Historians in the Past
(media.scored.co)
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
Toast message
Historians in the past were usually the smartest of their kind, had a patron of some sort (which could lead to bias, admittedly), and were writing for posterity, not fame or to sell books at Barnes & Noble. Let's see how many modern history books are preserved for literally thousands of fucking years, or copied by hand because someone decided that their value to humanity was priceless. Maybe Gibbon's history of the Roman Empire is the only volume worthy of that.
Imagine being born in 1988 and thinking that the historians of the past, especially the ones that are writing about the time period they are living in, are wrong in any fucking way imaginable. If Herodotus says that Atlantis was "here", why shouldn't we believe him? If Plutarch says something about the life of a Roman Emperor, who else can contradict him? It's supreme retardation.
Because there's zero archeological evidence of Atlantis. Are you a troll or just extremely gullible? Rejecting modern degenerate culture doesn't require you to totally reject every facet of modern science, archeology, etc. Everyone here has an anti-establishment bias, but we shouldn't be letting that cloud our judgement when it comes to the conclusions that these people make. Use your brain to confirm or reject their conclusions. Don't just say "modernity bad and modern historians say Atlantis not real, therefore Atlantis real". It's foolish.