Talk:Timothy Treadwell

is this guy for real?

has there been any verification of timmoty treadwell's death? what i am suggesting is that he has successfully faked his own death by making a movie about it. i dunno, just food for thought

Basically, you think he found two human bodies for bears to eat and tried to pass them off as him and his girlfriend? He's insane, but not that sort of insane. --Apostrophe 18:58, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

He should be nominated for a Darwin award, what a total moron. 24.160.136.10 22:07, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

article needs cleanup

There's too summarizing of POV material from the documentary film. There wa It seems unfair to highlight his drug abuse years as the introduction to who he was. Also no mention about how long he spent with bears. article at the moment sounds like he was a newcomer to bears. That poaching was not a major issue is disputed by Treadwell's friends. (there is a followup film to the documentary where Herzog talks to Treadwell's friends about what they thought about the documentary where they emphasize this and also that they thought the film made Treadwell seem more unbalanced than he really was) I'll try to address some of these issues later on, Bwithh 16:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

who are u to say he was a wanker esp. without a "bio" u dont need a past to understand how he came to his "present" life=growing and from all that happened to him in his past, it evolved his life into what it became and ended how it did.who is to judge where the past begins and the present starts

missing bio

isnt there more info that can be added to the bio? middle-class family, early association with animals, etc.? What a wanker he was

crazy but doing the right thing

I think Timothy Treadwell was a man the appreciated the true beauty of the world. He is an inspirational man. I wish there was more people like him ,but not going to live with the bears.

No, honestly, he was just crazy/stupid

First of all, if what he was doing was arguably detrimental to the safety of the bears by making them accustomed to humans, he was not necessarily doing the right thing just because it has some quality that can be perceived as romantic. Second of all, from what I've seen of the videos, I get the impression that he was really just a thrill-seeking, self-aggrandizing idiot with delusions of grandeur. In the end his futile efforts resulted in his own death and the death of his girlfriend, and for what? Ultimately, Timothy Tredwell is a perfect example of what's wrong with the environmental movement right now: extremists who have blind factless faith in a naturalistic philosophy that has no basis in fact. A member of a culture of joiners who started to idolize symbolism over actual environmental progress.

And yes, it's very easy to destroy something someone creates. You set fire to it.

my changes

at the top:
- added Amie Huguenard's age (don't know if this is the proper way though)
- added: "At the end of his thirteenth year..."
in biography:
- changed the wording on his drug addiction to "recovering from an earlier drug addiction", it makes it more subtle
- added: "which he videotaped and photographed the last five years of his life"
in death:
- added info on his thoughts about saving the bears and his promises about never hurting them
- because it is actually a video tape I changed "audio tape" to "audio recording"
added information about the Leonardo DiCaprio film

The Death part can be reworded. The "Troopers" part is messy.

- Halli

alaska

I've read in several places that while Katmai was actually Treadwell's favorite, it was not the only park he visited. Do you think that should be included in his bio?

Was "Treadwell" his real last name? I remember hearing somewhere that he changed it.

- He did change it, his real last name is Dexter, but in the movie I think his father said the Treadwell name was in the family. Perhaps we could say "Treadwell (born Dexter)" or something, whichever way is best... --Hli

article self-contradiction

The article contradicts itself. In one place it says:

"Whether the tape was actually destroyed or not is unclear."

Later it says:

"The audio recording, along with the other tapes recovered, are all intact"

Which is it?

The latter. The interview with Treadwell's friends that aired on Discover revealed that the tapes are still intact. --Mr. Vernon 04:00, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bear vs. bears vs. grizzly bear

From what I have read, no-one can be certain if the couple was eaten by one, two or three bears. It is not even clear if more than one bear was responsible for the attack. All they know is that the pilot saw one bear standing over the couple's remains; the same bear that was later shot by park rangers, inside which they found human remains. The younger bear (3yr - which was also shot) was eaten by other bears before authorities got a chance to perform a necropsy. To my knowledge (bear with me...) authorities did not investigate other bears in the area, so no-one knows just how many bears "were involved".

Furthermore, these bears are not grizzly bears, but coastal bears. The word "bear" is therefore, imho, more suitable.

But, to say the couple was eaten by "a bear", let alone "a grizzly bear", is solely based on speculation. Maybe we should say "attacked and partially eaten by bears", suggesting that there might have been more than one bear, and in the worst case scenario we are talking about bears in general, where I am not sure people will necessarily think of a herd of bears, but instead just think of a generic brown bear. Does that make sense? Hli 13:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added Nickname section.

I added a reference to his popular nickname among Alaskan. I would like to see more added on the impression his life and death had on people who live in the state. I don't know how to submit this wikipedia without sounding like a jerk, but from what I understand, he did more damage to bears (the thing he proclaimed to love) and their environment than all the poachers and developers ever could. What is really disturbing is that he had to take someone else with him.

- - I see your point. The problem is that most of the additions to the article regarding the more negative aspects of his "work" have sounded too personal and in dire need of citation (things like "wanker" are not helping). If we are trying to have this article reflect on both the positive and negative impacts of his, well, existence, then we should make sure we are adding a positive fact for every negative. I'm not defending him in any way, but at the same time I see no reason to make him look bad, either.

The article is struggling to be factual; quotes on him being a kind genius or an evil wanker would help everyone.

And yes, she should not have been there, let alone die for his dying interest in the grizzlies. But he shouldn't have died, either. - Hli 05:30, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]