*documentary *history

*history *learn *documentary *water *quality

Informative:
Link to article referenced in the video:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/12/nature-documentary-tricks_n_7249528.html
(but boo, reading, yuck)

Non-informative:
So they can edit in plottwists.
So yeah, bambi lives.
But then cut to: White wolf goes back starving kids. Camera goes slowly to dark as one of the wolf pups exhales for the last time.
But then cut to: A large family of maggots has been waiting for this moment, rooting for bambi in the earlier scene.

Disney are actually using the music and the lyrics to have the desired specific emotional effect on their musically and geographically poorly informed audience. Specific languages are present not for accuracy or making sense, purely for cinematic effect. It is much easier to use a real language and real obscure culture references than trying to come up with something original, like Klingon. Correct use of a specific language or musical reference is probably just an inside joke. Everything Disney does is cultural appropriation, that is their day job. They dont do documentaries, they are into compiled rehashed fairytales. If that one song was PC it was probably done that way on purpose, decided by Disneys equal opportunities department. A proper Inuit movie would have to be shot from an Inuit script with an Inuit score drawn by real Inuit men on Inuit snow in the only possible way you can draw while your fingers are freezing.

Good stuff, but this is in no way forgotten tech. Anyone that's ever "walked" a bookshelf or fridge into place has used the same lever with multiple pivot points method, just with less leverage needed and wider pivot points.
I think this documentary may be almost 30 years old now, I saw it ages ago.

I know they sometimes partner with other organisations, but this time they just say "This story is a part of our Human Condition series". Maybe they sold it to NOVA first?

p.s. Lang's website says "PBS's landmark series NOVA devoted an entire episode to the applications of origami in science, engineering, and technology. Based on the French/German documentary, "The Origami Code."" He also lists this interview as CNN's Great Big Story.

From the trailer, it seems to cover the same ground but has a different narrator.

I've been with my wife since 92. I was absolutely not better off being single. No documentary needed.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

It's from here:
This quote is attributed to Nobel laureate Baruch Blumberg. In a late 80s PBS documentary, he said half of all human deaths 'may' have been due to malaria.

While it sounds astounding, it's plausible when you think about it. 93% of all humans ever born are dead. But it's a highly speculative business starting from how many people have ever lived.

Prof Carl Haub has come up with an estimate of 108 billion people since 50,000 BC. And only 6.5% of these are alive today. How Many People Have Ever Lived on Earth?

So did malaria cause the death of roughly 54 billion people? We can speculate. More than 96 billion of these 108 billion lived between 8000 BC and 1900 AD. For malaria to have caused the death of 54 billion people, it should have kept up a phenomenal rate of 5.4 million deaths per year in the last 10,000 years.

WHO estimates of 650,000 deaths per year now seem wildly off the mark. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funded a study to find out how many deaths occur due to malaria in today's day and age. The number was 1.24 million in 2010! http://www.bbc.com/news/health-1...

So it's certainly plausible that malaria could have killed five times as many in an age pre-dating modern medicine when most of the world lived as communes along with their cattle and herds.

Also, the longevity of the parasite plasmodium, which causes malaria. Studies have revealed that it's been around since the time of the dinosaurs. And certainly been around from the beginning of our story. http://www.malaria.com/questions...

Entirely plausible!

https://www.quora.com/The-Human-Race-and-Condition-Is-it-true-that-mosquitoes-have-killed-more-than-half-of-all-the-people-who-have-ever-lived

*animation *videogames *military *geeks *documentary

Um....so you think the right didn't make sinister sounding documentaries about Clinton? Where have you been living the last 25 years, a cave in the Peruvian alps?

I think perhaps the "glass houses" complaints are being made by people living in a paper thin crystal snow globe who wish to distract from that fact.

Recall, Trump ran on the lie that he paid for his entire campaign and was beholding to no one, it was absolutely central to his candidacy, and was just another pack of obvious bold faced lies he sold the right, like draining the swamp, releasing his taxes, hiring the "best and brightest people", and putting his assets in a blind trust....all of which were total lies.

Glass houses...

Its a good thing there were no secret, seedy campaign backers for HRC that we could make sinister sounding documentaries about. Love the conspiracy theory soundtrack though, at least it knows the sandbox it is playing in.

I love documentaries. It was one of the reasons I became a member here. I really do miss geo321. A great mind indeed. As for endall, I will have to go through his submissions.

i watched that lecture as well,but it was over an hour long,and to get THAT bad boysifted would be a chore.

people and their short attentions spans..sheesh.

so i went with the 20minute piece rather than the longer..but far more informative..hour long lecture.

man,i miss geo321 and endall.they both found the most esoteric and interesting documentaries didnt they?

@radx and @enoch

radx said:
Painting Truthout, Truthdig, Counterpunch, Alternet, BlackAgendaReport, NakedCapitalism and others as stooges of the Kremlin is such an obvious attempt to discredit dissenting voices that it's, quite frankly, rather offensive.

enoch said:
i have considered his works and found them informative and reflective of our current situation.

just as i have found:howard zinn,noam chomsky,amy goodman,jeremy scahill,laura poitrus,glenn greenwald,paul jay,richard d wolffe.

All of the outlets and authors listed above have been very thorough or exhaustive in documenting the evils of America or Capitalism(as represented by America). The length, depth and detail they have all given and time spent documenting any and every instance is almost breath taking. For a long time, I sort of sat closer to you both by looking at the merits of each instance and case weeding through which stories were accurate, which ones were complete, which ones were misleading or fair. Lots and lots of the coverage from those groups and individuals were very accurate.

Here's the counter balance though, how much time, detail and effort have all of those groups combined given to any positive outcomes of America or Capitalism(as represented by America). How much time, detail and effort have all of those groups combined given to the evils of any alternatives or opposing forces that would or did fill the voids were America isn't involved? It's crickets all around.

Chomsky's work alone could fill a library with the thorough documenting of America's evil corporate execution of class war on the workers of the world. How many books and documentaries can we count form the entire group that attempt anything similar for China, Russia, Middle Eastern nations, heck, the rest of the world combined?

I don't draw attention to this to point out that anything they have all observed is even wrong or incorrect. I draw attention to the glaring omission of similar documentation of alternatives. As it stands, a country like Russia couldn't dream of a better and more effective propaganda coup than the work of these groups and individuals. That doesn't in anyway say any of them are in allegiance with Russia, or even like anything about Russia. It still stands that even if Russia set out to discredit and smear America and leave itself looking clean, it couldn't pay people to do a better job of it. That's something worth considering and the deep, deep absence of balance and perspective that the listed sources represent is DAMAGING when taken in isolation.

Perhaps more pointedly, is the problem with Breitbart merely with it's fact checking department? They are, in as close as investigated them both, about on a Howard Zinn level for accuracy/honesty. None the less, it's the facts they willingly and knowingly leave out that makes them so damaging. The fact they fall right wing instead of left wing doesn't make their damage so much more appalling to me.