TrueLife - History: Science or Fiction Reading 1

Starting point is 00:00:01 Darkness struck, a gut-punched theft, Sun ripped away, her health bereft. I roar at the void. This ain't just fate, a cosmic scam I spit my hate. The games rigged tight, shadows deal, blood on their hands, I'll never kneel. Yet in the rage, a crack ignites, occulted sparks cut through the nights. The scars my key, hermetic and stark. To see, to rise, I hunt in the dark, fumbling, fear. Heiress through ruins maze, lights my war cry, born from the blaze.

Starting point is 00:00:49 The poem is Angels with Rifles. The track, I Am Sorrow, I Am Lust by Codex Seraphene. Check out the entire song at the end of the cast. All right, hello my friends. How's everybody feeling out there? So I got something special I'm gonna look into today hoping you will follow me on this journey. I've recently put out some feelers to some of my like-minded conspiracy friends who've been asking me. George, what do you got in the way of conspiracies?

Starting point is 00:01:32 I got a good one for you. A lot of people like to talk about the New World Order, or a lot of people like to talk about vaccines, or a lot of people like to talk about maybe the Magic Johnson thing or sports or politics. However, I found myself digging way down on the bottom of the what-if barrel. And I came up with some real gold, I think. But I'm going to let you be the judge. I will let you be the judge because ultimately you're the one listening. And my job is to keep you interested.

Starting point is 00:02:14 So that being said, let me, first off, give you the claim Let me give you the claim to see if I can pique your interests. What if Jesus Christ was born in 1152 AD and crucified in 1185 AD? What if the Old Testament refers to mid-evil events? What if the apocalypse was written after 1486? Does this sound uncanny? this version of events is substantiated by facts and logic, validated by new astronomical research and statistical analysis of ancient resources, to a greater extent than everything you may have read and or heard about history before. Probably thinking to yourself, this guy sounds like a nutcase.

Starting point is 00:03:14 But I'm listening. You're still with me, aren't you? All right, let me try and give you a little validation about the man who made these claims. It's by a man named Anatoly Famenko. And before you get two out in the woods here, before you go, yeah, who's this guy Anatoly? Let me give you his background. A little more validation. Anatole Famenko was born in 1945.

Starting point is 00:03:42 He's a full member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, a full member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, a full member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, full member of the International Higher Education Academy of Sciences, doctor of physics and mathematics, professor, head of the Moscow State University section of mathematics, of the Department of Mathematics and Mechanics, solved Plateau's problem from the theory of minimal spectral surfaces, author of the theory of invariance and topological classification,

Starting point is 00:04:15 of Integrable Hamiltonian Dynamic Systems, laureate of the 1996 National Premium of the Russian Federation in Mathematics for a cycle of works on the Hamiltonian Dynamical Systems and Manifolds in Variance Theory, author of 200 scientific publications, 28 monographs and textbooks on mathematics, a specialist in geometry and topology, calculus of variations, symplectic topology, Hamiltonian geometry, and mechanics, computer geometry. So, is there any one of you that have those qualifications?

Starting point is 00:04:59 Because I definitely do not have those qualifications. I've got to tell you, there's something about a Russian mathematician. There's something about the eastern block of people that seem to be a higher order of cognitive thinking at times. I'll give it up to you guys. I'm going to give it up to my counterparts in the eastern blocks. They seem to be better at math. Might not be as good looking as me, but they're probably better thinkers.

Starting point is 00:05:32 So let us begin at the beginning. The problems of historical chronology. First and foremost, we're going to introduce the pretext. problem. I'm going to give a criticism of the Scaligerian chronology. Don't worry. I'll break down what that is. The dating methods as offered by mathematical statistics, eclipses, and zodiacs. Roman chronology as the foundation of European chronology. Let us give a concise preliminary account of the current state of ancient and medieval chronology. The importance of chronology for historical science is all the greater since this discipline allows for the determination of the time

Starting point is 00:06:22 interval between the historical event and the current era provided it can be adequately translated into terms of contemporary chronology that is to say it is given a corresponding bc slash ad dating. Nearly all the fundamental historical conclusions depend on the dating of the events described in the source that is being studied. An altered or imprecise dating of an event defines its entire interpretation and evaluation. The current global chronology model has evolved owing to the labor of several generations of chronologists in the 17th through 19th century and has Julian calendar datings ascribed to all the major events of ancient history. The datings of events referred to in some freshly discovered document are predominantly based on the Roman chronology, since it is

Starting point is 00:07:31 considered that all the other ancient chronological datings can be linked to our calendar, via direct or indirect synchronisms with the Roman dates. In other words, Roman chronology and history are the spinal column of the consensual global chronology and history.

