Just this once???

 

I already did. Re-read the post.

No. He wasn't.

That saying might have been true at one point but it isn't true today.

 

Indulge me, tell me again.

 

What are you, five? Re-read the damn post.

 

Believe me, I'm just as surprised as you are.

 

No, I will not, because I want it in the context of why I was "flat out wrong" and not some idiotic and irrelevant rambling.

 

There have always been multiple conflicting views of history, even ancient history. Either there were no eyewitnesses, leading to multiple interpretations, or there were multiple eyewitnesses, with the same result. There will always be revisionist views that will be tested and accepted or rejected. History is a moving target.

The events themselves are immutable, unless new evidence gets dug up...but the context within which they happened....the questions of WHY they happened, what caused them, and what they meant...those will always be debatable.

 

No matter how much you would desperately love for me to have ever posted an idiotic or irrelevant rambling, I never have and never will.

Grow the fuck up and stop acting like the first part of your username.

That only applies to a certain period. After a certain period, especially by the time of the "colonization" of the "New World" in the Americas and elsewhere, everything was documented in some way, shape, or form.

Something getting debated doesn't mean there is an actual debate or question to it. All it means is that people are willing to argue back and forth about it.

 

Which is the whole fucking point, you imbecile.

 

You don't have a point.

If you did, you wouldn't be using unnecessary insults, you immature wannabe intellectual.

 

Sorry, I was just following your lead.

 

Documented by people who had their own perceptions, interpretations and biases. As I said, the events themselves may not be debatable...what they mean, what caused them, and what impact they had certainly is.

On this forum, we've debated endlessly the question of whether the Civil War was "about" slavery or not. Historians differ. I have my opinion (based on the facts), and you have yours (presumably based on the facts). But knowing the date of the surrender of Fort Sumter (about which there is no doubt) will not help you find the answer.

 

Civil war? Ancient history.

Try something newer, WTC and 9/11.


How about the current debt ceiling crisis (or event)?

We sure seem to have a consensus on cause and effect there, don't we.

 

I just picked the first example that came to mind that was recent enough to be pretty thoroughly documented.

 

True, I was trying to get Baller to open his eyes. But, maybe I should stop trying to do the impossible.

 

No you weren't. I didn't insult you once until you called me genius.

No it isn't. For example: In India when it was under the rule of the East India Tea Company's private army, the "soldiers" in charge of financial and other logistic aspects were required to record things just like any other business. We know about an "experiment" where one of these supervisor types found out how little the Indians could survive on, after being reprimanded for giving them a fair share of food, because of such recordings.

Our opinions are irrelevant. It was about slavery and about other things. This is not debatable.

 

Just because idiots on either side argue out of their delusion, that doesn't mean anything is not completely known.

There is no secret about what caused the debt crisis.

No. You were trying to force me to accept something that is untrue based on your delusions, namely the delusion that you are always right.

 

One of them is right...the rest are wrong. Baller knows which one is right.

 

Not even remotely. You're just too much of a little child to admit you insulted me unprovoked yet again.

Name them. Because the actually objective sources I obtain my historical FACTS from don't put their opinion into it. Anybody who puts their own opinion or feelings into it is NOT a historian.

The people who don't have opinions far outnumber those who do.