- This topic has 12 voices and 26 replies.
-
Posts
-
What kind of job would you love to do? For me, I would love to have the job as host of “Digging for the Truth”, as seen on the History Channel. They guy goes around the world trying to solve historical mysteries, or at least to come to find evidence which supports one theory over others. He gets to go scuba diving, practice his archery skills, visit museums and historical sites (not necessarily open to the public), ride chariots – all the cool stuff that I would love to do in the context of a semi-academic quest to unearth intriguing historical puzzles. Who could ask for more?
I probably would like to be an archaeologist. Or almost any job having to do with cattle or horses. Actually I did raise cattle for a number of years but the monetary aspects dictated that I keep my day job. 😡 I still have a few pleasure horses.
A writer. Which is what I am after these days. Phid what is keeping you from doing what you want? I understand getting on TV mat be unrealistic, but all that other stuff is an attainable goal. I may never make it as a writer, but when I go the way of all men, I want to atleast say i tried.
My dream job was once to become the pre-eminent theologian of our time, but that's on hold for the time being….my theology is ahead of my maturity at this point. 🙂
My dream job would be to work in the State Museum. I also admire the librarians who work in the genealogy room of the Historical Society in my city.
My dream job would be to have a column in a journal or magazine where I would present a battle guide for a different battle with each issue and the magazine paid for my travel and expenses. I find walking battlefields fascinating and think other people would too if they were presented correctly. By, the Way, I think the National Park Service does a horrible job at National Battlefields. There is no sense of what really happened at any of the 20-30 national battlefields I have been to. You mainly get a disjointed account that is hard to piece together if you have not researched beforehand.
By, the Way, I think the National Park Service does a horrible job at National Battlefields. There is no sense of what really happened at any of the 20-30 national battlefields I have been to. You mainly get a disjointed account that is hard to piece together if you have not researched beforehand.
I wonder if that is because the Park Service workers are really only trained in specifics as to the parks themselves without having gotten an education in the history of it, so they might lack the perspective. I wonder if it's almost better to find someone with a PhD in the area, or a local professor, who could be a guide.
The really sad part is the park service has a trained historian on staff at most parks and they still do a horrible job. Example, at Shiloh last year I got into a discussion with the resident historian about why several of the markers in the vicinity of park HQ's are incorrectly placed. The answer I got was that it was because that was where they were put and most people did not know any better anyway. I am talking about the markers that mark the battery at Pittsburgh Landing. They also have non-period artillery pieces at the battery, the pieces on display date from a year or so after the battle. The woodlines are not correct, but I will admit that they have a program in place to restore the woodlines to where they were during the battle, which will help future visitors to visualize the course of the battle better.I know I am nit picking, but that is what we need if the lessons of the past are to be preserved.
Dr Richard Attenbourough (sp), the bullet headed guy with no neck who is always on the Military Channel playing with cool old weapons. He's got the dream job IMHO, plus his hair always looks great 😉
Dr Richard Attenbourough (sp), the bullet headed guy with no neck who is always on the Military Channel playing with cool old weapons. He's got the dream job IMHO, plus his hair always looks great 😉
Mail call? I was half thinking you were talking about Future Weapons but that guy has no hair.
Dr Richard Attenbourough (sp), the bullet headed guy with no neck who is always on the Military Channel playing with cool old weapons. He's got the dream job IMHO, plus his hair always looks great 😉
Mail call? I was half thinking you were talking about Future Weapons but that guy has no hair.
I was making a joke Phid…Dr Attenbourough is a bald as a bullet. 😀 He usually will pop up on “Top 10 Rifles”, “Tales of the Gun”, etc…I don't know the name of the guy on “FutureWeapons”, but that would be cool too 😉
Too bad most of the stuff on Futureweapons is crap that for the most part the Army has tested and found wanting.
I dont know I just saw some photos from Iraq where that new MRAP took a direct IED hit. I mean the vehicle is viturally unsuable but the worst injuries were some broken ribs when the driver hit the steering wheel. Drop me an email and I'll send you the pics. But that was on FutureWeapons. The problem is the expense. We could make some great stuff for our folks but just cant afford to procure it.
Notice I said most, not all. I have worked in the acquisition field for the last three years doing operational testing of Infantry and dismounted weapons for the Army. I know for a fact that some of the crap he shows on there is just that, crap. I was involved in the MGS test last year and I saw the episode he did on it last month. Made me wonder if he saw the same vehicle I did.
