Incredible--This two sides of a story comment on the History Channel may be a first.

This "first time ever" comment from the same History Channel, suggesting possibly Clyde Beatty was not perfect, and had a lot of "Hollywood fantasy" in his corner, as posted. Let's see how strong the defenses are in discrediting the individual who posted it, insinuating that about Clyde Beatty. Let's see who defends Buck. I'm interested because I didn't know either one of them, just what I read, or have been told.
*************************************************************************************

As explained in the Modern Mechanix article, the filmmakers set up their cameras at a jungle waterhole, figuring that eventually animals would show up there. According to the cameraman, the python showed up first and had its fight with the crocodile. Then the tiger showed up and fought with the python. With three cameras already in position, the fight was captured from three different angles. Even though the python eventually gained an advantage over the tiger, its strength gave out and the tiger escaped with its life. Although the real truth about how this sequence was filmed will probably never be known for sure, it is more likely that the waterhole was included in the section of jungle that the filmmakers enclosed inside the fence. The python and the tiger were then put inside together, and the cameramen filmed the result when they met. (This rather callous method for getting exciting action footage was also used by Clyde Beatty, who staged fights between lions and tigers for his films.) "I suggested this very thing a number of day's ago, with a Youtube link of a fight from "The Big Cage" on Circusnospin. Wade Burck
**************************************************************************************

I never knew or met a man named Ralph Helfer, who I guess was a Television/Movie trainer/supplier of animals, and wrote a book. Each time his name is mentioned on the History Channel there is so much venom directed at him, particularly in regards to an elephant named Modoc that he wrote about. The same holds true every time the name Frank Buck is mentioned. If I based my opinion of the men on that, I may not have all the facts, yet nobody has responded different. Do we assume it is the truth, or do some not want to "rock the boat" by responding, or censored, and we accept what we have read/been told as gospel?

*************************************************************************************