Starting point is 00:07:57 This is why Roman history shall have to enjoy our very special attention. Point two. Scallinger Patavius and other clerical chronologists. The creation of contemporary chronology of the ancient times in the 16th through 17th century AD. The chronology of ancient and medieval history in its present form was created and for the most part concluded in a series of fundamental works of the 16th and 17th century. that begins with the writings of Josephus Scalinger,

Starting point is 00:08:45 called the founder of modern chronology as a science by the modern chronologist E. Brickman. Scalinger's principal works on chronology are as follows. Scalinger 1 Opus Novum de imendation tempurum. Scallinger 1 thesorum tempurium. For the most part, the body of Scalinger's work was concluded by Dionysus Patavius.

Starting point is 00:09:19 The best-known book of the latter is titled De Doctrina Temporium. To quote the prominent contemporary chronologist E. Brickman, there has been no chronological research ever conducted that could be called exhaustive and conforming to modern standards. Hence, it would be correct to call the modern consensual chronology of the classical period and the Middle Ages, the Scalinger-Patabius version. We shall simply refer to it as Scaligerian chronology. As it will be pointed out, this version wasn't the only one existing in the 17th through 18th century.

Starting point is 00:10:06 Its veracity has been questioned by imminent scientists. The ground-laying works of Scalinger and Patavius of the 16th and 17th century present the ancient chronology as a table of dates given without any reasons whatsoever. It is declared to be on ecclesiastical tradition. This is hardly surprising since history has remained predominantly ecclesial for centuries, and for the most part was written by the clergy. Today it is believed that the foundation of chronology were laid by Eusebius Pampthelus and Saint Hieronymus, allegedly in the 4th century AD.

Starting point is 00:10:52 It is worth noting that Eusebius of Cicera is painted wearing typically medieval attire on the Renaissance epoch, most probably because he had lived in that period of time, and not any earlier. Despite the fact that Scaligerian history ascribes Eusebius to the 4th century AD during the years 260 to 340, it is interesting to note that his famous work titled The History of Time from the Genesis to the Nicene Council, the so-called chronicle, as well as the tractate by St. Hieronymus, weren't discovered until very late in the Middle Ages.

Starting point is 00:11:45 Apart from that, historians say that the Greek original is only available in fragmentary form nowadays and is complemented by the ad libidum translation made by St. Hieronymus. marked the fact that the Niciferous Callistius attempted to write the new history of the first three centuries in the ninth century or revised the history of Eusebius. But he could not do more than repeat that which was written by Eusebius. However, since the work of Eusebius was only published in 1544, that is much later than the writing of Nisiphorus, One has reason to wonder, could the ancient Eusebius have based his work on the medieval tractate of Niciferous Callistius? On figure 1.7, we can see a painting of Caesar Nebula and Giovanni Gera that was allegedly created in 1585 to 1590. According to historians, it depicts a scene of St. Jerome and his pet lion.

Starting point is 00:13:03 visiting the library of Eusebius, whose chronicle was translated by Jerome and Casar. What we see here, however, is a typically medieval scene of the Renaissance epoch, or maybe even the epoch of the 16th through 17th century. The library shelves are filled with books that look basically the same as those of the 18th and 19th century, in hard covers, with one. wide fastening straps, the artists of the 16th and 17th century have most probably painted recent medieval events and characters cast into the dark ages by later 17th and 18th century chronologist of the Scaligerian tradition. It is assumed that Scaligerian chronology was based on the interpretations of assorted numeric data collected from the Bible.

Starting point is 00:14:03 certain basis dates that were used as reference points originated as results of scholastic exercises with numbers. For instance, according to the eminent chronologist Jay Usher, the world was created on Sunday 23rd of October, 4004 BC, in the small hours of the morning. mind-boggling precision one is to bear in mind that the secular chronology of the present days is largely based on the scholastic biblical chronology of the middle ages e brickman a contemporary historian is perfectly right to note that the christian have made secular chronography serve ecclesial history

Starting point is 00:15:00 the compilation made by Hieronymus is the foundation of the entire edifice of Occidental Chronological Knowledge. Although Joseph Scalinger, the founding father of modern chronology as a science, had attempted to reconstruct the entire tractate of Eusebius, as E. Brickman tells us, the datings of Eusebius that often got transcribed erroneously, in manuscripts are hardly of any use to us nowadays. Due to the controversy and the dubity of all these medieval computations. The Genesis dating, for instance, varies greatly from document to document. Let us quote the main examples. 59.69 BC. The Antiochian dating, according to...

