|
| :: Previous topic :: Next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fintan
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 5198
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 10:30 pm Post subject: New Audio: Energy Wars & Jesus Money |
  |
|
Energy Wars & Jesus Money
Two Guests: Rolf Martens & Jerry Fletcher.
"The Next Level" Internet Radio Show
DSL Mp3 Audio 
http://www.breakfornews.com/audio/NextLevel061121a.mp3
Dialup Mp3 Audio
http://www.breakfornews.com/audio/NextLevel061121.mp3
| Quote: | REFERNECES & LINKS
Guest: Rolf Martens
Website: http://www.rolf-martens.com/
Articles:
Why is the oil price so high? (1)
Why is the oil price so high? (2)
Why is the oil price so high? (3)
Why is the oil price so high? (4)
Gold was right: Plenty of oil -Part 1
Gold was right: Plenty of oil -Part 1
On the clampdown on nuclear energy in the USA
More Chernobyl horror hoaxes
Health Effects of Low Doses of Ionizing Radiation
(Editor: S. M. Javad Mortazavi) Demonstrates important facts on this
subject which probably are still largely unknown to the general public
internationally. (Suitably small doses of radiation are not detrimental to
human health but in fact improve it.)......
http://www.angelfire.com/mo/radioadaptive/
Guest: Jerry Fletcher
Fool's Gold
Jerry Fletcher: I've recently been delving pretty deeply into the
functioning of the global commercial system and it's relationship to
international law and politics.
This study has completely transformed the way I look at 'currency
meltdown' propaganda like the article in Continuity's post. Predictable
articles like this perpetuate the average citizens misconceptions about
'money', while distracting from the midterm 'election' op with the usual
fears of economic armageddon and marshall law.
From what I have learned so far, it appears any relationship between the
value of a Federal Reserve Note and the 'price' of gold is an elaborate
use designed to support a false understanding of money. This misconception
is culturally reinforced by the state mandated 'education' of the citizenry
of the largest free market democracies. This misunderstanding is crucial
to the progress of what we lovingly refer to as the 'NWO Agenda'.....
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=9428#9428
History: Fiction or Science?
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1081
Fomenko on Google Video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3446119914735919347&q=tampered+with+history&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8709711894449216572&q=history+fiction+or+science&hl=en
Fomenko's book Sample Pages
http://www.breakfornews.com/fomenko-sample.htm
Reactions to Fomenko's Treatise
When I picked up "History: Fiction or Science?" for the first time, it was out of sheer curiosity. I appreciate crackpots and crackpot conspiracy theories of all sorts - one could say that I have a private freak collection on a separate bookshelf. Therefore, this entire history revision business looked very much like it belonged there as well, so I decided to give it a go. My initial reaction was disappointment; the author sounded perfectly sane, which is simply out of order, if you ask me (a good crackpot theorist is always stark raving mad, hence the interest - never a dull moment anywhere). Then I started to read deeper into the book and, as I submerged about thirty pages deep, the remnants of my ironic grin dropped to the floor along with my jaw. The stuff actually made sense. No hysterical overtones or complex paranoid theorizing anywhere - it is certainly a scientific work written in a manner that has academia stamped all over, no doubt about it.
Check Fomenko's calculations with ANY sky mapping software, professional or amateur, you'll get his results confirmed.
Dr. Renata Scaffoldini (Padova, ITALY) - See all my reviews
According to this chronology (which we can name "Ultra High Revised Chronology"), Jesus died in 1086 AD. More or less, in this time, the Cid was fighting against the Moors in medieval Spain. Taking this theory to extreme, then Jesus/Joshua would be Rodrigo Daz alias "the Cid, the Champion Knight" (el Cid Campeador in Spanish), who took Valencia (i.e. Jericho), because he was exiled from the kingdom of Castilla (i. e. Egypt) by King Alphonse VI (i.e. the Pharaoh of Exodus)!!!. We dont have to forget that, according with Spanish medieval legends, the Cid rode after his own death and won a battle (resurrection???). Ergo Jesus/Joshua was the Cid. On chronology, I am arranged to think anything.
Another hit: Bronze Age is a total hoax, because to make bronze you need metallic tin. It is knwon for a fact that tin was discovered as late as 14 th century!
