Lucrum referenced only one post. Did you read up on the definition and history of eunuch yet donut boy?
Had that been the case I would have quoted the post. http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=113413&perpage=30&pagenumber=2 The link goes to the second page of a two page thread. The thread where he's down over 100 ES points and still claiming he's ahead. You know a guy who is full of shit but not bright and or honest enough to admit it. The paper trading poser that for some reason you feel the need to defend. What are you, about 58 now?
Well cheeze-whiz arrow that just means you lack perception and initiative. As I stated before I read the whole thread and more
phht: I have a BA in History and was awarded the National Collegiate History award my junior year. I'd say that's buff enough.
No shit, I'm impressed. I don't have those credentials but i do like history. I enjoyed history classes the most in high school and college.
History is interesting but as a profession I quickly figured out it was a waste of time. The way Academia is set up one has to specialize to the point of knowing every minutia about basically nothing plus the myriad dead ends and blind alleys one can fall into. Plus the real kicker is "the why" is always changing according to the author and the popularity contest of adherents. I mean to me that's like physicists waking up one day and declaring the charge on electrons are positive from now on and sometimes pi is 3.43 if we need it to be.
I actually agree, PT. Agree on the revisionist and simply made up history part of your discussion. Going back only a few hundred years, and following it forward. And, I will even defer to you since you probably know better than I. My understanding is that the first 10 centuries after Christ, there were less than 1 or 2% of the population literate, and it slowly, very slowly increased. The first few centuries of history was written by theologians of some sort, and therefor the emphasis on Religion and how it was intertwined with the factual, natural history of events. I can't seem to find the hard numbers for literacy rates in the 17th and 18th century. - sometimes my web server over here is not the best either - but I think I recall something like 5%, perhaps you can recall from your studies. My point, making similar assumptions, is that it would have been pretty easy to alter history, early science, and obviously pre-history. Resulting in so much to be debunked in the our current century. AND, now it seems, in some ways to be declining again. Not so much in actual reading skills, but in the younger people's desire to know stuff, put very simply, they just don't seem to care as much about what goes on around them. This leaves the doors open to be easily manipulated, and not just by political pundits, but by anyone in the media. Right can claim MSM is left, left can claim Talk Radio is right leaning, and as we fail, as a generation, to get back to reality vs. political sides, it hurts the future. Not trying to argue either side here, honestly, just pointing out my feelings about learning, and those who really care.