The point of the post was that written history is political so those that said that via written history said it for reasons related to politics-- ethnic prejudice and etc. The point is that science contradicted the history books.there were not supposed to be - says who? what is that assumption based on?
What date are we talking about here? If the Viking era, the Scandinavians sailed well into (and beyond) the Islamic world, and brought back people as well as things. The Muslims had one of the most developed societies in the world at the time, in the intellectual domain, where they were way ahead of Western Europe and Scandinavia, e.g. Averroes.
Oh absolutely. The people here are excellent examples of truly great guessers. It's pity they're wrong so much of the time.Eh, one thing I learned in college (Biology major/Chemistry minor) was that an awful lot of science is educated guesswork, and how good your guesses are depends a lot on your education. Some of the best guessing is done by people who don't have an education to get in the way.
only in the sense that all subjects are political at the end of the day. The politics of science are pretty obvious right now.written history is political
that's just too sweeping. They really don't address the same things. And historians don't agree on most things anyway!science contradicted the history books
It doesn't matter what political persuasion one has, Boyle's Law is still Boyle's law, as is the gravitational constant and thousands of other 'laws'.only in the sense that all subjects are political at the end of the day. The politics of science are pretty obvious right now.
that's just too sweeping. They really don't address the same things. And historians don't agree on most things anyway!