I love leftwingers

[buckeye45_73]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

 

[asaratis]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

Even his left wing peers know that he is disingenuous and full of fantasies. He should write novels. They are by definition, fictional.

 

[frigidweirdo]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

The issue is he wrote a book by using sources.

History isn't the TRUTH. History is how people present it. They look at the evidence available and try to come to a conclusion. Some of the evidence is clearly false, some of it is contradictory, so you try to come to a conclusion using what you have. You will never get it 100% right.

Your argument seems to be that Trump's people are all liars, so they never tell the truth, therefore Wolff's book is wrong and therefore not worth anything, so you shouldn't trust it, so there's no reason to doubt Trump's people's word.

Er... do you not see the fallacy of such logic?

 

[asaratis]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

The issue is he wrote a book by using sources.

History isn't the TRUTH. History is how people present it. They look at the evidence available and try to come to a conclusion. Some of the evidence is clearly false, some of it is contradictory, so you try to come to a conclusion using what you have. You will never get it 100% right.

Your argument seems to be that Trump's people are all liars, so they never tell the truth, therefore Wolff's book is wrong and therefore not worth anything, so you shouldn't trust it, so there's no reason to doubt Trump's people's word.

Er... do you not see the fallacy of such logic?

Your first posit is ridiculous. History is what happened in the past. History is nothing but truth about what actually happened in the past. Distortions of history are lies. Now and then historians get away with lying their way into so-called History Books.

 

[frigidweirdo]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

The issue is he wrote a book by using sources.

History isn't the TRUTH. History is how people present it. They look at the evidence available and try to come to a conclusion. Some of the evidence is clearly false, some of it is contradictory, so you try to come to a conclusion using what you have. You will never get it 100% right.

Your argument seems to be that Trump's people are all liars, so they never tell the truth, therefore Wolff's book is wrong and therefore not worth anything, so you shouldn't trust it, so there's no reason to doubt Trump's people's word.

Er... do you not see the fallacy of such logic?

Your first posit is ridiculous. History is what happened in the past. History is nothing but truth about what actually happened in the past. Distortions of history are lies. Now and then historians get away with lying their way into so-called History Books.

Can you tell me anything that happened that didn't happen in the past?

You think History is nothing but the truth about what actually happened? Are you kidding me?

Are distortions of History lies?

One famous case is with a massacre that happened in Columbia. Gabriel Garcia Marquez wrote about it.

Banana massacre - Wikipedia

The workers of the United Fruit Company (The company was American). How many people died?

Gabriel Garcia Marquez said, in a piece of fiction, that it was around 3,000.

The guy who was in charge of the massacre said it was 47.

Some people estimate between 47 and 2,000.

Survivors say between 800 and 3,000.

One person says 9 people died.

How many people died?

The truth is never to be known. But people will believe figures. You ask most people and they'll tell you about 3,000 because Marquez's version is the most widely read.

History gets distorted.

If we go back to Roman History we don't know much and never will. Historians put pieces together and come up with History. But there are bits missing. Without the missing bits the truth will never be known. Does this mean there isn't any Roman History?

The expression often is that the winner gets to write the history.

Egyptian pharaohs often disappeared. The first pharaoh to go with Monotheism was almost totally wiped out by those who wanted to stick with more gods. If he disappears, then the History of Monotheism changes dramatically. If enough people agree that the version we have now is almost certainly the correct version, then THIS IS HISTORY. Regardless of whether it's true or not.

 

[buckeye45_73]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

The issue is he wrote a book by using sources.

History isn't the TRUTH. History is how people present it. They look at the evidence available and try to come to a conclusion. Some of the evidence is clearly false, some of it is contradictory, so you try to come to a conclusion using what you have. You will never get it 100% right.

Your argument seems to be that Trump's people are all liars, so they never tell the truth, therefore Wolff's book is wrong and therefore not worth anything, so you shouldn't trust it, so there's no reason to doubt Trump's people's word.

Er... do you not see the fallacy of such logic?

you lie i never said that.
i said he used these people as sources to write the book then he said they were liars

next time dont lie about what i post we can see it

 

[jon_berzerk]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

--LOL

another "we really REALLY got him this time" let down butt hurt

--LOL

 

[buckeye45_73]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

--LOL

another "we really REALLY got him this time" let down butt hurt

--LOL

yep the left swing and misses, their batting average is horrendous

 

[jon_berzerk]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

Even his left wing peers know that he is disingenuous and full of fantasies. He should write novels. They are by definition, fictional.

when you get cnn jake tapper you know it is a bunch of pure crapola

 

[frigidweirdo]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

The issue is he wrote a book by using sources.

