gets dragged out to an hour by repeating the same thing over and over. Maybe we just don't suffer fools gladly as we get older. ("Grumpy old men" forum perhaps?) Military is one of my interests too although I am not familiar with the military channel. Writing a book about my father's WWII experiences at the moment. I reckon it would make pretty fair TV.

12-04-2014, 09:01 AM	#3
flaviopetrone Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Reggio Emilia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,153	Maybe I'm a little younger than you, Dewman, but I feel the same.

12-04-2014, 12:30 PM	#4
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492 Original Poster	Originally posted by PJ1 That's nature - "red in tooth and claw". But I know where you're coming from. It's not the way the way many people imagine it to be (or the way they think it should be). We were looking after about 200 sheep for a friend a few months ago. They had about 25 lambs out of season. In two nights all the lambs and some of the ewes were killed by dingoes (the Australian wolf, often just referred to as a "wild dog"). Only a couple were eaten. The rest were just run to exhaustion and severely bitten. Most probably died of shock. It is hard to look at, either on television or in the flesh. History channel and discovery are OK at times. But it annoys me when a five minute message gets dragged out to an hour by repeating the same thing over and over. Maybe we just don't suffer fools gladly as we get older. ("Grumpy old men" forum perhaps?) Military is one of my interests too although I am not familiar with the military channel. Writing a book about my father's WWII experiences at the moment. I reckon it would make pretty fair TV. I understand natures way of "survival of the fittest, and agree that natural selection is the overall best way to manage things.... but, like your dingoes in Oz, we have our Canadian Wolf problem here in Idaho. Not far from here, there's a town called Council... a major sheep-raising area.... and they have an on-going battle with wolves.... not just killing for survival, but killing for the fun of killing. One particular incident saw over 100 head of sheep, young and old, killed in a SINGLE night. Not a single one had been fed upon! They were killed for the fun of killing. I have lived in a mountainous area of Idaho where wolves were a constant threat to our stock and pets and I know first-hand, the danger they pose. I won't get into an argument with those who are in favor of their re-introduction, because it's like arguing politics or religion.... it's a no-win situation. Most of those in favor of their reintroduction are the folks who live in millionaire havens of Ketchum and Sun Valley. They think the wolves are "cute" and have never had first-hand dealings with them. I'll leave it at that. Opinions vary. I too am a writer, PJ1. I'd be very interested in your book on your father's WWII exploits when it comes to fruition. Good luck on it. It's a long, difficult journey, isn't it? I would highly recommend the Military Channel. Some excellent programming. Dewman SW Idaho, USA

12-04-2014, 12:54 PM	#5
TedH42 F/8 & Somewhere Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Colorado Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,412	Originally posted by Dewman When the History Channel first came about, it was pretty good, but most of their programing is pretty sorry stuff, IMHO. Same with most other channels. The Discovery Channel used to be pretty fair, too.... but, alas, it has slipped into the "barely viable" category. Dewman SW Idaho, USA History Channel and Discovery Channel have gone so far downhill and into the woods that I can't even see them anymore. So I don't. And they certainly do work hard on dragging out < 7 minutes of material into a 1 hour program. Very disappointing.

12-05-2014, 08:21 AM	#6
gaweidert Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Rochester, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,325	I gave up paying for television about a year ago. It saves me $900/year and as stated above I cannot stand any more of the so called reality shows that are on every network but the shopping channels. They are already all commercials. I am an official old fart. I am also old enough toe remember where cable TV first came about. The question was: "Why pay for TV when you can watch it for free?" The answer from the cable companies was "Because the programs will be commercial free." I cannot even stand to watch American football anymore. The game is actually about 15 minutes of activity surrounded by 3 hours of commercials. Watching one in person is even worse. If you live up in the cold north like I do, nothing like sitting on a metal seat doing nothing while the plaers all stand around and wait for the commercials to end. Polls are now showing that fans would rather watch the game on TV than go to one in person.

