Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Steve Irwin gone too far. this man really is stupid

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ADG
    replied
    Croc Dundee on the Croc Hunter..


    "Well he isn't a rocket scientist is he?"

    "he's an idiot who should have kept his mouth shut"

    "the only reason anyone watches the show is in the hope that the croc is going to get him this time"


    :P

    The man is a LEGEND




    ADG

    Leave a comment:


  • Longreach747
    replied
    Originally posted by Katamarino
    Originally posted by ADG
    the same factor that has people believing actors/singers are better than everyone else because they are on TV.

    ADG
    To be fair, they ARE better than everyone else, at acting and singing, which is the skill they are there for and make a living from. It seems this supports the view that Steve is better than everyone else (read the vast majority of the world) with animals, due to the fact he runs a zoo. Your point seems to support precisely what you argue against...
    the vast majority of the world are treeswingers who have no idea about animal or reptile care. most don't know the difference between a reptile or a mammal.

    as for Steve, he is a bit of a laughing stock down here, he's seen by authorities as a cowboy who is cashing in. just because he runs an inherited zoo it doesn't mean to say he is the authority on animals. he has no formal education in veternary or any science for that matter.

    just an aussie showman who found a niche market for aussie humour.

    Leave a comment:


  • ADG
    replied
    To be fair, they ARE better than everyone else, at acting and singing,
    I disagree. They're simply marketted better. I'm sure you can think of some "famous" singers who you believe are absolute crap, I sure can. Same for actors/actresses. I've also seen singers/actors that are not famous who I really think should be.

    It seems this supports the view that Steve is better than everyone else (read the vast majority of the world) with animals, due to the fact he runs a zoo. Your point seems to support precisely what you argue against...
    I disagree. Those who believe that being on TV somehow makes you better than others will agree with you for sure, but eventually they'll figure out that it's pretty much irrelevant. The popularity of actors/singers etc is a matter of opinion and everyone's opinion is different. I think that those who are successful on TV are simply better marketted than those who are not. Nothing to do with skill, and everything to do with opportunity.

    Is Steve Irwin any better than those who run other, more successful zoos?

    What about those who run the Dubbo zoo? Does he know more about animals than them? Their zoo is larger and more succesful than his zoo. How about Taronga? It's the most successful zoo in Australia. What about the Melbourne zoo? the Canberra zoo? the Mogo zoo? All more successful than Steve Irwins zoo, but all choosing to focus on the zoo rather than on getting rich on TV by acting like pratts. That's before we get into the research facilities that are closed to the general public, and there are many of those.

    Then we can get onto the people who deal with these animals on a daily basis, hunting them down to move them. Showing them to tourists in the wild rather than safely behind cages. I can't see how these people are any less "expert" than Steve Irwin (and many of them more so).

    The issue began as a discussion that these people are simply speaking out against what Steve Irwin did to get their faces on TV. My comments are merely to back up my statement that I don't accept that. There are a multitude of people who have a right to speak out against what he did from those who are croc experts to those who are child safety experts to those who are simply responsible members of the community. After all, in a democracy the community generally sets what is acceptable behaviour.

    Jason: I think you need to leave the discussion in the context in which it was made, someone simply disagreeing with your points. There is no paranoid undertones here, no "grudges". Contrary to what jeff infers there is no "argument for the sake of argument", that's just a simple concept from a simple mind.

    I'm not willing to conceed Steve Irwin was Ok to do as he did on the basis of the points you raised, and I simply stated why. The points are out there, the facts are out there. You're as unwilling to accept them as you claim I am. That's your right. As is it your right to think that what he did was ok. I addressed only the issues you raised that I disagreed with and let you know why. You seem to have a problem with that, i'm unsure of why.

    Bear in mind thought that we do appear to agree on a single point, that we both hope the government does not remove his children from his care. So I guess there is a middle ground there.