History isn't the TRUTH. History is how people present it. They look at the evidence available and try to come to a conclusion. Some of the evidence is clearly false, some of it is contradictory, so you try to come to a conclusion using what you have. You will never get it 100% right.

Your argument seems to be that Trump's people are all liars, so they never tell the truth, therefore Wolff's book is wrong and therefore not worth anything, so you shouldn't trust it, so there's no reason to doubt Trump's people's word.

Er... do you not see the fallacy of such logic?

you lie i never said that.
i said he used these people as sources to write the book then he said they were liars

next time dont lie about what i post we can see it

I'm not really sure what the problem is here. If I'm lying, you're lying because I've just said the same thing you've said.

Who did he say were all liars? Well, the people in the video he mentions are Spicer, Bannon and Conway. Trump people.

 

[NYcarbineer]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

Is he right? Are they all liars?

 

[asaratis]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

The issue is he wrote a book by using sources.

History isn't the TRUTH. History is how people present it. They look at the evidence available and try to come to a conclusion. Some of the evidence is clearly false, some of it is contradictory, so you try to come to a conclusion using what you have. You will never get it 100% right.

Your argument seems to be that Trump's people are all liars, so they never tell the truth, therefore Wolff's book is wrong and therefore not worth anything, so you shouldn't trust it, so there's no reason to doubt Trump's people's word.

Er... do you not see the fallacy of such logic?

Your first posit is ridiculous. History is what happened in the past. History is nothing but truth about what actually happened in the past. Distortions of history are lies. Now and then historians get away with lying their way into so-called History Books.

Can you tell me anything that happened that didn't happen in the past?

You think History is nothing but the truth about what actually happened? Are you kidding me?

Are distortions of History lies?

One famous case is with a massacre that happened in Columbia. Gabriel Garcia Marquez wrote about it.

Banana massacre - Wikipedia

The workers of the United Fruit Company (The company was American). How many people died?

Gabriel Garcia Marquez said, in a piece of fiction, that it was around 3,000.

The guy who was in charge of the massacre said it was 47.

Some people estimate between 47 and 2,000.

Survivors say between 800 and 3,000.

One person says 9 people died.

How many people died?

The truth is never to be known. But people will believe figures. You ask most people and they'll tell you about 3,000 because Marquez's version is the most widely read.

History gets distorted.

If we go back to Roman History we don't know much and never will. Historians put pieces together and come up with History. But there are bits missing. Without the missing bits the truth will never be known. Does this mean there isn't any Roman History?

The expression often is that the winner gets to write the history.

Egyptian pharaohs often disappeared. The first pharaoh to go with Monotheism was almost totally wiped out by those who wanted to stick with more gods. If he disappears, then the History of Monotheism changes dramatically. If enough people agree that the version we have now is almost certainly the correct version, then THIS IS HISTORY. Regardless of whether it's true or not.

History is the study of things that did or are assumed to have happened or existed in the past.

Recorded history is the study of past happenings that have be documented by man.

Prehistory is the study of past happenings that occurred before man developed art and writing.

Universal history is the study of the origin, evolution and predicted future of the entire universe.

The exact number of people that died in the Banana Massacre is equal to the number of people that actually died in that event. Any statement to the contrary is a distortion of actual history...a lie, whether intentional or not. Historical lies told often enough and by the right people are perpetuated and become accepted as being true even though they remain misrepresentations of the true historical facts.

We are certain of even less of the natural history of the earth that occurred prior to the extinction of dinosaurs and pterodactyls. We see artists' detailed renditions of these prehistoric animals and assume they are correct down to the color and exact texture of the skin.

We are also not absolutely sure of the history of the universe prior to the occurrence of life in any form on our planet. That history depends on imaginations, conjectures, speculations and somewhat logically produced explanations of what might have happened, all made by those who concentrate on that type of study. With our current understanding of chemistry and physics, I suspect that these explanations are more reliable than either our current perceptions of natural history or our accepted volumes of recorded history.

Recorded history can be altered by redacting selected occurrences from the books or by altering statistics and wording in the books. The actual historical facts cannot be changed.

You cannot unring a bell. The closest you can come to that is to claim that the bell never did ring.

 

[buckeye45_73]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

Is he right? Are they all liars?

Well the reason he calls them liars is they say he's full of shit......your author, doesn't have the best reputation....and other than Bannon, he doesn't have much.......sorry charlie

 

[frigidweirdo]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

The issue is he wrote a book by using sources.

History isn't the TRUTH. History is how people present it. They look at the evidence available and try to come to a conclusion. Some of the evidence is clearly false, some of it is contradictory, so you try to come to a conclusion using what you have. You will never get it 100% right.

Your argument seems to be that Trump's people are all liars, so they never tell the truth, therefore Wolff's book is wrong and therefore not worth anything, so you shouldn't trust it, so there's no reason to doubt Trump's people's word.