Starting point is 00:16:00 to theophilus. 5508 BC the Byzantine dating also known as the Constant Noble version 5493 BC Alexandrian the Anian error also 5472

Starting point is 00:16:16 BC 4,04 BC according to Usher a Hebraic dating 5872 BC the so-called dating of the 70 interpreters

Starting point is 00:16:28 4,700 BC, Samarian, 3761 BC, Judeic, 3491 BC, according to Hieronymus, 5199 BC, according to Eusebius, 5500 BC, according to the Julius Africanus, 5515 BC, also 5507 BC according to Theophilius, 5551 BC, according to Theophilius, 5551 BC, according to Augustine. As we can see, this temporal reference point, considered fundamental for the ancient chronology, fluctuates within the span of 2100 years. We have only quoted the most famous examples here. It is expedient to know that there are about 200 various versions of the Genesis date in existence.

Starting point is 00:17:26 On figure 1.8, you can see an ancient painting. of the 70 Bible translators, commonly referred to as the 70 interpreters today. The correct Genesis dating issue was far from scholastic and received plenty of attention in the 17th and 18th century for good reason. The matter here is that many ancient documents date events in years past since Adam or since the Genesis. This is why the existence millennarium discrepancies between the possible choices of this reference point substantially affect the datings of many ancient documents. Joseph Scalinger, together with D. Petavius, were the first ones to have used the astronomical

Starting point is 00:18:20 method for proving, but not examining critically the late medieval version of the chronology of the preceding centuries. Modern commentators consider Scalinger to have ipto facto transformed this chronology into a scientific one. This scientific veneer proves sufficient for the chronologist of the 17th and 18th century to put unquestioning trust in the largely rigidified chronological date grid that they had inherited. It is very significant that Scaligerian chronology was initially created within the paradigm of the Western European Catholic Church, which had remained in its firm control for a great

Starting point is 00:19:17 amount of time. A. Olinkov wrote, the medieval theologians often tried to calculate the age of the earth interpreting assorted data contained in the holy writ on having studied the text of the Bible Archbishop Hieronymus came to the conclusion that the world was created 3,941 years before the beginning of modern chronology. His colleague Theophilis, the bishop of Antakia, had extended this period to 5,515 years. St. Augustine had added another 36 years, while the Irish Archbishop James Usher, who had obviously nurtured a fondness for precise numbers,

Starting point is 00:20:16 had made the assumption that the world was created in the early morning hours on 23rd of October 4004 BC. Many eminent Western European chronologists of the 16th and 17th century were clergymen. Joseph Scalinger, for instance, was a theologian. Tis Chertoff, the founding father of paleography, was a doctor of divinity. Dionysus Patavius, a Jesuit, and an author of several theological works. Their absolute trust in this infallibility of what the ecclesial chronology was telling them determined their entire Wellston Shaw.

Starting point is 00:21:11 Therefore, their attitude to the data offered by other disciplines was determined by whether or not it could serve the advocacy of this a priori assumption or the other, invariably based on the medieval ecclesial chronology that was later baptized scientific. The fact that the clerical chronologists of the Occidental Church had deified the endeavors of their predecessors of the 15th and 16th century excluded the very possibility of criticizing the foundations of chronology in any way at all, even minutely. Joseph Scalinger, for instance, could not even conceive of such heresy

Starting point is 00:22:04 as running a check on the chronological materials of the Holy Fathers, Eusebius, and others. Scallinger calls this work by Eusebius, the evangelical preparation, divine, trusting the authority of their purpose, predecessors unconditionally. The chronologist reacted to external criticisms very bitterly. The same Joseph Scallinger makes a perfect demonstration of this attitude toward objective scientific criticisms in the following episode. The eminent biologist Joseph Scalinger, the author of the

Starting point is 00:22:48 chronology that has received such high scientific acclaim, turned into a keen Quadratourist. Let us remind that a quadritorist was someone who tried to build a square equaling a given circle in area, using nothing but a pair of compasses and a ruler. This mathematical problem is insoluble as a principle, which is proven by geometry. However, Joseph Scallinger had published a book where he claims to have proved the true quadrature, which solved the problem, the best mathematicians of the epic. Vietz Clavius have tried their hardest to prove to him that his reasoning was incorrect, all in vain. The point here is that Scalinger's erroneous proof made the easy corollary about the perimeter

