Enjoy most of the stories however, some of the info is still mired in some fiction or omission of fact. Regarding Edison inventing lightbulb currently in use, it omits two Canadian gents that patented the Incandescent light bulb, 5 years ahead of Edison on July 24 1874. Mathew Evans of Toronto Ontario and his friend Henry Woodward made light by sending electricity through a Carbon filament. It's only after refusal by their own govt. to see any "real practical use" that the Canadian duo sold their patent to Edison, which he used to refine changes to make bulbs last much longer. There in is the True story!
4 Reviews
A lot of unknown trues, but...
wfreeburn-707904 July 2022
They seem to lay off some of the most contriverial trues. Such as Lincoln claiming that nowhere in the Constitution does it give the states the right to ceceede! Technicly true. However, in the Ordinance of Confederation, i.e. The acceptance papers put in for all the original 13 colonies to unite, four of the original 13 colonies put in their paperwork the right to withdrawl from the union at anytime. So either the people who put this union together lied to the 4, or Lincoln decided to ignore this LEGAL paperwork for his own purposes!
And as for Washington, the first of my clan was in th revolution and spent 1777-1778 at Valley Forge. His opinion of Washington was very low. First Washington was a lousy general and could not win a battle till Von Stueben entered his army. And leter Washingtion and his cronies prevented anyone who was not a rich, educted land owner from voting. So the whole bit about taxation without representation was bull as far As Washington was concerned! Then when Washington gets created fro ending the Whiskey Rebellion I want to puck! Wawshington started the Whiskey Rebellion when he tried to steal the land of the people who went to war for this country. How? Well he created a land tax in Western PA. That the people HAD to pay in Silver or Gold, knowing that these people had no silver or gold and used the Barter system using Whiskey to trade for needed supplies! So the same people, including Hill Freeburn who was my kin went to war against the people who once again were being taxed without being able to vote and since that was what they fought against the British for how coiuld they wrong fighting Wash about? Oh and the panting of him praying alone in the woods for these men was according to Hill a PUBLICITY STUNT!
And as for Washington, the first of my clan was in th revolution and spent 1777-1778 at Valley Forge. His opinion of Washington was very low. First Washington was a lousy general and could not win a battle till Von Stueben entered his army. And leter Washingtion and his cronies prevented anyone who was not a rich, educted land owner from voting. So the whole bit about taxation without representation was bull as far As Washington was concerned! Then when Washington gets created fro ending the Whiskey Rebellion I want to puck! Wawshington started the Whiskey Rebellion when he tried to steal the land of the people who went to war for this country. How? Well he created a land tax in Western PA. That the people HAD to pay in Silver or Gold, knowing that these people had no silver or gold and used the Barter system using Whiskey to trade for needed supplies! So the same people, including Hill Freeburn who was my kin went to war against the people who once again were being taxed without being able to vote and since that was what they fought against the British for how coiuld they wrong fighting Wash about? Oh and the panting of him praying alone in the woods for these men was according to Hill a PUBLICITY STUNT!
History Debunked with Truthiness
Speed_Daemon13 September 2014
This is a series of half hour episodes in which the host/narrator sets up a series of dubious historical fallacies, dramatically declares them "FICTION" with a big red "rubber stamp" screen graphic, and attempts to correct the wrongs by offering alternative theories from less than authoritative sources. Guest "experts" include Dr. Allan J. Lichtman, Professor of History at American University and frequent television commentator best known for his terrible looking hairpiece.
This show has two main problems: 1. The "popular myths" that are put forth are rarely popular, and often matters of conjecture that can neither be proved of disproved. 2. The so-called "facts" used to disprove the "myths" tend to be riddled with factual errors!
Rule number 1 of any show that purports to bust myths should be "get your facts straight!" This show ignores that rule frequently, ironically and sometimes hilariously. If you're a history scholar, don't watch this show on your own TV, because you will want to throw a shoe at it! If you're a Wikipedia Scholar, someone who cares much more about considering yourself "right" than about making an effort to learn actual facts, this show is for you. This is a show (by and) for the true dilettante. For everyone else, it's just not interesting.
All told your time will be better spent reading a good book.
This show has two main problems: 1. The "popular myths" that are put forth are rarely popular, and often matters of conjecture that can neither be proved of disproved. 2. The so-called "facts" used to disprove the "myths" tend to be riddled with factual errors!
Rule number 1 of any show that purports to bust myths should be "get your facts straight!" This show ignores that rule frequently, ironically and sometimes hilariously. If you're a history scholar, don't watch this show on your own TV, because you will want to throw a shoe at it! If you're a Wikipedia Scholar, someone who cares much more about considering yourself "right" than about making an effort to learn actual facts, this show is for you. This is a show (by and) for the true dilettante. For everyone else, it's just not interesting.
All told your time will be better spent reading a good book.
Not One Useful Fact in this Steaming Heap of Fiction
raysufo23 October 2016
This review is based solely on the Roswell/Area 51 episode.
The producers used a UFO debunker as their star witness and apologist. They did not even try for a balanced program, one that might include a respectable subject-matter expert.
By example, and there are many in this program, I hope to demonstrate how moronic the debunker actually sounded.
Debunker: "In the late 70's America was saucer crazy and just waiting for a story like Roswell to appear." Wow! Amazing stuff!What does this PROVE? Nothing! But the debunker implies that Roswell could not have happened because too many people were interested in UFOs. Poppycock!
Any good UFO researcher would have told the audience that the unimpeachable Army Air Corp (now US Air Force) witness, Major Jesse Marcel was very clear about what he handled at the crash site. "It was not of this earth. I was ordered to get it to Wright Field" (now Wright-Patterson Air Force Base) That you can take to the bank.
Ray Szymanski Author of Fifty Shades of Greys: Evidence of Extraterrestrial Visitation to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and Beyond.
The producers used a UFO debunker as their star witness and apologist. They did not even try for a balanced program, one that might include a respectable subject-matter expert.
By example, and there are many in this program, I hope to demonstrate how moronic the debunker actually sounded.
Debunker: "In the late 70's America was saucer crazy and just waiting for a story like Roswell to appear." Wow! Amazing stuff!What does this PROVE? Nothing! But the debunker implies that Roswell could not have happened because too many people were interested in UFOs. Poppycock!
Any good UFO researcher would have told the audience that the unimpeachable Army Air Corp (now US Air Force) witness, Major Jesse Marcel was very clear about what he handled at the crash site. "It was not of this earth. I was ordered to get it to Wright Field" (now Wright-Patterson Air Force Base) That you can take to the bank.
Ray Szymanski Author of Fifty Shades of Greys: Evidence of Extraterrestrial Visitation to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and Beyond.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
