I accidentally saw a few mins of that show while flipping channels. In the version I saw there were these two naked tenderfoots hopping around on the African plains going "ouch ouch ouch!!!'

I would humbly suggest that if they are allowed to keep one item from their clothes - it might be a good pair of shoes. Hahahaha!

Pete2

I understand that abos going without shoes will develop calluses that are a good 1/2 inch thick or more. These also crack so that the effect must be somewhat like the lugs on a good Vibram sole.

I excavated a large ruin at Canyon de Chelly some years ago with excellent preservation, and we found lots of sandals which often had intricate patterns on their soles. Archaeologists in an earlier day often wondered why they put decorative patterns on the soles of the shoes where they would be worn away. As a sometimes rock climber,it seemed rather evident that the patterns would give a good grip when traversing the many vertical routes in the canyon,some of which would rate as 5.8/5.9 on contemporary scales.

I agree that our modern wimpy feet benefit from decent shoes.

I gotta say, you gentlemen deprived the forum of a great deal of innocent amusement by declining the opportunity. having one of y'all, or Izzy on screen would guarantee a steady audience and intense discussion here.

Being nude isn't the issue. Between the ages of four and sixteen I had about eight surgeries to correct some pretty ugly birth defects followed by another six or seven in later years. My body is covered with a fascinating web of scars and weird shapes, I got over being self conscious of it decades ago. The main issues were not enough money to make up for losing my job, potential loss of credibility in both my scientific and plants careers, and the fact that even pixilated I'd be hated by just every guy who saw the show.
-Blast (aka "Pringles Can")

p.s. I'd chose shoes over pants.

Bwa-ha ha ha ha!!!

Everything's bigger in Texas, eh amigo?

The second show - set in Tanzania - was definitely more entertaining than the first. And proved my point that your two pieces of gear should be pot and fire starter.

Not sure I would agree with that. The knife was definitely a requirement in that environment. Making fire was work, but they got it figured out. No knife would've left them defenseless and unable to finally protect their feet the way they did. Maybe the fire kept the hyenas away, maybe not.

Maybe pot and knife, but firestarter? Not if you know what you are up to.

No sale.

It's all true: blast remains an icon in the graffiti art in the halls of RPI.

That's perhaps the only thing for which men can experience what it's like for women to be objectified. An occurrence of nature that you cannot help draws attention to you, and some people just cannot look past that to see the person you are. Getting stared at and getting comments about parts of your life that strangers, acquaintances, and even most friends should have no part in, are just really weird, uncomfortable, and degrading. Often it feels more like harassment, even though it's supposed to be a source of envy. I find that well-endowed women tend to sympathize readily, because they have experienced the same kind of treatment.

It took the male survival expert three days to make fire. They were in dire straits, unable to drink the filthy water. A cutting tool could have been fashioned from a rock in a couple of hours. "The knife was ... a requirement." Of course, and so are shoes, clothes, etc. But they were only allowed one tool/implement each. Being able to purify water is the most basic requirement. His tanto kabar is macho, but I'll take drinkable water.