How do you know you aren't being lied to about history?

Sounds a lot like the S3 plan from metal gear.

>>1677476
>How do you know you aren't being lied to about history?

>implying I know that history is distorted and is never 100% accurate

>>1677476
>How do you know you aren't being lied to about history?
Because any real academic (or any actually smart person) realizes that history is built on inference and conjecture based on limited evidence and it's a 100% accurate depiction of the past even when there is extensive first hand documentation. The reason why "alternative history theory" is dismissed out of hand is because real history is already constantly under revision and people who peddle conspiracy theories are usually con artists and not real historians.

>>1677503
>and people who peddle conspiracy theories are usually con artists and not real historians.
So what makes your history more real when it is also based on conjecture and inference?

>>1677522
Well, usually con artists just make things up. It's not even based on evidence, it's based on lies and misinformation.

>>1677531
Who determines what is and is not credible evidence? Why can't I use the bible as proof of giants?

>>1677552
>Who determines what is and is not credible evidence?
People who are experts in the field. Come on man. What are you even asking me? You can certainly try to use the bible as proof of giants if you want to but people won't believe you because it's not verifiable. Just go to school man this is like the basics of academic rigor.

>>1677476
There are too many people around to control. There isn't anyone powerful enough to do what the conspirationists say.

>>1677569
>People who are experts in the field.
What makes them experts?

>>1677476
>What exactly is stopping the worlds institutions from setting a narrative and the status quo to dupe the population into believing many convenient lies for nefarious purposes?
Lack of power. I mean it happened all the time locally in the past, but world institutions? There are none anywhere near strong enough to do that.

>>1677577
No you tell me, how do YOU think it works?

>>1677476
>and yet they regurgitate the same bullshit they themselves are fed from peer reviewed studies by people trying to turn a buck.
Tell me more about the extravagant wealth to be made via peer reviewed academic publishing anon, while I drink myself to death.

>>1677577
Understanding how critical thinking and academic research works.

These things are not innate, nor are they as easy to learn as most people seem to think. And yes, it makes a big difference. That's why peer review exists in academic publication, so that a bunch of people who also know their shit can tell someone when they're being an idiot about something because their methodology is wrong or their arguments don't make sense.

>>1677476
>they regurgitate the same bullshit they themselves are fed from peer reviewed studies by people trying to turn a buck

Are you saying most "alternative historians" aren't peddling bullshit for a quick buck? Because that's demonstrably untrue. Every one of them is trying to sell some book about ancient aliens or whatever. They repeat false information from other people who write the same shit.

>>1677584
This is one of the funniest points that I see people like the OP make. And it's weird that it's such a common argument. For some reason, these people think that academics are rich and that following the status quo makes them the big bucks.

That's not how academia works at all. No one in academia makes very much money, and you get absolutely nowhere without making real contributions to your field. The only thing that really lets you make a name for yourself and gets grants is finding new information, usually the bigger the better. If anyone could prove something really revolutionary, they would do it and wait for the grants to flow in. That's just how it works.

My first archaeology professor put it the best way when someone asked him about ancient aliens neat the beginning of the semester. His response was basically "I know that stuff sounds cool, but there's no evidence for it, and I'll teach you why later in the semester. But trust me, I've looked through it all and none of it makes sense. I would love it if it was, if I could be the one to prove it academically, I wouldn't need to teach adjunct here anymore. Could you imagine the money I'd make? But it doesn't work like that."

File: praclovek-slika.jpg (18KB, 304x1030px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 304x1030px

https://youtu.be/rw4zxLmR2AQ

>>1677582
I believe that the scientific method which has been pushed heavily on all children everywhere who go to school is a form of mind conditioning and brainwashing to make a human being only capable of processing direct data like a computer does losing the ability to fill in the blanks or use the creative function of their minds to think up abstract ideas or solutions to problems. This is a direct result of the industrial age when (((capitalists))) needed to program the public so they are smart enough to work and maintain technological process but not wise enough to see how they are being manipulated and forced to conform their perspective of reality to the same status who as everyone else.

