[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/edu/ - Education

'The weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism of the weapon, material force must be overthrown by material force; but theory also becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses.' - Karl Marx
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)
What is 6 - 2?

Check out our new store at shop.leftypol.org!

| Catalog | Home
|

File: 1608528091138.jpg (96.19 KB, 1920x1200, 1589137529016.jpg)

 

The history of space travel. I want all material, factoids, trivia, books on space. From Sputnik to the recent Crew Dragon and further beyond
31 posts and 21 image replies omitted.

File: 1706205725944.png (428.39 KB, 580x580, ClipboardImage.png)


File: 1711388245481-0.png (8.19 MB, 3169x2113, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1711388245481-1.png (1.27 MB, 1151x804, ClipboardImage.png)

Related slightly to the nuclear thread as well >>20394

This is late news but a month back the US MSM was drumming up hysteria about Russian ICBM capabilities and supposed preparations in the use of space-nuking.
https://southfront.press/beware-of-big-bad-russian-space-nukes/

Russia is developing space nukes… as a response to the US refitting the space shuttle platform as an orbital nuclear launch system for glide vehicles in violation of the outer space treaty, which was a response to Russia developing hypersonics* and the US being unable to compete, which itself was a response to the US unilaterally pulling out of the ABM treaty so they could deploy dual use nuclear capable anti-missiles in Eastern Europe pointed at Russia claiming non-existent Iranian threats as justification to escalate to the current war in Ukraine. The USA is also working on space lasers for early warning and tracking against hypersonics and possibly direct energy anti-missile systems which is why in response china developed and successfully tested their satellite killer missile. The interesting part is that the USSR predicted this as being the end goal of NASA's Space Shuttle program, despite denial from them.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russia-thinks-x-37b-space-plane-could-drop-nuclear-weapons-208369

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a36521988/russia-says-x-37b-spaceplane-is-secret-space-bomber/

Part of the reason for this hysteria is justified, in the sense that Russia's ballistic missiles of every type are superior to NATO equivalents, with only the aging Trident II SLBM being any actual threat and the LGM-35A Sentinel program being delayed heavily because of costs and mismanagement.
https://topwar.ru/232823-lgm-35a-sentinel-novaya-raketa-starye-problemy.html

HyperPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

File: 1713202146274.png (4.24 MB, 1402x1452, ClipboardImage.png)


The Angara A5 rocket was successfully tested recently. It is the replacement for the Proton-M series of rockets with several serious advantages relative to the older Soviet rockets.

The DPRK jammed a GPS satellite over the Yellow Sea, during operations involving surveillance balloons

https://topwar.ru/243352-kndr-podavljala-signaly-gps-v-zheltom-more-v-hode-naleta-vozdushnyh-sharov-v-juzhnuju-koreju.html



File: 1714527586528.png (44.09 KB, 324x402, georg.png)

 

I have to confess something to you, comrades. I've been a leftist for many years now (here since the 8chan days), and I still CANNOT fully understand what the fuck dialectics is. Yes, I've read plenty, I've read a lot of Marx and Engels, later Marxist authors, philosophy books, dictionary definitions, I've watched philosophy lectures, youtube videos. I've even read some Hegel, with a lot of difficulty. All this and my brain still cannot grasp wtf dialectics is actually supposed to be.
The first problem is that many of these texts on dialectics look like pure gibberish to me, and it makes me mad when I can't understand them. Second, the words and definitions seem to change constantly depending on what I'm reading. Some people talk about the "dialectical method", others about "laws of dialectics", the "dialectic of history", "materialist dialectics", "dialectical biology", "dialectical consciousness", x person's dialectics, x philosophy's dialectics, others even bring up math and physics, etc. It all becomes increasingly convoluted and confusing, and in the end I fail to understand anything. It just leads me back to my initial question, what the fuck is dialectics? Maybe I'm just really not smart enough for Marxism, or philosophy is not my thing.

Still, I've been thinking about giving dialectics another try, maybe starting from scratch again, so if anyone knowledgeable can point me in the right direction, I'd really appreciate it. Maybe there's some key treatise I've missed or some obscure lecture that will make it all easier. Thanks for reading my rant.
5 posts omitted.

