History, fact or fiction?

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
sort of. the book doesnt say that the moon is a planet or anything about pluto.

essentially we, humns are results of an experiement from another race of people....sort of. It is very complex and speaks alot about other religouns, it's kind of hard to paraphrase it into a sentence of explantion...conspiracy shit, but not exaclty a governmental cover up

Speaks alot about religoun actually. The author believes that chirst had revealed himself to 11 other areas around the universe and we were the only race to kill him. Asks questions why tehre is a zodiac sign on the floor of the vatican and all.

You're talking about Zitchin right? Dude is just another hack trying to sell books.

Originally posted by Deano
most of it fiction.

we hear some truth but most of it is binding by lies.

for example...in 100 years time, will people be readin history books that says bin laden was responsible for the twin towers attacks. anyone with a brain knows thats bullshit and theres more to it than that. but they drilling that bullshit into our heads to accept it. and in the future i hope it is not in the history books. because thats another notch on the bed post of ignorance.

Do you have proof that most of it is fiction?

Originally posted by Alliance
History, fact or fiction?

A lovely combo of both!

However, that video is capital-C-R-A-P

Bingo!

this needs to be flushed...i mean....moved to the conspiracy forum

If only czarina's account was history.......

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
If only czarina's account was history.......

you are so positive! i see how you can't disagree with someone without wanting to out them, very good, it shows your character.

and this isn't about a gov't conspiracy, i talked about the argument about time (linear vs nonlinear), let's deal with the components of what the man is talking about, not just call him a someone who is a conspirator.

I dont think someone could perform a forgery of history this vast...however I'm sure there are a few cases in which this can apply to be true.. but theres no way in hell 100% of history has been tampered with, or "fictionalized"

Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
I dont think someone could perform a forgery of history this vast...however I'm sure there are a few cases in which this can apply to be true.. but theres no way in hell 100% of history has been tampered with, or "fictionalized"

I don't see why not. Depends on what you mean by 100 %, or better put when the tampering began.

We were not around.

Originally posted by chithappens
I don't see why not. Depends on what you mean by 100 %, or better put when the tampering began.

We were not around.

I think he means it relating to human history only being around 1,000 years old.

Oh, well that is not likely but it is possible. History is "his story" after all and I have seen instances in which history is skewed towards the winner on an army, for example.

Originally posted by chithappens
Oh, well that is not likely but it is possible. History is "his story" after all and I have seen instances in which history is skewed towards the winner on an army, for example.

I am aware of the saying 'He who wins that battle writes the history book' [or something along those lines]; that is besides the point though.

We're not talking about military victories, we're talking about the ENTIRE history of humans and it supposedly only being around 1,000 years old. Dark ages, Roman Empire (start to finish), Macedonian Empire, Egyptian Empire, Babylonian Empire etc. etc. etc. all B.S. or skewed to fit in a very small timeline?

so are we talking about history being rewritten?.. or just flat out non-existant?

I know my japanese friend told me that the subject of 'japanese bombing pearl harbor' wasnt even in his history text book.

Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
so are we talking about history being rewritten?.. or just flat out non-existant?

That's what I'm trying to figure out

well.. they said the dark ages didnt exist... but I've read that monasteries (which later became the colleges / universities we know today) opening their doors to the ignorant is what ended the dark age.... the switching between leaders (who didnt know how to lead) is what caused it

Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
so are we talking about history being rewritten?.. or just flat out non-existant?

I know my japanese friend told me that the subject of 'japanese bombing pearl harbor' wasnt even in his history text book.

The guy/book claims that human history is only 1,000 years (or so) old, so I would think he means what we know/are taught today is a flat out lie/non-existant.

Just another conspiracy @sshole without a foundation basing everything on speculation and trying to sell a book I think.

Oh lord, that is such a broad topic you hit, but that's a quick paraphrasing of what you could say "phased out" the Dark Ages.

Before the Dark Ages are discussions are about random empires all about Europe and Crusades and all sorts of stuff that was considered Barbarian (including Pagan beliefs and the such).

Before then, mostly royalty were the only ones to be allowed education.

Asia is the same to some extent before this time and Africa always had a weird flux regarding education. Do we want to discuss this here or the History forum?

Originally posted by Robtard
We're not talking about military victories, we're talking about the ENTIRE history of humans and it supposedly only being around 1,000 years old. Dark ages, Roman Empire (start to finish), Macedonian Empire, Egyptian Empire, Babylonian Empire etc. etc. etc. all B.S. or skewed to fit in a very small timeline?

Yup, that's pretty wild.

Originally posted by chithappens
Oh lord, that is such a broad topic you hit, but that's a quick paraphrasing of what you could say "phased out" the Dark Ages.

Before the Dark Ages are discussions are about random empires all about Europe and Crusades and all sorts of stuff that was considered Barbarian (including Pagan beliefs and the such).

Before then, mostly royalty were the only ones to be allowed education.

Asia is the same to some extent before this time and Africa always had a weird flux regarding education. Do we want to discuss this here or the History forum?

No, that wouldn't cover what [I believe*] that topic claims. The Dark Ages lasted from around 480-1000 A.D (C.E.). We're talking about the entire human history going back (thousands and thousands of years) from around 1,000 A.D. (C.E.) being totally B.S. and/or scrunched into a very small time-line; that sounds ludicrous.

*Am I missunderstanding what the topic claims?

Originally posted by Robtard
No, that wouldn't cover what [I believe*] that topic claims. The Dark Ages lasted from around 480-1000 A.D (C.E.). We're talking about the entire human history going back (thousands and thousands of years) from around 1,000 A.D. (C.E.) being totally B.S. and/or scrunched into a very small time-line; that sounds ludicrous.

*Am I missunderstanding what the topic claims?

You understand the claim, I wanted to know if people believe his claim that time is linear instead of nonlinear, which goes against most gnostic or Eastern faith and philosophy.

I think factual information is presented in history classes and books its just our minds have to fill in what we can't possibly experience.

Its our imagination that makes it almost seem like fiction because the way people lived and how civilisations were formed is completely lost to us so we can't experience it and see it as reality.