Er... do you not see the fallacy of such logic?

Your first posit is ridiculous. History is what happened in the past. History is nothing but truth about what actually happened in the past. Distortions of history are lies. Now and then historians get away with lying their way into so-called History Books.

Can you tell me anything that happened that didn't happen in the past?

You think History is nothing but the truth about what actually happened? Are you kidding me?

Are distortions of History lies?

One famous case is with a massacre that happened in Columbia. Gabriel Garcia Marquez wrote about it.

Banana massacre - Wikipedia

The workers of the United Fruit Company (The company was American). How many people died?

Gabriel Garcia Marquez said, in a piece of fiction, that it was around 3,000.

The guy who was in charge of the massacre said it was 47.

Some people estimate between 47 and 2,000.

Survivors say between 800 and 3,000.

One person says 9 people died.

How many people died?

The truth is never to be known. But people will believe figures. You ask most people and they'll tell you about 3,000 because Marquez's version is the most widely read.

History gets distorted.

If we go back to Roman History we don't know much and never will. Historians put pieces together and come up with History. But there are bits missing. Without the missing bits the truth will never be known. Does this mean there isn't any Roman History?

The expression often is that the winner gets to write the history.

Egyptian pharaohs often disappeared. The first pharaoh to go with Monotheism was almost totally wiped out by those who wanted to stick with more gods. If he disappears, then the History of Monotheism changes dramatically. If enough people agree that the version we have now is almost certainly the correct version, then THIS IS HISTORY. Regardless of whether it's true or not.

History is the study of things that did or are assumed to have happened or existed in the past.

Recorded history is the study of past happenings that have be documented by man.

Prehistory is the study of past happenings that occurred before man developed art and writing.

Universal history is the study of the origin, evolution and predicted future of the entire universe.

The exact number of people that died in the Banana Massacre is equal to the number of people that actually died in that event. Any statement to the contrary is a distortion of actual history...a lie, whether intentional or not. Historical lies told often enough and by the right people are perpetuated and become accepted as being true even though they remain misrepresentations of the true historical facts.

We are certain of even less of the natural history of the earth that occurred prior to the extinction of dinosaurs and pterodactyls. We see artists' detailed renditions of these prehistoric animals and assume they are correct down to the color and exact texture of the skin.

We are also not absolutely sure of the history of the universe prior to the occurrence of life in any form on our planet. That history depends on imaginations, conjectures, speculations and somewhat logically produced explanations of what might have happened, all made by those who concentrate on that type of study. With our current understanding of chemistry and physics, I suspect that these explanations are more reliable than either our current perceptions of natural history or our accepted volumes of recorded history.

Recorded history can be altered by redacting selected occurrences from the books or by altering statistics and wording in the books. The actual historical facts cannot be changed.

You cannot unring a bell. The closest you can come to that is to claim that the bell never did ring.

Yes, it's the study of. But you can't study what has been lost. But what was lost was the truth. When something has been lost, you can't have the truth. In place you have HISTORY.

So, History is basically lies.

You can't unring a doorbell, but if no one heard the doorbell ring, what will History say?

Imagine you have a narrative, a man walks up to the house, rings the doorbell and then enters the house. But no one heard him ring the doorbell and he himself is deaf. What does the history say? That the doorbell rang or that it didn't ring? Or maybe History avoids talking about it altogether. The man walked up to the house and entered the house. It's not a lie, it's just not the truth.

 

[asaratis]

He wrote a book with all these sources, but now calls them liars
Does he not see how stupid he looks?

Author Michael Wolff: They're all liars - CNN Video


one way to answer it, release those tapes you have (he doesn't have any)

The issue is he wrote a book by using sources.

History isn't the TRUTH. History is how people present it. They look at the evidence available and try to come to a conclusion. Some of the evidence is clearly false, some of it is contradictory, so you try to come to a conclusion using what you have. You will never get it 100% right.

Your argument seems to be that Trump's people are all liars, so they never tell the truth, therefore Wolff's book is wrong and therefore not worth anything, so you shouldn't trust it, so there's no reason to doubt Trump's people's word.

Er... do you not see the fallacy of such logic?

Your first posit is ridiculous. History is what happened in the past. History is nothing but truth about what actually happened in the past. Distortions of history are lies. Now and then historians get away with lying their way into so-called History Books.

Can you tell me anything that happened that didn't happen in the past?

You think History is nothing but the truth about what actually happened? Are you kidding me?

Are distortions of History lies?

One famous case is with a massacre that happened in Columbia. Gabriel Garcia Marquez wrote about it.

Banana massacre - Wikipedia

The workers of the United Fruit Company (The company was American). How many people died?