>>22073
>Yeah. Ever since I became enamored with Marxism I tried to translate dialectical materialism to science. I think complex system theory and some ideas in physics such as critical transition are a scientific expression of dialectical materialism, coincidentally so. Though they still harbor brainworms due to the philosophical grounding of capitalist society (e.g. mechanical materialism, idealisations)
Ok then, good to know I'm going in the right direction. I get that having scientific knowledge is necessary to understand dialectics too. I've heard many times from marxist authors and soviet textbooks that dialectics has been vindicated by science. They mention dialectics in many scientific fields and in concepts like entropy, elementary particles, natural selection and so on. Karl Marx considered Darwin to be pretty important, he told Engels about Origin of the Species
>This is the book which, in the field of natural history, provides the basis for our views.
Have you ever read Dialectics of Nature? After studying a lot of science back in his day, Engels was convinced that nature is indeed dialectical and wrote this book with Marx's backing in an attempt to prove it:
>"To me there could be no question of building the laws of dialectics into nature, but of discovering them in it and evolving them from it."
>"Dialectics, so-called objective dialectics, prevails throughout nature, and so-called subjective dialectics, dialectical thought, is only the reflection of the motion through opposites which asserts itself everywhere in nature, and which by the continual conflict of the opposites and their final passage into one another, or into higher forms, determines the life of nature"

>That was a very interesting watch. Are you German? If not then it must be quite difficult for you to understand the content, having to learn all of that in a different language.

No. I should have mentioned that the video has English subtitles. Still, many of these words that the German philosophers used like substance, thing in itself, immanent, spirit, and the infamous Sublimate/Aufheben have been VERY confusing to me. I should make sure I understand them all before trying to step into German idealism.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>22106
>Have you ever read Dialectics of Nature?
Yes, and I was quite disappointed by it because it wasn't what I was looking for. For most of the book, Engels meanders about scientific questions that are archaic today and when he spoke about what dialectical materialism means in scientific terms he did so relatively briefly.

>have been VERY confusing to me.

Bet. The terms are more intuitively understandable when you speak German.

>Really? So you don't prefer to read in German? I thought Marx and Hegel would be way easier in the original language.

I didn't explain that well. I do read them in German nowadays and also think it's easier to understand them when you read them in the original language. What I meant was that I used to read everything in English because most of the content I engage in is in English. Free English PDFs are much easier to find than German ones so I started reading German philosophers in English first.

>>22025
Traditionally, dialectics was a subdivision on of logic and was about the study of how arguments are derived. Hegel's dialectics (which is what Marxists are usually building on) refers to a particular kind of dialectical method used by Hegel. If you want a simple introduction read Hegel's Encyclopedia. Its a basic short summary of his whole philosophical system. Get a physical copy. grab a drink, put on some music, and just read and make notes as you move along. Its the only way to do it.

>>22107
>For most of the book, Engels meanders about scientific questions that are archaic today and when he spoke about what dialectical materialism means in scientific terms he did so relatively briefly.
Oh well. Do you know Alan Woods' works? It's the most recent work I know of that attempts to tackle science from a marxist point of view. He wrote a book called Reason in Revolt and a history of philosophy
>>22108
Thank you, I actually forgot that Hegel wrote a condensed version. I've been slowly reading it these days. I've been forced to consult a couple extra books, like a Hegel dictionary/glossary thing because some expressions are really hard to get (and don't get me started on Kant, he's even more confusing than Hegel). I've been checking out the book The Philosophy of Hegel (1955) by W.T. Stace, which was recommended to me during the 8chan days of /leftypol/, but I'm trying to not rely on it much.

Well I think something is finally starting to click. At least I'm slowly starting to get Being and Nothing, which is way more than I ever knew before. You know it's too bad that Marx couldn't write that treatise on Dialectics he had planned. Would've saved decades of arguments and debates.

>>22146
>Do you know Alan Woods' works?
Yes, I read Revolt in Reason and liked it very much. It's closer to what I expected when I read Dialectics of Nature.



File: 1713253481560.jpg (7.12 KB, 275x183, pig.jpg)

 

I've read plenty of theory but any good books from the last 10 years about police? I'm particularly interested in the culture of fear police have when it comes to interacting with people.
3 posts omitted.

