How factual is history..
- Thread starter ironsides
- Start date
Al Queda....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Al Queda the dread
in the shadows
under your bed
stuck in the sawdust
way back in your head
give it up twit
Osama bin dead
Al Queda the dread
in the shadows
under your bed
stuck in the sawdust
way back in your head
give it up twit
Osama bin dead
Those were the grandsons, they inherited some caves that 'somebody' filled with 'stuff' even the military shouldn't have. Be damn glad the don't have NK subs.
I'd say the more recent the more factual.
More reliable than herstory do you think? :smile:
Collectively we know more about the Great Depression than the ones who lived it.
Isn't that what the OP is about? Are the books cooked or not? I take it to mean intentionally and unintentionally.
Peer review would be about thew same as the middle ages, ... minus the beheading..... in some locations.
I think we may have to agree to disagree over this point. However, I am going to refer you to this Wikipedia article about the US Civil War. Please note the section devoted to the causes of secession and the war lists eight main causes. Five of them mention slavery as a major cause of division between the Union and Confederate states.
American Civil War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I think a few of us have shown that we do.
A few, yes, but those trying to argue some version of the claim that history is essentially made up by whoever happens to be on top have shown that they don't. The comparison a few posts back between historical scholarship and a story being passed around at a party, for instance, is without merit.
The one lemming that decided to 'jump' did not make a decision that benefits the rest of the 'tribe'. It works great if you are a soldier ant.
What caused the conflict, God coming around and doing something to put the train back on tracks again. the flooed did the same thing essentially. That 'work' has needed not one update for 2,000 years. Yes Gentile Scribes are equally talented and if you use anything but the KJV1611 Edition the 'story' wont fit as good. That salvation exists can't be changed no matter how many changes are made, all the little aspects of prophecy can though. Make one item a standard and many of the 'versions' could not be promoted as 'being the way the words were originally 'said'. There are a lot of words to 'absorb', any complex subject requires study before all the pieces fit.
The closer a person is to reading something that is in 'plain language' the greater the chance that he can gain a lot rather that something that made overly complicated or includes intentional deceptions
The lower half of this post makes more sense than the upper half.The one lemming that decided to 'jump' did not make a decision that benefits the rest of the 'tribe'. It works great if you are a soldier ant.
What caused the conflict, God coming around and doing something to put the train back on tracks again. the flooed did the same thing essentially. That 'work' has needed not one update for 2,000 years. Yes Gentile Scribes are equally talented and if you use anything but the KJV1611 Edition the 'story' wont fit as good. That salvation exists can't be changed no matter how many changes are made, all the little aspects of prophecy can though. Make one item a standard and many of the 'versions' could not be promoted as 'being the way the words were originally 'said'. There are a lot of words to 'absorb', any complex subject requires study before all the pieces fit.
The closer a person is to reading something that is in 'plain language' the greater the chance that he can gain a lot rather that something that made overly complicated or includes intentional deceptions
But Dex, real history isn't pretty, can be dry and boring, and is most definitely time consuming to go through.
So 30sec sound bites, riveting docudramas, Op/Ed pieces and conspiracies, are far more fun to adhere to.
Rockafeller is noted for being a philanthropist , yet he was the mastermind behind the Ludlow massacre where company paid militia walked into a tent city of striking workers, in the aftermath they found the remains of women and children burned to death.
When Rockafeller realized he could no longer protect his profits through massacres alone, he was one of the first companies to create a bogus union that was really run and controled by the company. His union president was no other than William Lyon Makenzie King, another guy that is now in the history books as being a really good guy.
Also, you know who Rockafeller Jr's Public relations guy was? it was a guy that was very successful for years at making hitler sound like a great guy.
how about the Louis Riel story? ever notice how the Railroad's involvement and strong arm tactics are greatly understated through most story books? They were the pricks that instigated the whole situation yet somehow they aren't part of the record.
When Rockafeller realized he could no longer protect his profits through massacres alone, he was one of the first companies to create a bogus union that was really run and controled by the company. His union president was no other than William Lyon Makenzie King, another guy that is now in the history books as being a really good guy.
Also, you know who Rockafeller Jr's Public relations guy was? it was a guy that was very successful for years at making hitler sound like a great guy.
how about the Louis Riel story? ever notice how the Railroad's involvement and strong arm tactics are greatly understated through most story books? They were the pricks that instigated the whole situation yet somehow they aren't part of the record.
I've been to Cuba a couple of times now. The Cuban version of History, with respect to
events surrounding the American/Cuban embargo, Guantánamo Bay, Fidel Castro and
the many-many assassination attempts on his life, etc...sure has a different spin than
what one might learn in an American classroom, I'm assuming.
Same conflict, but different perspectives, with emphasis on different happenings, making
it sound like two very different versions of history.
events surrounding the American/Cuban embargo, Guantánamo Bay, Fidel Castro and
the many-many assassination attempts on his life, etc...sure has a different spin than
what one might learn in an American classroom, I'm assuming.
Same conflict, but different perspectives, with emphasis on different happenings, making
it sound like two very different versions of history.
They must be, somewhere, or you wouldn't know about them. And that's the major point about historical scholarship. History is a developing story much like science is, it changes as new evidence comes to light, new tools are developed, new insights appear, new personalities with different interests join the field, and so on. And just like science, it'll never be complete, but it has similar methods of self-correction, and to that degree can legitimately be called a science itself. So to answer the question posed in the thread title, history is as factual as historians can make it and they're constantly working to improve it.
That's why you have to avoid getting your history from one source, or perspective.
I have a perfect example.
In Ontario history classes, throughout all grades, Sainte Marie Amongst the Hurons, is the site at which the peaceful, hunter gathers of the Huron (Wendat), were viciously slaughtered by the aggressive savage Iroquois, for nothing more than lands and beaver pelts.
It doesn't matter that, there was rampant disease wherever the Blackrobes went. This of course would be a bad sign to a group of people who were unfamiliar with these diseases.
It doesn't matter that these peaceful hunter gatherers, were among the first to scalp enemies for cash from the French.
What matters is, the Blackrobes Brebeuf, Chabanel, Lalande, Garnier, Goupil, Lallemant, were martyred, Canonized and the place is now a shrine to mangled history and the assault on Native culture.
The problem lies, in the fact that people don't know how to identify a real history, from a hack with an agenda.