me-wonders, on 23 November 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:
I considered buy the Daily Life lectures. Are they worth the price? Not that it matters as I spent my budget plus some. Sometimes I really like the lectures, and sometimes I am disappointed and wish I made other choices.
As for having too much faith in a professor's knowledge, I had a psychology professor who told the whole class women who are raped, want to be raped. Not exactly what a professor should be saying to a room full of young men, barely able to control their hormonal urges. I could list several other outrageous things professors have said. Don't worry, I do not have undying faith in what professors say. I mentioned the professor to argue my argument was not based on an outdated, fringe web site, but an up to date, highly respected professor's lectures. This professor never mentioned gene research but cultural change. I posted several links, all saying different things, and I am not arguing any of them is God's truth. So what if the gene link is wrong. I think I posted the argument against it. Okay, lets move on.
Almost every lecture set I've purchased from TTC has been worth the price. I stress "almost" because a couple of them failed to engage my interest from start to finish. That's hardly an indictment of TTC, however, when you consider I've purchased 28 different lecture sets from them and am bound to purchase more. I'm about a third of the way through the Daily Life lectures and am enjoying them a lot. Yes, I consider them worth the expense. Just the same, I have never purchased a lecture set at its full price. TTC runs sales all the time, so if there's a particular set in which you're interested, it's bound to be on sale sooner rather than later. Also, I exclusively purchase the audio downloads as m4b files for my iPod, and this tends to be less expensive than alternatives like the DVDs.
The experience with this professor of yours is regrettable. I would've gotten up and walked out of the room. No one is saying professors are infallible, and indeed every field or profession has its share of nut cases, but they're the exception to the rule. I've personally worked with a number of Egyptologists, anthropologists, and other specialists, and while I'd consider a couple of them to be eccentric, they're all terrific people.
Quote
As for archeological evidence of a nuclear war, I hope I posted that, so I don't have to go to a lot of work finding it again. May be I should be very, very, very sure that any link I post is the absolute, unquestioned truth, (if there is such a thing) and come to these forums with the seriousness a of professional who is afraid her career will be destroyed, if I post something that is doesn't meet the highest standards? Nah, if I have to be that up tight in these discussions, I will stop coming because you don't pay me enough for all that stress.
What does "alternative history" mean? I thought it meant something that is more speculative and light hearted rather than the intense of arguments of professional historians. If I am wrong, well I will stop posting here, okay? Just clarify the standard of "alternative history". I want fun, not a lot of stress and everything else that goes with being a professional.
This may be nonsense, but it is presented as archeological evidence of a nuclear war. If you want to give alternative explanations for those radio active bodies, in a respectful way, that is playing this game in a fun way. If you want to rip into me for giving bad information, I am out of here.
http://theextinction...civilizations It is not just information that is important, but if you are fun to be with or not.
I know you're being kind of tongue-in-cheek here, but you're likely not going to like my response: Yes, you need to be careful with your sources. My own view is that the internet is extremely limited as a legitimate research tool, and in my experience, for every website representing sound and reliable research, there must be twenty or more that range between rather questionable and outright junk. That's why I've always preferred books, papers, and articles written by vetted and respected professional historians: their names carry a certain weight, and their work is properly researched, peer-reviewed, and cited. So when we look closer at the issue of nuclear war in ancient India, we see it sourced by the likes of Erich von Däniken and
Ancient Aliens. When we look at professionally researched analyses, however, we see absolutely no agreement with ancient nuclear war in India.
No one is telling you to stop posting, me-wonders. Just because folks like cormac and I might hold your feet to the fire when you post certain information, does not mean we're targeting
you as an individual. We're targeting only your information. What I'm seeing is that you seem to be taking a lot of this personally, which you should not. I admit I made the same mistake when I was new at UM and encountered some particularly poorly informed, aggressive fringe posters. When I learned to brush it off, not take it personally, and just stick to my own strengths, it no longer bothered me. I confess some fringe posters still know how to push my buttons and I tend to lose my cool on occasion, but it doesn't happen much.
So remember: no one here is making this personal against you. However, if you post something with which cormac or I or someone else disagrees, we're going to stand up and reply. That is the nature of UM and other message boards like it, as I mentioned to you in an earlier post. Without that give and play and the spirit of debate, message boards would be pointless.
As for "alternative history," it is merely a descriptor for a hypothesis that lies outside conventional historical explanations. David Rohl and his manipulation of timelines in the ancient Near East is a classic example. Extreme examples are Zecharia Sitchin and Erich von Däniken. I suppose the term is interchangeable with "fringe." I tend to use both terms, myself. The idea of nuclear war in ancient India is a very good example of alternative history.
2