Gabriel Garcia Marquez said, in a piece of fiction, that it was around 3,000.

The guy who was in charge of the massacre said it was 47.

Some people estimate between 47 and 2,000.

Survivors say between 800 and 3,000.

One person says 9 people died.

How many people died?

The truth is never to be known. But people will believe figures. You ask most people and they'll tell you about 3,000 because Marquez's version is the most widely read.

History gets distorted.

If we go back to Roman History we don't know much and never will. Historians put pieces together and come up with History. But there are bits missing. Without the missing bits the truth will never be known. Does this mean there isn't any Roman History?

The expression often is that the winner gets to write the history.

Egyptian pharaohs often disappeared. The first pharaoh to go with Monotheism was almost totally wiped out by those who wanted to stick with more gods. If he disappears, then the History of Monotheism changes dramatically. If enough people agree that the version we have now is almost certainly the correct version, then THIS IS HISTORY. Regardless of whether it's true or not.

History is the study of things that did or are assumed to have happened or existed in the past.

Recorded history is the study of past happenings that have be documented by man.

Prehistory is the study of past happenings that occurred before man developed art and writing.

Universal history is the study of the origin, evolution and predicted future of the entire universe.

The exact number of people that died in the Banana Massacre is equal to the number of people that actually died in that event. Any statement to the contrary is a distortion of actual history...a lie, whether intentional or not. Historical lies told often enough and by the right people are perpetuated and become accepted as being true even though they remain misrepresentations of the true historical facts.

We are certain of even less of the natural history of the earth that occurred prior to the extinction of dinosaurs and pterodactyls. We see artists' detailed renditions of these prehistoric animals and assume they are correct down to the color and exact texture of the skin.

We are also not absolutely sure of the history of the universe prior to the occurrence of life in any form on our planet. That history depends on imaginations, conjectures, speculations and somewhat logically produced explanations of what might have happened, all made by those who concentrate on that type of study. With our current understanding of chemistry and physics, I suspect that these explanations are more reliable than either our current perceptions of natural history or our accepted volumes of recorded history.

Recorded history can be altered by redacting selected occurrences from the books or by altering statistics and wording in the books. The actual historical facts cannot be changed.

You cannot unring a bell. The closest you can come to that is to claim that the bell never did ring.

Yes, it's the study of. But you can't study what has been lost. But what was lost was the truth. When something has been lost, you can't have the truth. In place you have HISTORY.

So, History is basically lies.

You can't unring a doorbell, but if no one heard the doorbell ring, what will History say?

Imagine you have a narrative, a man walks up to the house, rings the doorbell and then enters the house. But no one heard him ring the doorbell and he himself is deaf. What does the history say? That the doorbell rang or that it didn't ring? Or maybe History avoids talking about it altogether. The man walked up to the house and entered the house. It's not a lie, it's just not the truth.

Now you're getting into ridiculous use of analogy. My statement regarding the 'unringing' of a bell is true whether anyone heard it or not. The only historical record of a sound in the air is an audio recording.

Put that away. It has little or nothing to do with the accuracy of historical records.

Suppose the holocaust deniers are somehow magically able to obtain and destroy all photographs, accounting records, lists of names and all other physical evidence of the systematic murder of some six million Jews and other people. Would this be proof that the holocaust never happened and therefore is truly not included in the past happenings on the planet?

 

[frigidweirdo]

The issue is he wrote a book by using sources.

History isn't the TRUTH. History is how people present it. They look at the evidence available and try to come to a conclusion. Some of the evidence is clearly false, some of it is contradictory, so you try to come to a conclusion using what you have. You will never get it 100% right.

Your argument seems to be that Trump's people are all liars, so they never tell the truth, therefore Wolff's book is wrong and therefore not worth anything, so you shouldn't trust it, so there's no reason to doubt Trump's people's word.

Er... do you not see the fallacy of such logic?

Your first posit is ridiculous. History is what happened in the past. History is nothing but truth about what actually happened in the past. Distortions of history are lies. Now and then historians get away with lying their way into so-called History Books.

Can you tell me anything that happened that didn't happen in the past?

You think History is nothing but the truth about what actually happened? Are you kidding me?

Are distortions of History lies?

One famous case is with a massacre that happened in Columbia. Gabriel Garcia Marquez wrote about it.

Banana massacre - Wikipedia

The workers of the United Fruit Company (The company was American). How many people died?

Gabriel Garcia Marquez said, in a piece of fiction, that it was around 3,000.

The guy who was in charge of the massacre said it was 47.

Some people estimate between 47 and 2,000.

Survivors say between 800 and 3,000.

One person says 9 people died.

How many people died?

The truth is never to be known. But people will believe figures. You ask most people and they'll tell you about 3,000 because Marquez's version is the most widely read.

