Deadliest Warrior

[Aemilius Paulus]

I have heard of it, I checked its Wikipedia entry and it struck me as too messed-up and what I generally call OMG teh MILITARY PWNS!!11 - there are plenty of programs of that nature, as much as some of those programs are attempting to make themselves sound serious, as if they did not know only military-obsessed 13 year olds watch them... The scenario is so implausible that the show is nothing but pure entertainment fodder no different from anything else, save its veil.

Military porn would be a good name, because of the similarities. Just like History Channel is history porn and Discovery Channels are science porn. Neither actually feature real stuff.

Not that I condemn anyone watching the stuff. But getting engrossed in it is not a positive thing IMHO... Not negative either, but simply rubbish.

This Onion article (WARNING: one F-word, Onion always swears ) captures much of my feelings on Discovery-type channels:

SILVER SPRING, MD

Frustrated by continued demands from viewers for more awesome and extreme programming, Science Channel president Clark Bunting told reporters Tuesday that his cable network was "completely incapable" of watering down science any further than it already had. [U]

An ad for the Science Channel's easy-to-pronounce gourd-launching show, Punkin Chunkin.

"Look, we've tried, we really have, but it's simply not possible to set the bar any lower," said a visibly exhausted Bunting, adding that he "could not in good conscience" make science any more mindless or insultingly juvenile. "We already have a show called Really Big Things, which is just ridiculous if you think about it, and one called Heavy Metal Taskforce, which I guess deals with science on some distant level, though I don't know what it is. Plus, there's Punkin Chunkin."

"Punkin Chunkin, for Christ's sake," added Bunting, referring to the popular program in which contestants launch oversized pumpkins into the air using catapults. "What more do you people want?"

Along with Bunting's remarks, the Science Channel issued a statement claiming that it currently airs more than 150 programming hours that are tangentially, and often laughably, related to science, and that staff members are unable to bring themselves to make those hours even more asinine.


Test audiences responded poorly to the show's "overly-scientific" method of dropping a bear 300 feet.

Debbie Myers, general manager of the Science Channel, said the cable station has maintained a balance of 5 percent science content and 95 percent mind-numbing drivel over the past few years, and that this was as far as they were willing to go.

"At this point, having the word 'how' in a show's title is about as close to scientific investigation as we get," Myers said. "In fact, I don't even know how we can justify airing a show like Mantracker at all. A cowboy hunts contestants down using his trailing skills? I guess you could say it makes the audience use 'observation' by watching what happens on screen."

"Observation is a part of science, right?" Myers added. "Jesus Christ."

A survey of the network's current schedule confirmed Monday that on-air demonstrations of such basic scientific principles as "inertia" and "momentum" are mostly relegated to pushing a blindfolded participant strapped to an office chair down a steep hill, while other concepts, such as "sublimation," are regularly demonstrated by strapping dynamite to a large fiberglass Big Boy statue and then watching it explode.

As evidence of their refusal to further water down programming, network sources pointed to a number of proposed shows they've abandoned in recent weeks, including an animal-based bungee-jumping program called Extreme Gravity, and Atom Smashers, a series that was was roundly rejected by focus groups as being "too technical" and "not awesome enough."

"People liked that the particle accelerators were really huge, but apparently the show didn't have enough smashing to hold their interest," said a former employee who wished to remain anonymous. "In the end, it was either add a huge monster truck for no reason whatsoever or pull the plug on the entire project. Honestly, I don't think I'd be able to face my wife and children had we gone through with it."

While they won't be dumbing down their already crude lineup of shows, Science Channel officials assured viewers that the network will continue to cater to the lowest common denominator and will keep airing embarrassingly base content completely stripped of all intellectual integrity. Officials also noted that the cable channel greatly values the 18- to 45-year-old demographic of louts, clods, and empty-headed dumb.

"I don't like it when the science people talk about things no one can even understand," said Rich Parker, an Ohio resident. "It's like, just quit your yapping and dip the chain saw into the liquid nitrogen already."

David Zaslav, CEO of the network's parent company, Discovery Communications, said he has not ruled out rebranding the Science Channel as the Stuff Channel.