Starting point is 00:23:51 of an equilateral polygon, with 196 angles being greater than that of the circle, circumscribing it, which is naturally quite absurd. Nevertheless, Scalinger and his supporters who had a habit of defending their opinions vehemently didn't want to acknowledge anything, replying with maledictions and scornful epitaphs, and finally calling all the geometricians complete ignoramus in what concerned geometry. One might imagine how these people reacted towards attempts of analyzing their version chronology critically. Few are aware that Scalinger and Patavius brought chronology to perfection and absolutely precise datings.

Starting point is 00:24:50 quoting the year, day, month, and sometimes even the time of day for all the principal events in history of humankind. For whatever reason, modern monographies and textbooks usually only quote the years of events according to Scallinger Patavius, coyly omitting the month, day, and hour. It is verily a step backwards that deprives the chronology calculated in the 17th and 18th century of its former splendor and fundamentally. By the 19th century, the accumulated volume of chronological material had grown to the extent of inducing respect a priori by its sheer scale. So the chronologists of the 19th century saw their objective in making minor corrections and not much else. The issue of veracity is hardly raised at all in the 20th century and the ancient chronology

Starting point is 00:26:08 solidifies terminally in the very shape and form given to it by the writings of Eusebius, Hieronymus, Theophilius, Augustine, Hippolytus, St. Clement of Alexandria, Usher, Scalinger, and Patavius. To someone in our day and age, the very thought that historians have followed an erroneous chronology for about three centuries seems preposterous since it contradicts the existing tradition. However, as chronology developed, specialists encountered considerable difficulties in trying to correlate the very chronological data offered by ancient sources. with the consensual Scaligerian version. It was discovered, for instance,

Starting point is 00:27:02 that Hieronymus misdates his own time by 100 years. The so-called sassanide tradition separated Alexander the Great from the sassanides by an interval of 226 years, which was extended to 557 by contemporary historians. In this case, the gap exceeds 300 years. The Jews also allocate a mere 52 years for the Persian period of their history, despite the fact that Cirrus II is separated from Alexander the Great by 206 years. The basic Egyptian chronology has also reached us through the filter of Christian chronologists.

Starting point is 00:27:50 This list of kings compiled by Monothelian only survived as quotations made by the Christian authors. Some readers might be aware that the Oriental Church avoided using the birth of Christ as a chronological point of reference. Since in Constantinople, the debates about the date of his birth had continued well into the 19th century. Number three, the veracity of the Scallinger Patavius chronology was questioned as early as the 16th century. The doubts regarding the correctness of the consensual version aren't a recent phenomenon. They have quite a tradition behind them. In A. Morozov wrote in particular that the Salamanca University. professor de Arcela published his works Programma Histore Universales and Divine Flore Historica,

Starting point is 00:28:58 where he had proved that the entire history of the classical age was medieval in its origin. This is exactly the same point of view that was shared by the Jesuit historian and archaeologist Jean Hardwin, 1646 to 1724, who considered the classical literature to have been written in monasteries during the preceding 16th century. The German Robert Baldolf wrote his history and its criticisms in 1902 through 1903, proving that not only ancient history, but even that of the early Middle Ages is a forgery. of the Renaissance epic and the subsequent centuries with the use of nothing but philological arguments. You can see the title page of one of Jean Hardoon's books in figure 1.9 And that of its translation by Edwin Johnson.

Starting point is 00:30:07 The eminent English scientist Edwin Johnson, the author of several remarkable critical studies of ancient and medieval history gave some severe and serious criticism of Scalinger chronology. The main conclusion that Edwin Johnson had arrived to, after many years of chronological research, was formulated thusly. We are a lot closer in time to the Greeks and the Romans than what the chronological tables tell us. Edwin Johnson called for a revision of the entire of fiss of the ancient and medieval chronology. His principal works were published in the late 19th and early 20th century. Isaac Newton, an English mathematician, mechanician, astronomer, and physicist, the creator of classical mechanics,

