Is all of history a LIE??

Humanity must invent certain method how to check what really happened in history and when it happened (through astronomy, archeology, etc.). It's the only way how to solve this problem. Of course there is possibility that someone doesn't want us to know real history.

reply to post by Versa


The printing press was invented in 1440.
Therefore there were no family bibles before then.
Anyone who traced back to 1060 had to have been a royal.

History is censored, Television news is censored, the newspapers are censored. The wounderful internet
much more fun and real. Think about it, don't you tend to forgive and forget friends and families bad behavior?
Everyone wants everything to appear wounderful. People lie constantly and omit reality. Knowledge is power,
my neighbor bragged to me yesterday she has an uncensored library..... This is a luxury, buying books that are not mainstream and censored in nature from the local book store. I love reading everyone else's uncensored opinions.

Originally posted by Maddogkull
reply to post by OhZone

 

You are right with the carbon dating, but you are wrong about the trees. There are trees that are over 80,000 years old as a community. They can tell that they are over 80,000 years old just by looking at how deep the roots go down into the ground by GIS, Remote Sensing ect.

There is a standard for the depth that tree roots grow?

"Remote Sensing"?

Scientists like to make claims of oldness. It get them lots of attention and a sense of importance.
If they had said they were 180 years old no one would give them a second look.

To me this whole debate about "history" >>> his-story

If this Russian professor had been an American with the same ideas, he would have been de-frocked, hounded out of his academic position, and reduced to "would you like fries with that?". Russian science is way more tolerant of dissent and opinions that run counter to the establishment, than science in the self-congratulatory West.

However, I don't believe him.

BTW, are any of you aware of the British author David Rohl and his New Chronology?

BTW, history is bunk, as Henry Ford said...

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
If this Russian professor had been an American with the same ideas, he would have been de-frocked, hounded out of his academic position, and reduced to "would you like fries with that?". Russian science is way more tolerant of dissent and opinions that run counter to the establishment, than science in the self-congratulatory West.

Except it isn't "counter establishment" in Russia - it's rabidly Russian nationalist. It holds that Russian civilization was the basis for just about all civilisation, that's the only reason it holds any sway over there. It's utter nonsense.

Originally posted by FatherLukeDukeExcept it isn't "counter establishment" in Russia - it's rabidly Russian nationalist. It holds that Russian civilization was the basis for just about all civilisation, that's the only reason it holds any sway over there. It's utter nonsense.

So you're saying that it is not a matter of tolerance, but depends on a wholly different set of biases?

Originally posted by Maddogkull
reply to post by OhZone

 

Ok, then what happened before the 1600's? We just became civilized out of the blue in the 1600s? What is his opinion on what happened before the 1600's? He’s not explaining all sides of the story either.

Well from a Russian perspective it might as well be so. You have to remember that before the time of the Czars, the Khans(Mongol Empire) pimped out the Russians for fun.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a01f3d4b74e7.jpg[/atsimg]

Has anyone attacked his supposed proof?

I mean he was/is? a mathematician
this seems like the way to go.

My opinion of the image
above is that either he
is onto something
or history is
cyclic.


David Grouchy

Originally posted by OhZone
reply to post by Versa

 

The printing press was invented in 1440.
Therefore there were no family bibles before then.
Anyone who traced back to 1060 had to have been a royal.

...unless we count ancient China ?

library.thinkquest.org...

en.wikipedia.org...


maybe our "Western" books were "back-dated"?

I strongly agree that the history presented to us, is mostly false.


In this day and age - we can see the manipulation to our very recent history right infront of us.

Not with me?? Remember, America won the Vietnam war!

The PTB when it comes to history, dont take kindly to the truth, especialy when it points out their actions and labels them as right or wrong to the eyes of the reader.

Because of this, small thigns are changed, or manipulated. The only people who notice this are the ones who were alive for the event, and are alive when the events are added to the history books.


If this is happening right now, there's absolutely no doubts that this has happend in the past. As we do class ourselves as more intelligent and civilised than back then - so that would assume we would be more upfront and honest about real events when it comes to writing them in a book for future generations to read. But it's obvious that these points have nothing to do with peoples honesty. History is written acording to the ego of the writer.


Once it becomes a thing of the past - what can one do to find the truth?


That - and when you have people deliberately going out to find these collections of knowledge and trying to destroy them.... how can you be certain that ANY of the history youv'e been taught has an ounce of truth to it?*

*other than if we know people that were phsyically there to tell us about it... and have small ego's or doesnt turn into a serial killer if you try and point out faults or mistakes made by them...

Originally posted by davidgrouchy
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a01f3d4b74e7.jpg[/atsimg]

Has anyone attacked his supposed proof?

I mean he was/is? a mathematician
this seems like the way to go.

My opinion of the image
above is that either he
is onto something
or history is
cyclic.

