`History: Fiction or Science?` is the most explosive tractate on history ever written - however, every theory it contains, no matter how unorthodox, is backed by solid scientific data.
The book is well-illustrated, contains over 446 graphs and illustrations, copies of ancient manuscripts, and countless facts attesting to the falsity of the chronology used nowadays, which never cease to amaze the reader.
Eminent mathematician proves that: Jesus Christ was born in 1053 and crucified in 1086 The Old Testament refers to mediaeval events. Apocalypse was written after 1486. Does this sound uncanny?
This version of events is substantiated by hard facts and logic - validated by new astronomical research and statistical analysis of ancient sources - to a greater extent than everything you may have read and heard about history before.
The dominating historical discourse in its current state was essentially crafted in the XVI century from a rather contradictory jumble of sources such as innumerable copies of ancient Latin and Greek manuscripts whose originals had vanished in the Dark Ages and the allegedly irrefutable proof offered by late mediaeval astronomers, resting upon the power of ecclesial authorities. Nearly all of its components are blatantly untrue!
For some of us, it shall possibly be quite disturbing to see the magnificent edifice of classical history to turn into an ominous simulacrum brooding over the snake pit of mediaeval politics. Twice so, in fact: the first seeing the legendary millenarian dust on the ancient marble turn into a mere layer of dirt - one that meticulous unprejudiced research can eventually remove.
The second, and greater, attack of unease comes with the awareness of just how many areas of human knowledge still trust the three elephants of the consensual chronology to support them. Nothing can remedy that except for an individual chronological revolution happening in the minds of a large enough number of people.
"synopsis" may belong to another edition of this title.
The book `History: Fiction or Science?` is a premeditated crime against the community of historians committed by the prominent Russian mathematician Anatoly T. Fomenko. He shows no respect for the blood, sweat and tears of generations of learned scholars who toiled hard for the last three hundred years to erect a magnificent edifice of the Universal History of Humanity.
This mathematician shamelessly pokes hard astronomical data into the reader’s naked eye, raising the dust of valid statistics that distort the clear lines of history completely. Even the authority of school textbooks does not stop him from uttering blatant heresies: he infects millions of innocent souls with pain of doubt. Science can provide for a dangerous toy in irresponsible hands! This madness must be stopped! We implore historians to deploy all means of valid proof that they have at their disposal to destroy the absurd theory of A.T. Fomenko completely. Professional historians will easily surpass him both in method and logic. We are looking for a ¨Terminator3 historian who will put an end to this fresh scientific heresy.
No, Mr A.T. Fomenko, your theories are manifestly wrong; do not even try to convince us otherwise. The history never was, nor will it ever be a science - it is a proud profession. Our publishing house will gladly pay a premium of 10.000 dollars USA in cash to anyone who will prove with adequate methods and in sufficient detail that the theories of Anatoly T. Fomenko are not only preposterous and dangerous, but utterly and inherently wrong as well.
Thank you for your continued support of the Universal History of Humanity.From the Author:
The historical discourse appears to enjoy unwavering popularity in an abundance of manifestations. However, we have to ask ourselves this: how often do we question the veracity of the dominating historical discourse? Could it be that the historical inveracities are really a lot graver than the ones inevitably resulting from temporal distance and entropy?
What if the passions of Jesus Christ (as we may observe them in Mel Gibson’s rendition coming Christmas) took place in the XI century AD and not in the first? And what if the walls of Troy – the ones that we’re bound to see stormed by Brad Pitt & Co in the nearest future – have really been located elsewhere? Could Troy be identified with Constantinople, for instance?
Basically, the main idea behind this is that the chronological scale that we use nowadays is elongated to a great extent and completely arbitrarily, being a collation of several versions of one and the same temporal sequence that eventually became identified with several nonexistent historical periods.
It isn’t too hard to label the results of our research "sensationalist drivel", and indeed that seems to be the number one argument offered by the venerable community of fundamentalist historians. However, if we are to think critically and employ both common sense and rationality to the fullest extent and not just nominally, remaining bound by our a priori views and opinions all the while, we shall see numerous holes, gaps, and blanks that the traditional version of history pretends not to notice.
"About this title" may belong to another edition of this title.
(No Available Copies)
If you know the book but cannot find it on AbeBooks, we can automatically search for it on your behalf as new inventory is added. If it is added to AbeBooks by one of our member booksellers, we will notify you!Create a Want