It is very difficult to digest the new version of history from Fomenko without getting allergic shock. Official timeline is accepted in the same way as gravity, and movement of the sun; many nations have developed their identity based on official history. Literally speaking chronology is in our culture, in our roots, personal identity. Someone said here that this book was written by Russian nationalist to reassure Russian national identity. May be so, but I think for Russians will be very difficult to swallow that they were actually Mongols and Tatars too. This book will turn your world upside down. Literally.
Yes, history is a PROFESSION, a MYSTERY, not a Science.
LINK
Early in life, we learn about ancient history in school. Children love the magical lessons of history - they are like real-life fairy tales. Teachers recite breathtaking stories; very soon we learn by heart the names and deeds of brave warriors, wise philosophers, fabulous pharaohs, cunning high priests and greedy scribes.
We learn of gigantic pyramids and sinister castles, kings and queens, dukes and barons, powerful heroes and beautiful ladies, emaciated saints and low-life traitors. We are caught up in tales of cruel wars, merciless Roman legions, noble knights, crusades and contests. We are thrilled by perilous sea voyages and discoveries, passions and adventures. What an exciting journey it is!
As we grow up, our love of history grows stronger too. We watch megalomaniac breathtaking Hollywood productions, read historical fiction, buy glossy expensive books about mysteries, admire archaeological finds, go to museums, and travel to Egypt , Rome , Greece and China . Yes, now we understand it all so much better, the universal history of humanity, and the rise and fall of civilizations. The history of humanity began so very-very long ago. Per ternia ad astra!
There is too much fantasy to be found in history.
http://www.bookmasters.com/marktplc/01098.htm
As soon as you dig for proof slightly deeper than the school textbook, the adamant grounds for the totally and utterly dominant point of view suddenly evaporate. The whole world community of professional historians will not be able to come with up irrefutable documentary proof that Julius Caesar ever existed, be it on paper, papyri, parchment or stone. Same story for all great names of Antiquity. The proof is unavailable!
At present the c14 dating procedure runs as follows: archaeologist sends an artefact to a radiocarbon dating laboratory with his idea of the age of the object. Laboratory complies and makes required radio dating, confirming the date suggested by archaeologist. Everybody’s happy: lab makes money by making an expensive test, archaeologist by reaping the laurels for his earth shattering discovery. The in-built low precision of this method allows cooking scientifically looking results desired by the customer archaeologist. General public doesn’t realize that it was duped again.
http://www.bookmasters.com/marktplc/01098.htm
|
Last edited by Fintan on Mon Nov 27, 2006 6:36 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Useful Eater
Joined: 25 Jan 2006
Posts: 100
Location: London
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Great audio, surprised me that Jerry was going to speak, its good to put a voice to the person.
Rolf Martens certainly knows his business, hope you get him on again sometime.
Jerry, the part where you talked about being born into property of the state reminded me of what Jordan Maxwell has been saying. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Muir
Joined: 07 Feb 2006
Posts: 345
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:30 pm Post subject: The reason why nuclear energy has been suppressed. |
|
|
Most people of my generation (I am 31) don't remember the promises of energy "too cheap to meter". If the the USA had built fast-neutron Breeder Reactors in the 1950's then we would not have to pay for energy at all. The fact that people pay for energy today shows that we are over taxed. Breeder Reactor technology exists only in the top-secret world of the USA's and USSR's secret nuclear aerospace propulsion programs. In fact the UFO's that most people have seen are in reality aerospace craft from these programs. I have been researching these programs by reading the declassified documents on the subject. Both the U2 and SR-71 are nuclear powered. Since the 1970's the USA has been deploying nuclear-pumped lasers in low Earth orbit. In fact it is most likely the case that the USA has deployed a nuclear laser cannon in space that could wipe cities off the face of the map with a flip of a switch instantly. The USA developed single reactor cores capable of producing tera-watts of power in the 1960's.
Last edited by John Muir on Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:51 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fintan
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 5198
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 2:51 pm Post subject: Interesting Connections |
|
|
| Quote: | War on terror could last 30 years: report
November 21, 2006 12:00 - Article from: Agence France-Presse
THE fight against terrorism could last 30 years or more, according to a report published by a British think tank that specialises in international security. "There is every prospect of the 'war on terror' extending for 30 years or more," said the report by the Oxford Research Group.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,20794524-5006506,00.html |
So who is this Oxford Research Group?
The trail runs from the now totally discredited Iraq Body Count website,
all the way through the nuclear issue and right into NATO.
