is ancient history a lie?

[wishbone]

nothing beats the bible code.

[-evil-duerr-]

yeeah yeaah rock&roll jesus christ!

[lildonkey]

Originally Posted by Revolver

vast empires appearing out of nowhere?.....

starting at their apex of civilization>?

riiiiiiiight....care to back that up a little?

I can't wait for Apex either! Hi Avana!

[Revolver]

^ ya word!

oh hai avana! had a nice time at yur burday dinner....can ii has apex ticket?

[lildonkey]

Originally Posted by Revolver

^ ya word!

oh hai avana! had a nice time at yur burday dinner....can ii has apex ticket?

No bro... just come with me... I'll show you this place in the fence where you can sneak in easily!

I KEED I KEEEEEEED

[Revolver]

k,GAH, i just watched the videos...

it makes for a great consipiracy theroy. and the concept is not completely beyond the realm of possibility BUT, for the love of christ its a fucking commercial...voiced by that same computer dude from radioheads ok computer.

no decent intel,arguments or cases made in these vids...

MOTHERFUCKING FAIL.....AND MOTHERFUCKING SCAM LEWIS!!!1!!!.........

super lols @ wum ,i see what he's done here.....

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by djmarkpaul

What can I say, Im a sucker, your churlish bullshit makes me feel like rantin...I don't care if you're trolling me, you're talking about paranoia so I challenge any one of you to poke a hole in the following statement:


The problem with paranoia in this society lays in the bulk of people who squirm in their cynicism when facing revisionism in history/science/religion.

Being a deterministic culture continues to endanger humanity as it nurtures the lack of compassion and cynicism needed to constantly create a culture of war. Until humanity decides to grow up and leave cynicism to satire (which should have it's time and place), we will always be a culture of war, and seeing how we are treating this earth, it has a definite half-life.


The paranoia of a conspiracy theorist however, at worst is a silly waste of time (though still good for a laugh), though if there's merrit in the work, it is a couragous step to take for the individual who seeks truth in whatever school of thought they mean to revise. History as we know it, has been revised constantly from such revolutionary minds, and orthodox history is merely an account of accepted revisionism!

Sometimes it takes ~200 years for the rest of the Earth to believe it's on a sphere. Yet the world is still proverbially flat in many respects, because emotionally we have not grown up as a society.

So the big question is...why is revising history such a daunting task to so many people (not to be confused with the excuse that it's a waste of time)?

The problem isn't paranoia, the problem is paranoid or not, people are inherently deterministic, it is linked to personal pride and confidence and is very much an emotional survivalist tactic for the individual. For the truly paranoid individual, it gives them something to grasp onto because their ego is too weak to do so itself.



Our society nurtures determinism, but it is defiant on revisionism. This will not last, one way or another.

The greatest minds in history are constantly regailed for their discoveries which are almost always revisions of past beliefs, there's always a struggle for the society at large to accept new ideas. The same is true still today.

Those who don't create the future they want today, will have to endure the future they get tommorow.

However trying to find vast conspiracies and trying to find facts where they aren't is even worse. Yes, many people are locked in their ideals however not every aspect of history needs to be changed.

Yes, people thought the world was flat (that was a long long time ago, let it go) but that doesn't mean every scientifc/historical theory has such room for error.

I agree, history is constantly changed with slight revisions to modren thought. But the theories put forward by this book is far too ridiculious with not enough facts to back up the theory.

[azazel]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

However trying to find vast conspiracies and trying to find facts where they aren't is even worse. Yes, many people are locked in their ideals however not every aspect of history needs to be changed.

Yes, people thought the world was flat (that was a long long time ago, let it go) but that doesn't mean every scientifc/historical theory has such room for error.

I agree, history is constantly changed with slight revisions to modren thought. But the theories put forward by this book is far too ridiculious with not enough facts to back up the theory.

And you certainly determined that pretty quick with your omnipotent investigative abilities, didn't you.