Starting point is 00:31:06 member of the Royal Society of London since 1672, and its president since 1703, developed differential and integral calculus. He discovered light dispersion and chromatic aberration, researched diffraction and interference, worked on the development of the corpuscular theory of light, made a hypothesis, and combined the concepts of waves and particles, built the reflecting telescope, formulated the principal laws of classical mechanics, discovered the gravity law, formulated the theory of movement and celestial bodies and the founding principles of celestial mechanics. Sir Isaac Newton occupies a special place among the critics of the Scalinger-Patavius version. He is the author of a number of profound works on chronology, where he relates his conclusions

Starting point is 00:32:04 regarding the inviracity of Scalinger's version in some of its principal parts. This research remains rather obscure for the contemporary reader despite having provoked major controversy in the past. The main chronological works of Newton's are the following. A short chronicle from the first memory of kings in Europe to the conquest of Persia by Alexander the Great. The chronology of ancient kingdoms amended. Newton made a radical revision of the ancient chronology based on natural scientific ideas. Some very few events were added extra age. This is true of the legendary voyage of the Argonauts, which Newton determined to have occurred in the 14th century BC,

Starting point is 00:33:00 and not in the 10th BC, as was believed in his time period. However, the dating of this event is rather vague in later chronological studies of other chronologists as well. The new chronology offered by Sir Isaac Newton is a lot shorter than the consensual chronology of Scalinger. Newton moved most of the events dated as preceding the epic of Alexander the Great forward in time, closer to us. The revision isn't as radical as the contained in the writings of N.A. Morozov, who had been of the opinion that the Scaligerian version of ancient chronology was only voracious, starting in the 4th century AD. Let us mark that Newton did not go further in time than the BC AD mark in his research. Contemporary historians have this to say about those works of Newton's.

Starting point is 00:34:00 They are the fruit of 40 years of labor, diligent research, and a tremendous irridation. Basically, Sir Isaac Newton studied all of the major literary works on ancient history and all the primary sources, beginning with ancient and oriental mythology. Modern commentators invariably come to the conclusion that Sir Isaac Newton was wrong when they compare his conclusion to the consensual Scaligerian chronology. They say that, naturally, without deciphered cuneiform and hieroglyphal. writings have no archaeological data due to the non-existence of archaeology in that age. Bound by the presumed veracity of the biblical chronology and the belief in the reality of what was told in myths, Newton's errors weren't measured in mere tens of hundreds of years. He was thousands of years off the mark, and his chronology is far from true, even in what concerns the very

Starting point is 00:35:06 reality of the events described. W. Winston wrote in his memoirs, Sir Isaac often saw the truth in mathematics intuitively, without even needing proof. But this very Sir Isaac Newton compiled a chronology. However, this chronology isn't any more convincing than the most ingenious historical novel, as I have finally proved in my refutation thereof. Oh, how well. how utterly weak even the greatest of the mortals can be in some regards. What did Sir Isaac suggest exactly? Basically, he had analyzed the BC chronology of ancient Egypt and ancient Greece. He must have lacked the time for the analysis of more recent epochs,

Starting point is 00:35:57 since this tractate only got published in the last year of his life. For instance, the contemporary consensual, version of chronology ascribes the first years of reign of the Egyptian pharaoh menace to approximately 3,000 years BC. Newton suggested that this event could be given a date as recent as 946 BC. Thus, the shift forward in time comprises about 2,000 years. Nowadays, the myth of Theseus is dated to the 15th century BC. However, Sir Isaac claimed that these events took place around 936 BC, hence the shift of dates forward that he suggests amount to roughly 700 years. The famous Trojan War is dated to roughly 1225 BC today, but Newton claimed this event too have occurred in 904 BC. The shift forward here is a

Starting point is 00:37:06 is one of approximately 330 years. Newton's main conclusion may be encapsulated as follows. He moves a part of the history of ancient Greece about 300 years forward in time, closer to us. The history of ancient Egypt covering a span of several hundred years, according to Scallinger, that is, 3,000 BC, and on is moved forward in time by Newton and compressed into a time,

Starting point is 00:37:36 period as short as 350 years, namely 946 BC to 617 BC. Newton also moved some fundamental dates of the ancient Egyptian history about 1,800 years forward in time. Sir Isaac Newton only managed to revise the dates preceding 200 BC. His observations were of a rather eclectic nature, and he could not find any sense. system in these apparently chaotic redatings. We shall also briefly relate the publication history of Newton's work as told by the book, which may lead one to certain conclusions. Newton seemed to have been wary of the plethora of complications and the publication of his

Starting point is 00:38:29 tractate on chronology could lead him to. This work of his had commenced many years before 1727. The book had been rewritten numerous times up until his death in 1727. It is noteworthy. The short chronicle wasn't intended for publication by its author. However, the rumors of Newton's chronological research had spread far enough. And the Princess of Wales expressed a wish to familiarize herself. with it. Sir Isaac gave her the manuscript on the condition that no third party should learn of it.

