We've been conditioned to believe there are no "facts" in history. That there exists alternative history to level conventional history's errors.
To me, this is false. Historians are methodical as they are artistic in quantifying facts and evidence.
Like in medical science there's evidence based science and non-evidence (good or bad science), the same can be said for history. There's no such thing as alternative (revisionism, whatever) history running parallel with history. There's just history.
Thoughts?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.