Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Anatoly Fomenko?


  • Please log in to reply
221 replies to this topic

#61    Tutankhaten-pasheri

Tutankhaten-pasheri

    Buratinologist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,637 posts
  • Joined:22 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:страна дураков

Posted 15 June 2013 - 05:48 PM

Faking origins Christianity and all this nonsense about saints is something I will not dispute, but it was not done in late middle ages, it started from the very beginning and still continues. I have said on other parts of this forum that Christianity has a vacuum at it's heart as far as any god is concerned. This was seen by people back in those days, it is why emperor Justinian declared Christians to be atheists and re-opened the pagan temples. All that has followed from Justinian's death has been hiding the origins of the religion and subverting large elements of Roman paganism into Christianity to keep the masses happy. There, I have laid out a belief of mine that many here condemn and would say is as mad as anything from Fomenko. I have even been accused on this forum of being the Anti-Christ. So, if your real purpose is not to support Fomenko, but say that much of Christianity is fake, then I agree, though not about any timelines, the weight of evidence for things happening at a certain time and in a certain order is too great to ignore. I do not believe the accepted chronology of history can be challenged in any significant way, but why events happend, and how they can be interpreted is another matter. To say Christianity has fabricated it's own history is very contentious, but it is something that could be debated. To have Ceasar and Ghengis Khan living at the same time is simply not rational and cannot be debated, though I think you do not believe this anyway. It is only the religious aspect I think.......


#62    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,707 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 16 June 2013 - 03:12 AM

View PostVan Gorp, on 15 June 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

Not totally so that he (and others) only compresses all of the so called ancient 'civilisations', but also seeing much of them parallel/duplicated/mythological descriptions of same events.
In a blink of an eye it was in the time of Scaliger that practical all the ancient events were placed in a stretched timeline, without backing of any 'modern' science.
What a genius that must have been, knowing things we are trying to proof now :-)

Yes, I'm familiar with "New Chronology's" approach to descriptions of same events. It certainly doesn't wash. Think of ancient warfare, specific examples of which happen to be some of the best-recorded episodes from history. For example, let's consider the following ancient military campaigns:
  • Sumerian battle between Lagash and Umma (c. 2400 BCE)
  • Ramesses II's campaign at Kadesh (c. 1274 BCE)
  • Piye's conquest of Egypt (c. 733 BCE)
  • Assyrian siege of Jerusalem (701 BCE)
  • Greek victory over Persians at Marathon (490 BCE)
  • Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta (431-404 BCE)
  • Hannibal's victory over the Romans at Cannae (216 BCE)
  • Constantine victory at the Milvian Bridge (312 CE)
I could go on, but here we have eight separate and distinct military campaigns or engagements spanning thousands of years. I selected these as examples because they're particularly well recorded in ancient contexts—in most cases by multiple sources.

It would be intellectual folly to think that thousands of years of such historical events are duplications of single events. It's divorced from any frame of reality.

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!

#63    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,707 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 16 June 2013 - 03:14 AM

View Postcmontes1, on 16 June 2013 - 02:38 AM, said:

It doesn't work that way.Posted Image
Posted Image  
Posted Image  
Posted Image  
Posted Image

Welcome to UM, cmontes1. Nice to have you here.

A word of advice, going forward. Please flesh out your posts with information relevant to the discussion. A cluster of emoticons doesn't say anything. For example, you wrote "It doesn't work that way." What, exactly, doesn't work that way?

Thanks.

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!