History gets distorted.

If we go back to Roman History we don't know much and never will. Historians put pieces together and come up with History. But there are bits missing. Without the missing bits the truth will never be known. Does this mean there isn't any Roman History?

The expression often is that the winner gets to write the history.

Egyptian pharaohs often disappeared. The first pharaoh to go with Monotheism was almost totally wiped out by those who wanted to stick with more gods. If he disappears, then the History of Monotheism changes dramatically. If enough people agree that the version we have now is almost certainly the correct version, then THIS IS HISTORY. Regardless of whether it's true or not.

History is the study of things that did or are assumed to have happened or existed in the past.

Recorded history is the study of past happenings that have be documented by man.

Prehistory is the study of past happenings that occurred before man developed art and writing.

Universal history is the study of the origin, evolution and predicted future of the entire universe.

The exact number of people that died in the Banana Massacre is equal to the number of people that actually died in that event. Any statement to the contrary is a distortion of actual history...a lie, whether intentional or not. Historical lies told often enough and by the right people are perpetuated and become accepted as being true even though they remain misrepresentations of the true historical facts.

We are certain of even less of the natural history of the earth that occurred prior to the extinction of dinosaurs and pterodactyls. We see artists' detailed renditions of these prehistoric animals and assume they are correct down to the color and exact texture of the skin.

We are also not absolutely sure of the history of the universe prior to the occurrence of life in any form on our planet. That history depends on imaginations, conjectures, speculations and somewhat logically produced explanations of what might have happened, all made by those who concentrate on that type of study. With our current understanding of chemistry and physics, I suspect that these explanations are more reliable than either our current perceptions of natural history or our accepted volumes of recorded history.

Recorded history can be altered by redacting selected occurrences from the books or by altering statistics and wording in the books. The actual historical facts cannot be changed.

You cannot unring a bell. The closest you can come to that is to claim that the bell never did ring.

Yes, it's the study of. But you can't study what has been lost. But what was lost was the truth. When something has been lost, you can't have the truth. In place you have HISTORY.

So, History is basically lies.

You can't unring a doorbell, but if no one heard the doorbell ring, what will History say?

Imagine you have a narrative, a man walks up to the house, rings the doorbell and then enters the house. But no one heard him ring the doorbell and he himself is deaf. What does the history say? That the doorbell rang or that it didn't ring? Or maybe History avoids talking about it altogether. The man walked up to the house and entered the house. It's not a lie, it's just not the truth.

Now you're getting into ridiculous use of analogy. My statement regarding the 'unringing' of a bell is true whether anyone heard it or not. The only historical record of a sound in the air is an audio recording.

Put that away. It has little or nothing to do with the accuracy of historical records.

Suppose the holocaust deniers are somehow magically able to obtain and destroy all photographs, accounting records, lists of names and all other physical evidence of the systematic murder of some six million Jews and other people. Would this be proof that the holocaust never happened and therefore is truly not included in the past happenings on the planet?

Well no. In History what people said happened is usually one of the first ways of figuring out what happened.

The Holocaust happened the way that it did. The History of the Holocaust is something different. It's based on how humans perceive it.

Every year millions of animals die a year in the US alone. 35 million cows, 116 million pigs, 9 billion chickens, 271 million turkeys. The death of these animals at the hands of humans is not so different to the death of Jews in the Holocaust. The difference is that humans will write down in History that the Holocaust happened, that it was an awful event, that suffering was great, and they'll not write much about the animals and don't care about their feelings and won't call it an awful event.

That's History. The TRUTH is what humans find important.

 

[asaratis]

Your first posit is ridiculous. History is what happened in the past. History is nothing but truth about what actually happened in the past. Distortions of history are lies. Now and then historians get away with lying their way into so-called History Books.

Can you tell me anything that happened that didn't happen in the past?

You think History is nothing but the truth about what actually happened? Are you kidding me?

Are distortions of History lies?

One famous case is with a massacre that happened in Columbia. Gabriel Garcia Marquez wrote about it.

Banana massacre - Wikipedia

The workers of the United Fruit Company (The company was American). How many people died?

Gabriel Garcia Marquez said, in a piece of fiction, that it was around 3,000.

The guy who was in charge of the massacre said it was 47.

Some people estimate between 47 and 2,000.

Survivors say between 800 and 3,000.

One person says 9 people died.

How many people died?

The truth is never to be known. But people will believe figures. You ask most people and they'll tell you about 3,000 because Marquez's version is the most widely read.

History gets distorted.

If we go back to Roman History we don't know much and never will. Historians put pieces together and come up with History. But there are bits missing. Without the missing bits the truth will never be known. Does this mean there isn't any Roman History?

The expression often is that the winner gets to write the history.