Some confirmation Rolf Martens is on the money asserting
that the Anti-Nuke movement is a CIA Fake campaign.
| Quote: | John Sloboda took up his appointment as Executive Director of Oxford Research Group in January 2004. He is a founding member of Keele's Alternative Globalisations Research Network and the Network of Activist Scholars of Politics and International Relations (Naspir), and is currently researching the psychological factors underlying the recent massive growth of the global anti-war movement..... Most recently, he co-founded and manages the website www.iraqbodycount.net which quickly became a key source of information about civilian casualties for the media and NGOs worldwide during the Iraq war and its aftermath.
Frank Barnaby is Nuclear Issues Consultant to Oxford Research Group, and has been on ORG's Council of Advisers since its inception. He is a nuclear physicist by training and worked at the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment, Aldermaston between1951-57.
Gabrielle Rifkind is Human Security Consultant to Oxford Research Group and Director of the Oxford Process.... She is currently working with NATO on organising a workshop to examine the links between the military and the human security agenda.
Janet Bloomfield is UK Security Policy Consultant to Oxford Research Group. She is also the British Coordinator of the Atomic Mirror, a small non-profit programme that uses the arts to raise awareness of nuclear issues. She has been active in the anti-nuclear movement since 1981 and from 1993-1996 she was Chair of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND). She currently serves as an honorary Vice-President of CND. She also serves as Clerk of the Peace and Disarmament Programme of Quaker Peace and Social Witness in the UK.
http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/aboutus/staff.htm |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ormond
Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 1558
Location: Belly of the Beast, Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | "History is Bunk" ~ abbreviated remark of Henry Ford |
What Ford said, in context:
| Quote: |
"History is more or less bunk. It's tradition. We don't want tradition. We want to live in the present, and the only history that is worth a tinker's damn is the history that we make today." (Chicago Tribune, 1916). |
Great interview, Jerry.
It's a well known maxim that "History belongs to the victors". Insightful people have taken that as the explaination for noticing that every new generation is taught a slightly to radically different version of history. We know that the history we were taught emphasizes different events than the history our grandfathers were taught, and many of them were aware that they'd been taught a different history or different conclusions than their grandfathers.
Those who've recognized the morphing of history to suit the whomever is the PTB today have heretofore assumed a series of 'victors' emphasizing what's useful to them.
But what if the 'victors' morphing history to suit their present agendas haven't been such 'different' victors, but merely different players serving the same long term agenda all along?
That would change the context of shifts in emphasis and conclusions of history generationally speaking from a struggle to co-opt history randomly as 'new' victors emerge, motivated to impose their 'new' ideologies.
What it could suggest, is that there's been an agenda which has never changed. What changes is the paradigm sold to each generation, and that necessitates a new version of history to suit the next paradigm.
I'll leave this thought at that, just to hear any feedback you may have on this possibility, and how it would frame the context of the continual "upgradging" of history.
I'll ad just a quick example of how the history of Christianity might look through that lens.
Obviously the 'teachings of Christ' or even the Apostle Paul didn't emphasize and earthly system of economics. Yet we know that historical Christianity through the auspices of the Roman Catholic Church was spread by the sword, first through the Crusades - ostensibly what really happened was the spread of the banking system by the Knights Templar. Followed by the Normans spreading that same combo--Church and Cheque--by the sword.
_________________
The anticipated never happens. The unexpected constantly occurs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Christopher Brooks
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 4:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Over one hundred years ago in the published "Protocols of Zion" the design to control humanity was described.
Your guests are hardly introducing new insights.
Many are in jail throughout Europe for challenging historical orthodoxy.
Your guests and Fintan are as free as birds. Hmmmmmm!
At the centre of this scam is the "H*l^c!*s#" hoax but at this forum the thought police only allow discussion of obvious lies but fail to uncover the
critical allusions that control the public perception.
Why is this so? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jerry Fletcher
Joined: 21 Jan 2006
Posts: 838
Location: Studio BS
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Great interview, Jerry. |
Thanks Ormond. It was certainly sort of an impromptu interview, so I hope I didn't mangle the facts too badly. I sounded a little less like a lunatic than I expected, so hopefully that was a passable starting point for a more thorough and cogent report later. Fun though!
Welcome back, BTW. I'm glad you're not in Gitmo after all. 
| Quote: | That would change the context of shifts in emphasis and conclusions of history generationally speaking from a struggle to co-opt history randomly as 'new' victors emerge, motivated to impose their 'new' ideologies.