#64    OhZone

OhZone

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 41 posts
  • Joined:07 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Florida

Posted 12 January 2014 - 12:38 AM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 16 June 2013 - 03:12 AM, said:

Yes, I'm familiar with "New Chronology's" approach to descriptions of same events. It certainly doesn't wash. Think of ancient warfare, specific examples of which happen to be some of the best-recorded episodes from history. For example, let's consider the following ancient military campaigns:
  • Sumerian battle between Lagash and Umma (c. 2400 BCE)
  • Ramesses II's campaign at Kadesh (c. 1274 BCE)
  • Piye's conquest of Egypt (c. 733 BCE)
  • Assyrian siege of Jerusalem (701 BCE)
  • Greek victory over Persians at Marathon (490 BCE)
  • Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta (431-404 BCE)
  • Hannibal's victory over the Romans at Cannae (216 BCE)
  • Constantine victory at the Milvian Bridge (312 CE)
I could go on, but here we have eight separate and distinct military campaigns or engagements spanning thousands of years. I selected these as examples because they're particularly well recorded in ancient contexts—in most cases by multiple sources.

It would be intellectual folly to think that thousands of years of such historical events are duplications of single events. It's divorced from any frame of reality.
And we should believe these dates why?
Same goes for the "Julian Calandar".

I think Fomenko does bring up a lot of valid points, as does Van Danken. Many dismiss him out of hand without any valid rebuttal.  I'm not sure exactly why we should believe the "official" story of history when in our own time we have seen so many lies. History, like most of the pronouncements of perceived authorities, is just a political tool, to lead and mislead the masses.

One thing I do find spurious is his seemingly desperate attempt to validate Christianity and its patron Jesus as well as his attempts to show that the early bible stories correlate to later events.


#65    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,707 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 12 January 2014 - 04:15 AM

View PostOhZone, on 12 January 2014 - 12:38 AM, said:

And we should believe these dates why?
Same goes for the "Julian Calandar".

I think Fomenko does bring up a lot of valid points, as does Van Danken. Many dismiss him out of hand without any valid rebuttal.  I'm not sure exactly why we should believe the "official" story of history when in our own time we have seen so many lies. History, like most of the pronouncements of perceived authorities, is just a political tool, to lead and mislead the masses.

One thing I do find spurious is his seemingly desperate attempt to validate Christianity and its patron Jesus as well as his attempts to show that the early bible stories correlate to later events.

My above post has nothing to do with Jesus Christ or the Bible. I can only imagine you're talking about the dating system overall. Note that I do not use BC or AD, which are in fact biased toward Judeo-Christianity. I conform to the more modern BCE (Before the Common Era) and CE (Common Era). This dating system is not tied to any religion and simply marks the year 0 as a base point. It is the most accurate and reliable dating system in existence for historical studies. That said, your remark about Christianity does not seem relevant.

Aside from that, why trust orthodox scholarship and not Fomenko? That's pretty easy to answer. Orthodox scholarship is based on more than two centuries of ongoing, concerted, and corroborative analyses of extent evidence. The examples in the list from that old post of mine, as it says in that post, are all well-recorded historical events, and in some cases are recorded in more than one ancient source. In the world of professional research, including many decades of field work, archaeology, and lab work, nothing has occurred to upset the existing historical timeline to any significant degree.

The New Chronology, on the other hand, is clearly a mix of twisting much historical evidence and ignoring much more of it. This is not how research is conducted. There is a reason this or that "new chronology" of any given alternative "historian" has never survived scrutiny and has had no effect on orthodox scholarship.

I don't necessarily dismiss folks like Fomenko out of hand. I base my position on twenty-five years of research of societies of the ancient Near East. So based on my own research and experience, folks like Fomenko simply do not measure up.

Von Däniken I do dismiss out of hand, however. Most people do. The man is a convicted criminal (he served time in Europe for fraud) and has been caught red handed falsifying evidence for his alien themes (again, fraud). There is absolutely no reason to take him seriously. He is not an historian, nor is he a researcher. He's a fiction-entertainment writer of bad sci-fi.

Please understand that it will never be sufficient just to dismiss orthodox scholarship. Its pursuits are based on rigid research protocols subjected to peer-review. In order to challenge orthodox scholarship, one must adopt the same protocols and prove with corroborative evidence that accepted theories are incorrect. This has never happened.

