History is for suckers.

[reletor]

It is about remaking humans by brute force, this time we are to be fit for UTOPIA.

It is mental illness.

I agree. If it is "politically correct," it has its roots in mental illness.

 

[reletor]

You don't seem to know much at all about history.

I know enough that no major forum out there will let me mention it. Mainly, because I can also back up what I say.

 

[reletor]

you are just another right wing moron

Fucketh offeth.

 

[Hawkeye10]

I agree. If it is "politically correct," it has its roots in mental illness.

Politically Correct means "Say what you are told to say or else you get hurt".

This is a Dark Age.

 

[BidenPresident]

I know enough that no major forum out there will let me mention it. Mainly, because I can also back up what I say.

Oh, you are that Nazi. I remember.

 

[BidenPresident]

Fucketh offeth.

Back at you, asshole.

 

[Into the Night]

History is largely just opinions.

WRONG. History is a set of past events.

Physics and chemistry aren't based on opinions. They are the results of testable science.

WRONG. Physics and chemistry are made up of theories of science. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Science itself isn't testable.

 

[Into the Night]

These days some of the dumbest people around have degrees from an Ivy.

THAT's certainly true! I have seen a lot of illiterate people, or people that claim to be able to do a job and can't. The most arrogant and incompetent (I won't hire them!) are those from Ivy schools.

When I hire someone, I am doing so for them to do a job at the agreed upon wage. I test them for competency before hiring them. Haven't found a competent twit yet from an Ivy school (and they do apply!).

 

[Into the Night]

Incorrect.

Historical scholarship is based on analysis, written documentation, archeological data, corroboration, and a weight of evidence approach.

Historians establish hypotheses like physicists do, and disagree on the interpretation of data just like astronomers do. In both disciplines, knowledge and interpretations evolve as more information and new approaches become available.

Science is not hypothesis. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. A hypothesis stems from a theory, not the other way around.
History is not hypothesis. History is a set of past events.

 

[Into the Night]

Gee, and it used to be just the facts about what happened, but I guess that's too much honesty for leftist shitbags to muster. It's a good thing they

haven't been around for very long as far as the timeline of history is concerned.

He is trying to justify expert worship as 'history'.

 

[Hawkeye10]

THAT's certainly true! I have seen a lot of illiterate people, or people that claim to be able to do a job and can't. The most arrogant and incompetent (I won't hire them!) are those from Ivy schools.

When I hire someone, I am doing so for them to do a job at the agreed upon wage. I test them for competency before hiring them. Haven't found a competent twit yet from an Ivy school (and they do apply!).

Or as I have said they are so ignorant that they have no clue how ignorant they are. Modern Morons imagine that they are the bestest humans who have ever walked the earth, to the point that listening to any humans who came before them is a waste of time.

 

[Into the Night]

Knowledge isn't just lying around on the ground waiting for us to pick up.

Almost all human knowledge is based on analysis and interpretation. That is true for physics, for biology, for history, for archeology.

Physics generally uses partical accelerators and integral calculus.

Historical analysis uses analysis of written sources, archeology, and corroboration.

Science is not interpretation or analysis. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Nothing more.
Physics doesn't need particle accelerators or calculus (which isn't even science!).
History isn't analysis. History is a set of past events. You don't need a voting bloc in either science or history.

 

[Into the Night]

There are no written documents from the historical past that just "tell it like it is".

Ancient authors frequently had an agenda when they wrote. It would be stupid to accept historical written documentation at face value and not be skeptical. That's why we need trained historical scholars to analyze multiple written sources, corroborate the written evidence, supplement it with archeological data or linguistic analysis, and come to a reasonable conclusion about what really happened.

It is the same basic process used in astronomical or physics investigations though the tools of analysis and degree of quantification are different.

History isn't a document. History is a set of past events. Science isn't analysis or quantification. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.

 

[Into the Night]

Wow, that is much worse if that is the case. I'm sticking with reality.

It is the case.

 

[Into the Night]

Uneducated dumbasses don't understand the conceptual differences between anecdotal evidence and corroborated evidence from multiple sources.

To be perfectly honest, most of them don't want to learn the difference and a good portion of them are too fucking stupid to learn.

Nope. No voting bloc.

 

[Into the Night]

A lot of MAGA never went to college, do not understand the nature of research scholarship, and the only thing they actually know about universities is what Tucker Carlson and Gateway Pundit have ordered them to believe.

Bigotry. Redefinition fallacy (research scholarship<->Universal Truth).

 

[Matt Dillon]

Thank you.

I assumed there was some reason why he was defending this so strongly.
In other words, some people wanted other people to ignore something about history.

So...Into The Night...is a Nazi?!?

I have been here a fair while.
And I still get surprised at how far out some of the people here are.

No, not Into The Night, the OP.

 

[Matt Dillon]

You don't seem to know much at all about history.

He knows a lot more than your dumbass.

 

[reletor]

WRONG. History is a set of past events.

WRONG. Physics and chemistry are made up of theories of science. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Science itself isn't testable.

When it comes to historical events, were you there? Enough said. Much of science is backed up by mathematics. It is as inescapable as 1 + 1 = 2. Also, these days the have this thing called the double blind study. Where things are tried where even the scientists themselves don't know what is being done. Whether or not it works comes out in the results. Those results are rock solid and irrefutable.

 

[Matt Dillon]

Versus your inarticulate bullshit.

By any other name, articulate bullshit is still just bullshit.