BBC2 Series 'Earth'

[studiot]

Has anyone been watching the new BBC2 series Earth, presented by Chris Packham ?

 

I wonder what you made of it ?

 

I thought it had some new thought provoking ideas but found some thi ngs rather difficult to follow.

It has not been clear what is established and what is hypothesis.

The programmes jump backwards and forwards along the timeline so it is difficult to place material presented in context or connection with other material either in the series or elsewhere.

[Sensei]

25 minutes ago, studiot said:

The programmes jump backwards and forwards along the timeline

Welcome to current television. In any Netflix series, this is a must-see element..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flashback_(narrative)

 

 

Edited September 25, 2023 by Sensei

[Genady]

Is it entertaining?

[Sensei]

Just now, Genady said:

Is it entertaining?

I suspect studiot is looking for knowledge than entertainment..

 

[Genady]

Just now, Sensei said:

I suspect studiot is looking for knowledge than entertainment..

 

I suspect that it is a wrong place to look for knowledge.

[Sensei]

1 minute ago, Genady said:

I suspect that it is a wrong place to look for knowledge.

If something interests you in the series, you can always search the web to expand your knowledge about it.

[Genady]

9 minutes ago, Sensei said:

If something interests you in the series, you can always search the web to expand your knowledge about it.

Yes, this is right, when what they say is at least correct. Unfortunately, it is often not so.

[dimreepr]

28 minutes ago, Genady said:

Is it entertaining?

Yes it is, and it's informative, a tricky thing to do.

But I'm with @studiot, the timeline issue confused rather than informed because, unlike "Pulp Fiction", the narrative didn't help to link to the story/entertainment.

1 hour ago, studiot said:

It has not been clear what is established and what is hypothesis.

In this context, I don't see a difference TBH.

1 hour ago, studiot said:

I wonder what you made of it ?

I enjoyed it.

1 hour ago, studiot said:

I thought it had some new thought provoking ideas but found some thi ngs rather difficult to follow.

It has not been clear what is established and what is hypothesis.

The programmes jump backwards and forwards along the timeline so it is difficult to place material presented in context or connection with other material either in the series or elsewhere.

I wonder if it was because of overlapping (as in a Venn), a contiguous timeline would just add to much complication for the average viewer.

[studiot]

13 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Yes it is, and it's informative, a tricky thing to do.

But I'm with @studiot, the timeline issue confused rather than informed because, unlike "Pulp Fiction", the narrative didn't help to link to the story/entertainment.

In this context, I don't see a difference TBH.

I enjoyed it.

I wonder if it was because of overlapping (as in a Venn), a contiguous timeline would just add to much complication for the average viewer.

Thank you for replying as someone who has actually seen it.

The presenter, Chris Packham is a journalist, not a scientist and did a creditable job of presenting the material.

So yes I enjoyed it.

The episodes included short 'interviews' with a range of academic specialists from around the world.

I especially liked the new material about Funghi and their fossil tree like growths that everyone thought were fossil trees.

However I noted discrepancies between some of the episodes.

So at the end of episode 2 they had rushed timeline forward several billion years to -700 million years and announced that in the next episode they would be taking it from there to discuss life and its great proliferation.

Yet in episode 3 they barely reached -700 million years, yet kept jumping forwards to show magical open sky margins around tree tops, that I do not recognise from any forest I have ever been in, and made the claim that funghi, which they reckoned once towered over plant life once were relegated to the ground at this time.

Yet all the pruning theory for trees and bushes tell us to 'open out the top area' so as to avoid colonisation by -- yes -- funghi and lichens (these latter did not merit amention in the programme).