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!

#66    Noteverythingisaconspiracy

Noteverythingisaconspiracy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,410 posts
  • Joined:31 Dec 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:A very small country north of Germany

  • "An open mind is like an open door, unless you're careful anything might get in." Sir Wearer of Hats

Posted 12 January 2014 - 09:53 AM

How does history outside Europe fit in this theory ?

Is the history of the Americas, China, India, Japan and South-east Asia faked to, because they are quite well documented today.
Did the jesuits fake that too ?

"People will generally accept fact as truth only if the fact agree with what they already believe"
Andy Rooney

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and im not sure about the former"
Albert Einstein

#67    OhZone

OhZone

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 41 posts
  • Joined:07 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Florida

Posted 12 January 2014 - 04:11 PM

Yes, my comments were directed at the dating system in general.
That year “0” is predicated on the year Jesus was supposed to be born isn’t it?  Therefore it is tied to religion.  CE/AD etc is neither here nor there; we both understand the meaning don’t we?

What records or the ancient dates recorded and what did they use as a “date”?

Has anyone refuted Formenko’s astrological dates?

Established scientific thought is overturned frequently.  See this site for a list of vindicated mavericks:  http://amasci.com/weird/vindac.html
When the Wright brothers first demonstrated their aircraft it was declared a hoax.  Western Union  said the telephone wasn't practical and they "had no use for it"
Alfred Wegener was an outcast for his ideas of continental drift.  etc.,etc.

Von Daniken's fakery destroyed confidence in the ideas in his original work; which was not the first and won't be the last of the sort.

The Jesuits are ensconced all over the world, in every country and in every culture; possibly minus the most primitive.

Edited by OhZone, 12 January 2014 - 04:13 PM.


#68    Gingitsune

Gingitsune

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 106 posts
  • Joined:01 Nov 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Canada

Posted 11 February 2014 - 05:57 PM

There is no year 0, they didn't used the 0 back then, it's year 1. One year is year -1 and the next is year 1. That's also why in 2014 we are in the 21st century, there is no century 0. And why we changed millenium on January 1st 2001 and not 2000.

So year 1 should have been the year Jesus was born, but the calculus was made a few centuries after the fact, so who knows if it's accurate or not.

View PostVan Gorp, on 15 June 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

If you would ask me: I couldn’t even give you proof the earth is round, except some nice pictures and stories I’m convinced to believe in :-)

Go to a sea port. Look at the boats coming and going. You'll notice they "rise" and "set" like the sun, as if there were going over a hill of water, instead of skrinking to nothingness. But you interact daily with water and you know there can be no such a thing. The only answer is the earth is round and the boats are gradually hidden, bottom to top, as the distance between you and them gain degrees. It work also on decent size lake, where you can see the trees, hills and houses on the oposite shore, but no the shore itself, which is hidden by a hill of water. Also, that's why you can't see what's on the other side of the sea with a telescope even though you can see stuff much farther away up in the sky.

More on topic, even if carbon dating can be tricky at times, medieval artifacts always score as more "recent"  than antic atifacts. So even if every event's dates are not always totally accurate, the order of the eras relative to one another makes no doubt. Plus, dendochronology have progressed a lot over the years, they now have databases over different species of trees over the years going millenia back, it's easy to pinpoint the right year if they have some wood among the artefact.


#69    Van Gorp

Van Gorp

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 671 posts
  • Joined:26 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Belze KampaniŽ

Posted 11 February 2014 - 08:13 PM

View PostGingitsune, on 11 February 2014 - 05:57 PM, said:


Go to a sea port. Look at the boats coming and going. You'll notice they "rise" and "set" like the sun, as if there were going over a hill of water, instead of skrinking to nothingness.


Exactly my point, I never have done that (going to the sea to see ships disappear), so I officially I can't even prove to myself the word is round.
How sad a bloke can be :-) I must rely on the accounts of an internet lady.  But I am a good believer, so I'll believe you. You seem to be talking by experience.