    ADG

    Leave a comment:


  • JeffinDEN
    replied
    Jason,
    She just likes to argue... she is a legend....

    in her own mind.... :P

    Leave a comment:


  • jasonblmu
    replied
    I can see how working in a zoo could make you an expert.
    I was hoping to see some real points raised, I was dissapointed.
    Your contradicting yourself. ...I raised a real point.

    I'm not the one that started tearing apart each of the quotes in certain replies, you did. I tried to make that FACT above known, and my OPINION about the media and child care "experts" heard....since this is a forum for opinion yes?? ...then all of a sudden it turned serious and engaging.

    I think the issue is fully resolved already and was before the discussion was even started.
    So why are you still going?? You forget I tried to end this.

    If you have some grudge against the guy...or ME...well...give up it's not gonna get you anywhere. It obviously seems there is some ulterior motive in the post for you. I agreed that it was a funny and stupid sight to see no?? I also put forth that it probably wasn't as dangerous as it seems.

    and last point here...I live in Los Angeles, I have a friend who stars on the Disney Channel, and I have met several "celebrity" types...they are the same as everyone else just with a dramatic twist...I've grown to not give them more leverage than others after my experiences..

    besides....Jeff seems to agree with me..

    This is Jason signing off!!!!!!!

    LATER!

    no hard feelings ADG....give the heart a rest!

    Leave a comment:


  • Katamarino
    replied
    Originally posted by ADG
    the same factor that has people believing actors/singers are better than everyone else because they are on TV.

    ADG
    To be fair, they ARE better than everyone else, at acting and singing, which is the skill they are there for and make a living from. It seems this supports the view that Steve is better than everyone else (read the vast majority of the world) with animals, due to the fact he runs a zoo. Your point seems to support precisely what you argue against...

    Leave a comment:


  • ADG
    replied
    I can see how working in a zoo could make you an expert.

    I stand by my belief that those who are supporting steve irwin in this are blinded by the "publicity factor", the same factor that has people believing actors/singers are better than everyone else because they are on TV.

    Sad, but true fact of life.

    The only fact they have to support them is because he's worked in a zoo and been spat in the eye by a snake on TV. To support their point they set out to attempt to discredit the real experts with already discredited claims about others speaking out only to seek their own publicity.

    I think the issue is fully resolved already and was before the discussion was even started. I was hoping to see some real points raised, I was dissapointed.




    ADG

    Leave a comment:


  • jasonblmu
    replied
    Actually I thanked Jeff for his humor...

    It brought something fun to our little debate. :P If he agrees with me that's cool, and if not that's cool too...he's entitled to his opinion.

    With these folks on the media...it's fair to say they wouldn't make an appearance unless their identity was given out to the public, hence the exposure. Exposure helps their cause.

    Anyway, the big fact I stated was that the man has been working in that Zoo environment for years...before he was famous. Look it up online, that's where I did...you'll find pictures and the like...enough evidence to show that this is indeed fact. You see it online, in a book and on television. It's fact...look it up!

    If you can't accept that, there is nothing I can do for you to see my side...hence the reason I tried to end this little debate earlier....

    Leave a comment:


  • JeffinDEN
    replied
    You take this whole croc/baby thing kinda personal don't you?

    I'll stick with Jasons reasoning...

    Leave a comment:


  • ADG
    replied
    Oh come on Jason.... two things come to mind...

    Firstly, you can't possibly think anything jeffinden has written in here makes any sense ...

    Secondly, I beg to differ on your opinion of my knowledge of the man. It may shock you to know how it's possible to gain information on people in a short period of time, particularly where I am. It surprises me that you'd even infer that watching his TV shows would make a person any sort of expert on the man and his family life AND/OR educational background.

    In fact, i'd turn your arguement back on yourself. What do YOU know of him other than the TV shows you watch, which by your own admission are edited?

    I didn't set out to "win an arguement", I set out to clear up the misinformation that you placed within your post. I don't see any *facts* that have been ignored on *my* part and think that your argument that 'he's on TV therefore he's an expert' is pretty much debunked.