David Grouchy

edit on 24-1-2011 by davidgrouchy because: spelling

Remember that the books of the Old Testament from which these Israelite Kings and reign lengths are derived from, were translated into Koine Greek in the Septuagent version, which places it long before the "Holy" "Roman" "Empire." History is cyclic, duh. If you don't believe it, dig up a copy of Brad Steiger's "A Roadmap of Time," IF you can find one.

He lost me. I was already to buy the book when I saw a video of him talking about ALL of Ancient Chinese history being false. Also what does he mean Chinese keep finding relics of ancient space flight...Thats the part where the theory loses traction.

Originally posted by OhZone
reply to post by Versa

 

The printing press was invented in 1440.
Therefore there were no family bibles before then.
Anyone who traced back to 1060 had to have been a royal.

What are you talking about? Before the printing press wealthy and noble families commissioned monks to painstakingly write and illustrate their bibles.

A lot of history has been manipulated by those in charge. Even when I was a kid I noticed that the textbooks in schools were full of euphemistic language meant to distort the truth.

That lovely diagram of correlated reign lengths isn't the only time that correlation comes into play...the same one overlays with the first Roman Imperial period and a list of British monarchs, iirc, as well as a few others.

...

A 'novel prediction' of Fomenko's theories was discovered.

An Egyptian blue pigment was discovered to have been used in a Romanesque church...~700 years out of place by conventional chronology.

www.sciencecodex.com...
allaboutegypt.org...
www.archaeologydaily.com...

I have 'novel prediction' in the quotes because it wasn't a prediction in the sense that he specifically said 'go look for this pigment' but inh the broader sense that based on his theory, you would reasonably say that it predicts that forensic investigations should reveal physical connections between supposedly disconnected eras which are posited to be connected by Fomenko.

And finding an Egyptian blue paint pigment 700 years out of place is exactly that sort of thing.

The "Romanesque" style, a 'revival' in Roman style popular around the time of Emperor Otto II by conventional chronology, would be more properly called something like 'late Roman' by Fomenko's conclusions, because there would have been continuity instead of interruption and revival. And he does specifically cover this in his research.

Occam's razor would suggest something like that somehow or another the blue pigment survived those 700 turbulent years because it was an expensive paint pigment, in a store room or something. However, that itself would be a somewhat testable and disprovable hypothesis. As in, you could work to determine the real shelf life of the pigment in storage. Personally, while I think Occam's is a useful idea in that it provides good angles of attack for an inquiry, I think Occam's is flawed and hardly 'all that' as some people seem to. I see it as the simplest razor which gives the perfect shave for the man with the simplest face, but leaves everyone else cut and bloody. As in, things aren't always so simple.

Originally posted by packinupngoin
He lost me. I was already to buy the book when I saw a video of him talking about ALL of Ancient Chinese history being false. Also what does he mean Chinese keep finding relics of ancient space flight...Thats the part where the theory loses traction.

At least on of his books is available for free via google books, if that hasn't been shut down yet.

But in general...

The nature of the claims is not so much that 'nothing happened, no people were there, etc.'

It's that the written records are in some significant cases fictitious and not a match.

There have been many times where records were lost to natural disasters. And on top of that, there have been many times where records were INTENTIONALLY collected and destroyed. These occurences are especially opportune times for re-writing the historical record. These 'iconoclasms' 'biblioclasms' etc occurred often as a matter of Imperial policy. What is the point of decreeing such things other than to give you an opportunity to remake the paradigm of your times as you want to? Or to at least shift it a bit to where as you see fit and desirable meets what you find possible to achieve

Fomenko's claims are strongest when he is working from his wheel house, mathematics.

Some of his own historical conclusions are indeed a bit daffy...BUT the meat of his technique and it's findings should be very interesting to people who are interested in history and want to make their own conclusions.

And Fomenko is hardly the first mathemetician to notice something was amiss...

...no less than Isaac Newton had a life long obsession with teasing out the problems in the generally accepted historical chronology of his time.

www.google.com...

Here's a search result for Anatoly Fomenko at Google books. They seem to have both volume I and volume II of his "History: Fiction or Science?" available now with full view.

Scribd also has some of his stuff I think...

Originally posted by 11andrew34
www.google.com...

Here's a search result for Anatoly Fomenko at Google books. They seem to have both volume I and volume II of his "History: Fiction or Science?" available now with full view.

Scribd also has some of his stuff I think...

I took a look at the earlier chapters of Fomenko's book, and it looks like he gets a lot of milage out of declaring inconsistencies in old artwork. He sees major problems with how ancient scenes are depicted as if set in the middle ages, and he seems to assume that it might just mean it really happened in the middle ages. I see it as simple lack of breadth of knowledge - it had yet to occur to artists that things looked different in different parts of the world, or in different times. Far-out theories usually are propped up by some such unjustified assumption. I must admit, that, even so, I am just knocked over by the sheer vigor with which Fomenko pursues his thesis...