Now, some other blokes should talk to you further about that.  I just found this, not my quote but the dude seems evenly convinced of his case.

"

If the world is so obviously a sphere then why do people still think it's flat? Why don't you people research the Flat Earth Theory for yourselves and you will see it's not crazy or unrealistic. Everyone knew the world was flat for 1000's of years across the world including The Hebrews, The Egyptians, The Chinese, The Muslims, The Native Americans and others.
"Free Thinkers" that challenged the scriptures were fooled by such simple tricks of perception. They say "The moon is round and so is the sun" and then they see Ships "appear" to disappear over the horizon and assume the world is a sphere.
Well friends, If the world is a 25,000 mile circumference sphere then you are standing on top of a ball and the ground should curve downwards 1 mile over a 90 mile distance in all directions. People think the world is so big that you can't see the curvature, but the ground should curve 8 inches in only the first mile, 32 inches in the second mile and 6 feet in the 3rd mile.
We should be able to see this curvature if the world is indeed a sphere. Test the claims for yourself and you will see that the ground does not curve at all. In fact, You can see the FULL Toronto skyline from New York over Lake Ontario with a telescope which is 30+ miles across. There should be at least a 150+ foot tall bulge of water blocking part of the view and it does not. The ground should be curved downwards 600 feet but it does not. The skyline is flat, the horizon is flat and Lake Ontario is amazingly flat.
The reason things appear to disappear on the horizon is because of mirages. The moisture in the air and also heat blocks light rays from reaching you when the objects reach the vanishing point of your vision. The ship's full view can be restored with a simple telescope or binoculars.
PWNED"

But we were talking about another nut ...


#70    Kaa-Tzik

Kaa-Tzik

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 February 2014 - 08:15 PM

Fomenko belongs to a different phenomena than Daniken etc who are simply charlatans who want your money, or are egoists who want followers. To understand Fomenko, who is actually a genuine academician with bona fide qualifications in mathematics at Moscow State University, it is necessary to understand the education system in Soviet Union, and what was taught and what was left out as regards history, and this is not simply a matter of pushing Vikings into the background. It is then necessary to understand that when Soviet Union collapsed it was not just the economic situation that became chaotic, it was also in academia. Otherwise rational people, and I include Fomenko, for though he is wrong, he is not some ignorant fool, now with freedom they did not have before to express private ideas in public, lurched to far in the direction of anything is possible, anything believable. An analogy is with morality collapsing, among some, during the same period, and why, when Russia got online in the 90s, it was "ugly". This was not a surprise and is actually a natural occurence after being "buttoned up" for decades. Fomenko and others are the academic expression of this loosening of control. The phenomena of Fomenko and such in Russia comes under the name "Folk history". But this is not quite the same as historians in other countries studying old customs etc, it goes to who "the people" are and where they come from, but not in a proper historical and archeological manner, it is in an emotional and even quasi religious manner. The people who deal with this are for the most not actively charlatans as they actually believe what they are saying. Some have branched out into new ageism and we see the same nonsense, the same "self help" and "self/cosmic awareness" books that infest the rest of the world. Though if people want or need this nonsense that is their affair. There is no scientific or historical method to Fomenko's New Chronology, he simply wants something to be true, so he makes it true in his books. He makes a living from these many books, but whether he believes his nonsense or is a deliberate fraud I do not know. In the west he is seen by skeptics as an outright fraud, for how can anybody possibly believe in such obvious nonsense. Yet while it is nonsense, the "culture" behind this phenomena is not so well known in the West, and certainly not a subject of common knowledge. This subject is rather "esoteric" and unfortunately a subject not addressed by any English authors I can find, so I cannot give any English links to back up what I say. Some may wish to struggle with google translator with this article that addresses the phenomena of "Folk History", Fomenko and others. http://scepsis.net/library/id_148.html

Edited by Kaa-Tzik, 11 February 2014 - 08:35 PM.


