XPost: rec.sport.pro-wrestling, alt.pro-wrestling.wwf, rec.arts.tv   
   XPost: alt.tv.lost   
   From: david@block.net   
      
   On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:25:02 -0400, "Sean Carroll"   
    wrote:   
      
   >"Padmar Mushkin"  wrote   
   >   
   >> >.J. Abrams: "Fringe" isn't meant to be realistic -- "it's science   
   >> >fantasy"   
   >   
   >> Other than intention, how is this different from every other "science"   
   >> based TV show in history?   
   >   
   >????   
   >   
   >What the hell are you talking about?   
   >   
   >Are you saying that you believe there has never been a SINGLE television   
   >show that featured basically accurate science (within the obvious acceptable   
   >bounds of dramatic licence)? I can think of quite a few.   
   >   
   >Of course no show gets *everything* right, unless you count some of the good   
   >documentaries on Discovery and such. But there are plenty of shows with   
   >professional scientific advisers who do a damn good job of making sure that   
   >all of the basics and the overwhelming majority of the details are accurate.   
   >   
   >Where is the 'science fantasy', for example, on 'Bones' -- every episode of   
   >which is reviewed for accuracy by Kathy Reichs, one of only a handful of   
   >board-certified professional forensic anthropologists in the country?   
      
   Well there's no such thing as the magical hologram reconstruction of a   
   skulls face.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)