|
On February 10 2011 14:41 travito wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 14:38 Elegy wrote:On February 10 2011 14:37 travito wrote:
I've been trying to look this up but I haven't found what I am looking for...here are the only(few) details I know:
-a mass killing, considered to be a "holocaust"
-took place somewhere in either eastern europe, russia, or the balkans
-to this day the country responsible denies it
-they buried them in mass graves...
I remember learning about this in high school social. ... Armenian genocide? or is this like a troll post that I'm not getting because I'm stupid o_O No I think this might be it, a quick google shows that the Turkish government tries to hide this, which sounds familiar. EDIT: Nevermind. Don, that is the one I was thinking of. I didn't know that they admitted that Stalin was responsible however. The forest part was also a vague detail that I now remember since you mentioned it. Thanks
Well Katyn is I think no longer denied by Russians. Actually Polish president's crash in Russia this year was actually when he was on the way to ceremony related to Katyn I think. Also it cannot really be called genocide. But I would say in Russia it might still be somewhat topic that is consistent with OP.
|
On February 10 2011 15:12 Mortality wrote:
Galilieo.
I recently read about this and was a little surprised. The American K-12 system essentially teaches that Galileo was a quirky good guy fighting for truth against the evil Catholic Church trying to suppress his ideas.
The truth of Galileo's trial is actually very different. He was, at least when he was younger, actually friends with the pope (later in life he wrote a book in which he called the pope a simpleton, which was what got the ball rolling on the whole heresy trial to begin with) and there was a lot of politics involved in his trial, in particular that many people wanted to discredit Galileo either because of Galileo's criticism of their own work -- Galileo was sort of an intellectual bully of his time, and not always right either -- or to get at Galileo's patrons, the Medici family. Fellow "natural philosophers" -- as scientists were called back then -- testified against Galileo. But even after confessing to heresy, he lived the rest of his life -- and he was already quite old, in his 70's -- in a very cozy house arrest.
I forget where I heard this but was he not friends with the pope before the man became the pope? Not that it really makes a difference.
|
On February 10 2011 14:01 Eskii wrote:Show nested quote +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! User was temp banned for this post.
This and the ban made me laugh sooo hard.
Ironically (or maybe not), holocaust is historiographiclly extremely interesting.
|
On February 10 2011 14:55 travito wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 14:53 gongryong wrote:
1969 Moon Landing!
why has no one mentioned it yet?
Sorry Americans, but there is overwhelming evidence against it. Can you provide some of this evidence? I'm all ears if you can back up your claims.
why dont you do your own research on it. the internetz is there for you 
|
On February 10 2011 15:03 Alexhandr wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 15:01 mcc wrote:On February 10 2011 14:18 Alexhandr wrote:On February 10 2011 14:07 travito wrote:On February 10 2011 14:02 Alexhandr wrote:On February 10 2011 14:01 Eskii wrote: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. Well there is a difference between the ideologies, not really that much between those leaders. Killing of people is basically part of nazist ideology. There is nothing like that inherent in communism, not even specifically in marxism, that is the reason for double standard, and pretty good reason, otherwise you could say democracy is also bad, capitalism is bad, .... I don't know of a communist state/nation yet where the government is all nice and kind. So therefor, communism is bad. plus, communism is a dream. It will not work due to human nature. And that is to work and keep what we have for ourselves. Communism is a nice idea. A lovely idea. But impossible to achieve.
I agree with you, I just tried to explain the seeming double standard.
|
I'm pretty sure there are a bunch of discrepancies in who made what scientific/invention discovery first. Lots of thieves, plus a whole bunch of stuff was discovered and created way back thousands of years ago and then rediscovered and documented in more recent times.
For example, Alexander Graham Bell apparently got a patent out first for the telephone over Antonio Meucci (who made it first), and then destroyed his earlier diagrams.
And those freaking ancient Greeks did everything before us, but I'm sure someone took their ideas and claimed them.
|
Japan trying to surrender to the US before the nuclear bombs were dropped, but were denied because they wouldn't give up their emperor. Which they didn't actually have to do in the end.
|
What about the assassination of JFK?
Would that suffice as historically controversial to a certain extent?
Conspiracy theories, man with the umbrella, grassy knoll, Lee Harvey Oswald, etc.
Certainly in history classes we've discussed (and even watched videos on) the fact that there is some sort of mystery surrounding his death.
|
On February 10 2011 15:17 gongryong wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 14:55 travito wrote:On February 10 2011 14:53 gongryong wrote:
1969 Moon Landing!
why has no one mentioned it yet?
