On February 10 2011 14:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Debatable by credible experts? Or by the general public?
Because heck, people will think there's an actual debate over the age of the Earth and universe for non-scientific reasons, even though the experts have incredibly solid evidence backing up their estimates.
There's no actual controversy, except by those who just aren't fond of the facts.
What I mean is history that is printed in textbooks, and magazines, showcased in documentaries that could have alternatives with some evidence. Not like "the earth is only 6000 years old! durr".
On February 10 2011 14:03 Phenny wrote: Tbh saying "I'll probably get banned" is more likely to get you banned than actually saying whatever you were gunna say.
It was more of a joke. I assumed he was referring to saying the holocaust and it didn't seem like a martyring post.
On another note, I read in a The Rise of the Fourth Reich by Jim Marrs that apparently the US did not actually create the Uranium for the bomb in WW2. IIRC he showed and cited a bunch of accounts that the US never produced enough Uranium to create both bombs, but they actually intercepted a German sub en route to Japan filled with enough Plutonium for the at least one of the bombs. It also showed that the US researched Atomic bombs with Uranium iirc while Germany was researching with A-Bombs with Plutonium while one bomb was Plutonium based while the other was Uranium which wouldn't make that the US had a Plutonium bomb if they didn't research into it.
I read it a while ago, I could be confusing the two isotopes. Oh but the book also claimed that the Nazi's may have created UFO's. I looked into the bomb sources but not the UFO ones. The bomb sources looked kind of legitimate iirc. It was years ago I read it.
On February 10 2011 14:13 Candide wrote: Because Hitler did something called the holocaust where it was a racial genocide. compared to the gulag which was a small cultural genocide and a political prison.
Hitler sent more than just Jewish people to concentration camps. He sent Christians, blacks, homosexuals, gypsies etc.
On February 10 2011 13:54 Silidons wrote: If I say it, I'll probably get banned.
Fine, if you don't say it, I will...
THE HOLOCAUST!
Oh... only absolute morons deny such things. You can't hide the deaths of 11 million innocent people. =/
Despite the atrocities of the holocaust, Hitler was a brilliant leader. He can be credited with huge a economic boom during his time, as well as military success. My question is why is he painted as the posterboy for evil when Stalin and Mao both killed thousands more people under their rule? I am in no way trying to undermine the horrors of the holocaust, but I don't really understand why Stalin or Mao don't get the same negative attention that Hitler does. :/
I understand your point and feel how you feel. Completely. Stalin and Mao were just as bad as Hitler and deserve to be bashed and hated just as much. Millions and millions of innocent people died under their rule. But, hey, Nazis are bad (true). Communism is good (/sarcasm). Remember that.
On February 10 2011 14:13 Candide wrote: Because Hitler did something called the holocaust where it was a racial genocide. compared to the gulag which was a small cultural genocide and a political prison.
Hitler sent more than just Jewish people to concentration camps. He sent Christians, blacks, homosexuals, gypsies etc.
The bastard sent anyone who disagreed with him. Preachers/priests. He executed college children. Look up the White Rose. Christian college kids. Executed. Because they didn't agree with Hitler. It didn't matter to that scumbag.
one thing that's been debated for a long time is whether or not Socrates was a real person, and how much of his ideas were merely Plato's being vocalized through Socrates.
Newton inventing the Calculus. I like to believe he did, and was a total badass, but some will undoubtedly argue the opposite. Then there's that apple thing...
I saw a story a couple of days ago about a 4000 year old corpse that was being removed from an exhibit of Chinese history because the corpse had features similar to a European, but this didn't agree with the Chinese interpretation of history, and could cause turmoil in the region the corpse was found in. (I'll look for a source) Edit: found it: Link, google "Chinese mummy" in news for more if you're interested
On February 10 2011 13:54 Silidons wrote: If I say it, I'll probably get banned.
Fine, if you don't say it, I will...
THE HOLOCAUST!
Oh... only absolute morons deny such things. You can't hide the deaths of 11 million innocent people. =/
Despite the atrocities of the holocaust, Hitler was a brilliant leader. He can be credited with huge a economic boom during his time, as well as military success. My question is why is he painted as the posterboy for evil when Stalin and Mao both killed thousands more people under their rule? I am in no way trying to undermine the horrors of the holocaust, but I don't really understand why Stalin or Mao don't get the same negative attention that Hitler does. :/
Because Stalin and Mao were pretty much West's allies during WW2
On February 10 2011 13:54 Silidons wrote: If I say it, I'll probably get banned.
Fine, if you don't say it, I will...
THE HOLOCAUST!
Oh... only absolute morons deny such things. You can't hide the deaths of 11 million innocent people. =/
Despite the atrocities of the holocaust, Hitler was a brilliant leader. He can be credited with huge a economic boom during his time, as well as military success. My question is why is he painted as the posterboy for evil when Stalin and Mao both killed thousands more people under their rule? I am in no way trying to undermine the horrors of the holocaust, but I don't really understand why Stalin or Mao don't get the same negative attention that Hitler does. :/
From an America's perspective it largely has to do with Western bias in the telling of history. Although, bias isn't nescesarily the right word. I'd say more of a version of history skewed to speak more of the Western world.
Hitler: We kicked his ass and get to play hero. Also, his massacre also occurred while conquering other nations and people, not merely his own in revolution or regime change.
Stalin: Our begrudging ally in WWII whose insanity, famine, and poor country cost many lives on top of his own orders. Once again though, killing your own people, as terrible as it is, has less to do with the outside world so its importance is diminished.