What it could suggest, is that there's been an agenda which has never changed. What changes is the paradigm sold to each generation, and that necessitates a new version of history to suit the next paradigm |
I think that's a good point and historical 'updates' have certainly been used repeatedly to justify the legitimacy of pre-renaissance 'monarch de jures'.
What's interesting about this particular historical framing is that it occurred as nomadic cultures were shifting to agricultural practices, bringing concepts like land 'ownership', surplus, and trade to the forefront of cultural relations. Simultaneously, the development of mass produced information media - namely the printing press, provided the possibility of homogenizing the social and historical 'attitudes' of radically different cultures.
By reinforcing the 'monarchical' structure of all 'ancient' cultures, these pyramidical power structures appear to be inevitable results of man's 'natural' tendency toward empire building. After a few generations of this conditioning, these institutions become a reality that appears to have always been.
It also appears that combination of media 'messages', and state mandated education of the individual proved to be an extremely powerful tool of imperial control, rooting itself deeper into a societies culture with each new generation.
The pen may be mightier than the sword, but they both got a good butt kicking from the printing press. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dilbert_g
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | At the centre of this scam is the "H*l^c!*s#" hoax but at this forum the thought police only allow discussion of obvious lies but fail to uncover the
critical allusions that control the public perception.
Why is this so? |
The reason is because F&#c Y80.
(My reason for using Hcaust instead of the correct spelling has been to keep the batwing count down on Google.
My reason for doing that is evident, here and my other places:
http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/911truth.html
Connoisseur’s Guide to Internet Anti-Semitism |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Christopher Brooks
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 12:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dilbert-g, you are very selective in your arguement.
Loose Change is hardly an example of serious research.
It's almost as flawed as the 9-11 commission investigation.
It is very useful to distract and discredit the very real unanswered
questions surrounding the 9-11 event.
Perhaps you can explain the Silverstein confession regards WTC 7.
Perhaps you can rationalise the behaviour of Bush at Booker elementary school.
Perhaps you can explain the planned invasion of Afghanistan and the Patriot Act ready for the critical moment.
You suggest the media would expose lies to the public but just contemplate the "money" dellusion of our age or the "oil crisis" scam that has filched humanity for generations.
Do journalists, acedemics and polititians deliberately lie or is the political reality far more complex. subtle and clever.
Can you name one single verified victim of "gassing" at Auschwitz?
The Treblinka mass graves do not exist. Science has verified this fact.
The Russian authorities have admited their "gas chambers" exhibits were constructed after the war as propaganda strategies.
Large numbers of the "eye witness" accounts have been shown to be frauds including some very widely published literary frauds.
Historians who speak about the facts are jailed.
The frauds are championed. How strange!
The public appear to not even notice. They cannot distinguish between truth and propaganda.
Without free speech all investigation is flawed and corrupt.
That is my point.
If we wish to understand the complexity of information, truth and the power of mind control then there is no better subject to analyse than the Auschwitz ledgends.
So why does Fintane avoid the best scam of all if he is genuine.
Without freedom of speech this question cannot be resolved. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
urbanspaceman
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 311
Location: London , UK
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
On Fomenko, from:
http://www.skepticreport.com/mystics/fomenko.htm
| Quote: |
The American presidents Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy were both concerned with civil rights and had wives who lost children both during and after their terms in the White House. Both presidents were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson from towns that were 15 minutes from Johnson City in Tennessee, and both successors left the presidency in disgrace.
Lincoln was shot in the Ford theatre and Kennedy was shot in a Ford Lincoln. Both were shot in the head by a southerner on a Friday while sitting next to their wives. Both assassins were assassinated before the trials, and one of them ran from a theatre and was caught in a warehouse, while the other ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theatre.
These facts force us to the inevitable conclusion that Lincoln was a fictive copy of Kennedy!
|
I'm all for sacrificing sacred cows if new evidence arises, but Fomenko's attempt to reduce history to mathematics is bizarre, and strikes me as junk science. His statistical analsis of history is inventive, and might one day be shown to be another very useful tool in the historian's toolbox, but Fomenko uses it in such a forced an isolated way, I'm far from convinced by his arguments.
And as another poster commented, those ads on google for his book are weird. In fact, fucking creepy, almost cultish. If Alex Jones' name was attached to them, half the people on this forum would be screaming 'obvious propaganda!'.
