3 ms·
no. nothing should be ever free from questioning. else things get distorted or exaggerated over time. It would have been enough imo if the book just had a forw
by PHGamer 5y ago
no. nothing should be ever free from questioning. else things get distorted or exaggerated over time.
It would have been enough imo if the book just had a forward that noted some of it was conjecture based on whatever info they had. No one can truly know as I imagine there was either no documentation or it got destroyed in whatever allied bombing happened.
also blaming white people for shirking responsibility is a bit rich given that term encompasses a lot of nationalities including the British and Americans who fought against the Germans who were the ones doing the geocoding.
- sodonotaskis 5y agoIf: 'no. nothing should be ever free from questioning.' Than: "It may be 'Sympathic, a pianoplayer appears playing in pantofles' for some, but others may..." was listening to > hint://youtu.be/GLujhLBZdPg?t=188 P-:
- mcphage 5y ago> nothing should be ever free from questioning Nothing should be free of questioning, but I don't think a major publisher has much interest in publishing a book whose research has been discredited. That's just basic common sense—just like (most) people don't go around repeating things that they know to be false. Except for things like Santa Claus, I guess.
- watwut 5y ago> It would have been enough imo if the book just had a forward that noted some of it was conjecture based on whatever info they had. No, it would not be enough. It would be enough if the text of the book itself expressed a lot of uncertainty around facts that are uncertain. Not just CYA in forward and then writing it all confident and convincing to those who did not went through massive amount of work it takes to verify it all.