History And Its Fabrication

There’s no end to it – data – especially of the historical kind. My attention has been directed to Anatoly Fomenko’s historical revision and a quick scan of the Amazon Kindle bookstore shows that he and his colleagues have published alot of information. Sigh.

This leads to the question of why history seems to get mangled and confused and the answer is rather simple (and very politically incorrect as well). It seems that mangled history is the product of the religious mind in which deference to authority, of whatever type, trumps physical evidence.

I’ve always had the view that religion was the old way of doing politics. Reduced to its essence it is the coercion, both initially subtle and overt, of people to behave in prescribed, and also proscribed, ways by the self appointed priestly/political class who interpreted the desires of the authority as written in deemed sacred texts or books.

The political incorrectness stems from the realisation that it is the political left in general, the Platonists, Marxists, Liberals and more recently the Post-Modernists, as well as the religious, who fabricate history. If you think Marxism and Post-Modernism is but a new development, then guess again, it’s been with us since the times of the Greek philosopher Plato.

The problem lies in our understanding of the process of thinking itself. Thinking is essentially the recall of memory into particular patterns called ideas and like all biochemical/physical activities, constant repetition of thoughts ultimately leads to thinking becoming habitual and unconscious. Such minds interpret life in terms of their fossilised beliefs and authorities. Such minds reject new data when it conflicts with their previously held assumptions; challenges to the theory of gravitation comes to mind.

Fomenko’s methodology reminds me of a more recent fabrication of history, that fabrication being of Australian Aboriginal History documented by Keith Windschuttle. The overiding impression of Windschuttle’s work was that the fabrication seemed to be done unwittingly, that the various author’s actually believed their view points had to be correct. And when the believers dominate a culture, then history starts to become politicised, so it’s little wonder it has also been mangled in the process.

It’s essentially cultural marxism that mangles memories into politically correct histories, whether Biblical or otherwise.

About Louis Hissink

Retired diamond exploration geologist. Trained by Western Mining Corporation and polished by De Beers.
This entry was posted in History, Philosophy. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to History And Its Fabrication

  1. fabio says:

    Hi Louis, what I consider deigned of note in Fomenko are the remark about some coincidences concerning the Godunov and the Romanov. Why Goths ruled in Crimea until late Middle Age? Rome loves Crimea ..
    Fomenko does not believe in dinosaurs, which would be only giant birds (those beared on two legs) according to ancient legends…


    • HI fabio,

      His reconstruction of CE history would beed to be studied more but dinosaurs were giant birds? You would need to see what skeletal remains actually exist for the idea of dinosaurs to be checked – there is a good possibility that mountains might have been made from molehills of hard data – more time consuming research if Fomenko is right. Mind you watching the birds here on the farm reminds me of dinosaur walking styles – much like those StarWars 2 legged walking machines.

      More mysteries to look into………


  2. THX1138 says:

    While reading Fomenko, I kept on wanting to inform him of catastrophism and the Electric Universe theory, and then I realized it would shoot down a lot of his theories, so he would not be motivated to pay attention to that. His ideas smack of Soviet nationalist propaganda, where Russia invented the automobile, and Russia invented the light bulb. In his explanation of the discrepancies in history (which I agree exist, and I think purposefully so), Egypt was merely a burial ground for important Russian rulers, and Russia pretty much ran the world back then.

    So, while I’m intrigued to know any real history (if it exists), Fomenko’s explanations fall short of truth for me.

    As soon as I’m through reading the Internet, I plan on going back through it and correct all of the oversights, poorly constructed hypotheses and out-and-out lies I found along the way. Surely I must be about half-way through by now, with all the reading I’ve done over the last few years? 😉


    • Yes,

      Fomenko’s ideas are challenging though I suspect the raw data might in a lot of cases be correct, it’s the interpretation of that data which is a problem. Finding medieval graffiti on Pompei ruins is interesting, as well as other anachronisms.

      So the rule of thumb is that if mainstream interpretation is that something is a dead-ringer for a classical artefact etc, then the dead ringer is the chronological anachronism.

      Never ending……….and I’m too occupied with fabricating an experiment to test a gravity model at present to get too fomenkosized.


  3. fabio says:

    Well, Fomenko, at least, have some substantiation in his claims about pharaons: the Roman Emperor inherited this title after having conquered Egypt, what was actual even after Theodosius (like Alexander the Great and the Persian kings). Muslim caliphs, on other hand, refused this title. And Moscow is the third Rome .


  4. richard says:

    I don’t yet see Fomenkos reconstruction as in any way compromizing either the electric universe nor our catastrophic past. The reason for fabricating history is obvious however. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it and in that repetition enrich those who remember history and the means of control of the masses. It is a certainty that an Iron curtain was raised between east and west and in an earlier epoch than we have been educated to believe. One only has to admire the megalithic stone works left by our superiors to witness a huge hole in the fabric of modern history as taught to us unsuspecting and innocent vessels.
    best regards Richard.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s