    Apart from that, i'm pretty sure that the "arguement" is where most end up. You believe one thing and I believe another. I would just prefer that your belief was based upon fact rather than the assumption that all who speak up against Steve Irwin don't have the experience or knowledge to do so, or are doing so because of some desire for 15 minutes of fame on TV which is how your arguement appeared to be going. A fact that is blatently inaccurate.

    In reality it's irrelevant what we think because if the welfare remove his kids (and I sincerely hope they do not) no amount of bleating and accusing on the part of the pro-Steve lobby will change that one iota.

    I don't think that I, or anyone else, goes off at Steve Irwin for every antic. I think this issue is of a serious enough nature to discuss it. I'm unsure on your attitude of children, but where I live the community has a responsibility to all children living within it, and we take that responsibility quite seriously. I do not believe that kids are our property and we can with them as we wish, and in this instance i'd like to see him show the kid a lot more respect and at the very least, hold the kid properly .... and if he's going to drag the kid into the cage then he should have the nads to admit that he had ulterior motives that don't involve the unbelievable claim of teaching a 1 month old baby to be "croc savvy".




    ADG

    Leave a comment:


  • jasonblmu
    replied


    Thank you Jeff.

    As much as I would love to get into more of a debate about this...it doesn't seem to be getting anywhere far. What was simple fun banter, has now turned into a serious debate...and I don't have time for it anymore! When it comes to the facts, you simply ignore or discredit them, or make others up.

    he also lacks the comraderie and the experience.
    Your first argument: Assumptions...assumptions...you just heard of him...how do you know this?

    The man has worked in a crocpen his entire life...it doesn't matter that people out in the bush are working on crocs more than him. He has 25 years experience in that environment. The same environment we were talking about, which you don't seem to give credit, even though it's fact.

    I know there are other croc specialists in Australia, even though I heavily disagree that there are "thousands of others zoos", as known as Steve's. These other guys really don't matter. The issue was the safety in that particular pen...Bob wasn't out in the swamps with Steve was he??

    Even though Britney Spears gives off a bad image to those overseas...doesn't mean I go off on her every scandal....I just look at her and smile...

    I suggest you do the same when Steve falls out of a tree, gets bitten by a snake, or uses a lame Aussie accent or phrase....laugh and move on.

    If you feel like you've won the debate...go on ahead...we'll both be thinking the same thing.

    Leave a comment:


  • JeffinDEN
    replied
    Aaah.... sounds like a crock to me...

    Fine him, let him go....he has a show to do....

    Leave a comment:


  • ADG
    replied
    This is a pretty hefty and personal judgement. Unless you have tracked him back to his childhood, how can you possibly say his knowledge is not up to par with the rest???
    He lacks the educational portion of their background, he also lacks the comraderie and the experience. As I said, he ISN'T involved in the croc incidents in Australia. He's not out there involved in the hunts, in the studies and so on. He runs a croc farm and he goes on TV. It's like comparing a TV presenter to a University Professor.

    He is a showman yes, but he also is in charge of a zoo and was doing so well before a producer from the discovery channel ran across him on vacation and decided to make a star of him.
    I'm sorry, but I do not see how running a zoo is that important. There are thousands of zoos all over Australia, most with crocs, doesn't make any of those people a subject matter expert. Not only that, he doesn't run the zoo by himself.

    It's the producers work..not all Steve.
    and doesn't an "exert" make .... I don't watch reality TV by the way, it's not that interesting...

    Ok, they're in different fields....so how can they pass good judgement on the issue???...
    You appear to have lost sight of the issue here. You are saying they are in no position to comment on his actions, clearly you agree that they are in a position to do exactly that. Do we need to partake in a tit for tat discussion about them? They are subject matter experts, they have the experience Steve Irwin does as they do work WITH crocs in a manner different to him, but no less important AND they have educational backgrounds to top up that experience.

