Is history being rewritten or are historians wrong?

[Duckshot]

That seems to be a moral stance Old Bookaroo, that offing the wounded is wrong.

Here is something for you to think about- Are morals objective or subjective? If morals are subjective then any action could be justified as moral. I beleive that morals are objective. To believe that morals are objective is a leap of faith, in that l cant prove to you which morals are correct. Not from here anyways, at least not by me.

 

[Chadeaux]

I'm going to interject my 2 cents worth ...

History does not change. Was it recorded correctly the first time? Well, that depends on the source for the written word that records the history. Was it based on interviews with witnesses, or was it first hand?

I think too many of the "revisions" of written history are simply money grabs by the authors. If Joe D. Writer says the same thing a Ima Witness wrote in his book, Joe would be guilty of plagiarism and lose face among his peers ... as well as future book sales.

However, if Joe finds a little scrap of verifiable history that Ima left out of his account, well, now Joe can say Ima misunderstood something ... or if he manipulates the fact enough, he might even make it look like Ima didn't really know what happened. We all know that in this mostly vulgar world today, controversy sells books and magazines.

Money. Greenbacks. Truth? Maybe, maybe not ... but who cares when he has your green?

Now, Joe will do another book.

 

[ECS]

...
I do not "pass judgement" on other posters here at TN. That's obvious nonsense. You persist in trying to make a discussion of historical facts personal. I have not...

The obvious nonsense is in your denial as others have noticed otherwise.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

ECS:

I'll let my posts "speak" for themselves. They don't require my interpretation. Or yours.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Duckshot:

If morals are purely objective, the context (situation) makes no difference.

"Thou shalt not kill." Is that "purely objective?" No exemption for self defense or war?

What's the difference between first degree murder and manslaughter - other than the circumstances, of course.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[huntsman53]

I don't wish to get into a great debate on this and will not do so but this is what I believe and which I believe is true. Satan has long manipulated man to do many things and one of those, is to change the history of man (which also includes women as well) and the history of the World. He does this to confound us, to make us believe that facts and the things we know are no longer true. This is only a precursor of getting us to question and then not believe the Bible and to question the existence of God, our Heavenly Father and his' Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.


Frank

 

[Escape]

If you pick anything apart long enough, in time you won't know what you started with. Sort of like finding the answers but not remembering the question.

 

[Escape]

Duckshot:

If morals are purely objective, the context (situation) makes no difference.

"Thou shalt not kill." Is that "purely objective?" No exemption for self defense or war?

What's the difference between first degree murder and manslaughter - other than the circumstances, of course.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

Leo Tolstoy's in his book , "The kingdom of God is Within You" exams that commandment. Mahatma Gahandi cites this book as a major influence on his thinking and outlook. Its something only a pacifist could love. But interesting and thought provoking just the same.

 

[Duckshot]

Duckshot:

If morals are purely objective, the context (situation) makes no difference.

"Thou shalt not kill." Is that "purely objective?" No exemption for self defense or war?

What's the difference between first degree murder and manslaughter - other than the circumstances, of course.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

Now you are talking about religious belief. Which do you put more Faith into, mans laws or God's laws? The two are very different.

But, we ain't allowed to discuss God's laws here or Treasure Hunter gets out his eraser, so let's just discuss Natural laws. Natural laws are less fluid than man's laws. Take the laws of physics, natural law, for example is unchanging as far as anybody can tell. If you drop a ball, it will fall towards the floor, not the ceiling. Well, maybe not if room is inverted. Man's laws change frequently, probably daily for most people.

 

[Honest Samuel]

Historians are correct most of the time. Authors who write treasures stories, rather in magazines and books, make up the stories which to make money and most of the time is not true. Good hunting and good luck.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Duckshot:

No, not religious beliefs. Law. What is the difference between first degree murder and manslaughter and justifiable homicide?

Circumstances. Somebody died in each case. Was it wrong? The courts determine that, based on the law.


Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[Old Bookaroo]

I found the pay was the same for writing factual articles. Just considerably more work requiring less imagination.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[ECS]

ECS:
I'll let my posts "speak" for themselves. They don't require my interpretation. Or yours.

Well, Old Bookaroo, if you don't judge my posts that "speak for themselves", I won't mention your platitude interpretations.

 

[neo]

Interesting side note in Hendricks book there's a passage on page 263 talking about colonel Charles goodnight one sentence says he had a pair of extra strong marine night glasses this is the first of night vision I've heard of before the 1930s, does anyone know anything about them such as how they worked I can't find anything online.

 

[Tnmountains]

Duckshot
The moderator asked you to keep religion and or politics out of this discussion. Please heed his advice as there will not be a third warning.
Happy New Year
2017 !

 

[Duckshot]

My apologies. I thought Old Bookaroo and I were having a philosophical discussion, and a civil discussion at that.

Buckaroo, thank you for your opinons and for hearing mine. If you would like to continue our discussion you can send a p.m.

Happy new year to you too, Tnmountains.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

neo:

Which book is that?

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Changes in latitudes;
Changes in platitudes...

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[T.C.]

I have a true story about a recent best seller that is non-fiction historical. The book is "Killing The Rising Sun." It is a great read. I have sent four e-mails to Bill O'Reilly asking him to please publicly admit his mistake.....as of this date, I've received no correspondence whatsoever.

In his book, he discusses Japanese balloon bombs used during WWII. These were launched from Japan using prevailing winds to distribute them across the Pacific Northwest in hopes of causing major forest fires and creating fear amongst the American people.

On the bottom of page 45 it states, "The so-called fire balloons were indeed launched. Most did not reach America, and those that did inflicted little damage."

I felt that he unintentionally left out an incident that happened in a little town called Bly, Oregon. Six people on a Sunday school picnic were killed as a result of one of these fire balloons exploding. This incident happened on May 5, 1945, five kids and one pregnant woman were killed. Refer to "Mitchell Monument."

I was hoping Bill would publicly apologize for his mistake...these people deserve to be recognized and remembered as the only people killed in the U.S. due to enemy action during WWII.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

T.C.: Those books are not reliable history. They have many errors and mistakes. One of the two bookstores in Washington, DC, at a Lincoln historical site, refused to sell one of his works. As I recall the story, another one did.

I gave up on his Civil War book when he (and his co-author) wrote that Gen. U.S. Grant saddled his own horse.

You are going to have a very, very long wait for Mr. O'Really? to admit his mistake. If he does, and then he admits another one, that will make two in his lifetime.

2.0: Compare a couple of his books with those written by Jim Bishop some years ago. There are remarkable "similarities."

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo