Talk:Simcha Jacobovici

Why the name for the series?

The Naked Archaeologist, why is the show given that name? -Chris

Not to be taken literally, what they mean by "naked" is "stripped-down (figuratively)" and "raw," and in general, no beating around the bush, all just straight up IN YO FACE.

Personally I find the name of the show extremely dishonest as he has no credentials in the field of archaeology (a fact never mentioned on the show, which even showed him participating in a real dig as if he was an archaeologist), in interviews he describes himself as a journalist. The name is obviously just for titillation and trivializes archaeology as a serious endeavor. On the show he continually ignores the scientific method in favor of presenting his own biases regardless of contrary evidence to his positions or a lack of evidentiary support for his theories. He also often misrepresents theories that would argue against him.

--Wowaconia 12:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I have an actual degree in Archeology (among others) and I have to say, that show is offensive for a variety of reasons but the basic objection i have is that the show visually suggests he is in fact, an archeologist, in the series introduction that runs before every episode and does nothing to prevent a viewer from coming to that conclusion. in fact, the intro is designed to introduce him as "the Naked Archeologist". He lifted the "naked" bit from Jamie Oliver's 'the Naked Chef" show in the sense that "naked" is supposed to indicate unconstructed, freshly approached. I've watched four episodes of that show and in each one, he makes astonishing logical leaps that dumbfound the real archeologists and istorians he interviews. He does have degrees in Philosphy and if he'd just call him self the naked philospher, no one would have an issue. it's just that if he is this comfortable with misrepresenting his basic credentials, why wouldn't he also misrepresent facts and history as well? Of course, the article has to stay NPOV. I would suggest making a separate section for criticisms and bulletting the cited criticisms LiPollis 23:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I have a problem with the logic of the show, myself, as mentioned the numerous "Logical Leaps" which are made. I realize the term "archaeologist" is a bit deceiving, but that's not what I really have a problem with. He has no actual credentials in archeology? Fine, if he's the host of a TV show and his job is to just narrate and lead through the explanations. You could call that the "documentation of archeology" or something. It's more irking that he presents himself as an authority in making claims of historical events based on, at best, shaky evidence IE: "This archaeologist said that theres a chance the man buried here was during the time of Jesus. Therefore this is probably the tomb of Jesus." There is no conjecture nor are the experts given the opportunity to give the final opinion. He makes an (amateur) hypothesis and then he cherry-picks a few sound bytes by those who know and makes a few logical leaps and presents it as history. Drbuzz004:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Another question: He is Jewish? Interesting and surprising, because the show seems to take Christian scripture as fact and the conclusions always seem to support Biblical accounts. It seems very much like the goal of the show is to prove or validate Christian beliefs.Drbuzz004:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he is an Orthodox Jew. However, if you think he is pro-Christian, maybe you need to watch some more of his work. A lot of what he presents proves the historicity of the Old Testament Writings, so I guess if you view that as Christian, then, yes. If anything, he would be out there to show people more about the real Jesus, and not the figure that has been presented by the Church.

I also take issue with the name of the show --- I think the wiki article would go a long way to balance things out by listing Mr. Jacobovici's educational credentials. If there is a justification for calling the show "The Naked Archaeoligist" anyway, I'd like to hear it. Now that I know a bit more about Mr. Jacobovici though, I suppose it's time to relegate his work to the same place I long ago relegated Erich von Daniken's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenbackcafe (talk • contribs) 19:56, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

The use of controversy

"Throughout his career Jacobovici has courted controversy." This sentence is overtly negative. Moreover the brief treatise that follows, fails to live up to that introductory verdict. That sentence is just an editor's opinion and definitely original research. EyeTruth (talk) 07:14, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Advert language

Some of these films have terrible ratings. Look at this language: These efforts serve as springboards telling the stories of the ideology, economics and politics of slavery. It's also a story of resistance, accomplishment and hope.Hausa warrior (talk) 19:13, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

COI Request

Hello editors, I used to work with Simcha and have been asked to update this page from a current employee. I have disclosed my conflict of interest. I'd like to suggest some improvements to Simcha Jacobovici's page, and I very much appreciate your help. I have listed my suggestions below:

I would like to add the following paragraph to the end of the "Biography" section:

• Specific text to be added or removed:

Jacobovici has lectured on many campuses including Johns Hopkins, McGill and Yale. Jacobovici lectured at many academic conferences including the European Association for Biblical Studies (EABS) annual conference at Humboldt University of Berlin.

• Reason for the change:

Simcha has lectured many times and I believe should be included on his page.

I would like to add the following paragraph as the new second paragraph in the "Controversies" section:

• Specific text to be added or removed:

In The Exodus Decoded, Jacobovici argued that, based on Biblical coordinates, Hashem el-Tarif, a mountain on the Sinai Peninsula, is the most likely candidate for Mount Sinai where, according to the Bible, Moses received the Ten Commandments. In the film, he also argued, along with Professors Manfred Bietak and James Hoffmeier, that Lake el-Ballah in Egypt’s Delta, which is presently dried out as a result of the Suez Canal, is the Biblical “Yam Suph”, where the Book of Exodus claims God split the sea for Moses and the Israelites.

• Reason for the change:

These were famous claims Jacobovici made in both film (Film) and print (Article). If he’s right, they are major discoveries. At the very least, people should be aware of the controversy.

I would like to add the following paragraph as the final paragraph in the "Controversies" section:

• Specific text to be added or removed:

Despite being the target of numerous criticisms with respect to the above claims, it’s been difficult to dismiss Jacobovici’s arguments since he is a three-time Emmy-Award winning filmmaker, journalist, NYT best-selling author and lecturer.

• Reason for the change:

The reason Jacobovici’s claims have become controversial is because he is a credible individual. Otherwise, he would have been ignored. This paragraph provides the context.

I would like to add a new section under "investigative Archaeology" called "Charitable work".

• Specific text to be added or removed:

References

Charitable work

Jacobovici has been involved in several not-for-profit organizations. From 1978-1980, he was the Chairperson of the North American Jewish Students’ Network, the then union of Jewish students in North America. In 1984, along with Dr. Mark Doidge and Henry Gold, he founded Canadian Physicians for Aid and Relief in response to the extreme famine and critical health crisis faced by Ethiopian refugees in Sudan. Today, CPAR is one of Canada’s major non-governmental organizations providing integrated development in Africa.

• Reason for the change:

I believe his charitable work should be included on the page.

Thank you for your help,

APJohnM (talk) 18:29, 11 April 2024 (UTC) APJohnM (talk) 18:29, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

References