5 ms·

So apropos of this pop history author, my "oh shit, being compelling and interesting doesn't mean it's correct" anecdote comes courtesy of another book that was

So apropos of this pop history author, my "oh shit, being compelling and interesting doesn't mean it's correct" anecdote comes courtesy of another book that was popular around the same time as Guns, Germs and Steel, 1421: The Year China Discovered The New World. I read it, found it all very plausible and interesting. I read Gavin Menzies next book, 1434, found it equally interesting and compelling. Then I read his third book, The Lost Empire of Atlantis, and found it just as plausible as his first book. Except the prior plausibility in my head of a Minoan civilization maintaining global trade was way, way lower, and so I didn't just accept it as uncritically as I had the first two books, and that made me realize how unskeptically I had been reading the first two books, and other books in the genre. It was a more enjoyable life lesson than most, all things considered.

arethuza 3y ago
When I was about 10 or so I read the Erich von Däniken book Chariots of the Gods and was absolutely fascinated - eventually (and I don't know how) I came to understand that just because something is written in what seems to be a non-fiction book doesn't mean it's remotely true. Nearly 40 years on I can still remember my rage on realising this.
- alephnerd 3y ago
  Haha I fell into the same trap around 15-25 years ago!(but tbf, elementary school me was going through cryptozoology phase) von Daniken really knew how to write in academic prose, which only sold it further.
- zwayhowder 3y ago
  I keep a dozen books by von Daniken and his contemporaries on my bookcase to this day. Not because I believe them, but to remind me that I once did. I like to blame the X-Files, but the 90s was a funny time and I don't even remember buying all these books, but I sure believed them for a while.
HPsquared 3y ago
See also Graham Hancock.
082349872349872 3y ago
I personally think Ancient Aliens ought to be required watching in english classes. The way they smoothly slip down that slope from non-controversial statements of the form "X." towards statements of the form "Ancient Astronaut Theorists believe X; could it be true?" usually beats even political discourse.
- throwaway_83967 3y ago
  I used to watch Ancient Aliens as entertainment, and was usually not convinced by their claims. But it did reveal the cultural and historical ignorance that we have of other nations. You can basically say anything about a culture that the audience is not familiar with, and they will think it is plausible. For me, AA jumped the shark when they claimed that Vikings came from "nowhere" and "suddenly" had sea faring technology. Obviously the Aliens had given them the technology through the god Odin, who was also an alien... what other explanation could there logically be? There was so much wrong with those claims, that I just turned off the TV. I decided to be more careful about looking at shows about aliens and conspiracies, because I am afraid that it will slowly change my ability to distinguish fact from fiction. In reality, the ships were based on a long history of ship making with incremental improvements and did not suddenly appear. Anyone could find this easily, which indicates to me that they don't care to make even a slight effort to moderate their claims. That got me thinking of all the other programs I watch that are not necessarily as "inventive" as AA. What other false statements are said about other cultures that I am not aware of?
  - saalweachter 3y ago
    From a sibling comment, the Graham Hancock/"progenitor civilization" idea is likewise just so obviously wrong to me. Basically, they think that multiple agricultural civilizations arising independently at the end of the last glacial maximum is implausible, and that there must have been a global progenitor civilization that discovered it all and spread it after its own fall. Except ... all of the crops of those early agricultural civilizations were distinct, based on the plants native to that region. Why would ancient farmers have traveled the world to teach people how to farm, but not have brought seeds with them?
Beijinger 3y ago
"I read Gavin Menzies next book, 1434, found it equally interesting and compelling." As a trained STEM Scientist, I found this book utterly nonsense and non-scientific. "Then I read his third book, The Lost Empire of Atlantis, and found it just as plausible as his first book." For me this is not very promising. "As plausible as his first book"
- taejo 3y ago
  In the rest of the comment you're replying to, the commentor indeed concludes that being as plausible as the first book means the first book isn't so convincing after all
lmm 3y ago
I rated 1421's credibility pretty low from the introduction onwards - he talked about matching Chinese maps to how he'd seen things from seaports, which sounds like a very easy way to see whatever you want to see, and some stuff about the same kind of chickens which felt like extremely thin evidence to hang extraordinary claims off of. I haven't got to GGS yet, but given that the top reddit "debunking" is pretty open that its main argument is "his conclusions are racist, therefore he mush be wrong", I'm feeling a little more hopeful.