Mao: How many deaths Mao is responsible for is extremely debatable just because of the great leap forward, cultural revolution, the war itself, famine, etc... pegging down a number for him is extremely difficult. Add into that the western bias when teaching history (from our standpoint in the west) and he'll be overlooked largely. Hell, even the atrocities of Japan vs China during WWII are seldom spoken about when teaching WWII, as the majority of information is always about the European war as opposed to the battle in the Pacific.
On February 10 2011 14:02 travito wrote: One that I thought of is many people believe that Shakespeare did not write the plays that he is credited for. One evidence for this is the statue of Shakespeare in his hometown is him holding a bag of seeds or something to do with farming, rather then a pen or anything related to writing. Interesting food for thought.
I heard all his plays were written by a talking cow(anyone get this weekenders reference?)
To refer to the Napoleon quote Travito. Hitler lost the war, Stalin didn't. American history wasn't about to start bashing the shit out of its allies at the time. After that started coming to light I don't think anyone really cared since it was quite a few decades later. Plus the US always needed to demonize Germany/Japan to justify military action. Since we were in a war with Germany and not the USSR there was no reason to bring up their misdeeds since it would only weaken their alliance.
I imagine it probably surfaced around the cold war era at which point people didn't care as much.
Despite the atrocities of the holocaust, Hitler was a brilliant leader. He can be credited with huge a economic boom during his time, as well as military success. My question is why is he painted as the posterboy for evil when Stalin and Mao both killed thousands more people under their rule? I am in no way trying to undermine the horrors of the holocaust, but I don't really understand why Stalin or Mao don't get the same negative attention that Hitler does. :/
He is painted the way he is by history because he lost his war. Stalin in helping defeat Hitler sealed his place on the positive side of history and Mao had a very long and harsh program of closing off China from the outside world thus keeping most of his business relatively quiet. History is all from the perspective of the prevailing power of the time.
On February 10 2011 13:54 Silidons wrote: If I say it, I'll probably get banned.
Fine, if you don't say it, I will...
THE HOLOCAUST!
Oh... only absolute morons deny such things. You can't hide the deaths of 11 million innocent people. =/
Despite the atrocities of the holocaust, Hitler was a brilliant leader. He can be credited with huge a economic boom during his time, as well as military success. My question is why is he painted as the posterboy for evil when Stalin and Mao both killed thousands more people under their rule? I am in no way trying to undermine the horrors of the holocaust, but I don't really understand why Stalin or Mao don't get the same negative attention that Hitler does. :/
Because Stalin and Mao were pretty much West's allies during WW2
Exactly. I like to refer to another quote, by Winston Churchill which echos this point perfectly: "History will be kind to me for I intend to write it."
On February 10 2011 13:54 Silidons wrote: If I say it, I'll probably get banned.
Fine, if you don't say it, I will...
THE HOLOCAUST!
Oh... only absolute morons deny such things. You can't hide the deaths of 11 million innocent people. =/
Despite the atrocities of the holocaust, Hitler was a brilliant leader. He can be credited with huge a economic boom during his time, as well as military success. My question is why is he painted as the posterboy for evil when Stalin and Mao both killed thousands more people under their rule? I am in no way trying to undermine the horrors of the holocaust, but I don't really understand why Stalin or Mao don't get the same negative attention that Hitler does. :/
Because Stalin and Mao were pretty much West's allies during WW2
If you look in the right places(which you'll find is not very hard) people give Stalin and Mao a hard time. I think it was mostly because of the holocaust and Hitler being a primary reason for ww2 starting.
Oh, another falsehood: Columbus being the first european to get to NA. I guess it's not really debatable anymore, but you'll still find schoolchildren being instilled with this strange lie to this day.
Since no one has posted it yet. You cannot see the great wall of china from space.
Also, something that might be of interest is the TV Quiz show "QI". It goes about debunking myths such as Michael Jackson being the creator of the Moon Walk whereas in actuality it was "Bill Bailey". Not the comedian, but a very talented Tap Dancer. -
You can see him demonstrating the dance-move in that video, it's at the end.
PS: Not entirely sure if this is what your looking for, but you may find it interesting.
On February 10 2011 14:28 Roe wrote: Oh, another one: Columbus being the first european to get to NA. I guess it's not really debatable anymore, but you'll still find schoolchildren being instilled with this strange lie to this day.
On February 10 2011 14:06 geometryb wrote: the history of jesus
That's what I instantly thought of after reading the OP. I mean, what's more plausible, Marco Polo going to China or the existence of a magical man?
Well I am a Christian, and I am by no means offended by this, and I DO NOT want this to turn into a religious debate but the fact is that Cornelius Tacitus, considered to be a great historian, wrote about Jesus. Whether or not you believe that he is who he claims to be is completely up to you
On February 10 2011 14:28 Roe wrote: Oh, another one: Columbus being the first european to get to NA. I guess it's not really debatable anymore, but you'll still find schoolchildren being instilled with this strange lie to this day.
On February 10 2011 14:06 geometryb wrote: the history of jesus
That's what I instantly thought of after reading the OP. I mean, what's more plausible, Marco Polo going to China or the existence of a magical man?
Well I am a Christian, and I am by no means offended by this, and I DO NOT want this to turn into a religious debate but the fact is that Cornelius Tacitus, considered to be a great historian, wrote about Jesus. Whether or not you believe that he is who he claims to be is completely up to you
I think there may be some historical evidence regarding a man named Jesus, although that does seem to be a topic of controversy.
Obviously, "man named Jesus" =/= "something more than a man named Jesus" But yeah, that's not a historical controversy really; that's more religious.
EPT![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/AJZJb.jpg)
