The early middle ages never happened

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 06:13 PM
Oh thank goodness! So 2012 isn`t gonna happen for another few hundred years?! And here I was about to sell everything I own and move into the mountains next month, talk about bein saved by the bell!...

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 11:49 AM
This, on Fomenko's "work"

H. G. van Bueren, professor emeritus of astronomy at the University of Utrecht, concluded his scathing review of Fomenko's work on the application of mathematics and astronomy to historical data as follows:

It is surprising, to say the least, that a well-known (Dutch) publisher could produce an expensive book of such doubtful intellectual value, of which the only good word that can be said is that it contains an enormous amount of factual historical material, untidily ordered, true; badly written, yes; mixed-up with conjectural nonsense, sure; but still, much useful stuff. For the rest of the book is absolutely worthless. It reminds one of the early Soviet attempts to produce tendentious science (Lysenko!), of polywater, of cold fusion, and of modern creationism. In brief: a useless and misleading book.[59]

Taken from the Wiki entry on Fomenko's "theory".

Of course, "believers" will say whatever they feel they need to say to "validate" this "theory". The fact remains, manipulating data to "prove" a "point" can get you only this far, at some point you WILL be faced with questions you cannot answer. Then it will be like the ancient maps ("Here there will be aliens" or "here there will be global conspiracies" or "here there will be lots and lots of beer and pot" or whatever).

One question remains though, one about mr Fomenko is silent about. Columbus got to Central America AD 1492 (and through to AD 1498 when he landed on the mainland of South America) and found people living there, right? How did those people got there, if the history of mankind is only about 1000 years old? (that's 500 years during Columbus' journeys) How did they manage to colonize the entire continent, build what they built and raise to the levels of population they were when Europeans "discovered" them for the first time?

posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:45 PM
reply to post by Maegnas

Fomenko didn't say that the history of mankind is only 1000 years old.
He said "Written" history. He says that very little can be known of events prior to about the year 900AD.
He contends that human progress has been steady without periods of decline.

Consensual history would have you believe that there was this great Greek and Roman "Classical Age of marvelous architecture and schools of learning and then for an unknown reason all was lost. Minds and skills went into a deep sleep for several hundred years and then to revive again for a few more hundred, and then to decay for a few more hundred and again to revive. This is nonsense. None of these "dark ages" existed.

He also shows that improvements in Cartography have been steady.

Your commentator there said nothing of substance.
Do you have a link for his review?
Until you have looked at the material you are not in a position to judge it.
Did you look at the links I provided?

One of them has one of Fomenko's "tree" diagrams showing the duplicate dynasties over a period of time with coincident lengths of reign and coincident events. This diagram left out the dates. This is where the idea of History repeating comes from.

Again on the subject of "erasing history". You cannot erase something that Didn't happen, but you can fabricate many duplicates to extend time.

posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 06:45 AM
Alright, you asked for it. Here are some questions then that Mr Fomenko is expected to answer:

1. How old is the Hagia Sofia? We do have records about building it, about rebuilding its dome when it collapsed (and then again, when it collapsed a second time). Who kept those records? Why did Justinian celebrate the completion of the temple with the words "I have beaten you, Solomon"? (Νενίκηκά σε Σολομών, in Greek)

2. How old is the Pantheon and the Colosseum? We do have records for those too, when they were built and which emperor commissioned them.

3. Was there ever a library in Alexandria (and one in Pergamum)? Who built them and when? where buildings that were mentioned in scripts there older than the library itself, contemporary or plain fiction? Buildings such as the Parthenon or the Pyramids...

4. Did Alexander the Great ever exist and when? Did he march on against a Persian empire and take it over? Was said Persian Empire true or fiction? Were all the Alexandrias that he founded true or fiction? some of them exist, albeit by a different name, today.

5. When was the Parthenon built and by whom? We have records about both but since mr Fomenko "proved" that all records over 1000 years old are fabricated, I have to ask for the "official" response.

6. Did the Greeks fight at Marathon and Thermopylae and Salamis and Plataea? If so, when? We do have a few, scarce and unreliable records about all those battles but since all ancient records are fabricated... (were the etched in stone texts referring to these events also fabricated?)

7. Were there or weren't there Indian scriptures WRITTEN between 1000-500 BC? If not, who fabricated those scriptures (known as Vedic texts) and how did they know how to write in a language unknown to Europeans at around 1500 AD? I am not talking about the 17th century "translations" (and onwards), I am talking about the original texts.

8. When were the Confucian texts written?

9. Who, and more importantly when, built the pyramids in Egypt? they did record their history on the walls of their monuments, was that fabricated too?

Good luck mr Fomenko

posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:22 PM
Maybe a better question to ask would be,

did the Middle Ages ever end?


posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 04:08 PM
I think people do not understand Fomenko's theory. He doesn't claim that the achievements of the dark ages don't exist, he argues that our agreed-upon dating is off. His view is that this concensus developed in the Western world early on (18th century, I think) and that people would fill in the agreed-upon dating of years with some material that was incorrect. For example, he doesn't argue that Alexander didn't conquer a vast territory but that this happened more recently than otherwise thought. In other words, if conventional dating says that three hundred years exists than actually did exist, something must have happened in those three hundred years and historians and others would naturally fill in the extra time.