Egyptian pharaohs often disappeared. The first pharaoh to go with Monotheism was almost totally wiped out by those who wanted to stick with more gods. If he disappears, then the History of Monotheism changes dramatically. If enough people agree that the version we have now is almost certainly the correct version, then THIS IS HISTORY. Regardless of whether it's true or not.

History is the study of things that did or are assumed to have happened or existed in the past.

Recorded history is the study of past happenings that have be documented by man.

Prehistory is the study of past happenings that occurred before man developed art and writing.

Universal history is the study of the origin, evolution and predicted future of the entire universe.

The exact number of people that died in the Banana Massacre is equal to the number of people that actually died in that event. Any statement to the contrary is a distortion of actual history...a lie, whether intentional or not. Historical lies told often enough and by the right people are perpetuated and become accepted as being true even though they remain misrepresentations of the true historical facts.

We are certain of even less of the natural history of the earth that occurred prior to the extinction of dinosaurs and pterodactyls. We see artists' detailed renditions of these prehistoric animals and assume they are correct down to the color and exact texture of the skin.

We are also not absolutely sure of the history of the universe prior to the occurrence of life in any form on our planet. That history depends on imaginations, conjectures, speculations and somewhat logically produced explanations of what might have happened, all made by those who concentrate on that type of study. With our current understanding of chemistry and physics, I suspect that these explanations are more reliable than either our current perceptions of natural history or our accepted volumes of recorded history.

Recorded history can be altered by redacting selected occurrences from the books or by altering statistics and wording in the books. The actual historical facts cannot be changed.

You cannot unring a bell. The closest you can come to that is to claim that the bell never did ring.

Yes, it's the study of. But you can't study what has been lost. But what was lost was the truth. When something has been lost, you can't have the truth. In place you have HISTORY.

So, History is basically lies.

You can't unring a doorbell, but if no one heard the doorbell ring, what will History say?

Imagine you have a narrative, a man walks up to the house, rings the doorbell and then enters the house. But no one heard him ring the doorbell and he himself is deaf. What does the history say? That the doorbell rang or that it didn't ring? Or maybe History avoids talking about it altogether. The man walked up to the house and entered the house. It's not a lie, it's just not the truth.

Now you're getting into ridiculous use of analogy. My statement regarding the 'unringing' of a bell is true whether anyone heard it or not. The only historical record of a sound in the air is an audio recording.

Put that away. It has little or nothing to do with the accuracy of historical records.

Suppose the holocaust deniers are somehow magically able to obtain and destroy all photographs, accounting records, lists of names and all other physical evidence of the systematic murder of some six million Jews and other people. Would this be proof that the holocaust never happened and therefore is truly not included in the past happenings on the planet?

Well no. In History what people said happened is usually one of the first ways of figuring out what happened.

The Holocaust happened the way that it did. The History of the Holocaust is something different. It's based on how humans perceive it.

Every year millions of animals die a year in the US alone. 35 million cows, 116 million pigs, 9 billion chickens, 271 million turkeys. The death of these animals at the hands of humans is not so different to the death of Jews in the Holocaust. The difference is that humans will write down in History that the Holocaust happened, that it was an awful event, that suffering was great, and they'll not write much about the animals and don't care about their feelings and won't call it an awful event.

That's History. The TRUTH is what humans find important.

You are truly sick. To compare the systematic murder of millions of people for political reasons to the slaughter of animals for food is absolutely ludicrous. You are a disgusting, repugnant excuse for a human. Go to hell. I will not converse with you further.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Can you tell me anything that happened that didn't happen in the past?

You think History is nothing but the truth about what actually happened? Are you kidding me?

Are distortions of History lies?

One famous case is with a massacre that happened in Columbia. Gabriel Garcia Marquez wrote about it.

Banana massacre - Wikipedia

The workers of the United Fruit Company (The company was American). How many people died?

Gabriel Garcia Marquez said, in a piece of fiction, that it was around 3,000.

The guy who was in charge of the massacre said it was 47.

Some people estimate between 47 and 2,000.

Survivors say between 800 and 3,000.

One person says 9 people died.

How many people died?

The truth is never to be known. But people will believe figures. You ask most people and they'll tell you about 3,000 because Marquez's version is the most widely read.

History gets distorted.

If we go back to Roman History we don't know much and never will. Historians put pieces together and come up with History. But there are bits missing. Without the missing bits the truth will never be known. Does this mean there isn't any Roman History?

The expression often is that the winner gets to write the history.

Egyptian pharaohs often disappeared. The first pharaoh to go with Monotheism was almost totally wiped out by those who wanted to stick with more gods. If he disappears, then the History of Monotheism changes dramatically. If enough people agree that the version we have now is almost certainly the correct version, then THIS IS HISTORY. Regardless of whether it's true or not.