Oh that's the third edition, originally from 2007, so maybe OP won't like it.

>>21933

I'm in a marxist org that I think has shied away from attacking the police and I want to correct our line. I believe Farell Dobbs was in the right when he said the following in Teamster's Rebellion:

"Under capitalism the main police function is to break strikes and to repress other forms of protest against the policies of the ruling class. Any civic usefulness other forms of police activity may have, like controlling traffic and summoning ambulances, is strictly incidental to the primary repressive function. Personal inclinations of individual cops do not alter this basic role of the police. All must comply with ruling-class dictates.

As a result, police repression becomes one of the most naked forms through which capitalism subordinates human rights to the demands of private property. If the cops sometimes falter in their antisocial tasks, it is simply because they-like the guns they use-are subject to rust when not engaged in the deadly function for which they are primarily trained. No police organization is exactly the same day in and day out. Two essential factors determine its character at a given moment: the social climate in which the cops have been operating and the turnover of personnel within the force. An unseasoned cop may tend to be somewhat considerate of others in the performance of duty, especially while class relations are relatively peaceful. Even in such calm times, however, the necessary accommodation must be made to capitalist demands, including readiness to shoot anyone who tampers with private property. Otherwise the aspiring cop, if he is not kicked out of the force, will have little chance of rising beyond a beat in the sticks. By gradually weeding out misfìts along these general lines, a police department can keep itself abreast of requirements during a more or less stable period in class relations."

The issue is these are powerful words but I want to prove that they have been borne out by reality. Particularly I think since the financial crisis/anti police movements police have shifted more and more right wing as relative class peace falls apart. Similarly I'd also be interested in works that look into the nature of police unions.

>>21943
>Under capitalism the main police function is to break strikes
which is why they get the privilege of being the only work force that is universally unionized and armed. because their job is to make sure other work forces are not

>>21943
>Under capitalism the main police function is to break strikes
they kinda pivoted from this to doing stochastic terrorism

>>21932
Relevant

https://youtu.be/_nl5zMIwcmQ

It sucks. I really wish there was good ethnographic work on the cops the same way there was on Neo-Nazis. IMO state gore workers and non-state gore workers are pretty similar.



 

Serious discussion.

The right completely rejects any anti-natal ethic (see pic related). most antinatalists are overwhelmingly pessimists (or cynics) and when politically active they tend to be leftist socialists (Think Thomas Ligotti, David Benatar, Philipp Mainländer… etc). antinatalism is very underground, even more so than veganism and is mostly perceived in a negative light even by the left. it's seen as reactionary and extreme and therefore dismissed.
however, I think that anti-natal ethics have a huge potential to reduce a lot of suffering as antinatalist philosophy often asks deeper questions about life, meanwhile most of the leftist discourse is focused on social identity and capitalism. it's not that antinatalists don't think of those things as big problems that need to be overcome, on the contrary, antinatalists tend to be hardcore socialist leftists but they also recognize deeper issues that (I would argue) are even more pressing than the overcoming of capitalism.
now before you slam antinatalists as genocidal defeatist nihilists, you should understand that antinatalists are not a monolith, some are apolitical and some aren't, some have unconditional anti-life attitudes and some are transhumanists and so on…
the point im trying to make here is that I think it's a mistake to outright reject antinatalism or antinatalists from leftist discourse, and as allies, as antinatalists care deeply about suffering, something that the left is synonymous with.
465 posts and 80 image replies omitted.

"Leftist socialist" doesn't always equate to good. There are after all Fabian eugenicists, Nazi socialists, and lumpen anarchofascists that technically count as socialists but are fundamentally of the reactionary socialist types ultimately. Many Western socialists are simply disaffected petty bourgeois who are mad that the world has some laws.

>>14251
Its only positive if retards dont reproduce.

Why are people so obsessed with reproduction when adults lack empathetic ability towards childrens personhood?

Why is it that procreation is the only activity thats not given any regulation?

I'm very sympathetic to antinatalism and I think it's a logical conclusion. Unfortunately, the average person is too close minded to even hear it out. I've learned that the average person isn't necessarily stupid, just anti-curiosity. It's why veganism (although being a completely logical endpoint to animal rights) is so hated on. People don't want to think about their ethics or a way to improve the world.