#71    Van Gorp

Van Gorp

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 671 posts
  • Joined:26 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Belze KampaniŽ

Posted 11 February 2014 - 08:41 PM

View PostVan Gorp, on 11 February 2014 - 08:13 PM, said:


... to the sea to see ...


Because we all get poetical once in a while, little sidenote for the ones understanding Dietsch among us:

Sea = Zieje
See = Zieje

Ziejen = Trekken (Attract), Spannen

Eyes wide open, wijd gespannen!


#72    NO-ID-EA

NO-ID-EA

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 343 posts
  • Joined:14 Oct 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:wherever im at

Posted 11 February 2014 - 11:06 PM

If we are into mad theories here ,flat earth , all history in a span of 1000 years , sun and the planets revolve around earth etc ......another interesting thing to contemplate are a couple of books by Neale Donald Walsche , In which he talks about conversations he has with God , in reply to questions that he (RDW) has put to him(God) about how the world works.

God tells him we are all a part of God , we are just a spark inside a body , that thinks it is a whole being , and that each one of us is really a part of the creator , and (in his image) actually is a creator in it's own right ......The interesting thought part.......as a collective mind , ie: not individually , but when a large percentage of us believes something is so , God makes it so......SO.....at the time most men thought the Sun revolved around the Earth it did , until a majority of us believed the earth revolves around the sun.. now it does.......Sounds Daft , i know.

Contemplate.......in medieval times from what you read people believed in witches , merlin , magic,  and in the myths you read magic worked , people could shrivel and die if a witch put a curse on them ,or a harvest could fail ,  and in other parts witchdoctors would be in full employment , along with rain dancers , and shamen.etc.......enough people believed it worked ....so it was collectively created , and it became so , it worked.........................but then People lost their belief in magic , if a gypsy were to put a curse on someone today , there are not many people who would believe in it..........the collective don't believe in it , so magic is no longer so. and no longer works .

Similarly...Maybe.......  at some stage there is no group called the illuminatti, someone wants to create such a group , but no one knows who they are , they have no power .an elite group puts it about on the internet that a group called the illuminatti are intent on running the world , they are very powerful and rich and secret..... keep it going for a while , and introduce a contra group of individuals with a conspiracy theory, they confirm the illiteratti are real , and they need to get it out to the public ,the collective starts to hear about it,  more and more people start to believe in this group called the illuminatti , but they have never actually done anything...........until enough of the collective sheep have heard of these powerful illuminatti .. and there is no smoke without fire now is there ?.... and a powerbase is created out of nothing ........and just like magic if we believe it exists , we give it the power of fear to exist , and it is so...........

Just thought it was an interesting idea to think about.......maybe if enough of us read, and start to believe Fomenko...History will be SO

Edited by NO-ID-EA, 11 February 2014 - 11:13 PM.


#73    Sir Wearer of Hats

Sir Wearer of Hats

    SCIENCE!

  • Member
  • 10,767 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia.

Posted 12 February 2014 - 12:36 AM

How does this compressed history business tally with the oral history of Indigenous Australians (who have kept their history rather then let it slip into legend and then myth) some of whom have a historical record of watching the waters rise after the ice age ended and being able to tell you how many life times ago that was.

And China. Meticulous record keepers. They've a history that goes back longer then Formeko would have us believe.



Now, I can conceive of history being shorter then we think. I can conceive of it being longer then we think, I can conceive of how events in one place could be transported to another an assimilated into the culture.


But we have records that cast doubt on this argument.

I must not fear. Fear is the Mind-Killer. It is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and to move through me. And when it is gone I will turn the inner eye to see it's path.
When the fear is gone, there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.