    They are not out there on TV, but that doesn't make them less of an expert, after all AS YOU SAY what you are seeing on TV is producer led manipulation of film to portray a wanted image. I think this point is resolved.

    They have no vested interest in speaking out and they have the experience/educational background to speak out as they have.

    I would bet most of these professors haven't phyically dealt with the countless crocs that Steve has...
    You would lose that bet. You base your decision only on what you see on the TV about Australia, i've yet to see Steve Irwin do anything with a croc off his farm in Australia. Yet there is an ongoing croc hunt going on in Northern Territory chasing a crock that killed a guy just before Christmas. Steve Irwin had no involvement in that at all as he never does (no publicity for him in that stuff).

    Whilst he's on TV getting his $$$$, others here in Australia (the 'experts') are dealing with these crocs, and their habitat and trying to work towards a compromise where the crocs can live and the people are safe. These people are the experts, Steve Irwin is nothing more than a showman.

    or even been within a few feet as many times as Steve has without getting seriously hurt.
    Again, you are incorrect.

    Well, he does...in ways most don't see directly. Professors and the like are all trying to get time on the air for themselves...anything to get the name of their university out...etc. And again, while I agree with you on the stereotype problem...this is NOT the issue.
    I disagree, these professors aren't out there trying for airtime as he is. They are doing the job which he isn't.

    If you are correct about him not being involved in "croc hunts" etc...what does this say about his ability to deal with crocs in an enclosed environment...? Not much...again..the guy has been working in that Zoo for YEARS. Dealing with crocs in closed environments since he was a child...he's gotta know something.
    Yeah, he knows how to deal with crocs in an enclosed (controlled) environment. Whoop de do. I can deal with crocs in an enclosed environment as well, by staying away from them

    His business does keep that Zoo intact and the facilities up to par...saving numerous animals...no?
    I'm unsure about the saving animals issue, but yes he keeps the zoo intact. Something that many of us could do. Many people run successful businesses.

    Did I say he was a good parent???? I simply said the danger was not as severe as it seems.
    Hmmm... I don't think the danger was that severe either, but the fact is that there was a level of danger there, and one that no responsible parent should inflict upon their children.

    Like I said earlier...these child care experts have no idea what goes on in a crocpen and the dangers that accompany it.
    I disagree. I think most Australians understand the dangers of crocs, we are taught from a very early age about the native wildlife and it's dangers. The Childcare experts have seen the results of croc attacks and we all saw the interest that the croc had with that chook. I think it's wrong to make an assumption that Steve Irwin is the only one who knows anything about crocs in this country, remember we live with them in the wild .. he deals with them in his zoo. (well, those Aussies who live in the croc zones anyway)

    How can they base their opinions on him, without even knowing the guy?
    They don't need to know the guy. That's like saying we shouldn't base opinions of drink drivers unless we know them because some of them have many years with alcohol and are better drivers drunk than some are sober. I absolutely disagree. They are focussed on the children.

    Putting the issue of the croc aside, the guy wasn't even handling the child properly. He didn't support the kids neck, that in itself is a hugely stupid thing to do and indicates a lack of concern for the child. I think they have every right to become involved.

    Not only that, the law in this country requires them to be involved if a complaint is made, and many complaints were made.

    They would need to see him at home with the child and study his behaviors heavily..
    Heavily? I don't think so. But yes, the Government workers will attend his home, they will investigate him and he will now have a file and will be visited numerous times. He will be watched now. The care of the children are paramount and these people will NOT be blinded by the popularity and the publicity and his bullshit. They will make a balanced decision based upon the facts.

    It's what they do.

    I don't use their experience to support Steve, I use their LACK of experience.
    I disagree, they have extensive experience in the welfare of children. Do you need to be a skydiving expert to know that Michael Jackson was stupid for putting his kid over that balcony? NO.

    And nobody takes the time to add their time and opinion without a personal reason...again exposure helps their cause.
    What a cynical world you must live in. I not only disagree, but i'll say outright that you are incorrect. Some people maybe, but not everyone as you suggest.

