"Revising history is good actually" is a rare honest insight into the progressive mind.https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/23/dan-snow-daughter-women-war?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @BDSixsmith
Revising history is good actually, change my mind
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @SilverVVulpes @BDSixsmith
According to my history Silver Vulpes is a fugitive wanted for eating babies in 4 states. This is ok, right?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
in other words: what's the difference between a libel and a revision?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @danlistensto @BDSixsmith
the first and most practical is that the death can't sue. the second is related to a question: what do you think is the equivalent to history revisionism for other disciplines?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SilverVVulpes @BDSixsmith
data fabrication in the hard sciences. plagiarism in literary or journalistic writing.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @danlistensto @BDSixsmith
weird. I would put it closer to "non-mainstream researcher", and can be for good or bad reasons. I realize alt-nutrition has some moony guys so I'm not making a compliment either, but I wouldn't think of reaching your extreme.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SilverVVulpes @BDSixsmith
why not though? I'm categorizing it as as a variety of malicious lying. is it not that?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
I guess I'm having trouble understanding your position, and maybe you're not using the word the same way I am or that the act was performed in the guardian article. I wouldn't call "alternative interpretation of agreed upon facts" to be revisionism. It's lying about the facts.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.