arethuza 3y ago

When I was about 10 or so I read the Erich von Däniken book Chariots of the Gods and was absolutely fascinated - eventually (and I don't know how) I came to understand that just because something is written in what seems to be a non-fiction book doesn't mean it's remotely true. Nearly 40 years on I can still remember my rage on realising this.

alephnerd 3y ago
Haha I fell into the same trap around 15-25 years ago!(but tbf, elementary school me was going through cryptozoology phase) von Daniken really knew how to write in academic prose, which only sold it further.
zwayhowder 3y ago
I keep a dozen books by von Daniken and his contemporaries on my bookcase to this day. Not because I believe them, but to remind me that I once did. I like to blame the X-Files, but the 90s was a funny time and I don't even remember buying all these books, but I sure believed them for a while.

HPsquared 3y ago

See also Graham Hancock.

082349872349872 3y ago

I personally think Ancient Aliens ought to be required watching in english classes. The way they smoothly slip down that slope from non-controversial statements of the form "X." towards statements of the form "Ancient Astronaut Theorists believe X; could it be true?" usually beats even political discourse.

throwaway_83967 3y ago
I used to watch Ancient Aliens as entertainment, and was usually not convinced by their claims. But it did reveal the cultural and historical ignorance that we have of other nations. You can basically say anything about a culture that the audience is not familiar with, and they will think it is plausible. For me, AA jumped the shark when they claimed that Vikings came from "nowhere" and "suddenly" had sea faring technology. Obviously the Aliens had given them the technology through the god Odin, who was also an alien... what other explanation could there logically be? There was so much wrong with those claims, that I just turned off the TV. I decided to be more careful about looking at shows about aliens and conspiracies, because I am afraid that it will slowly change my ability to distinguish fact from fiction. In reality, the ships were based on a long history of ship making with incremental improvements and did not suddenly appear. Anyone could find this easily, which indicates to me that they don't care to make even a slight effort to moderate their claims. That got me thinking of all the other programs I watch that are not necessarily as "inventive" as AA. What other false statements are said about other cultures that I am not aware of?
- saalweachter 3y ago
  From a sibling comment, the Graham Hancock/"progenitor civilization" idea is likewise just so obviously wrong to me. Basically, they think that multiple agricultural civilizations arising independently at the end of the last glacial maximum is implausible, and that there must have been a global progenitor civilization that discovered it all and spread it after its own fall. Except ... all of the crops of those early agricultural civilizations were distinct, based on the plants native to that region. Why would ancient farmers have traveled the world to teach people how to farm, but not have brought seeds with them?

Beijinger 3y ago

"I read Gavin Menzies next book, 1434, found it equally interesting and compelling." As a trained STEM Scientist, I found this book utterly nonsense and non-scientific. "Then I read his third book, The Lost Empire of Atlantis, and found it just as plausible as his first book." For me this is not very promising. "As plausible as his first book"

taejo 3y ago
In the rest of the comment you're replying to, the commentor indeed concludes that being as plausible as the first book means the first book isn't so convincing after all

lmm 3y ago

I rated 1421's credibility pretty low from the introduction onwards - he talked about matching Chinese maps to how he'd seen things from seaports, which sounds like a very easy way to see whatever you want to see, and some stuff about the same kind of chickens which felt like extremely thin evidence to hang extraordinary claims off of. I haven't got to GGS yet, but given that the top reddit "debunking" is pretty open that its main argument is "his conclusions are racist, therefore he mush be wrong", I'm feeling a little more hopeful.