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by azazel

And you certainly determined that pretty quick with your omnipotent investigative abilities, didn't you.

I didn't realize stating what was obviously my opinion on the subject needed such investigation.

What were you saying about having an open mind again?

[azazel]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

I didn't realize stating what was obviously my opinion on the subject needed such investigation.

What were you saying about having an open mind again?

You don't have one?

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by azazel

You don't have one?

Should I point out the obvious?

[djmarkpaul]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

However trying to find vast conspiracies and trying to find facts where they aren't is even worse. Yes, many people are locked in their ideals however not every aspect of history needs to be changed.

Is even worse then what? Being a defiantly deterministic society that squashes debates in schools of thought that are obscured/fringe, thus leading to the holding back scientific, technological or spiritual developments in our society?

Do you actually believe that?

If a theorist is wrong, they have wasted their time and made an ass out of themselves, sad, pathetic maybe, but not a tragedy.

However, continuation of our society being addicted to patterns of emotional behavior and our literal addiction to being a dominative/deterministic culture will ultimately send this societyto an almost certain demise (take your pick: we've got global warming, encroaching terrorist threats/globalism, the boom/bust cycle of capatilism...not a well kept playground) well...really now bruv what could be worse then ecocide/reverting back to another depression?

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

Yes, people thought the world was flat (that was a long long time ago, let it go) but that doesn't mean every scientifc/historical theory has such room for error.

I'll let it go when Christians let go of Jesus...if we're talking shelf life here...

...besides, it illustrates the point perfectly. One man's observations against a dogmatic system based on determisitic logic. The same challenges are faced today and it's because of the emotion set of the status quo.

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

I agree, history is constantly changed with slight revisions to modren thought. But the theories put forward by this book is far too ridiculious with not enough facts to back up the theory.

I agree as far as a gut instinct is concerned, but I can't be so deterministic with that statement since I haven't read the book. Speaking of, have you?

If not, what does that tell you of your own determinsitic emotional set?

[azazel]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

Should I point out the obvious?

or maybe you should bow out gracefully since you thought this thread was only about witticisms.

[NinjaBoy]

No point in adressing wum's point since he hasn't put anything forward.

Originally Posted by djmarkpaul

Is even worse then what? Being a defiantly deterministic society that squashes debates in schools of thought that are obscured/fringe, thus leading to the holding back scientific, technological or spiritual developments in our society?

Do you actually believe that?

I understand what your trying to say, but I think that's a very black and white way of looking at it.

Yes, some things need to be changed, but trying to find find errors in history for the sake of it isn't quite the same as what you are saying.

It's one thing for me to purpose that artifical intelligence if developed might one day turn on us. It's another thing for me to publish the book and sell it as fact.

If a theorist is wrong, they have wasted their time and made an ass out of themselves, sad, pathetic maybe, but not a tragedy.

Read his book. I've read the first part of it. It's one thing to purpose a theory. It's another to call it fact and sell it as an "encyclopedia".

If it was purposed as a theory open for debate, fine. But stating it as a fact puts his work on the same level of those arguing creationism.

I'll let it go when Christians let go of Jesus...if we're talking shelf life here...

Then you can't really argue against them. And since I'm not christian it's not really worth using that against me.

...besides, it illustrates the point perfectly. One man's observations against a dogmatic system based on determisitic logic. The same challenges are faced today and it's because of the emotion set of the status quo.

And there isn't any problem challenging the status quo socially and scientifically. The acceptance we have of other cultures would have been unheard of even 50 years ago. People challenged the status quo. The idea of planet's orbiting other world's wasn't proven till the last decade. Science changes, theories are put forward, researched, studied and proven. It's simply amazing the level of advancements that can be made.

That being said, there are a lot ideas and theories that exist that could be proven, some would suprise me. Some wouldn't.