Starting point is 00:39:09 The same happened with Abe Conti, who started to lend the manuscript to interested scientists upon his return to Paris. As a result, M. Frerich translated the manuscript into French and added his own historical overview to it. The translation eventually reached the Paris. bookseller G. G. Gavilar, who wrote Newton a letter in May 1724, eager to publish his writings. Having received no answer, he wrote another letter in March 25, 1725, that is, telling Newton that he would consider Sir Isaac's silence as acquiescence for the book's publication with Ferret's comments. No reply was given to that either. Then Gavillier asked his friend in London to get a reply for Newton personally. Their meeting took place on 27th of May 1725. And Sir Isaac's answered in the negative.

Starting point is 00:40:14 But it was too late. The book had already been published under the following title. Abregie de chronology de M. El Chavillier Newton. Sorry for my very poor attempted French. Sir Isaac received a copy of the book on 11th. of November 1725. He published a letter in the philosophical transactions of the Royal Society, where he accused the Abbe of breach of promise and publication without the author's consent. When Father Soset started his attacks in 1726, Sir Isaac had announced the preparation of a more voluminous and detailed work on ancient chronology for publication. All of those events took place

Starting point is 00:41:01 shortly before Newton's death. He had sadly lacked the time for the publication of a more in-depth book, and none of its traces remain in existence. Sir Isaac died in 1727, leaving his research of ancient history unfinished. Could all this complicated history of the short Chronicles publication be explained by Newton's fear of groundless attacks? What was the reaction to the publication? of this book. The mid-18th century press saw a multitude of responses.

Starting point is 00:41:39 Most of them were made by historians and phylogists and had voiced such negative opinions as the blunders of the honored dilettante in regard to Newton's work. Only very few articles appeared and expressed support of his opinion after the initial wave of responses subsided, the book was de facto hushed up and withdrawn from scientific circulation. In the 19th century, Francois Arago, the author of The Review, presumed Newton's chronological research unworthy of more than the following rather flippet remarks. By and large, Newton failed to come up with correct judgments in everything, accepting Mathieu's

Starting point is 00:42:31 mathematics and its application. Apart from his theological opuses, the chronology that he compiled is there to confirm our opinion. The very chronology that Freret refuted immediately upon publication. Most probably, Arogo decided not to get involved in the issue and quoted Ferret's opinion without thinking twice about it. Cesar Lombroso tries to bring the issue to the issue to conclusion in his notorious genius and insanity in the following manner. Newton, whose mind amazed the entire humanity, as the contemporaries rightly state, was yet another one to have gone senile in his old age, although the symptoms in his case weren't quite as grave

Starting point is 00:43:23 as those of the geniuses listed above. That must have been the time when he had written his chronology, apocalypse, and letter to Bentley. Obscure, involved writings, quite unlike anything that he had written in his youth. Similar accusations would later be addressed at N. A. Morozov, another scientist, bold enough to revise chronology. They sound most peculiar in a scientific discussion, and as we think, mask the inability to reply substantially. All right, my friends. What do you think about that so far? Because we are getting deep, huh?

Starting point is 00:44:06 You see, this initial intro is just trying to get in and kind of debunk the fact of the chronologist. The fact that the majority of our timelines came from Scalinger and Patavian. And if you can trace back the majority of all our timelines back to these two guys, who did not really have all the information they need. You could think about how science is done today, how the difficult it is to argue with the consensus. You can make that same argument to the past.

Starting point is 00:44:44 So this intro is about kind of debunking timelines, and you can see great minds like Isaac Newton had issues with it. Other great scientists at the time had issues with the chronology. So this intro is going to be the foundation on which we build up to the crescendo of historical and biblical figures being a lot closer to us than we previously thought. Let me know what you guys think. This is kind of tough to get into, and please forgive my pronunciations of a lot of these particular Greek and French and Russian words, as I am a dumb American. I love you guys. Thank you for taking time to hang out with me.

Starting point is 00:45:27 Let me know if you want to hear a little bit more about this because this is I find it fascinating. I hope you do Let me know in the comments if you like it and we'll keep moving forward if I get some good feedback. All right? I love you guys. Aloha

TrueLife - History: Science or Fiction Reading 1

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.