If you stare into the abyss,the abyss stares back into you
Posted 26 April 2013 - 06:55 AM
jaylemurph, on 25 April 2013 - 11:08 PM, said:
I don't have any specific argument I'm making that is different from mainstream historical interpretation. I'm not challenging anything and I'm not claiming I'm the one who really understands what history is or how it works. I'm not saying any particular fields fails to live up to the standards I never get around to providing.
That's you. You're making all manner of specious claims. With no evidence or development. And you're the one whining that people don't give them equal respect for a manner of specious, unsupported reasons.
You say you understand history because you understand what's really going on™. You're the one making claims like -- oh, to be specific and quote you verbatim, in case you've forgotten:
So unless you want to pretend like you've never seen these comments before, that you didn't make them or that you don't understand them, here they are. As I said, none of these is a coherent argument. If you feel like turning any one of them or all of them into an actual thesis, we can discuss them.
But you seriously need to stop this routine where you pretend you have made detailed, coherent arguments and I'm somehow ignoring them. I don't like your attempts to make into a liar. You need to stop saying historians in general or anyone specific here is not giving you a fair shake. Make an argument. Back it up to show you're not just blowing smoke. But don't, in the inimitable words of Judge Judy, pee on our legs and tell us it's raining.
1.Modern HSS have been around this world far more earlier then Evolutionist claim:
I discussed this basis Cremo's work and various other anamolies in anthropological finds around the globe. There are and were so many Human fossils that were giving dates way older then the excepted dates.These finds are usually reinterpreted to fit in with the evolutionist time line.
The current theory of evolution is incomplete and erroneous and based majorly on simplistic assumptions.
(Have discussed these issues on various topics created by me and others)
2.By the virtue of HSS being around for such a long time, we must have reached civilization before, and civilization maybe cyclical and not linear.
I have strated a topic "why most fringe theories exist?" citing specifically this reason.
Have discussed various underwater lost cities and Gobekli tepe and many other finds to support this statement.
Have also discussed mythological and cultural refferences that state that there were ancient advance cultures way before mainstrem currently acknowledges.
3.We give less credit to ancients then we should.
Have discussed various examples of technology in the past, i.e Baghdad battery, refferences in ancient texts to a nuclear holocaust sort of an event.
Have discussed this across many different topics.We interpret most of the information from ancient texts not taking into account that they could have been more advanced and talking about things that the mainstream has arbitarily decided 'they were not aware of'.
This point i have stated in various topics that i have created, regarding theories like aryan invasion, purposeful distortion of the history of different peoples by imperial regimes in the past, to serve their own purposes.And also stupid and baised interpretations of various cultural paradigms by these imperialistic historians.
Many of these theories and interpretations have still continued in modern world history, though the initial progenitors have been disproved.
5.There was at one point of time a global civilization in antiquity.
Have created many topics to discuss this statement. The serpent and the Sun, why there are so many cultural similarities between supposedly disconnected civilizations in the past.
For eg- do you suggest that the wheel was invented by different ancient cultures multiple times in geographically seperated regions?
6. Lot of historians assert that their assumptions are scientific when they are not.
Again have discussed this multiple time across different topics citing specific examples, had recently also had a debate with aquatus regarding what is real science i.e empirical science and how it is different from Hypothesis.
Now there are many people on UM who have had discussion on these ideas of mine in across various topics, i can't expand all these points again in one post for you , the reason is i am to bored to do it again.
Now you have missed out on most of these discussion and hence you feel i am giving general statements (i am giving you the benefit of doubt here).Have given coherent arguments with related evidences to support each of the points i made above, you can go and search the forums.
Don't be presumptious, and decide that i am arbitary. I have formed many of these opinions discussing different specific things here at UM. Now if you can atleast list down your own stand on these points and give evidences for the same,we can discuss further.If you have nothing to add of your own then stop wasting everyone's time.
P.S.- I and Spartan have been at it for quite some time across different topics, and he wrongly assumed that i am taking nationalistic stands and hence i listed a jist of my position for him and others to review.....hope you understand the meaning of 'Jist' i.e a concise version of my position on various things that i am currently discussing and would like to discuss further.
We have always seen Mahabharata from the point of view of winners, but recently I have read this amazing book you can check it out at : http://www.slideshar...uestion-history . It's a really awesome book, which gives you story from the Kauravas point of view. It is therefore called as Ajaya - Roll of the Dice - Epic of the Kaurava Clan.
Would you be interested to know more do click on the trailer link : https://www.youtube....h?v=an5lcg4teOQ
Have your say on such a brilliant and amazing book.