History is the study of things that did or are assumed to have happened or existed in the past.

Recorded history is the study of past happenings that have be documented by man.

Prehistory is the study of past happenings that occurred before man developed art and writing.

Universal history is the study of the origin, evolution and predicted future of the entire universe.

The exact number of people that died in the Banana Massacre is equal to the number of people that actually died in that event. Any statement to the contrary is a distortion of actual history...a lie, whether intentional or not. Historical lies told often enough and by the right people are perpetuated and become accepted as being true even though they remain misrepresentations of the true historical facts.

We are certain of even less of the natural history of the earth that occurred prior to the extinction of dinosaurs and pterodactyls. We see artists' detailed renditions of these prehistoric animals and assume they are correct down to the color and exact texture of the skin.

We are also not absolutely sure of the history of the universe prior to the occurrence of life in any form on our planet. That history depends on imaginations, conjectures, speculations and somewhat logically produced explanations of what might have happened, all made by those who concentrate on that type of study. With our current understanding of chemistry and physics, I suspect that these explanations are more reliable than either our current perceptions of natural history or our accepted volumes of recorded history.

Recorded history can be altered by redacting selected occurrences from the books or by altering statistics and wording in the books. The actual historical facts cannot be changed.

You cannot unring a bell. The closest you can come to that is to claim that the bell never did ring.

Yes, it's the study of. But you can't study what has been lost. But what was lost was the truth. When something has been lost, you can't have the truth. In place you have HISTORY.

So, History is basically lies.

You can't unring a doorbell, but if no one heard the doorbell ring, what will History say?

Imagine you have a narrative, a man walks up to the house, rings the doorbell and then enters the house. But no one heard him ring the doorbell and he himself is deaf. What does the history say? That the doorbell rang or that it didn't ring? Or maybe History avoids talking about it altogether. The man walked up to the house and entered the house. It's not a lie, it's just not the truth.

Now you're getting into ridiculous use of analogy. My statement regarding the 'unringing' of a bell is true whether anyone heard it or not. The only historical record of a sound in the air is an audio recording.

Put that away. It has little or nothing to do with the accuracy of historical records.

Suppose the holocaust deniers are somehow magically able to obtain and destroy all photographs, accounting records, lists of names and all other physical evidence of the systematic murder of some six million Jews and other people. Would this be proof that the holocaust never happened and therefore is truly not included in the past happenings on the planet?

Well no. In History what people said happened is usually one of the first ways of figuring out what happened.

The Holocaust happened the way that it did. The History of the Holocaust is something different. It's based on how humans perceive it.

Every year millions of animals die a year in the US alone. 35 million cows, 116 million pigs, 9 billion chickens, 271 million turkeys. The death of these animals at the hands of humans is not so different to the death of Jews in the Holocaust. The difference is that humans will write down in History that the Holocaust happened, that it was an awful event, that suffering was great, and they'll not write much about the animals and don't care about their feelings and won't call it an awful event.

That's History. The TRUTH is what humans find important.

You are truly sick. To compare the systematic murder of millions of people for political reasons to the slaughter of animals for food is absolutely ludicrous. You are a disgusting, repugnant excuse for a human. Go to hell. I will not converse with you further.

Oh, I'm sick am I?

Comparing the systematic slaughter of animals to the systematic slaughter of animals. Oh, fuck me.

Good, you won't converse we me, what a shame.

That you have the twisted view that it's okay to slaughter billions of animals a year, but then find it horrible to do it to humans just shows how compartmentalized you are.

 

[buckeye45_73]

History is the study of things that did or are assumed to have happened or existed in the past.

Recorded history is the study of past happenings that have be documented by man.

Prehistory is the study of past happenings that occurred before man developed art and writing.

Universal history is the study of the origin, evolution and predicted future of the entire universe.

The exact number of people that died in the Banana Massacre is equal to the number of people that actually died in that event. Any statement to the contrary is a distortion of actual history...a lie, whether intentional or not. Historical lies told often enough and by the right people are perpetuated and become accepted as being true even though they remain misrepresentations of the true historical facts.

We are certain of even less of the natural history of the earth that occurred prior to the extinction of dinosaurs and pterodactyls. We see artists' detailed renditions of these prehistoric animals and assume they are correct down to the color and exact texture of the skin.

We are also not absolutely sure of the history of the universe prior to the occurrence of life in any form on our planet. That history depends on imaginations, conjectures, speculations and somewhat logically produced explanations of what might have happened, all made by those who concentrate on that type of study. With our current understanding of chemistry and physics, I suspect that these explanations are more reliable than either our current perceptions of natural history or our accepted volumes of recorded history.