#74    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,707 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 12 February 2014 - 03:45 AM

View PostSir Wearer of Hats, on 12 February 2014 - 12:36 AM, said:

How does this compressed history business tally with the oral history of Indigenous Australians (who have kept their history rather then let it slip into legend and then myth) some of whom have a historical record of watching the waters rise after the ice age ended and being able to tell you how many life times ago that was.

And China. Meticulous record keepers. They've a history that goes back longer then Formeko would have us believe

Such books are tailored toward the gullible or uninformed, or perhaps a mixture of both. Anyone with a sound background in historical studies will know such books for the nonsense they are. Compressing many centuries of history into a microsecond is not a useful approach to historical research, nor does it survive even cursory scrutiny.

Kaa-Tzik said something in his recent post that I've long wondered about folks such as Fomenko (Sitchin, von Däniken, et cetera): whether they honestly believe the half-baked nonsense they peddle or if they're actually in it only for the money. Now that's a real mystery.

Quote

Now, I can conceive of history being shorter then we think. I can conceive of it being longer then we think, I can conceive of how events in one place could be transported to another an assimilated into the culture.

But we have records that cast doubt on this argument.

Actually carbon dating in recent years in Egypt shows us how accurate conventional historical research is for later eras, and how it might be off with earlier eras. Dates long provided for New Kingdom peoples and events are usually no more than fifty years off, but for the Old Kingdom we could be as far off as a century: the Great Pyramid and contemporary monuments might have been built not in 2500 BCE but 2600 BCE.

More is the case that continued archaeology and research are pushing back our understanding of early man. Anatolian sites such as Catalhoyuk and Gobekli Tepe have revealed how sophisticated people could be in Neolithic times, more so than was understood prior to their discoveries. But this is real-world research conducted by extensively educated and highly intelligent professional men and women—not by cranks pecking out pseudo-histories straight from their vivid imaginations.

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!

#75    Van Gorp

Van Gorp

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 671 posts
  • Joined:26 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Belze KampaniŽ

Posted 12 February 2014 - 06:09 PM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 12 February 2014 - 03:45 AM, said:

Such books are tailored toward the gullible or uninformed, or perhaps a mixture of both. Anyone with a sound background in historical studies will know such books for the nonsense they are. Compressing many centuries of history into a microsecond is not a useful approach to historical research, nor does it survive even cursory scrutiny.

Kaa-Tzik said something in his recent post that I've long wondered about folks such as Fomenko (Sitchin, von Däniken, et cetera): whether they honestly believe the half-baked nonsense they peddle or if they're actually in it only for the money. Now that's a real mystery.



Actually carbon dating in recent years in Egypt shows us how accurate conventional historical research is for later eras, and how it might be off with earlier eras. Dates long provided for New Kingdom peoples and events are usually no more than fifty years off, but for the Old Kingdom we could be as far off as a century: the Great Pyramid and contemporary monuments might have been built not in 2500 BCE but 2600 BCE.

More is the case that continued archaeology and research are pushing back our understanding of early man. Anatolian sites such as Catalhoyuk and Gobekli Tepe have revealed how sophisticated people could be in Neolithic times, more so than was understood prior to their discoveries. But this is real-world research conducted by extensively educated and highly intelligent professional men and women—not by cranks pecking out pseudo-histories straight from their vivid imaginations.

Come on Kesh, do we really need to the words nonsense, gullible, cranks, ...
You don't need that.
That is just not true. Very well educated people (Monaldi&Sorti) think likewise. They are no misfits, very well educated, not gullible. Investigate it theirselves.

Now you gonna tell they only want to sell books.
Do you really think these educated people (not less than you) like to be called names and their reputation being attacked only for the money?
I don't.

Maybe you can't grasp the reality of it, find it nonsense, fine but I don't see the need to call names to everyone who just wants to investigate this further.
There is a reality that much dating is a circular event, fest of linking accepted assumptions and not much is needed to get it all fall like a house of carts.

What is recorded history, the foundation of Rome?





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users