    Did they not get your attention?
    No. The footage of Steve Irwin got my attention.

    Since I feel that there is no changing of society's opinion...I agree with you...Steve should have just given up and gone on with life. But I think he believes what he did was OK, and he is trying to stand up for himself.
    I agree, but think this is wrong. I think that what he did was wrong, the child is just too young for his "theory" to have any substance. The issue now is that the public doesn't accept his opinion on this and whilst he sticks with the loud bleating the public will continue to turn from him.

    OK, so he is not big news in Australia...
    No he isn't. But children are a big issue here, and issues where children are exploited, used badly, hurt etc are big news. Our community is focussed on the children and keeping them safe.

    He gets plenty of play here in the US and probably in Canada as well...and in these places, when criticsm of his actions comes about...the same critics names will be in the articles in the newspapers and news reports on television, as those that you detailed earlier.
    I can make no comment on yuor media as we're only getting snippits.

    [/quote]I never singled this out explicity to Australia. And if he isn't that famous over there and you just heard of him...how are you able to make such knowledgable accusations about his experience and motives?? [/quote]

    Because I watched the footage and I watched him on TV. Him, not others. I listened to his "excuses" and made my decisions based upon what he said, not what others said. Information about his background is freely available if you seek it out.

    Exactly why it's fun to watch.
    ??? to you maybe.

    I know people make generalisations, you base your arguement on them. Fact is that you know Steve Irwin because you've seen him. What you need to remember is that there are many others here in Australia that do what he pretends to do, that know not only what he knows but much more.

    Fact is, there are people out there who are in a position to make an informed judgement on his behaviour and they don't do it for the "publicity", which you appear to be inferring is likely to make them dishonest. They did it because they were asked to comment due to their qualifications/experience etc.

    If the kid were old enough to be aware of it's surroundings then the situation would have been different.





    ADG

    Leave a comment:


  • JeffinDEN
    replied
    Jason

    You da man.

    Leave a comment:


  • jasonblmu
    replied
    Since you graciously and very thouroughly responded to my reply...I thought I'd do the same..

    First off, I understand that the "Crocodile Hunter" does portray a very stereotypical and sometimes "cartoonish" view of what Australians are...I have family members from Australia, who come to visit us here in California...and they always rag on him whenever he pops up on the screen...."he's such a poser" etc... They've explained to me how offending it can be to an Aussie...so don't worry...in that issue...I hear where you are coming from..

    This however is not the issue with "Bob."

    Steve Irwin is nothing more than a showman. Fun to watch for his antics, but nothing more. I count their knowledge as superior to his.
    This is a pretty hefty and personal judgement. Unless you have tracked him back to his childhood, how can you possibly say his knowledge is not up to par with the rest???

    He is a showman yes, but he also is in charge of a zoo and was doing so well before a producer from the discovery channel ran across him on vacation and decided to make a star of him. These producers know HOW to take what Steve does and twist it into more of an entertainment, than education piece. Ever watch reality television?? All of that crazy stuff is manipulated for entertainment....same here. It's the producers work..not all Steve.

    These people have nothing to gain by discrediting Steve Irwin as they simply aren't in the same fields. He's out to make money, they're out to study crocs.
    Ok, they're in different fields....so how can they pass good judgement on the issue???...the university professors are studying them, he physically restrains and moves them...I would bet most of these professors haven't phyically dealt with the countless crocs that Steve has...or even been within a few feet as many times as Steve has without getting seriously hurt.

    In fact, I was unaware that he had any competitors. Remember, he's nothing here in Australia .. it's over in the US where he's big. We see him as an embarrasment to this country, enforcing an incorrect stereotype of Australians.
    Well, he does...in ways most don't see directly. Professors and the like are all trying to get time on the air for themselves...anything to get the name of their university out...etc. And again, while I agree with you on the stereotype problem...this is NOT the issue.