Sorry Americans, but there is overwhelming evidence against it. Can you provide some of this evidence? I'm all ears if you can back up your claims. why dont you do your own research on it. the internetz is there for you
Well usually when you claim something like that you should be able to back it up.
|
On February 10 2011 15:10 frodoguy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 15:01 mcc wrote:On February 10 2011 14:18 Alexhandr wrote:On February 10 2011 14:07 travito wrote:On February 10 2011 14:02 Alexhandr wrote:On February 10 2011 14:01 Eskii wrote: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. Well there is a difference between the ideologies, not really that much between those leaders. Killing of people is basically part of nazist ideology. There is nothing like that inherent in communism, not even specifically in marxism, that is the reason for double standard, and pretty good reason, otherwise you could say democracy is also bad, capitalism is bad, .... How can you have a good reason for double standards? If history has taught us anything, its that the victor is righteous, always has been, always will be.
Sorry, that was badly worded , I meant there is only seemingly double standard, but that in reality there is actually difference.
|
On February 10 2011 15:11 Noev wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 15:01 Alexhandr wrote:On February 10 2011 14:55 Darpa wrote:
I do believe that there is extensive accounts of marco polo's trip through China. The great wall itself being around at that time is a common misconception. The wall existed in sections being built throughout history. However the wall as it is today (one long wall) was never actually completed until the ming dynasty (around 1375 - about 75 years after marco polo travelled china) So its entirely possible he didnt see it.
As for the other suggestions, those are maybe just coincidence, but remember that China at that point was a very large country. Certain cultural practices (like binding of the feet) were not common practice among northern chinese. Which was where Marco Polo was generally have thought to adventure.
The only reason I know this is because of a course I took in University, so I genuinely believe marco polo did visit China.
As for the original question
The only thing I can think of that is accepted but probably didnt actually happen the way it was thought is based around famous people as opposed to events. I.e. General Custard was a hero, William wallace was a hero, Thermopalyae only had 300 greeks... ect.
One big one I've heard is that The civil war wasnt actually about slavery (this is a contentious one, but there are records of abraham lincon suggesting in his memoirs that he didnt want to free them, but was forced to because of a changing social structure and the slavery issue was just the scapegoat for consolidating power over the southern aristocrats.)
edit. For those who care, the armenian killings happened, almost half a million armenians were killed. Armenia is in the process of having the killings recognized as a "genocide" in the world criminal court and the United nations. (something which turkey obviously opposes) Slavery wasn't the cause of the Civil War. The rights of states was. Slavery was just used to justify what the Union did. South said, "State's rights!" North said: "No, federal government is more powerful!" South said, "No. We won't do what you want." North said: "Okay." Lincoln was elected. Tensions rose. South realized Lincoln wasn't a man to mess around with. Seceded. Fort Sumter attacked, and the war in which brother against brother began. Lincoln freed the slaves in the South during the war (not the North, mind you) to gain more support. Amendment added in after war. Years and years of Northern intolerance towards the South, Tensions stayed strong for awhile. Blam. Done. I got a essay in yo essay. <3 Nice write up short sweet and to the point. Just to add to your post you might want to include that the north declared it a war about slavery in an effort to keep other european nations from siding with the south, because most of them at the time had abolished it. I must say the planed worked very well.
Eh, South cared for the state's rights only so they can keep slavery running, so this shift of explanation is just to retain any respectability. The war was about slavery in the end.
|
The only 'states rights' issue during the American Civil War was the right of southern states to continue practicing slavery.
In an effort to contribute more to this thread however, did you know that we have no idea what Christopher Columbus looked like? Every portrait of him was painted posthumously and each portrait offers a very different account of his physical appearance.
|
On February 10 2011 15:17 gongryong wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 14:55 travito wrote:On February 10 2011 14:53 gongryong wrote:
1969 Moon Landing!
why has no one mentioned it yet?
Sorry Americans, but there is overwhelming evidence against it. Can you provide some of this evidence? I'm all ears if you can back up your claims. why dont you do your own research on it. the internetz is there for you
I'm sorry but if your going to post such a bold statement like this then I think you should atleast back it up with something.
I'm pretty sure myself that all the evidence against it has been proved otherwise. But I would love to hear of evidence that hasn't. Also 99% of the Moon Landing "hoax" is uninteresting copypaste which is obviously untrue. That last 1% is hard to find but interesting, and again, Extremely likely that it is untrue.
|
On February 10 2011 15:21 travito wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 15:17 gongryong wrote:On February 10 2011 14:55 travito wrote:On February 10 2011 14:53 gongryong wrote:
1969 Moon Landing!
why has no one mentioned it yet?
Sorry Americans, but there is overwhelming evidence against it. Can you provide some of this evidence? I'm all ears if you can back up your claims. why dont you do your own research on it. the internetz is there for you Well usually when you claim something like that you should be able to back it up.