I would however be absolutley stunned, if it could be proven that almost all civilizations on Earth are the same, and this fact is part of a Church conspiracy (A church by the theories logic places Jesus Christ death at 1053, when the church was in existance already for hundreds of years).

The theory is just that, a theory. One meant to be debated (as you and I are doing) and disscused.

Not packaged, and sold as fact.

I agree as far as a gut instinct is concerned, but I can't be so deterministic with that statement since I haven't read the book. Speaking of, have you?

I read the forward, and a few dozen pages (Thanks free books from google). It would be nice if I had time to read a seven volume book (that is really poorly written by the way) but I don't...

If not, what does that tell you of your own determinsitic emotional set?

It looks as if I've done more research into this subject then anyone in this thread. Damn that's scary.

Seriously people. Yes some conspiracies can exist, I'll admit it. (JFK assaination for example always seemed a little fishy).

But read up on this subject.

He has two things he uses as proof. Astronimical chart comparisons (it's already be shown that he fudged some numbers), and the lifespans of reigning kings in Europe (Since the lifespans and reigns of some of the kings in Europe were the same as those in Egypt, it could be said that they are the same people and the same histories).

Through this, he's extrapilated that many civilizations did not exist. (Egypt, most of the dynasties of China...)

This has all been hidden by a massive catholic group that rewrote history in the middle ages (And apparently somehow in China but I haven't gotten that far yet).

But they took the small history of their country and basically copied and pasted it to make history millenia longer then it actually is. We've all been suckered.

Can you see why I would be hesitant to believe this?

[Gusto]

proposed not purposed. pls fix all occurences.

[azazel]

Astronimical chart comparisons (it's already be shown that he fudged some numbers)

lizzink?

[Gusto]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

The theory is just that, a theory. One meant to be debated (as you and I are doing) and disscused.

Not packaged, and sold as fact.

lots of theories are published. evolution, general relativity and universal gravitation are all theories. i haven't read this or anything, and you might be absolutely right in this case, but your definition of theory sounds off.

[decypher]

Originally Posted by azazel

lizzink?

New Chronology (Fomenko) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[SEAN!]

Originally Posted by decypher

lol those videos are retarded. Pure marketing for conspiracy buffs, just like they have marketing for rebels and grandmothers.

I caught this pretty sweet line near the end:

"more fascinating then dan brown at his wildest, but it is truly a nonfiction work that goes to say that everything you have read about history should be classified as fiction." oh noes amazon here comes my credit card.


It's hard to get any context out of that video but i did read lightly into the topic. I'm highly skeptical of mathematical logic being applied to history. But i love a good radical mess shit up theory so i'll look into this more.

<paraphrase>
He is essentially using statistical methods and mathematics to correlate historical texts together from different time periods.

He has found astronomical correlations and refutes the reliability of carbon dating. But he has been criticized for using a statistical method that selects certain texts in history that correlate highly but ignoring others that don't. </paraphrase>

So basically his logic is starting from a larger and i would say ideological basic to a theory and then uses his math and long winded speech to prove his point.

If you look at the politics too. He's allied with kasparov the chess champion turned opponent to Putin's 'dynasty.' They have similar ideological beliefs about history so there's an obvious bias right there. By no way am i refuting that history has been written and burned in many aspects but it's hard to see it so drastically change in this manner. There's some obvious flaws in fomenko's theory off the bat.


The ideological nature wouldn't surprise me though, Using mathematical perspectives have been used in many places as a form of power. Look at neoliberalism and how the underlying ideology, based on games theory, is a reductionist concept of social reality. These sorts of logics are used to legitimate power relations in society imo. They try and tell us that everyone is self-interested and individualistic so lets gut social spending and deregulate the state and put our notions of freedom and equality into the free-market. These ideas always start somewhere, then they are put into the service of power and naturalized throughout system.