He's using very similar tactics than the Creationists to demonstrate that the dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time, compressing geological history to 4000 years. It's starting with a conclusion and making every effort to make the data fit.
In our zeal to stand up to the PTB, let's not counter their bullshit with more bullshit, people. There's 2 kinds of non-conformity: independant thinking that sees beyond blind groupthink, and blind teenage rebelliousness. This strikes me as much more of the second kind than the first.
You can't fight propaganda with your own narcissism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ormond
Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 1558
Location: Belly of the Beast, Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Yes, history is a PROFESSION, a MYSTERY, not a Science. ~ Jerry |
It's advisable to take history as a set of "possibilities", based on disputable 'data', with a high probability of spin depending on the vested interests and subjective beliefs of the historians--and one must always look at whom they studied with, whom they were affiliated with, and who published their version and not somebody else's.
| Quote: |
I'm all for sacrificing sacred cows if new evidence arises, but Fomenko's attempt to reduce history to mathematics is bizarre, and strikes me as junk science. |
Obviously, the past is wide open to any manner of 'deconstruction'. "History shows" that most if not all academic premises for presenting 'new' historical versions of what really happened are built around a foregone conclusion of the historian. So it can't be a natural science. More of a pseudo-science at best--like macro-economics, and statistics. I'm sure some will disagree with what I've just said here, but my own premise is that we can't ultimately write conclusions on broad historical events because everyone who was there is dead--and even if they weren't, they would have only seen a piece of the puzzle through their direct experience anyway.
Fomenko's approach is fascinating, though. It does cause some interesting questions to pop up when reading his notions--and some of those questions may be things he didn't intend.
Bottom line is, questioning history is ALWAYS a good pursuit.
In my own 'final analysis', though, I'm going to go with what Ford said:
| Quote: | | "History is more or less bunk. It's tradition. We don't want tradition. We want to live in the present, and the only history that is worth a tinker's damn is the history that we make today." |
What I think he meant was, letting historical analysis influence decisions we face now is probably a wrong motion. Obviously the "past is prologue" maxim is strict 'linear thinking'. Result: looking too much to the past for solutions in the present can cancel out the simple direct solutions that may be in front of our noses.
I like Fomenko's wild departure from the conventional premises of history.
The intriquing thing about Jerry's discussion in this topic is that it may be possible to see certain threads of consitancy running through it---and most of that's deliberately hidden.
My own question is, has history been controlled all along, even written in advance by those who are inside the planning of world direction? That's a valid question considering certain things we've learned during the last century. The most major changes and events of the 20th century weren't just 'predicted', we have compelling evidence that they were planned.
If that's an acceptable supposition, next question is, how long has that been going on?
_________________
The anticipated never happens. The unexpected constantly occurs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ormond
Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 1558
Location: Belly of the Beast, Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | He's using very similar tactics than the Creationists to demonstrate that the dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time, compressing geological history to 4000 years. It's starting with a conclusion and making every effort to make the data fit. ~ urbanspaceman |
I simply must acknowledge your skepicism on Fomenko's book. But I'm not taking his conclusions as by any means proven. I don't think Jerry or Fintan are either.
What Fomenko's done could well have been intended as yet another psyop to confound and blow a lot of minds, since I think it's clear that there really is a plethora of mad theoretical 'everything you know is wrong' clusterbombs dropped on the internet as part of the 'dumbing down' agenda.
But all psyops must have some truth in them...something that intelligent people always suspected in the back of their minds but accepted.
What an intentional psyop does is exploit a valid question on the tips of people's tongues that could lead to exposure of REAL hidden truth, in order to co-op the valid question and spin it into outer space like a frisbie so that anyone who asks that question again will be labeled a 'kook'.
What I see as the valid premise--an assumption based on a question we've all almost asked ourselves at times studying history--the'emperor wears no clothes' question:
"Isn't history really just written up to suit the PTB?"
It's the kind of question one asks early...maybe at 7 or 8, but is told "you're an idiot. Say that again and you'll end up being held back or sent to 'special' school. So you shut up and accept everything for a few years.
Eventually we realized that it's true---history is flawed. By college we can begin to see spots where it's obviously skewed and/or arbitrary.
Fomenko's begun with the notion that history is tailored and fictionalized to make it fit as a taken for granted pre-supposition. From there, he's free to assume that if the purpose of history is 'reality and culture creation' instead of recording the past accurately, then it will also be foreshortened or lenghtened to suit as well.
