Join 49,000+ Looksmaxxing Members!

Register a FREE account today to become a member. Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox.

  • DISCLAIMER: DO NOT ATTEMPT TREATMENT WITHOUT LICENCED MEDICAL CONSULTATION AND SUPERVISION

    This is a public discussion forum. The owners, staff, and users of this website ARE NOT engaged in rendering professional services to the individual reader. DO NOT use the content of this website as an alternative to personal examination and advice from licenced healthcare providers. DO NOT begin, delay, or discontinue treatments and/or exercises without licenced medical supervision. Learn more

Hypothesis How can we trust history

It’s the past and only a memory to some (oldcels),how can we trust history books when maybe the opposite happened for example. What if our grandparents were all tortured to not speak about what happened. It’s the same concept as “Don’t believe what your eyes don’t see”. You could show me a picture of space “taken” by NASA and I wouldn’t entirely believe it but we’ve grown up with the concept. Not a conspiracy theorist but how should I believe something I didn’t see for myself?
i mean we can trust them because theres so many people saying the same things and we dont see motives to lie, however they should be taken with a grain of salt and not taken as the ultimate truth because there can always be more context lost to time
 
i mean we can trust them because theres so many people saying the same things and we dont see motives to lie, however they should be taken with a grain of salt and not taken as the ultimate truth because there can always be more context lost to time
You don’t see motives to lie,they do. The same people saying the same things are US not THEM
 
  • Stone Cold
Reactions: rem
You don’t see motives to lie,they do. The same people saying the same things are US not THEM
U need to take the pills bro
 
Yeah correct, the problem arises from the said sources, are they contemporary? Were they written after ? How much credibility do these contemporary sources have ? Might they be a mere fabrication?
For example, you'd see that most roman accounts about Carthage after the Punic wars are those of belittling and contempt , while other sources ( Greek , Egyptian ) confirm that the Carthaginians were indeed a great empire
On the other hand , you'd see how the Spanish records say how the central American native civilization were barbaric and demonic ( and this is the widespread view ) while the monuments prove otherwise ( it was actually great for a civilization that was isolated since it's conception)
 
Yeah correct, the problem arises from the said sources, are they contemporary? Were they written after ? How much credibility do these contemporary sources have ? Might they be a mere fabrication?
For example, you'd see that most roman accounts about Carthage after the Punic wars are those of belittling and contempt , while other sources ( Greek , Egyptian ) confirm that the Carthaginians were indeed a great empire
On the other hand , you'd see how the Spanish records say how the central American native civilization were barbaric and demonic ( and this is the widespread view ) while the monuments prove otherwise ( it was actually great for a civilization that was isolated since it's conception)
father never disappoints
 
Yeah correct, the problem arises from the said sources, are they contemporary? Were they written after ? How much credibility do these contemporary sources have ? Might they be a mere fabrication?
For example, you'd see that most roman accounts about Carthage after the Punic wars are those of belittling and contempt , while other sources ( Greek , Egyptian ) confirm that the Carthaginians were indeed a great empire
On the other hand , you'd see how the Spanish records say how the central American native civilization were barbaric and demonic ( and this is the widespread view ) while the monuments prove otherwise ( it was actually great for a civilization that was isolated since it's conception)
I agree. That’s why we should not put blind faith on a single source (religion moment)
 
I agree. That’s why we should not put blind faith on a single source (religion moment)
What do you think about world war 2 btw , do you think the death toll was that much ? And do you think the Germans were actually cartoonishly evil while the allies were the defenders and liberators ?
 
What do you think about world war 2 btw , do you think the death toll was that much ? And do you think the Germans were actually cartoonishly evil while the allies were the defenders and liberators ?
we tryna get this guy to say sum incriminating so he can be banned?
 
What do you think about world war 2 btw , do you think the death toll was that much ? And do you think the Germans were actually cartoonishly evil while the allies were the defenders and liberators ?
Cartoonishly evil is actually not an exaggeration for once in history.
 
Cartoonishly evil is actually not an exaggeration for once in history.
I believe they were "evil" but not for the sake of evil , they had a goal and the ends justify the means ig
Esoteric visions go with this , I certainly believe that the nazis had a deep occult background
 
Cartoonishly evil is actually not an exaggeration for once in history.
id say columbos was cartoonishly evil, as well as like the king of england the one from hamilton and the boston tea party and allah that
 
I believe they were "evil" but not for the sake of evil , they had a goal and the ends justify the means ig
Esoteric visions go with this , I certainly believe that the nazis had a deep occult background
Elaborate
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top