Pretty interesting stuff though. This TA i know is pretty radical and applies social theory to statistical analysis so maybe he can put some more weight on fomenkos side, i'll ask. Thanks for the paper topic guys lolz.

anyone with any ideology to prove can use spurious mathematical correlations, groups like the frasier institute and the centre for policy alternatives are equally to blame.

and kasparov is anti-putin as far as I know

using mathematical formulas to prove a point when there is no legitimate theoretical basis to either is one of the first problems they teach you about in statistics. for example its like noticing that the greater number of firetrucks that show up to a fire is also linked to a greater amount of fire damage and saying that the number of firetrucks involved in a fire contributes to the intensity of the fire. which is a spurrious connection because the non-stated variable which is the true driver is the intensity of the fire which causes both more firetrucks and more damage. nah im syain?

[SEAN!]

Originally Posted by azazel

I think one of the primary reasons why we've been lied about history is because it doesn't support the idea of traditional evolution, also conveniently ignoring the mythos about angels (nephilim) and heroes coming down to spawn civilization.

ummm, what?

[SEAN!]

Originally Posted by djmarkpaul

The problem with paranoia in this society lays in the bulk of people who squirm in their cynicism when facing revisionism in history/science/religion.

the problem with paranoia is that some people are capable of rational thought and others, like you, for some reason or another are not.

[Revolver]

Originally Posted by SEAN!

ummm, what?

lol...he's talking about the biblical nephilim...the 'giants' who came down from the heavens and created us and took human wives bla bla bla bla...

it is said,that the nephilim are(google enki and enlil) are directly responsible for tampering with the dna of primates to create humans to work in the gold mines...wich inturn created sumeria wich is basically the very first 'recorded' human civiliation.

trace it alllllllll back and, as far as we know, it all starts with the sumerians. theres nothing older. those folks have some seriously bizarre imagry in their pottery and tablets...

its actaully a pretty fascinating,alternative, archeological theory. ive been interested in it for a long time now..

oh...and john travolta is one of them....

see.....


travolta is also a scientologist,therefore he cant be wrong.

[decypher]

Originally Posted by SEAN!

anyone with any ideology to prove can use spurious mathematical correlations, groups like the frasier institute and the centre for policy alternatives are equally to blame.

and kasparov is anti-putin as far as I know

using mathematical formulas to prove a point when there is no legitimate theoretical basis to either is one of the first problems they teach you about in statistics. for example its like noticing that the greater number of firetrucks that show up to a fire is also linked to a greater amount of fire damage and saying that the number of firetrucks involved in a fire contributes to the intensity of the fire. which is a spurrious connection because the non-stated variable which is the true driver is the intensity of the fire which causes both more firetrucks and more damage. nah im syain?

yeh i know both sides are equally to blame but i have to sit on one side lol, so my examples always reflect that. and yup i know kasparov opposes putin that's why i used the word opponent to describe his relation to putin heh.

i'm taking an intro statistics course right now actually, boring as hell. The prof comes from a strictly mathematical background so it's dry but we apply different world-views at least sometimes. Definitely a valued technical skill i'm taking seriously though.

So anyways i guess it would be unfair for me to peg my disdain for mathematics and social totality on one side of the political spectrum, i was just using neoliberalism as an example of a reductionist concept, but i know the left side is equally ideological in attempting to predict how people are or what their inherent qualities are or how our structures should function. The conflict doesn't even stop there. I'm attempting to wrap my head around 12 different conceptions of ideology right now and they all can say something unique about these relationships between ideas, ugh.

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by azazel

lizzink?

Who Lost the Middle Ages?

[SEAN!]

Originally Posted by Gusto

lots of theories are published. evolution, general relativity and universal gravitation are all theories. i haven't read this or anything, and you might be absolutely right in this case, but your definition of theory sounds off.

theories generally have empirical evidence and can be shown to be false. This their has neither, it is not a theory it is speculation with ancedotal evidence to support. thats why its not even worth taking seriously, and that is why 'establishment' science won't even look at it. This is science in the same way creationism or religion is science.