Well then why dont you do that to ALL THE OTHER CLAIMS in this thread? Cmon man, we are in the information age. Its all out there waiting for you. It will be a rewarding experience to decide for yourself, believe me.
|
On February 10 2011 15:12 Shiragaku wrote:
The Polish Calvary never fought against German tanks. It was all German propaganda but it is fun to bring it up as a joke.
The French did not lose every single major war. If you are going to argue against that statement, then you are pretty dumb.
I support the first one as pretty good example of what the OP is looking for. It is very widely spread even here, and we are neighbours of Poland.
|
On February 10 2011 14:52 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 14:46 Alexhandr wrote:
There are so many dark and disgusting secrets in humanity's history... In the past two thousand years alone, it's depressing... all the people that have had their lives taken from them based upon ignorance, hate, and human nature. Do tell, my good sir. For you in this single and entire instance have captivated us like no other orator of marvelous fortune. Hooked us in, and reel us, will you? Aye, like a phoenix your stories are reborn in a great ad infinum, and catch our eyes e'ry time as though no other sight had been seen by them. Do, pray tell my friend of your great stories of emotional magnitude and uncertainty, the likes of which humanity knows so deeply in its heart. For I entreaty to you, my sole, undivided attention.
I have no idea what you meant by any of that. But it made me lol. <3
On February 10 2011 15:11 Noev wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 15:01 Alexhandr wrote:On February 10 2011 14:55 Darpa wrote:
I do believe that there is extensive accounts of marco polo's trip through China. The great wall itself being around at that time is a common misconception. The wall existed in sections being built throughout history. However the wall as it is today (one long wall) was never actually completed until the ming dynasty (around 1375 - about 75 years after marco polo travelled china) So its entirely possible he didnt see it.
As for the other suggestions, those are maybe just coincidence, but remember that China at that point was a very large country. Certain cultural practices (like binding of the feet) were not common practice among northern chinese. Which was where Marco Polo was generally have thought to adventure.
The only reason I know this is because of a course I took in University, so I genuinely believe marco polo did visit China.
As for the original question
The only thing I can think of that is accepted but probably didnt actually happen the way it was thought is based around famous people as opposed to events. I.e. General Custard was a hero, William wallace was a hero, Thermopalyae only had 300 greeks... ect.
One big one I've heard is that The civil war wasnt actually about slavery (this is a contentious one, but there are records of abraham lincon suggesting in his memoirs that he didnt want to free them, but was forced to because of a changing social structure and the slavery issue was just the scapegoat for consolidating power over the southern aristocrats.)
edit. For those who care, the armenian killings happened, almost half a million armenians were killed. Armenia is in the process of having the killings recognized as a "genocide" in the world criminal court and the United nations. (something which turkey obviously opposes) Slavery wasn't the cause of the Civil War. The rights of states was. Slavery was just used to justify what the Union did. South said, "State's rights!" North said: "No, federal government is more powerful!" South said, "No. We won't do what you want." North said: "Okay." Lincoln was elected. Tensions rose. South realized Lincoln wasn't a man to mess around with. Seceded. Fort Sumter attacked, and the war in which brother against brother began. Lincoln freed the slaves in the South during the war (not the North, mind you) to gain more support. Amendment added in after war. Years and years of Northern intolerance towards the South, Tensions stayed strong for awhile. Blam. Done. I got a essay in yo essay. <3 Nice write up short sweet and to the point. Just to add to your post you might want to include that the north declared it a war about slavery in an effort to keep other european nations from siding with the south, because most of them at the time had abolished it. I must say the planed worked very well.
Yes, I did forget to mention that. Thank you for agreeing. ^_^;
|
On February 10 2011 15:24 gongryong wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 15:21 travito wrote:On February 10 2011 15:17 gongryong wrote:On February 10 2011 14:55 travito wrote:On February 10 2011 14:53 gongryong wrote:
1969 Moon Landing!
why has no one mentioned it yet?
Sorry Americans, but there is overwhelming evidence against it. Can you provide some of this evidence? I'm all ears if you can back up your claims. why dont you do your own research on it. the internetz is there for you Well usually when you claim something like that you should be able to back it up. Well then why dont you do that to ALL THE OTHER CLAIMS in this thread? Cmon man, we are in the information age. Its all out there waiting for you. It will be a rewarding experience to decide for yourself, believe me.
Yes, it would be nice if all the claims in this thread posted evidence... but why not start with you?
