DDickey Posted May 29, 2008 Report Share Posted May 29, 2008 (edited) . I'm assuming this guy is a fundamentalist Christian trying to prove that the world is only 6,000 years old. Still, it's worth a watch because it's both infuriating and hilarious. It's particularly worth watching about 5 minutes in, when he talks about Julius Caesar. . Infuriating, I tell you. Edited May 29, 2008 by DDickey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic Posted May 29, 2008 Report Share Posted May 29, 2008 I couldn't watch it all - I was shouting and swearing at the screen! I can't work out which is worse: this or the building of a museum showing humans and dinosaurs living together! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DecimusCaesar Posted May 29, 2008 Report Share Posted May 29, 2008 I've come across Anatoly Fomenko before. I think I mentioned him in the pseudohistory thread. It's very annoying trying to find ancient history videos on Youtube and having to trawl through pages and pages of those videos promoting his books. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted May 29, 2008 Report Share Posted May 29, 2008 If I understand him correctly... and that in itself may be impossible... is he simply suggesting that the timeline is wrong, not that these historical occurrences, events, etc. did not happen? His complaint seems to be with the mathematics of human history rather than the course of it. Perhaps I am missing something entirely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Neil Posted May 29, 2008 Report Share Posted May 29, 2008 (edited) I do not know if I dare watch this - even the views of moderate christians vis-a-vis Roman history tend to get me a little worked up. EDIT: I came, I saw, I fell about laughing - this was too preposterous to get me even slightly cheesed-off. Most pseudo historians and religious apologists annoy me because their stories are just plausable enough to influence people who have not read other material in depth. They use the conventional timeline and have enough knowledge of history to convince some people that they have researched their stuff, and so 'must be right'. This chap is too harmless to get me annoyed - he pads out his narrative by giving several long lists attached to the pictures which flash up on the screen - in one particular visual list, I noticed he stopped naming things and said '..and so on' when Haghia Sophia appeared. Maybe he cannot pronounce Constantinople? I also notice that when Julius Caesar was mentioned, a statue of Augustus appeared. HILARIOUS! Seriously, I can imagine even fundamental religious types with their own manipulation of history whispering to him: 'PSSST.. shut your face! We're losing credibility here!' Edited May 29, 2008 by Northern Neil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.