12-05-2014, 09:23 AM	#7
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492 Original Poster	Originally posted by gaweidert I gave up paying for television about a year ago. It saves me $900/year and as stated above I cannot stand any more of the so called reality shows that are on every network but the shopping channels. They are already all commercials. I am an official old fart. I am also old enough toe remember where cable TV first came about. The question was: "Why pay for TV when you can watch it for free?" The answer from the cable companies was "Because the programs will be commercial free." I cannot even stand to watch American football anymore. The game is actually about 15 minutes of activity surrounded by 3 hours of commercials. Watching one in person is even worse. If you live up in the cold north like I do, nothing like sitting on a metal seat doing nothing while the plaers all stand around and wait for the commercials to end. Polls are now showing that fans would rather watch the game on TV than go to one in person. I hear ya'. I have my own solution to the commercials. I record EVERYTHING I watch, then I fast-forward through them! I absolutely REFUSE to watch that ignorant $h%T! Same with football. I record it and DO NOT watch any news programs.... so I don't know what the final score is until I watch the game, sans commercial interruption. Dewman SW Idaho, USA

12-05-2014, 10:08 AM	#8
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,627	Count me in as another person who's disappointed in how the programming on History, Discovery, etc have gone to the gutter. I have trouble sleeping after seeing a goose with a broken wing. Its not that fact that animals die that bothers me... its the consideration of the fear and misery and pain. I prefer to spend my time with the animals, anyway, so my perspective may be skewed.

12-05-2014, 10:15 AM	#9
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,476	Originally posted by Dewman The Military Channel is another one I really enjoy. History has always been a favorite subject of mine and that channel is right down my alley. When the History Channel first came about, it was pretty good, but most of their programing is pretty sorry stuff, IMHO. Same with most other channels. The Discovery Channel used to be pretty fair, too.... but, alas, it has slipped into the "barely viable" category. Dewman SW Idaho, USA It isn't The Military Channel anymore. It's the American Heroes Channel. And half the programming is about the Bible... It's kind of like the Science Channel showing Firefly. History Channel is nothing but pawn shops and Aliens now.

12-05-2014, 10:39 AM	#10
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	I tend to agree... wolves eat a big meal once every 4 or 5 days, so how is the moment when they catch a small deer, on the fifth day, the only part of their existence worth documenting? On a Canadian show about the wolves in Wood Buffalo park they tracked a pack of 17 wolves, and the "kill " they recorded was of an old buffalo. The film crew couldn't figure out what was happening, a young bull and an older one separated from the herd, the wolves broke off their chase of the herd and followed them to where they stopped for a rest and then bedded down for the night. IN the morning it was obvious from inspecting the scene that the wolves had just waited for the old buffalo to die, then were feeding on the carcass. No signs of struggle, so signs the old bull had anything other than a peaceful death. And if you think about it, why would the wolves want to chance injury by attacking before the old guy was dead? And this is the issue, people focus on random acts of violence, but ignore the vast majority of the animals existence. In that sense this is people who believe in violence forcing their view of the world on the animal kingdom. It's justification for what they do. mean while, there is a small deer fending for itself in the woods behind our house in the middle of a wolf family's territory, because the local hunters shot it's mother and sibling. The spot where it lays down is no bigger than what a medium sized dog would be. The locals would have shot it if they could, but no one got a clean shot at it. (Fawns are the best meat if you're eating deer.) I've never seen people shooting at a female deer and it's fawns on any National Geographic special. What we have here is some serious propaganda." Look how bad these animals are. We are so much better." Ya, right.

12-05-2014, 11:26 AM	#11
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	I'm with you guys 100%.....you asked if it is the old age? Well, Otis says it's the estrogen......get that now Norm? Regards!

12-05-2014, 11:42 AM	#12
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by Rupert I'm with you guys 100%.....you asked if it is the old age? Well, Otis says it's the estrogen......get that now Norm? Regards! Tell Otis I'm showing no signs of Estrogen, still have really good muscle mass, and am a pretty good shot with a 22. Ask him if he wishes to pursue that matter further. But here's a peace offering, just in case he decides to be more reasonable.

12-05-2014, 02:43 PM	#13
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Norm, sooner or later...usually, and hopefully later...much later.... we all show some signs of estrogen. But....not to worry, the ladies show signs of testosterone, so it sort of evens things out! Tess can let you wear her bra and you can help her shave her face......works for me and Mrs Rupert! Otis passes on the challenge, he said he will wait you out until you are a little older and more "estrogen enriched" when it will be more to his advantage. He does thank you for the great shot and asks for more, you are one of his favorite shooters here......he is always reminding me by "why can't you shoot like that!". I wouldn't worry much about the estrogen, there are exceptions........I don't see that there would ever be an estrogen problem here. Regards!