>>22133
this. Most people love to preach abput intellectual curiosity amd advocate for mandatory literacy but then will criminalise others for differing opinions.



File: 1707218313418.jpg (56.86 KB, 577x433, 3w6oa9.jpg)

 

Half of your DNA is from viruses. You are as much virus as human. How does this make you feel?

>Eight percent of our DNA consists of remnants of ancient viruses, and another 40 percent is made up of repetitive strings of genetic letters that is also thought to have a viral origin. Those extensive viral regions are much more than evolutionary relics: They may be deeply involved with a wide range of diseases including multiple sclerosis, hemophilia, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), along with certain types of dementia and cancer.


https://www.cshl.edu/the-non-human-living-inside-of-you/

File: 1709874869944.png (167.92 KB, 1280x720, ClipboardImage.png)

man viruses are so fucking weird scientists still haven't even agreed alive yet. Me personally I lean towards alive but a different type of life per se

The COVID virus was created by the future spacedweller intergalactic timetraveler Communist union as retrocausal weapon to destabilize capitalismo.o

It possible that a good chunk of evoltuionary processing was viruses?

Pretty cool actually.



File: 1660222457280.png (433.11 KB, 1500x782, casperlogo.png)

 

Anon from the cybercom thread suggested I post this here as well. A forum for political economy research started by Marxists. Classical Econophysics is listed on the resource page.

>The goal of this forum is to create a community for producing and reproducing scientific knowledge in political economy that exists totally outside of the realm of academia, the world of bourgeois non-profits and thinktanks, and the state apparatus. Today, political economy, which has been transformed into the “scientific” discipline of economics, has been both gutted of its most insightful content and held back by obscurantist and outdated mathematical models. It was once the case, in the days of Smith, Ricardo and Marx, that political economy was a form of thinking, researching and discussion which was undertaken by a broad public: working men, skilled craftsmen, professionals, clergy and professors. In this time, people didn’t write textbooks of economics, books to be taught by rote learning, they wrote books which were meant to be read by people interested in political economy and further their own research and understanding.


>This forum is built on the optimism for human curiosity and ingenuity, on the hope that there’s a possibility for creating a social science that isn’t trapped in the confines of a state ideology. A place for discussing political economy and related issues outside of the universities, economic bureaucracies and institutes funded by and for the ruling class; to the extent individuals from that world use this forum it should be to escape that world. On the other side of things, while it would be excellent for the work of this forum and its users to go on and inspire political movements, the forum itself is not sectarian, and is intended as a place for a general scientific community where all stripes of researchers can present their findings and debate.


>The features of this site are intended to nurture such a community. Users can write posts on their own personal blogs in long form to describe their research, as well as follow the works of other users. The actual forum allows users to create topics to discuss anything political economy related, as well as developments in real world economies, keeping dialogue open and inclusive to the public. The debates in the forum can teach people about political economy, as well as inspire further investigat
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
7 posts and 2 image replies omitted.

>>22053
I thought I had two diff. cockshott books but turns out I downloaded the same one twice.

Bumping for interest.

File: 1715800013422.png (16.13 KB, 591x558, ITSOVER.png)

>the website is down
over before it began

>>22109
it's caspover

>>22109
it's up again



File: 1608528162327.gif (2.91 MB, 500x200, untitled-15.gif)

 

Inspired by my reading of the book, Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn
How do we know myths, stories, magic, etc. are not real? Assuming what we know scientifically is true, how does this negate myth, legend, etc? Why are dinosaurs not simultaneously animals and also monsters when they fit what we would have called monsters? Why are overriding social systems not tantamount to a spirit or God when they control our actions and shape our life histories even if they don't act consciously? Are they not what we'd call an egregor, i.e., a presence brought into existence by the actions and beliefs of a large number of people? Is our Sun not a God when it is responsible for all life on Earth? Is the biosphere not some sort of Earth spirit when it encompasses all living things yet influences each individually and can be destroyed through harming the Natural (non-human) World. Are spirits not the electrical currents moving through your brain? Do we not tell history as a story?

