Is history wrong?

[thatmikeguy]

Dinosaurs = Dragons, doesn't everyone know this?

[Mihalik]

"Magical god being". So i take it you dont believe we had a creator? Very relevant to the conversation.

No, it is not relevant to the conversation, at all.

[Fiftyonred]

You asked for it, I once masturbated during school assembly

I once masturbated while working at a gas station. At the cash register. During the day.

#MetalGearSolidTypeOfShit

Your move.

[purebalance]

My favorite teacher was a history teacher in high school in his last year of teaching. He came to class with a Hawaiian shirt half buttoned up, brown pants that were not long enough, and tan boat shoes with no socks.

The first day we all sat down, everyone was talking and all of a sudden he slammed a large book on his desk. He looked up at us and just stared into space for like two minutes. He then cleared his throat and said "history is a mystery, whoever wins the wars writes the books, shall we begin." We had to read chapter one of our history book. The next day he did the exact same thing. We were all thinking he had lost it and was crazy. He told us every other day we will be going to the library to test if anything in our textbook was true. He told us what books to look at, and any others we could find including online. Each test was one single question, was this chapter true or false, and why? All the correct answers for the many chapters we used were false, and it was obvious in each one where the times and dates were not only wrong, but if they were correct it would have far greater implications.

On the last day we all said the quote he had been saying every day, and he did not, he just sat there looking into space.

That makes almost no sense unless you're just saying the company that made the text book was bad. So what you're telling me is that you're reading another book written by someone else as proof that the other was a liar? How did you prove the 2nd book you read to prove the first was wrong was right? There is no way of knowing who is right and who is wrong unless it's something you can scientifically measure. At least with the advent of photography we have evidence of events although even those can be misconstrued without proper context.

[draynay]

If you really want to get an idea of perspectives on history, take a subject you're interested in and find some primary sources to read.

I'm a Civil War guy and I recently read the autobiographies of General Sherman and Grant. It's fascinating to get their perspective on exactly what was happening at the time.

Sherman's (which I haven't actually finished) was particularly interesting - guy was one of the first people to see gold in California, he ran a bank, worked as a lawyer, and was the first superintendent of LSU before the war even started. During the war, he was at one point sidelined and reputed to be insane, and at the end of the war he was the #2 general for the north. It's really interesting to hear his perspective on things.

So yeah, you can't know everything, but perspectives can be great. It's also fascinating to read alternative descriptions of history - the preeminent historians on the Civil War have vastly different estimates for the size of the Confederate army in various engagements.

Have you read "Company Aytch"? Its the memoirs of Sam Watkins, regular soldier, and its a great read, get a much different perspective from a confederate foot soldier than from a Union general, I highly recommend it.

Back to the topic, people are remarkable and have been doing remarkable things for thousands of years, anyone who can't see it, and has to make up magic alien stories is too confined by how unremarkable they are to imagine what humans are really capable of.

[thatmikeguy]

Ancient aliens are literally more plausible than your wacky stuff.

Ancient Aliens is so funny, I hurt my side last time I watched that.

[Fascinate]

No, it is not relevant to the conversation, at all.

Its absolutely relevant to the conversation, and i just got an "infraction" notice in my inbox from mmochamp for posting what i did.

Apparently i cant have an opinion on our earths history?

[Medusa Cascade]

I once masturbated while working at a gas station. At the cash register. During the day.

#MetalGearSolidTypeOfShit

Your move.

My mother walked in on me, I didn't stop

[purebalance]

No, it is not relevant to the conversation, at all.

I mean it is possible to be scientific and still believe there was a being who started it all. I'm not saying one way or the other because you could also believe that if there is a god there that it could be a being who found our planet and decide to "rule" it. I mean hell we don't even know the full extent of dimensions and time and space. Until we actually can narrow down how exactly life started(we're possibly semi close), anything is still plausible especially since we're working with an N of 1 in terms of life. Now did a god directly put humans here? No.

[zenkai]

Not all of them.