Fomenko hasn't proven to me that what follows from these premises is accurate or correct. I mean, give a staff of very serious free thinking scholars at least 20 years to do the research to really debunk the ancient history we have, and prove he's on target with his datelines.
But what I see as valid are the pre-suppositions:
1. The history that becomes published and 'official' is that which is tailored to fit the paradigm the PTB like and want reinforced.
2. History timelines are squeezed and streched to suit.
As an artist, I learned early that a lot of art professors and artists backdate work. It's considered unethical, and you can be blacklisted for getting caught. But I know of many cases that have been caught.
Why do they do it? To make themselves look much brighter and better than they are. If I've done a painting this year with all I've learned and know about art trends now, and I backdate it to 1970, it might impress.
"wow, he was ahead of his time, a real undiscovered innovator".
When I first viewed the video link, I found accepting Fomenko's rollforward of ancient history to the post first millenium times very hard to swallow.
I won't 'buy it'--but my point is I can't buy any version of history prior to the one my grandparents told me of the world as they'd known it in their own times before me. So anything before 1900 could -- as far as I know --be more greatly exaggerated the further one goes backward, if it's been manipulated.
As we do know that history is modified more or less for each generation, if that's been doing on deliberately according to a formula of how much time must elapse before the time of the living before you can go freakin' wild and say WTF you want, the that would be the science. For while a science of knowing true history isn't feasible, a science of history fabrication sure could be as much a science as principles of advertising is.
Another thing is that at first it's hard to imagine 'Ancient Rome' Existing in the early qutrocento. But keep in mind that Fomenko didn't say people just crawled out of caves in 1000AD. Obviously there was a civilization going on for millenia prior to then. My personal suspicion clashes with Fomenko's to the extent that I never did think buy that the first 'civilization' was Sumer. The Sumerians and 'civilization' seems to have just popped out of thin air with fully developed astronomy--and the same olf exploiting artificial economic system we're still dealing with now that fucks everything up that it touches.
What he's proposed is that whatever that history is was completely censored out and what we've been given has been the PTB 'preferred' history. ie, propaganda.
What would they have been wanting to hide?
(personal speculation)
That there was another natural form of human living the pre-dates banking and artificial power economy. And whatever that was, I imagine it was probably around for tens of thousands of years. Everything I've intuitively felt since childhood has been that the civilization we live in is an abomination. Because only the shit-heads float to the top. The sociopaths.
I believe the human species has been co-opted by a minorty of abberant gene-bearers. But that's just my personal, subjective perception of it.
(end personal disclaimer).
That's got a ring of truth to it. What I'm willing to buy is this:
If a completely new system came to dominance in the world in a global way around 1000 years ago, I can believe they would have the perfect motive to wipe the slate and start the world off at the "Year Zero". Since the world was full of too many witnesses, they did this gradually over several generations, and back dated their "Year Zero" to "A.D" a thousand years earlier. It's a no-brainer that making your new Thousand Year Reich "Ancient" and "this is how it's been since the dawn of MAN" is the key to how ANY culture validates itself. ie, 'IT ALL COMES FROM GOD" (so pay no attention to that little old man behind the curtain....)
How much of history is just a bunch of fiction, I think, is open for a helluva lot more study than presented by one author in one book, but maybe some young historians should devote their careers to finding out more about it.
Oh, and any reading this who are thinking of doing so, a bit of good advice.
Don't take any Carnegie or Rockefeller foundation money!
_________________
The anticipated never happens. The unexpected constantly occurs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jerry Fletcher
Joined: 21 Jan 2006
Posts: 838
Location: Studio BS
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| urbanspaceman wrote: | On Fomenko, from:
http://www.skepticreport.com/mystics/fomenko.htm
| Quote: |
The American presidents Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy were both concerned with civil rights and had wives who lost children both during and after their terms in the White House. Both presidents were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson from towns that were 15 minutes from Johnson City in Tennessee, and both successors left the presidency in disgrace.
Lincoln was shot in the Ford theatre and Kennedy was shot in a Ford Lincoln. Both were shot in the head by a southerner on a Friday while sitting next to their wives. Both assassins were assassinated before the trials, and one of them ran from a theatre and was caught in a warehouse, while the other ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theatre.
These facts force us to the inevitable conclusion that Lincoln was a fictive copy of Kennedy!
|
|
Also from the above quoted article:
| Quote: | This might come as a surprise to most readers, but there are actually people who have taken this article seriously.