Just go on /sci/ and debate them about these basic things and they will completely lose their shit and deride as a group anyone who opposes their enlightened perspective of reality. It's actually a direct attack on their egos which is all they have, same goes for any university student or academic.

>>1677600
>And it's weird that it's such a common argument.
It's generally not an argument you hear for history, it's something that's said about no proofs fields like art critique and the less scientific social sciences. Which is actually not a very farfetched accusation. It's not so much about getting rich, as it is "follow the status quo or be unemployed".
I do agree it's a stupid thing to say in connection to history.

File: image.jpg (720KB, 1000x767px) Image search: [Google]

720KB, 1000x767px

>>1677629
Oh, so science is actually Jews brainwashing everyone. Okay.

File: image.jpg (151KB, 900x1210px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 900x1210px

>>1677476
Paranoid much?

>>1677649
All academia is nothing more than indoctrination of the masses in all its various forms on all levels. Education is about inflating and rubbing the ego rather than obtaining knowledge for money at a job. People want to be able to call themselves experts or doctors or hang up their PHDs on office walls or wear a nice uniform or suit which accompanies their egoist fantasy of being more important than everyone else. The meme that university students are scrawny nerds who never made it in high school with sports and the opposite sex is very true. Work itself is about satisfying the ego otherwise people would be content with having little in life. Being a success results from a fear of being forgettable and sub-par.

>>1677629
>The scientific method prevents people from getting away with pushing any old bullshit to suit their flawed agendas.

Pretty much yeah.

>>1677686
Did you fail at uni anon?

>>1677706
Except reality isn't so black and white and conforming to one persons outlook just shows how sheeplike and incapable of original abstract thought a person is.

File: 35edpp.jpg (50KB, 625x422px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 625x422px

>>1677706
Assumptions can never be fully erased. Every chain has a base, otherwise it is useless.

>>1677728
Which is exactly what the method is used to prevent.

>>1677745
If the Egyptians didn't believe in magic the pyramids would not have been built.

>>1677735
>Le brain in a jar argument
Yes very clever anon.

>>1677758
What are you even talking about?

File: 1466970786745-1.jpg (54KB, 570x491px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 570x491px

>>1677760

>>1677765
How could you possibly know? You adhere to the scientific method, you rely on other people to tell you what is and is not true. Your mind has already been sent through the meat grinder, whatever was there when you were born is now gone. You're just a walking biological robot now, not much different from the technology you're using to communicate with me.

File: beautiful.jpg (73KB, 650x674px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 650x674px

Is this the crypto-skitzo thread?

>>1677790
>How could you possibly know
>Your yada yada yada
Fuck off. Get a sense of irony.

And you clearly don't understand what the scientific method is. It isn't 'relying on other people to tell you what is and what is not true'

>>1677786
see >>1677765

>>1677552
I would honestly love to know why there is a cover up on giant skelingtons. Who could the truth really hurt?

>>1677829
Then wtf is it m8?

File: fork-evolution.jpg (47KB, 960x724px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 960x724px

>>1677838
Conspiracy, that's what.

>>1677629
based pasta
saved for future fun and games on /sci/ and /his/

>>1677829
It comes from someone else's mind so it belongs to someone else. It's like putting on the clothes of another man and even if they don't fit you, you pretend That's how they're supposed to look.

Guaranteed OP cannot be any older than 17. This kind of conspiratorial solipsism is borne out of the fact that you're literally new in the world. You think all of this methodology and ifnraswtructure just sprung up all at once out of nowhere because, in your experience ,it did, because you haven't been alive very long. But the scientific method has been applied and yielding results for over 2000 years. That beats out any blubbering rhetorical garbage you might come up with to justify skipping class.

>>1677843

There isn't a cover up. Giant skeletons have never been found. Every picture of one you see on the internet is either a photoshop, or was made using perspective trickery.

>>1677874
There you go acting like your pespective can be the only correct one because of
> muh history masters

>>1677860
>It comes from someone else's mind so it belongs to someone else.
No it doesn't, that's silly.

>>1677853
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Why don't you learn to use google?

