“Hundreds and hundreds of historians” and “only five” against. You’d think it’d be easy to refute the “five,” but...nope
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @CHRISBRANCO69 @AjaxMull and
The entire
#1619Project is the refutation. Doesn't get easier than that. Everything in it is supported by referenced sources. The list of historians behind it is long. NYT's letter refuting the 5 historians' complaints is comprehensive. I think you just need to read it ...3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @besshubbard @AjaxMull and
Again, no one will address the criticisms. I know why.
1 reply 0 retweets 23 likes -
Replying to @CHRISBRANCO69 @AjaxMull and
Seriously, though, already handled. #1619 https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/20/magazine/we-respond-to-the-historians-who-critiqued-the-1619-project.html …
4 replies 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @besshubbard @AjaxMull and
Did you even read what you just posted. No it wasn’t “handled.”
1 reply 0 retweets 23 likes -
Replying to @CHRISBRANCO69 @AjaxMull and
The 5 have been refuted. The criticisms were addressed. Read the letter. Read something. Anything.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @besshubbard @AjaxMull and
No they haven’t. I guess you haven’t been following the thread with Phil Magness.
1 reply 0 retweets 24 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
poast SATs coward
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.