I watched the second in the series, the Southern Ocean. It was filmed in Tasmania where I am from and so knew the locations fairly well. I have never seen a nature documentary try to be so dramatic, so intense and so in your face. Is this the legacy of Steve Irwin with nature being treated as a wild lion? This episode started out looking for the kelp forests of Tasmania. They failed to find any except a few strands. Judging from the background, they were still very close to Hobart, in an area known locally as "the Channel." The real kelp forests start much further out to sea down around Tasman Peninsula. It's akin to trying to find virgin rain forest on Copacabana beach. Then using the "one swallow makes a summer" argument they decry the effects of global warming. Hmmmmmmm.
They then attempted to "discover the origins of the Southern Ocean" by searching for fossils in some of the sea caves under "the largest sea cliffs in the world." Why? I am a geologist and I studied at the University of Tasmania in Hobart. I studied these fossils they were trying to find but I didn't need to go into any sea cave. There are plenty of sites where you get the sea cliffs exposed at low tide and the fossils are there for the taking. Why risk going into an underwater sea cave--purely for dramatic effect. "Air is short, we have 20 minutes to find the fossils and save the world" stuff.
Yet the laughable thing--the fact that really made me aware that this was a series conducted by pseudo-scientific idiots--was when they eventually got into the cave and started picking stones off the sea floor containing fossils. That is, these are stones that could have come from anywhere. They were not part of the cave walls or ceiling or floor. Fossils from those parts MAY have been valuable but picking a stone off the floor of the sea tells you nothing about the sea caves AS IT DOES NOT COME FROM THEM. And then what, they get the fossils back to the boat and their "expert" goes: "Yep. Brachiopods." Didn't even try to identify them. That's like going to a car wreckers, dragging home a wreck and going: "yep. A car." The Brachiopods they examined are very common all around Hobart -- you can drive to outcrops and get them.
The whole episode smacked of "high seas adventure" -- sensationalizing the mundane or normal to make it look so much more dramatic that what it really was. Whatever their message -- and perhaps it was serious -- got lost in this over sensationalism.
There are many more criticisms: when the leader dives to explore a wreck in deep water, they say: "Only he was qualified to dive at this depth." Well what about the cameraman?! Why does the leader "check things out" alone -- isn't this contrary to normal scuba procedures when you have your buddy? Oh, I forgot, the cameraman was his buddy.
I could not watch the episode to its end. Pathetic is too kind a word. David Attenborough and all the great nature documentary makers would cringe watching this. Let's hope the BBC stop trying to chase ratings and get rid of this "action-based" environmentalism and get serious again.
They then attempted to "discover the origins of the Southern Ocean" by searching for fossils in some of the sea caves under "the largest sea cliffs in the world." Why? I am a geologist and I studied at the University of Tasmania in Hobart. I studied these fossils they were trying to find but I didn't need to go into any sea cave. There are plenty of sites where you get the sea cliffs exposed at low tide and the fossils are there for the taking. Why risk going into an underwater sea cave--purely for dramatic effect. "Air is short, we have 20 minutes to find the fossils and save the world" stuff.
Yet the laughable thing--the fact that really made me aware that this was a series conducted by pseudo-scientific idiots--was when they eventually got into the cave and started picking stones off the sea floor containing fossils. That is, these are stones that could have come from anywhere. They were not part of the cave walls or ceiling or floor. Fossils from those parts MAY have been valuable but picking a stone off the floor of the sea tells you nothing about the sea caves AS IT DOES NOT COME FROM THEM. And then what, they get the fossils back to the boat and their "expert" goes: "Yep. Brachiopods." Didn't even try to identify them. That's like going to a car wreckers, dragging home a wreck and going: "yep. A car." The Brachiopods they examined are very common all around Hobart -- you can drive to outcrops and get them.
The whole episode smacked of "high seas adventure" -- sensationalizing the mundane or normal to make it look so much more dramatic that what it really was. Whatever their message -- and perhaps it was serious -- got lost in this over sensationalism.
There are many more criticisms: when the leader dives to explore a wreck in deep water, they say: "Only he was qualified to dive at this depth." Well what about the cameraman?! Why does the leader "check things out" alone -- isn't this contrary to normal scuba procedures when you have your buddy? Oh, I forgot, the cameraman was his buddy.
I could not watch the episode to its end. Pathetic is too kind a word. David Attenborough and all the great nature documentary makers would cringe watching this. Let's hope the BBC stop trying to chase ratings and get rid of this "action-based" environmentalism and get serious again.