At least this is what I remember from a few years ago when I read his first book.

Where I think Fomenko falls flat is in his rejection of carbon dating (I think - if I recall correctly). Anyway, it's an interesting theory.

[edit on 9/2/2010 by niv]

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 05:12 PM
reply to post by Skyfloating

Because so little is known about the early middle ages that they are referred to as Dark Ages. Some believe that the middle ages or at least the early middle ages did not exist!

So if they didn't exist are you saying there was a void, maybe if we could tap into another dimension we might find them, granted we don't know much about that time. Some things were going on, when I visited Coln in Germany I went to the Dome, a church that was started in 1100 AD and is still a work in progress. I think if you were to visit many of these countries you would find out what was going on during that period.

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 07:49 PM

Originally posted by zazzafrazz
OK I'll bite..... sigh~ though I'm pretty sure this thread is taking the mickey my friend

Western Civilisation as in the Roman Empire declined with the attacks on Rome from the North and disease, the empire however was Hellenised and flourished in this period in Byzantium. There is more than enough evidence from icons to buildings to writings and mosaics that this period and empire were far reaching and documented fact.

Additionally Centres of learning were based more in the Arab world, had it not been for the Arabs, we likely would have lost many of the writings of Classical philosophers, they held the old libraries, and did not destroy the information as 'heresy'. They also made great contributions to math and science at this time, whilst Western Europe flayed around in pits and fields and chanted latin and breathed in incense.
[edit on 7-7-2010 by zazzafrazz]

The Byzantium Empire preserved most of the Greek Texts. Contrary to popular opinion the Catholic Church did not destroy most of the Greek texts for heresy. The monasteries were instrumental in preserving the Greek texts through the Byzantium Empire. Almost all of the ancient Greek texts were preserved by the Byzantium Empire. For some reason we tend to ignore the Byzantine Empire which was a Christian Empire that flourished until the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453. The muslim empires tended to destroy that which conflicted with whatever interpretation of the Koran was extant at the time. Most historians today don't even use the term "Dark Ages" as we have begun to give credit to those of that era fro making great strides in agriculture and science. Most of the "Arab" intellectuals were members of conquered populations who had taken Arab names for practical reasons, it was a lot easier to be Muslim than not. For example, Al-Khwarizmi was Persian. The myth lies up with the myth that Galileo was tortured by the Catholic church. It never happened. Another myth of the time was that the church taught that the earth was flat. Clement, Origen, Ambrose, Augustine, Isodore, Albertus Magnus and Aquinas all accepted the Earth was a globe.

posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 06:36 PM
This is a fascinating thread, too bad people have to be rude and hostile about it. I think they are misunderstanding the point, which is too bad. This reminds me of a russian theory that all the old testament bible stories were actually written about medieval people. Of course the russians do come up with a lot of looney theories, but it's interesting no matter what.

posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 09:51 PM
from what i've learned in school it seems that after the western roman empire fell in 476 (some historians believe it was circa 480, because they consider Julius Nepos to be the last emperor of Rome) everything was so rushed and it seems like those dark ages never happened.

there's not much i've studied about the byzantine empire, the arabs or the chinese in that time, those subjects were totally skipped in my History classes. it was like: end of rome/barbarian invasions (brief talk) / feudalism and then we were in the Renaissance. The Middle Ages were totally skipped, i wonder if because of lack of documents or time to talk about the subject.

edit on 26-12-2012 by Picollo30 because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-12-2012 by Picollo30 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 18 2013 @ 09:51 PM
The middle ages was terrible.

I did a great amount of research on the Middle Ages, being led to believe that the time was Idyllic. Boy my eyes were opened. It was not at all "Idyllic." Most of humanity were enslaved, yuck. Illiteracy was rampant, no one knew what year it was.

The Earth was going through a warm period of "Global Warming" (hah!) and England was able to grow wine grapes. The staple crop was a grain called maslin. A large amount of peasants were divided into four classes, two formed freemen -- the other two formed the serfs. People usually sharecropped and lived on a subsistence economy and paid taxes to their Lord. That was just those who toiled, ha!

Then there were those who went to war. These were the nobility. Although often they were better educated, their education was not much better than the educated of Greece. Those who Prayed got the most education. However, I wonder if the people in the One World Government got the best education out of all of them.

This is because War was incessant. Kings were manipulated by the Church. The Crusades (WHICH WERE NOT CHRISTIAN IN THE LEAST) were manipulated by the Pope and the One World Government. The Middle Ages sucked, and the only thing that got Europe out of the Middle Ages was the virulent Black Death -- which seemed to be a mixture of the Bubonic Plague and a virus that spread along with Plague that caused hemmoragic (sp?) fever.

top topics
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in