Proper history like Science can be revised. The problem lies within having to relearn history that changes one's perception. People seem to have a natural tendency to want to believe what they were taught and not be open to new ideas.

Some people think it's almost all - http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...cales-science/

[Chemii]

Not wrong but there are bits that are missing, knowledge lost and such things, ironically because of religion and war.

Science has had to deal with a lot of shit over the years.

[Endus]

"Magical god being". So i take it you dont believe we had a creator? Very relevant to the conversation.

Not really, no. It's completely unnecessary to the conversation, since it explains nothing, it's just a way to hand-wave human accomplishment and pretend that stuff was done because "magic". Where "magic" is just a way for you to refuse to think about the subject in the first place.

So no, I don't think there was a literal 50 foot tall superbeing with magic powers that lifted those stones into place, or something. And if you expect to convince anyone that there was, you're gonna have to pony up some actual evidence. Otherwise, I'll just say that of course there was no such "creator". There were just billions of alien nanomachines that eventually broke down.

And hell, that's more reasonable than your claims. Because those nanomachines don't break any fundamental laws of nature.

[purebalance]

It's rather strange that you felt compelled to deflect as you did against a post that did nothing to condemn anyone, but merely talked about the influence of victory on how history is recorded and perceived.

How is that deflecting? I was agreeing and showing an example, but adding we shouldn't pity the losers. I stated many have been winners at some point and showed what they were capable of. The Nazis won temporarily and for that short period in Europe they were the writers of history until the US came in and tipped the scales.

[Revi]

Its absolutely relevant to the conversation, and i just got an "infraction" notice in my inbox from mmochamp for posting what i did.

Apparently i cant have an opinion on our earths history?

Probably because of religious or conspiracy theory stuff. The infraction seems very unfair though.

That said, your ideas are absolutely bonkers. One of the most illogical ideas about the world I've read here in a long time.

[purebalance]

Thanks, Kellyanne.

Can we stop crediting her with alternative facts when it was a staple of many left arguments for a couple decades?

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I mean our perception

Is it possible there were civilizations far older than the ones we know of? Were they more advanced than we think?

DISCUSS!

History is written by the victors.

[AcidicSyn]

The story of the Exodus is largely a parable not literal history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancien...nt_and_economy -The Ancient Egyptians ran one of the first centralized planned economies in history, beating out the Soviets by a few thousand years.

I wasn't really referring to the Exodus story in as far as just the existence of the slaves. But perhaps my ignorance is that they are both one and the same? Or did they not actually use slaves at all or if they did; were those slaves not comprised largely of jews? So many questions now; I suppose I didn't really need to get any work done today; spending the rest of the day lost in wikiland seems like a perfectly fine alternative.

[Mihalik]

I mean it is possible to be scientific and still believe there was a being who started it all. I'm not saying one way or the other because you could also believe that if there is a god there that it could be a being who found our planet and decide to "rule" it. I mean hell we don't even know the full extent of dimensions and time and space. Until we actually can narrow down how exactly life started(we're possibly semi close), anything is still plausible especially since we're working with an N of 1 in terms of life. Now did a god directly put humans here? No.

If something is not observable and testable it is irrelevant to bring into a discussion about observable and testable things. Whether he believes in a creator or not is irrelevant to the point.

Example.

If you and I are calculating the angular momentum of our planet, whether you or I believe in a creator is utterly irrelevant to the number we need to come up with.

[Stormspark]

It's very possible that there is lost history, that we don't have any record of today.

[thatmikeguy]

That makes almost no sense unless you're just saying the company that made the text book was bad. So what you're telling me is that you're reading another book written by someone else as proof that the other was a liar? How did you prove the 2nd book you read to prove the first was wrong was right? There is no way of knowing who is right and who is wrong unless it's something you can scientifically measure. At least with the advent of photography we have evidence of events although even those can be misconstrued without proper context.

The dates of events in the textbook were wrong according to the dates of the events that were supposed to be happening at the exact time. So three sources would give one date, and more than five we found including maps with dates show no such thing. We also looked at old maps showing name changes, where a name was changed and then changed back again giving another date.