O
Old Silver
Guest
OS, I read all the time on this forum people making statement such as you make. History is all
wrong, You can't believe history books cuz the Druids were here first, Or the Israelites discovered
America before the Egyptians got here, on and on ad nauseum. What can any serious researcher
do with this dribble?
Supply the evidence to make us believe your theory opposed to the written account. An historian
is only as good as the evidence he provides. Reputation among scholarly peers is invaluable to
advancement in the profession. One who distorts history will gain no reward except fleeting
notoriety and afterwards banishment as no authority wants to be involved with rumor mongers.
Wow, you've got me saying all sorts of things that I didn't actually say.
If you want proof of what I DID say, here's a couple of examples. Main stream "historians" say the Egyptian pyramids were built by a civilization that had no advanced technology. Rollers, ropes and ramps. They Pooh Pooh the evidence to the contrary. Modern type tool marks have been found in the stones of the pyramids and other ancient structures in Egypt. Those granite blocks were cut with such precision that you can't slide a razor blade between them. Main stream would have us believe these were built by a people fresh out of the cave, even though the evidence shows otherwise. Now, am I supposed to respect those people for ignoring facts in order to uphold their reputation?
The "experts" had the world believing there was no such place as the city of troy. Until it was found. Now who is believed, the great historians, or the proof?