The Morningstarr*

Mr Morningstarr* · 17-06-2006, 21:28

How do we know that history is correct? Or even if these past events happened when they were supposed to?

On several occasions past scholars have tried to map human history, or at least timelines, and have theorised that our accepted chronology is all tits up!

hock:

Fomenko decided the Dark Ages didn't happen! And Jesus was only born 1000 years ago.

Ck · 18-06-2006, 11:10

We don't know, I find it best to keep an open mind about everything, history included.

People have different outlooks on what's happened on a day to day basis so when it comes to major events the same will apply but tenfold. Even when you take modern history where we have access to data from calenders and diaries giving exact times and dates of events you'll always get different takes on things. Also, we as the general public are often spoon fed information, rather than be aparty to actual facts. Facts tend to come out much later and are often dismissed due to people believing the original story that they were fed. *waffle*

I feel more recently that generally people have started to question what's happened, take the moon landing for example. I'm quite liking the theory that man didn't actually land on the moon and that it was all staged in order for it to look like the Americans were more technologically advanced than the Russians and that it also explained away 30 billion dollars! It's only a theory but it does raise certain questions such as why hasn't man been to the moon more often? But more importantly, if it is true that the Moon landing was faked, what else are the Governments prepared to lie about?

911 maybe? Things have certainly tightened up since then and there's more to come what with identity cards.

But back to your question about time lines, can science not be used to 'date' things? I have a faint recollection of the Turin Shroud being 'dated' within my lifetime using modern technology, although what I remember is very vague. If Fomenko is correct about Jesus only being born 1000 years ago and not over 2000 years ago then what is all that stuff they're worshipping ? :?

Mr Morningstarr* · 18-06-2006, 12:11

From what I've read carbon dating and other methods of dating objects still relies on referencing to the existing chronology. Fomenko suggests that time lines appear longer than what they are because certain events were duplicated throughout history, depending on how the events were reported. Rather than dismiss conflicting reportd entirely historians in the 16th century just slotted things into the chronology at different times.

SFB · 18-06-2006, 20:34

Our idea of measured time isn't necessarily accurate, what is a year really? Maybe we only live to the age of 10 ***'s?

I'm off to watch a film.

Mr Morningstarr* · 18-06-2006, 20:42

The year does seem a bit to cock too, the seasons are all muddled these days. A day is always the same length though.

SFB · 18-06-2006, 20:47

Not true M*, the Roman measured day is, ish, the 'natural' day isn't!!!!
Ner, ner, ne-na-na.

Mr Morningstarr* · 18-06-2006, 20:50

How far out is it though? Seconds?

They do have a system to recoup these losses don't they? I trust they can manage to fix a tolerance on a 24 hour period. Recording a yearly cycle around the sun must be more challenging though. The variables must be massive.