On February 10 2011 15:26 Alexhandr wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 14:52 Roe wrote:On February 10 2011 14:46 Alexhandr wrote:
There are so many dark and disgusting secrets in humanity's history... In the past two thousand years alone, it's depressing... all the people that have had their lives taken from them based upon ignorance, hate, and human nature. Do tell, my good sir. For you in this single and entire instance have captivated us like no other orator of marvelous fortune. Hooked us in, and reel us, will you? Aye, like a phoenix your stories are reborn in a great ad infinum, and catch our eyes e'ry time as though no other sight had been seen by them. Do, pray tell my friend of your great stories of emotional magnitude and uncertainty, the likes of which humanity knows so deeply in its heart. For I entreaty to you, my sole, undivided attention. I have no idea what you meant by any of that. But it made me lol. <3 Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 15:11 Noev wrote:On February 10 2011 15:01 Alexhandr wrote:On February 10 2011 14:55 Darpa wrote:
I do believe that there is extensive accounts of marco polo's trip through China. The great wall itself being around at that time is a common misconception. The wall existed in sections being built throughout history. However the wall as it is today (one long wall) was never actually completed until the ming dynasty (around 1375 - about 75 years after marco polo travelled china) So its entirely possible he didnt see it.
As for the other suggestions, those are maybe just coincidence, but remember that China at that point was a very large country. Certain cultural practices (like binding of the feet) were not common practice among northern chinese. Which was where Marco Polo was generally have thought to adventure.
The only reason I know this is because of a course I took in University, so I genuinely believe marco polo did visit China.
As for the original question
The only thing I can think of that is accepted but probably didnt actually happen the way it was thought is based around famous people as opposed to events. I.e. General Custard was a hero, William wallace was a hero, Thermopalyae only had 300 greeks... ect.
One big one I've heard is that The civil war wasnt actually about slavery (this is a contentious one, but there are records of abraham lincon suggesting in his memoirs that he didnt want to free them, but was forced to because of a changing social structure and the slavery issue was just the scapegoat for consolidating power over the southern aristocrats.)
edit. For those who care, the armenian killings happened, almost half a million armenians were killed. Armenia is in the process of having the killings recognized as a "genocide" in the world criminal court and the United nations. (something which turkey obviously opposes) Slavery wasn't the cause of the Civil War. The rights of states was. Slavery was just used to justify what the Union did. South said, "State's rights!" North said: "No, federal government is more powerful!" South said, "No. We won't do what you want." North said: "Okay." Lincoln was elected. Tensions rose. South realized Lincoln wasn't a man to mess around with. Seceded. Fort Sumter attacked, and the war in which brother against brother began. Lincoln freed the slaves in the South during the war (not the North, mind you) to gain more support. Amendment added in after war. Years and years of Northern intolerance towards the South, Tensions stayed strong for awhile. Blam. Done. I got a essay in yo essay. <3 Nice write up short sweet and to the point. Just to add to your post you might want to include that the north declared it a war about slavery in an effort to keep other european nations from siding with the south, because most of them at the time had abolished it. I must say the planed worked very well. Yes, I did forget to mention that. Thank you for agreeing. ^_^;
Please address my post right above his, thanks. I find it really hard to believe the civil war wasn't about slavery.
|
On February 10 2011 15:17 phosphorylation wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 14:01 Eskii wrote: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! User was temp banned for this post. This and the ban made me laugh sooo hard. Ironically (or maybe not), holocaust is historiographiclly extremely interesting.
I actually think most holocaust deniers are trolls. The few that seem serious usually admit the existence of the camps and just nitpick about numbers and causes of death, like one of the myths is that the mass graves at Auschwitz were due to an untreated Typhus outbreak. (as if biological mass killings were less bad than chemical mass killings)
|
On February 10 2011 15:27 huameng wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2011 15:24 gongryong wrote:On February 10 2011 15:21 travito wrote:On February 10 2011 15:17 gongryong wrote:On February 10 2011 14:55 travito wrote:On February 10 2011 14:53 gongryong wrote:
1969 Moon Landing!
why has no one mentioned it yet?
Sorry Americans, but there is overwhelming evidence against it. Can you provide some of this evidence? I'm all ears if you can back up your claims. why dont you do your own research on it. the internetz is there for you Well usually when you claim something like that you should be able to back it up. Well then why dont you do that to ALL THE OTHER CLAIMS in this thread? Cmon man, we are in the information age. Its all out there waiting for you. It will be a rewarding experience to decide for yourself, believe me. Yes, it would be nice if all the claims in this thread posted evidence... but why not start with you?
Wow, can we stop with the moon hoax trolling? This isn't 2005 any more...
|
On February 10 2011 14:01 Eskii wrote:Show nested quote +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! User was temp banned for this post.
Why was he banned for that? He stated what some people actually do deny. Nothing he said was offensive or hurtful. =/
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