It is meant as a joke
From:
http://www.skepticreport.com/mystics/fomenko.htm |
Perhaps this explains the cheeky 'conclusion'.
| Quote: | Conclusion
Even though it is quite embarrassing to live in a country whose history has been faked, I’m actually quite proud: It only took me a few hours to prove that a lot of history has been faked, that a transvestite has been ruling Denmark, that time machines exists and that humans and dinosaurs just might have met each other as the creationists claim. |
Besides, the article is about a lecture regarding Fomenko's ideas, not a critique of his book, which he states he has not read.
Instead, he read a 'skeptical' review of the book written by, none other than debunker boy wonder Jason Colavito!. It's a small, skeptical world after all.
| Quote: |
I'm all for sacrificing sacred cows if new evidence arises, but Fomenko's attempt to reduce history to mathematics is bizarre, and strikes me as junk science. His statistical analsis of history is inventive, and might one day be shown to be another very useful tool in the historian's toolbox, but Fomenko uses it in such a forced an isolated way, I'm far from convinced by his arguments. |
As you know, algebra give me hives, so I haven't double checked Fomenko's mathematical formulas for his 'New Chronology', and therefore can't comment on the math. I can't 'feel' anything about the calculations unless I understand them. Do you? Other than a chip on your shoulder about Creationists, what is it about Fomenko's use of math that infuriates you? He is, after all, a PhD. in physics and mathematics. His credentials don't suggest a career of 'Junk Science', unless all the leading Russian academics are in on it too.
| Quote: |
And as another poster commented, those ads on google for his book are weird. In fact, fucking creepy, almost cultish. If Alex Jones' name was attached to them, half the people on this forum would be screaming 'obvious propaganda!'. |
It's unfortunate the computer translated voice over accompanying the video trailers gave you such a scare. There was some nice music, though, although that kind of added to the surreal voice over. Then again, real and surreal have been spending so much time together it's hard to tell em apart.
I've got an idea - stop watching the video trailers and read the book. Then come here and tear it to shreds page by page so everyone can see what a gullible tard I am. I never intended to be a proponent of Fomenko's book or defender of his hypotheses, and if this is a load of caca, for the love of poop jokes, please stop me before I torpedo what tiny amount of credibility Fintan's phone call may have brought.
But so far, these are your feelings, and, valid as they may be, don't mean much unless you specify which of Mr. Robotrailer's statements you disagree.
| Quote: |
He's using very similar tactics than the Creationists to demonstrate that the dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time, compressing geological history to 4000 years. It's starting with a conclusion and making every effort to make the data fit. |
Why does questioning historical accuracy or doubting Darwin immediately make me a Creationist? Why and how are these 'Creationist' tactics? Who cares what Creationists think, as we're talking about validity of supposed historical evidence. Is 'Creationist' meant to be an epithet?
I'm not even at the part where Fomenko discusses his New Chronology, as I'm still reeling about how much history is unverifiable. Not patently false, just unverifiable. As Fintan mentioned, he's "kicked some serious holes" in a lot of the pre-conceived ideas about the historical timeline. That was my main interest - what may not have happened, because that opened up the possibility for my own individual examination of the possibilities. I may or may not agree with Fomenko's final assessment of what did happen before the middle ages, namely, cause I'm busy working on one of my own - one with only half the math of other revisionists.
| Quote: |
In our zeal to stand up to the PTB, let's not counter their bullshit with more bullshit, people. There's 2 kinds of non-conformity: independant thinking that sees beyond blind groupthink, and blind teenage rebelliousness. This strikes me as much more of the second kind than the first. |
Well, I'm still in the countering bullshit stage, and I don't think being amazed by how much of consensual history is contradictory and unverifiable constitutes blind teenage rebellious groupthink.
But then, I'll have to check with the group on that...
| Quote: | | You can't fight propaganda with your own narcissism. |
But you can love yourself for trying! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
elbowdeep
Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 393
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Jerry...
I feel for you. I too have journeyed into revisional stuff.