    Steve Irwin is not involved in the multitude of "croc hunts" and "croc study's" and so forth that go on in this country ever year, his focus is entirely on his business and nothing more. To the point where he enforces an incorrect stereotype in an attempt to increase his profits and he exploits his children to his own end.
    If you are correct about him not being involved in "croc hunts" etc...what does this say about his ability to deal with crocs in an enclosed environment...? Not much...again..the guy has been working in that Zoo for YEARS. Dealing with crocs in closed environments since he was a child...he's gotta know something.



    To the point where he enforces an incorrect stereotype in an attempt to increase his profits and he exploits his children to his own end.

    Whether you find that ok or not is really a personal opinion, but it certainly doesn't make him an expert in anything but marketting.
    His business does keep that Zoo intact and the facilities up to par...saving numerous animals...no? While it seems like he did this with Bob to stir up controversy...I highly doubt it, did he not do it in front of a crowd at the Zoo? It wasn't live here in the states?? The only reason it is known is because the media jumped on it here.

    While I feel the baby issue was not for his own profits...I do feel that his aussie stereotype does immorally help him. He does give off that persona and his producers love it....however this doesn't necessarily pertain to the baby's safety.

    and I exercise my right to disagree. I'll also add that lots of people have raised kids, and watched their parents do the same, that doesn't make them good parents does it?
    Did I say he was a good parent???? I simply said the danger was not as severe as it seems.

    Actually it's the general public that is causing the raucous, the child care experts are merely adding their opinions, based on their expertise and many years experience at dealing with children. That same experience you use to justify your support of Steve Irwin.
    Like I said earlier...these child care experts have no idea what goes on in a crocpen and the dangers that accompany it. How can they base their opinions on him, without even knowing the guy? They would need to see him at home with the child and study his behaviors heavily..in order to decide if he is parent worthy. I don't use their experience to support Steve, I use their LACK of experience.

    And nobody takes the time to add their time and opinion without a personal reason...again exposure helps their cause.

    Quote:
    again to garner some of the spotlight for their own cause...


    Again i'd disagree. There is no indication of this at all in what is going on, at least not in the media here.
    Did they not get your attention?

    It's his PR mistake. He should have apologised and it would all have blown over
    Since I feel that there is no changing of society's opinion...I agree with you...Steve should have just given up and gone on with life. But I think he believes what he did was OK, and he is trying to stand up for himself.

    Again, I believe you are wrong here. I'm seeing no other "agenda" on our media and you are misinformed on his status in Australia. He is not a public figure here, he is not "big". In fact, his story was not front page here, taking a back page to the resignation of our Cricket Captain.
    OK, so he is not big news in Australia...but that is not the only place where he has an effect. He gets plenty of play here in the US and probably in Canada as well...and in these places, when criticsm of his actions comes about...the same critics names will be in the articles in the newspapers and news reports on television, as those that you detailed earlier.

    So I'd have to disagree with you on this issue. I don't see anything to justify your statements above (although I do understand) you have a right to your own opinion on this. Steve Irwin is a big star over in America and if it was just the American press then perhaps your statements might have some validity, but here in Australia he isn't as famous as Paul Hogan or even the Leyland Brothers. In fact, I'd hardly even heard of him before he got invited to the PM's BBQ with your Prez.
    I never singled this out explicity to Australia. And if he isn't that famous over there and you just heard of him...how are you able to make such knowledgable accusations about his experience and motives??

    I do remember seeing some show about snakes in Africa or something but turned it off because someone deliberately having snakes spit in their eye has to be pretty stupid.
    Exactly why it's fun to watch.

    I'm sorry that this guy has disrepected your culture as you say. You know what...it's a part of life. We in the U.S have people in Europe thinking were all a bunch of greedy. immormal, fat people....when all they see is Britney Spears, "who wants to marry a millionaire", for love or money, Michael Jackson, McDonalds advertisements....what do ya expect?? We all deal with it.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X