Fake History: Ten Great Lies and How They Shaped the World

Product Information

Tonkin, Stephen (2003). "Uriel's Machine – a Commentary on some of the Astronomical Assertions". The Astronomical Unit . Retrieved 21 November 2013.

Examination of 'pseudohistory' and how to uncover trustworthy accounts focus of next Modern China Lecture | CSUSB News". inside.csusb.edu. Archived from the original on 2019-12-22 . Retrieved 2019-04-26.The following are some common categories of pseudohistorical theory, with examples. Note that not all theories in a listed category are necessarily pseudohistorical; they are rather categories that seem to attract pseudohistorians. The woke don’t believe in truth, they believe in discourses. What this Otto English is doing is ‘exposing’ the ‘white supremacist’ discourse. The woke minions will not question it and perceive it as revelatory wisdom.

I guess the complexity comes from the fact that there is no bright-line between opinion and fact. To say that the middle ages were a benighted era of superstition has some basis in fact and is an opinion that can be held with the historical record. To say that medieval thinkers thought the world was flat can easily be disproven with a visit to Hereford cathedral to see the Mappa Mundi with one’s own eyes. The belief that Ancient India was technologically advanced to the extent of being a nuclear power is gaining popularity in India. [103] Emerging extreme nationalist trends and ideologies based on Hinduism in the political arena promote these discussions. Vasudev Devnani, the education minister for the western state of Rajasthan, said in January 2017 that it was important to "understand the scientific significance" of the cow, as it was the only animal in the world to both inhale and exhale oxygen. [104] In 2014, Prime Minister Narendra Modi told a gathering of doctors and medical staff at a Mumbai hospital that the story of the Hindu god Ganesha showed genetic science existed in ancient India. [105] Many new age pseudohistorians who focus on converting mythological stories into history are well received among the crowd. Indian Science Congress ancient aircraft controversy is a related event when Capt. Anand J. Bodas, retired principal of a pilot training facility, claimed that aircraft more advanced than today's versions existed in ancient India at the Indian Science Congress. [106] As a topic of study [ edit ] Often denies that there is such a thing as historical truth, clinging to the extreme skeptical notion that only what is absolutely certain can be called 'true' and nothing is absolutely certain, so nothing is trueAccount icon An icon in the shape of a person's head and shoulders. It often indicates a user profile. a b c d e Williams, Stephen (1991). Fantastic Archaeology: The Wild Side of North American Prehistory. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Robert Todd Carroll has developed a list of criteria to identify pseudo-historic works. He states that: So have history teachers really been lying to us? Have historians been deceiving us all along? And has Otto English really found the smoking guns? The history of Culture rather than the history of events has already been incorporated into the purview of the Culture War whereby the dogmatic adherents of Uncritical Theory seek to eliminate any rival interpretations of cultural history and eliminate any cultural artifacts that symbolise these rival interpretations. a b c d e f g h i j k l m Fritze, Ronald H. (2009). Invented Knowledge: False History, Fake Science and Pseudo-Religions. London, England: Reaktion Books. ISBN 978-1-86189-430-4. But you are a serious and profound historian who should perhaps not get entangled with the nonsense of people such as this individual.While those best examples, just named, were well equipped to survive the 1945 Marxist landslide to Westminster and its catastrophic consequences were specially bad for others which were not yet ready. Of course all societies have myths, and they always have done. But a myth isn’t the same as a lie, unless you are seriously going to argue that all societies since the Egyptians and the Persians have been barefaced liars. Is it a “lie”, as English suggests, that the Little Ships were crucial at Dunkirk? Surely not. At worst, it’s an exaggeration, a patriotic myth, central to the national narrative both at the time and afterwards. And in any case, there are already hundreds, perhaps even thousands of history books putting Dunkirk into a wider context, and gently debunking the Little Ships story. Is English really so arrogant that he thinks he’s breaking new ground?