In the beginning there was nothing but the One, then the One expanded into the Everything, as the Everything continued to expand soon the beating hearts of the Everything, the Stars began to form from the energy of the Beginning, the stars coalesced into huge interstellar communities, galaxies; in the nuclear core of the stars more building elements were created, and from the stars came the planets; in the deep seas of one planet around one star life formed out of the energy of the planet's iron core, over the course of billions of years life arose in complexity in a way matching the Everything until finally from Life emerged the Someone, a complex arrangement of the Everything capable of consciously perceiving itself.

Why isn't our understanding of the Universe, even being scientifically true, a myth? Myths were once truths, after all.
38 posts and 5 image replies omitted.

ITT people who are bad at critical thinking attempt to justify irrational beliefs with half-assed epistemological relativism and not enough people smack them down

>>2179
Nothing is supernatural. I hate those terms like metaphysics.

File: 1695065923417.png (840.39 KB, 1280x952, ClipboardImage.png)


File: 1716088650856.png (243.57 KB, 512x341, ClipboardImage.png)

>In June 1941, Soviet scientists Tashmuhammed Kari-Niyazov and Mikhail Gerasimov were sent by Stalin to Samarkand to exhume the body of Timur, one of the most cruel warlords of the medieval age, for study. The goal was basically to see if his tomb was really his tomb or not, what his face looked like, and if he was actually physically lame. Stalin had a morbid curiosity about the notorious warlord, as did many Russians. For centuries, Russia had suffered under and paid tribute to fearsome nomadic steppe warriors, and their histories were entwined.The keepers of the tomb warned the team about ancient curses, but they were rudely pushed aside, and their warnings were discounted. The casket of Timur was cut from precious black jade, the largest single piece in the world. Upon its opening, a pungent, sweet smell arose, which was supposedly the smell of several curses being unleashed but was probably due to the scented embalming fluids used to preserve the remains for burial. One of the inscriptions on the inside of the tomb (in addition to the one above) said, “Whosoever opens my tomb, shall unleash an invader more terrible than I.”The remains were carefully, but unceremoniously, packed up and prepared for flight back to Moscow. Two days later, the German wehrmacht invaded the Soviet Union, launching Operation Barbarossa.

>when the germans have reached to the volga, Stalin wanted to try his luck, he had chosen this time to have Timur’s remains flown back to Samarkand for a proper reburial with full rites. He chose to have the plane carrying the historic corpse fly over the front at Stalingrad for a month before detouring back to Timur’s place of rest. Timur’s reinterment by a few weeks. Paulus and The Sixth Army surrendered at Stalingrad.

"supernatural" is a silly concept, it might as well be synonymous with "fiction"

We don't actually understand the universe that well though and there's still a lot of fundamental physics to figure out. If by "supernatural" you mean "defies our current understanding of physics," then the James Webb telescope keeps finding things that fit that definition. But I guess galaxies having structures that don't make sense to us (yet) isn't as fascinating as laser swords and telekinesis.



File: 1627166319017.png (Spoiler Image,836.32 KB, 1095x1095, ee62c9901d22c6b3651a751f2b….png)

 

A list of reading groups and their schedules that have chosen to advertise themselves here. Take a minute to check them out. If you would like to promote your reading group, feel free to leave a comment telling people where they can go.

>>5912 /read/

>>6162 Continental Floppa

edit: linking the old Reading Thread sticky, for easy reference: >>>/leftypol_archive/5825951
19 posts and 5 image replies omitted.

>>22049
>Muh tankiez!!!
<Deliberate ignorance
<Saying this on leftypol
Go back

>>22049
When Soviet tanks entered Hungary in 1956, supporters of this were called "tankies". This happened under Khruschev, not Stalin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sgNVG9a4XU

>>22049
Oh you should definitely read Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR, I would describe it as a very revealing text.


>>22066
not to mention the repressed anti de-stalinization protests that khrushev also repressed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1956_Georgian_demonstrations



File: 1608527944532.jpg (65.54 KB, 604x381, nigelaskey.jpg)

 

This guy Is called nigel askey, and is apparently a legitimate historian. He published a paper debunking TIK's claim that the K/D ratio of the soviets during WW was 1/1.6, instead claiming that the soviets lost over 4 more times as many combatants as the Germansduring WW2. Here is his paper. I'm not a qualified historian and I dont have access to acrhives or time to research, so I can't debunk him.

