I'm genuinely sorry that you cant follow my posts.
They were mostly motivated by a sincere desire to help someone who is being deceived.
When confronted by claims in the media, in life generally, there are people who seek truth, and sadly some who tell lies, and a third group who are deceived.
People who tell lies do it for different motives, some for money, some for fame, some to please a peer group... they know they are telling lies, and are a despicable blot on society. I genuinely hope you are not one of them.
People who are deceived believe the people who tell lies, or they believe and take as truth things which are theories, things claimed by people who claim theory as truth. Lots of people in this category.
Another group are the smokers, the romantics who believe things because they want to, or things that are wildly improbable... magic, astrology, witchcraft, fairies, UFO's, things dreamed, or unseen or unproven... some would argue there's a whole bunch of modern scientists in this group
Because I don't believe everything I read, I'm quite OK with reading arguments about history or science, there are many historians, and many theories about science, science just means knowledge, But for some science becomes a religion, where people advocate on one side or another of a particular author, in this case Fomenko.
I'll try to speak clearly and not use too big words.
For a start, I might as well ask:
1st question do you Allynh have any commercial interests in the sale of Fomenko's books?
2nd question, have you read them yourself?
3rd question, do you understand what Fomenko claims?
4th question, have you read any ancient history?
5th question, do you know much about geography or chronology?
6th question, have you read Velikovsky?
7th question, have you read about communism, propaganda, brainwashing?
8th question, have you read Josephus, Gibbon, Thucydides, Livy, Herodotus, Isaac Newton, Homer?
When people are favourably impressed by Fomenko, I've not made any personal ad hominem attacks.
(ad hominem means an attack at the *person and not the *subject of a debate, discussion or argument)
I've avoided poking the finger at you or anyone else personally about things like "What are you smoking?"
You seem surprised at my mention of Orwell and suggest I've been smoking...
if you search Fomenko's Chron1 book, the very first item in his book is a quote from Orwell, 'Orwell' is the sixteenth word in his book... don't take my word for it, search for it, you can also get information about George Orwell online
"The protagonist of the novel, Winston Smith, is a member of the Outer Party, who works for the Ministry of Truth (or Minitrue in Newspeak), which is responsible for propaganda and ***historical revisionism. His job is to rewrite past newspaper articles, so that the historical record always supports the party line."
If you are really interested in what Fomenko's motives might have been to write historical revisionist material.. take the time to download a copy of Orwell's book, you might then understand why I noticed this quote immediately right at the beginning of Fomenko's Chron1
you can see two interesting things straight away... historical revisionism, and 'party line'
ever heard these terms?
I was trying to persuade you yourself, you particularly, to look at reasons to doubt Fomenko's claims.
Because I was concerned you might be in the process of being taken in by a charlatan, a fool, a madman, or a liar, or a manipulating deceiver. I dont have any doubt at all that Fomenko's claims about a global historical conspiracy are either the result of delusion, deliberate deception, or part of some sort of communist plot, the reasons are unknown to me... but the vast scale of his theory is just incredible, ie not able to be believed, his methods are not even logical, statistics to prove that someone is someone else...
I read in Fomenko's first book, page 69 of the pdf, or page 30 of the book, where Fomenko speculates that the Greek Apollonius could really be Polish, because the Greek word 'Apollonius' and the imagined Latin word 'Polonius' are similar in appearance.. I don't believe 'Polonius' is even Latin, (or Russian), for a person from Poland... this is in relation to Fomenko showing some unfamiliarity with etymology or the derivation of words...
"The earliest recorded mention of "Poland" is found in a Latin text written in 1003 A.D. and titled "Annales Hildesheimenses": "Heinricus Berthaldi comitis filius, et Bruno frater regis, et ambo Bolizavones, ***Polianicus vide licet ac Boemicus, a rege infideliter maiestatis rei deficient."
Russian for a person from Poland: Russian Польша, Pol'sha
the logic is as bizarre as speculating that Apollonius might really be Paul McCartney, since Paul and Apollonius share the stem sounds 'p' and 'l', ie they sort of sound the same, so could Apollonius really belong in the XX century?
If you search Fomenko's first book, you will find Apollonius, but no mention of Shakespeare, this is obviously a deliberate historical fraud, and the Greek Apollonius should be moved to the sixteenth century to England where he belongs...
In Shakespeare's Macbeth, there is a character called Polonius, if I was Fomenko, I could speculate, could the Greek Apollonius be really an Englishman and living in the sixteenth century?
Fomenko's chronology is claiming thousands and thousands of historical events are a deliberate fraud.
Yet his own works seem to be an even bigger fraud. I dont know if Fomenko is deceived, deluded, or telling lies deliberately, or genuinely believes what he has written, he praises Morazov, but says Morazov didn't go far enough, since Morazov felt the conventional 'Scaligerian' chronology was correct from the fifth or sixth century AD forwards...
Scientists can calculate eclipses quite accurately assuming conditions in the past or in the future are not changing. Assuming the relative motion of the moon to the earth is the same today as in the past, it's possible to calculate when a historical event happened.
Ancient people described eclipses, in the context of other events, so historians and scientists can work together to decide when an eclipse happened. if it was in the middle of a fight between one mob and another, or in the 5th year of so-and-so's reign, eclipses can be used to serve as markers on a historical timeline, a point in time to synchronise chronologies.
Fomenko used the eclipses reported by Thucydides to claim that because the stars were visible in an eclipse described by Thucydides that actually happened in 430 BC, and scientists calculated recently that the eclipse was not a full eclipse, and so therefore people in 430 BC could not possibly have seen stars on this particular eclipse viewed from Athens where Thucydides was assumed to be, when Thucydides described the event, the sun would still be fairly bright, and so the stars would not be visible... ie Thucydides was not accurate, and added stars when none were visible in this particular eclipse, or the event was really at a different time, or most likely Thucydides was in Thrace where he had connections....
so Fomenko used a computer program to find another possible full eclipse at the location of Athens, but ***chose between ***two other eclipses that occurred in the same place but at a much later time, ie there was a full eclipse at Athens in the twelfth and another full eclipse in the thirteenth century, so Fomenko decided that he was right, the rest of the world was wrong, and the eclipse and all the Greek and Roman and other history was a Jesuit conspiracy...