What if everything you've ever been told was wrong?

[Sevenpointfive]

there were no dinosaurs. no mummies or grand pyramids and wonders of the world. no space travel or wars ever until the bible. the thought of a dinosaur and archeology wouldn't matter to anyone. they dug up jesus and that's when everything went crazy. but how accurate is carbon dating? it's determined by scientists and people that want you to believe something.

that goes the same for everything since the British invaded africa. why are the only great finds of africa in British territory? reconstructing these monuments at the time they were discovered would be possible. (and i have a theory on the pyramids).

i'm just not sure i believe much of history that's been recited from someone and someone unless it's from the 1850's. i can't trust or won't trust someone telling me it happened unless you have legitimate proof!

anyone else understand my rant of non-belief of history?

[Lliam]

I wouldn't say that everything we have been told is entirely wrong It's just shallow and deliberately one sided. So the conclusions people draw from what they are told are wrong.

The main thing I don't believe is the Bible. Virtually none of it can be backed up by honest research.

I have faith in science. But science continually evolves as scientists learn more, which means that a science is illuminating but not settled or 100% accurate. That's true of paleontology, geology, archeology, astronomy, physics and other true sciences.

We've recently seen how medical science has been twisted by big money for profit. In fact, that began when J. D. Rockefeller created allopathic medicine at the beginning of the 20th century and monopolized medical study for profit.

Now we are seeing the fake science of climate change being used for power and profit.
The possibility of profit can distort any science.

History can be a big problem. History is written by the victors, so it is mostly one sided. People are propagandized by historical narratives, and information that does not fit the desired narrative is censored. One has to seek out and read well researched books with various perspectives to get an inkling of the truth.

A book entitled "Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War" blew my mind. It changes everything that people think they know about the causes of WWI.

I just finished a book by Douglas Reed entitled "The Controversy of Zion". It is fully documented, but most people would suffer cognitive dissonance by reading it.

Historians are literally destroyed for researching the "holocaust" objectively.

[Sevenpointfive]

well everything must be proven in my world. zion isn't. jesus or god isn't. i don't mean to offend but the holocaust isn't. without historical records it didn't happen. and that's where we run into problems. who can believe a journal from anne franke? that's the number one narrative that we have. the book of a child.

so i hope you see my skeptisicm. i don't know why we ever started digging into the ground to find dinosaurs. it doesn't make sense. and i'd like some history as to why these things happened because it spawned cryptids like the loch ness that don't exist. name a significant find since the 1950's and i might believe

[Lliam]

I totally understand your skepticism and agree.

Regarding dinosaurs. People stumble across fossils that have become exposed due to erosion. Once a piece of bone is discovered, paleontologists try to unearth the bones and sometimes discover an almost complete skeleton. And, in some parts of the world like Dinosaur National Park in Utah, or the La Brea tar pits in Los Angeles, they discover multiple fossilized skeletons.
The same thing happens with other species besides dinosaurs, and including early hominids.

That's how we have learned a great deal about the evolution of the planet. But the research is still under way.

[OlderAndWiser]

The Roman historian stated that the purpose of recorded history was to glorify his people and, apparently, historical accuracy was a lower priority. Livy said it explicitly but most revisionists lack that candor. Is that the attitude in history to which you are reacting?

[jshm2]

In other words. You're asserting that history is always reframed to fit the perspective of the people it's being written for.

For example. The USA believes it defeated the Nazi's, and is a positive force in the world. When in fact historically neither is true. No other country took in more fleeing Nazi's and no other country causes more problems around the world.

[NostalgiaSenpi]

Well, it is good to be skeptical, for instance, up until 1938, the Coelacanth was thought to be extinct. History as well as paleontology and other sciences that deal with the past constantly goes through revisions after new discoveries are made.

[NathanDavis]

that would mean... that you're wrong

[Sevenpointfive]

no. it would only mean that i was told wrong

[NathanDavis]

what is wrong is that you have to be told...

rather than actually knowing, yourself

[Sevenpointfive]

that's an easy way out.

[NathanDavis]

no... knowing is the longest road

comprehension and understanding are not for everyone... that's for sure

that's why the vast majority have to be told, and have little choice, other than trust or belief

[Sevenpointfive]

so what company do you keep? you haven't answered the question.

[NathanDavis]

more often than not... it's either of my three cats at the home-office, with me

[Sevenpointfive]

nice! i believe it was the great beck that once said, "Don't believe everything that you breathe, you get a parking violation and a maggot on your sleeve

[NathanDavis]

" Don't sweat the petty things... and don't pet the sweaty things" - Nietzsche

[Guardian45]

All great scientists are skeptical and require reproducible scientific evidence. Science don't lie!

[call_me_scar]

Well shit I'd need some good evidence then

[Drdeeznuts1132]

Haha, my life

[Anonymous]

Nope.