>>1677895
No, it's a matter of whether they have been found or not. This example isn't even a matter of edgy teenager philosophy, it's a matter of whether something physical exists and has been found or not.

If you insist giant skeletons have been found, provide some incontrovertible proof.

>>1677895
see >>1677760

>>1677855
So you don't understand evolution either.

File: hominoid-pelvic-girdle-cladogram.jpg (128KB, 432x648px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 432x648px

>>1677945
I understand it, I just don't see it as science.

>>1677985
Why?

File: QACTU_IMG_ZOOM_907.jpg (28KB, 298x480px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 298x480px

>>1677996
Primarily because it proposes that we are all related rather than being created with similar features and a very wide range of variability within that body-type. For what reason I cannot say.

>>1678021
So your exactly what you've been calling everyone else for the entire thread.

Thought as much.

/thread

>>1677895
Giant Skeletons are invisible anon, how would you even get a picture of them?

File: 22250_0.jpg (63KB, 961x510px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 961x510px

>>1678048
What exactly have I been calling everyone else?

>>1678061
A sufferer of confirmation bias.

File: LucyandLucy.png (573KB, 1118x1381px) Image search: [Google]

573KB, 1118x1381px

>>1678087
Well, I guess an unbiased view would be that the creatures are, in fact, similar in many respects to man. Interpretations can vary from that point on.

>>1678117
Man are 'creatures'. There's no reason to think that we are not.

File: Comparison of apes and Man.jpg (568KB, 1600x928px) Image search: [Google]

568KB, 1600x928px

>>1678139
I never said they weren't.

>>1677476
Look up alternate history from series such as ancient aliens. Even though your gut feeling is that this shit is utterly retarded, their arguments can make people think "hmm, I guess that makes sense".
Now, check out this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9w-i5oZqaQ

This is why alternate history is rejected.

All history is based on limited sources and they grow even more limited as you move further back in history and there are countless of different theories on each subject which makes up for a debate. This is why we have academia, so that people are experienced enough to contribute to debate instead of contributing with nonsense.

Now, what I am skeptical towards is research that is not even allowed to be debated by society nor the academics because it upsets and offends people.

>>1678376
About that video: It was made by a hardcore, biblical literalist, fundamental Christian. For the most part, it's a good video, but since this is a thread has been about what good historical scholarship is, I felt the need to point that out. Through most of the video, the presenter doesn't let his views influence anything, but towards the end, he starts hinting about how he thinks the flood happened. He was subtle enough about it that it's not terrible and doesn't ruin the video, but it's worth noting.

Overall, though, I think it's a great video, and I'm glad someone made. It does a good job of pointing out how dishonest psuedoscientific arguments like that are inherently flawed, and it points out the common archaeological understandings of those things well. It's frustrating a that a fundie had to make it, but good work is good work, even if the reason for it was shit (wanting to prove alien bullshit wrong so people won't get distracted from biblical literalism). But it says a lot about how good research works that even a fundie like that guy is willing to accept common archaeological narratives about all that stuff.

>>1677476

The same can be applied to anything, really.
How do you know you are not living in the Matrix?

>>1678426
Yeah, I considered mentioning it or doing any further research on him to check out his background, but since his arguments were valid I didn't bother. But now that you mention that it even supports my argument considering that you don't even need a history/archeology degree to disprove all this alternate history shit.

>>1677686
You're misguided heavily.

Why are you projecting and implying so much?

>>1678445
Because if whoever was doing it had the power to force me into acting as a battery, they could just do it and there'd be nothing I could do about it. Therefore, putting me in the Matrix is wasted effort that gives them no additional benefit.

>>1677802

My sides were never heard from again. Last time a signal was detected, by our distant descendants a million years from now, they are making their way beyond galactic space.

>>1677649
>image.jpeg
Underage redditor detected

>>1677476
>What exactly is stopping the worlds institutions from setting a narrative and the status quo to dupe the population into believing many convenient lies for nefarious purposes?

Nothing, that's why it's so visible

>>1678021
If evolution is not real science, then should a real scientist say these different species were "created" by something?
How would a real scientist determine what force or mechanism "creates" different body-types?