History Lies

[Globalfightback]

The article linked below, detailing new research on Anglo-Saxon diets, is a great example of how assumptions based on sparse evidence, even if it's the best evidence available, then become conventional wisdoms that are potentially very dangerous because they are based on fallacy. That's before we factor in historical accounts that have deliberately been sown with disinformation by people with hidden agendas. In the 21st century it's surely time to accept that you should never trust someone else's dialogue just because it's in print, whether that be a lavishly bound book, a glossy magazine or a skilfully constructed website; whether the sentences are emotionally appealing or, on the face of it, intellectually convincing. There are a few absolutes in the universe, and beyond that there is continuous change which, from a human viewpoint, is evaluated through the subjectivity of mind. Life is much more complex that the mantras of those who seek to control would have you believe.

Even this latest research relies on assumptions: for example, that because there are 300 buns listed in an itinerary there must have been 300 feasters, who had one bun each allocated to them, and that this can then be used to determine the portions of other food the diners ate. An objective mind can see that there are all manner of real-life factors that could have been overlooked here.

Question Everything, Always.

https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-c ... 62513.html