Recorded history can be altered by redacting selected occurrences from the books or by altering statistics and wording in the books. The actual historical facts cannot be changed.

You cannot unring a bell. The closest you can come to that is to claim that the bell never did ring.

Yes, it's the study of. But you can't study what has been lost. But what was lost was the truth. When something has been lost, you can't have the truth. In place you have HISTORY.

So, History is basically lies.

You can't unring a doorbell, but if no one heard the doorbell ring, what will History say?

Imagine you have a narrative, a man walks up to the house, rings the doorbell and then enters the house. But no one heard him ring the doorbell and he himself is deaf. What does the history say? That the doorbell rang or that it didn't ring? Or maybe History avoids talking about it altogether. The man walked up to the house and entered the house. It's not a lie, it's just not the truth.

Now you're getting into ridiculous use of analogy. My statement regarding the 'unringing' of a bell is true whether anyone heard it or not. The only historical record of a sound in the air is an audio recording.

Put that away. It has little or nothing to do with the accuracy of historical records.

Suppose the holocaust deniers are somehow magically able to obtain and destroy all photographs, accounting records, lists of names and all other physical evidence of the systematic murder of some six million Jews and other people. Would this be proof that the holocaust never happened and therefore is truly not included in the past happenings on the planet?

Well no. In History what people said happened is usually one of the first ways of figuring out what happened.

The Holocaust happened the way that it did. The History of the Holocaust is something different. It's based on how humans perceive it.

Every year millions of animals die a year in the US alone. 35 million cows, 116 million pigs, 9 billion chickens, 271 million turkeys. The death of these animals at the hands of humans is not so different to the death of Jews in the Holocaust. The difference is that humans will write down in History that the Holocaust happened, that it was an awful event, that suffering was great, and they'll not write much about the animals and don't care about their feelings and won't call it an awful event.

That's History. The TRUTH is what humans find important.

You are truly sick. To compare the systematic murder of millions of people for political reasons to the slaughter of animals for food is absolutely ludicrous. You are a disgusting, repugnant excuse for a human. Go to hell. I will not converse with you further.

Oh, I'm sick am I?

Comparing the systematic slaughter of animals to the systematic slaughter of animals. Oh, fuck me.

Good, you won't converse we me, what a shame.

That you have the twisted view that it's okay to slaughter billions of animals a year, but then find it horrible to do it to humans just shows how compartmentalized you are.

its sad you value animals as much as humans

just another leftwing whacko

 

[asaratis]

Yes, it's the study of. But you can't study what has been lost. But what was lost was the truth. When something has been lost, you can't have the truth. In place you have HISTORY.

So, History is basically lies.

You can't unring a doorbell, but if no one heard the doorbell ring, what will History say?

Imagine you have a narrative, a man walks up to the house, rings the doorbell and then enters the house. But no one heard him ring the doorbell and he himself is deaf. What does the history say? That the doorbell rang or that it didn't ring? Or maybe History avoids talking about it altogether. The man walked up to the house and entered the house. It's not a lie, it's just not the truth.

Now you're getting into ridiculous use of analogy. My statement regarding the 'unringing' of a bell is true whether anyone heard it or not. The only historical record of a sound in the air is an audio recording.

Put that away. It has little or nothing to do with the accuracy of historical records.

Suppose the holocaust deniers are somehow magically able to obtain and destroy all photographs, accounting records, lists of names and all other physical evidence of the systematic murder of some six million Jews and other people. Would this be proof that the holocaust never happened and therefore is truly not included in the past happenings on the planet?

Well no. In History what people said happened is usually one of the first ways of figuring out what happened.

The Holocaust happened the way that it did. The History of the Holocaust is something different. It's based on how humans perceive it.

Every year millions of animals die a year in the US alone. 35 million cows, 116 million pigs, 9 billion chickens, 271 million turkeys. The death of these animals at the hands of humans is not so different to the death of Jews in the Holocaust. The difference is that humans will write down in History that the Holocaust happened, that it was an awful event, that suffering was great, and they'll not write much about the animals and don't care about their feelings and won't call it an awful event.

That's History. The TRUTH is what humans find important.

You are truly sick. To compare the systematic murder of millions of people for political reasons to the slaughter of animals for food is absolutely ludicrous. You are a disgusting, repugnant excuse for a human. Go to hell. I will not converse with you further.

Oh, I'm sick am I?

Comparing the systematic slaughter of animals to the systematic slaughter of animals. Oh, fuck me.

Good, you won't converse we me, what a shame.

That you have the twisted view that it's okay to slaughter billions of animals a year, but then find it horrible to do it to humans just shows how compartmentalized you are.

its sad you value animals as much as humans

just another leftwing whacko

He is an anti-Semitic piece of shit....totally worthless is civilized society.