If you have read Fomenko, then I would highly recommend you read "Fingerprints of the Gods" by Hancock to "balance" things. (whatever that means!?)
http://www.grahamhancock.com/library/default.htm
Hancock uses different methods and makes some startling conclusions as well, in a nutshell says we've been on this planet (as a civilized world) way longer than accepted historians tell us (more like 12-15 thousand years). This may supplement Fomenko, or contradict, not sure, haven't read all too much of Fomenko. All I'm recommending, is that you also read Hancock, and don't get too tied up in any one of these authors. I think there may be a certain amount of embellishment that goes into these works, to make things fit like a glove... they are human after all.
Seems there is lots of debunking on all accounts, and it seems that the deeper one gets into any one view of things, the more myopic one becomes. It's a tough journey.
I tend to try to get the "general idea" of the concepts of these various writers, and also read the debunkers. I take all points into consideration, and in the end, I generally evaluate everything into some shade of gray. Rarely am I 100% on anything... I generally am always at the 60% view on things, and change my mind often, as often UNRELATED works become related, and either boost my belief in a certain "fact", or dimenish it. It's all related unfortunately. [] Just have to let your 'gut' guide you.
Good luck my friend, I also hate this stuff, and also love this stuff. Read Hancock as well. Knowing what you now know, it might make you laugh, it might make you cry.
ED
_________________
One day the cows will sprout wings and fly away...
http://twitter.com/elbowdeep |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ormond
Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 1558
Location: Belly of the Beast, Texas
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm supposing that we don't have any tenured history professors on the forum, since the broadcast and topic has been out for several days. If there were, they surely would have been on this one like 'white on rice'.
So I'll put forward my 'layman's understanding' of how official history is sanctified and goes down on the books.
Number One, there are at any given time two versions of history to begin with.
The most public one is the Public Library version. The second is the Academic Archive version, available only to tenured professors, and graduate students upon permission from an authority to have access to specific topics in the Archive.
Certain real histories are "classified". The personal letters and lives of famous persons--politicians and scientists in particular, though it does include artists and anyone else noteworthy.
The sensitive documents of government, also.
These critical notes, letters, memos and meeting minutes go 'in the vault' of archives, figuratively speaking, for fifty years. The legal reasoning is to wait fifty years to assure that anyone mentioned in the real history will be deceased.
Meanwhile, as I mentioned, certain categories of qualified academics are permitted to view inside the vault. Generally material they're allowed to view is specific and limited to their field of study, and only upon demostration that it's for academic purposes.
Now, these academics are under restriction that they may view the material, and they can chat about it with peers, even with grad students--informally. But they may not publish it, or make what they learn part of their class curriculum.
During that fifty years, historians are working away writing up the final version of the official histories of today. Only that version will not be made public until 2056.
I belief that my synopsis of how it works is very general, but also accurate to the best of my understanding, as it was explained to me by professors when I was a student, and also worked in University libraries.
I bring this up because when I learned how official, academic history is continually updated, it's obvious that at any time, the 'wikipedia' history is full of screens, gaps, blind spots, and misconceptions.
It's also evident that with a tightly controlled, compartmentalized 'maze' system like this controlling the production of history, there's plenty of opportunity for systematically altering history. If that's being done, then all this Byzantine method and safeguarding was set up to conceal that.
In my own lifetime, I've seen 'history' change a great deal from what was in my World Book Encyclopedia as a kid. Famous quotes have been altered, (Neil Armstrongs 'One small step for Man', for one...)
And now there's even a new paradigm of 'Post Modernism' which says it's just fine to 'deconstruct' history. This seems very like a segue to excuse 'history generation'.
Of course all the while the cloistered scribes are toiling away for a half century in the 'vault' arranging the papers in the right montage order, anyone can print best sellers proposing any paradigm of history they wish--provided they're published. It's a free and open market.
Fomenko's book falls into that category. Along with Von Daniken's "Chariots of the Gods", Velikovsky's "Worlds in Collision". amd whatever book that was a couple of years ago that claimed Abraham Lincoln was gay. Even best sellers that put forth histories have no effect or sanction from the official academic version of history. They do not follow the approved proceedure for academic approval.
What I find exciting and valid about Fomenko is that he's dealing with a valid aspect that nobody has generally questioned--- the chronology.
He questions it big time.
He may be wildly off in his calculations, but I love the direction of being able to question these timelines!
Another valid point is when he points out that when ursupers stole thrones, they had to rewrite history to validate their Divine Right, as that is surely so and can been proven.
As for math.
| Quote: | Theodore Roosevelt said:
"There are lies. There are damn lies. And then there are statistics...." |
_________________
The anticipated never happens. The unexpected constantly occurs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
