Wing Nuts, Yahoos, and Historical Evidence
I would remind you, however, that if you make a claim and say you have evidence to support it and then fail to produce said evidence, you are doing a disservice to yourself and the others who think like you do. I mean, I know evidence can be a bit of a bother. But it really comes in handy when you are trying to make a historical argument.
The age old tactic of “if I think so it must be true” or the more recent “I read about it on the Internet” just won’t do. Things that happen(ed) in one’s mind do/did not necessarily happen in the real world. That sort of methodology just won’t get you the respect you think you deserve, and…if you make a wild enough claim, you might even earn yourself a wing nut or yahoo title.
Now there are many reasonable ways to illustrate an argument. Emphasizing the words and/or actions written or undertaken by historical actors is a good place to start. Now I know that one can interpret words, actions, or events differently depending on any number of factors – but again…evidence should play a part in the interpretation somewhere. Shouting (virtually), making bizarre and tenuous connections, and then skedaddling when challenged is not an especially effective way to convince people of anything. In the end, it will only make them want to expose you for the charlatan that you are.
But I will let your comments through anyway. Just because.