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Essay-alt-view-TIK-presentation.pdf

I checked out his website and alsthough he does seem to be knowledgeable, he makes certain ridiculous claims that the "Vicors write history" in WW2, and the allies covered up how technologically and tactically inferior they were to the germans.
76 posts and 9 image replies omitted.

File: 1696393167124.png (1.15 MB, 900x600, ClipboardImage.png)

>>20597
This sounds like bullshit to me, what are the sources on throw weight here? What is the time frame for Soviet and German artillery barrages? The Battle of Kursk was an example of a German Offense running into a heavily entrenched Soviet defense (which like in today's Russian defensive lines in the SMO) included the use of massed artillery on advancing armor and troops. The Germans forwent an artillery barrage before their initial assault, hoping to catch the Soviet's unawares in the early morning, but the Soviet artillery opened fire on their flanking armor and forced them to run into the minefields. This continued even as the Germans advanced through the defensive lines while German artillery had limited capability in hitting soviet positions because of the risk in hitting their own troops. German artillery only came into significant play during the Counter-Attack phase of the battle, when the Soviets halted and routed the German advance at Prohorovka and pushed into Orel, which was met with German artillery. Thus the use of artillery at different times in the battle are important to state. Moreover this discounts aviation, as Soviet fighters downed many bomber and dive-bomber aircraft, while their own Sturmoviks dealt immense losses to German armored and infantry forces.

Also how is artillery counted? Is it including Self-propelled artillery like the Stug-III or SU-122? as artillery units? Was the German and Soviet methods of counting if one is artillery or not different?* Does it count mortars as artillery? Are MLRS systems like the Katyusha counted?

Going by statistics of artillery the Soviets had nearly 20K mortars and cannons at eve of battle with over 7.5K more in reserve. Meantime the Germans collectively had 10K of all artillery, and none in reserve. More importantly the Soviets main howitzer artillery was in the 122 or 152mm range, which had higher throw weights that normal German artillery, and the mortars for Germany and the USSR were roughly equal in capability, firing speed and throw weight.
49% of 51,083 tons is 25,030 tons of shells and 36% of 21,867 tons is 7872.12 tons. Meaning the Germans were firing over 3x more than the Soviet forces, even though they had 2-2.5x fewer artillery. That sounds fucking ridiculous, especially considering Soviet artillery doctrine. The idea that they fired far less ammunition than the GePost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>20601
>>20597
Unfortunately I cannot access the archive documents I used to read
https://kursk-75.mil.ru/ is blocked by Western services and even VPNs don't seem to work.

>>20601
>Also how is artillery counted?
When he says "gun artillery" and "tubes" he is referring to cannons & mortars. If you scroll down to the last paragraph he does a separate comparison for the MLRS' between the German Nebelwerfer and the Soviet Katyusha.
> Meaning the Germans were firing over 3x more than the Soviet forces, even though they had 2-2.5x fewer artillery. That sounds fucking ridiculous
The gist of the argument is that while the Germans did have less artillery weapons, they also had more artillery ammunition (due to a larger gunpowder industry) which allowed them to shoot more than the Soviets

>>20603
>they also had more artillery ammunition (due to a larger gunpowder industry) which allowed them to shoot more than the Soviets
Which is fucking bullshit, because the Soviets fired more shells over the war than the Germans, by a significant margin, and while logistics in the first 2 years of the war could account for it, Kursk was in the summer of '44 and the Soviets prepared those defensive lines for some time, the idea that they lacked the shells necessary is absurd, especially considering that the USSR had a reputation for their artillery usage and it having a significant impact on the initial start of Kursk especially.

File: 1715258634369.png (3.65 MB, 1471x1789, ClipboardImage.png)

Hello folks, I was hoping someone could give me some decent literature on the Babiy Yar massacre in English, I wish to send it to a friend for them to study. It's hard to find anything non-Russian on the subject that doesn't insert anti-communist drivel into it and unfortunately, unlike myself, she cannot read Russian. Help a comrade out.



 

Long-hidden ruins of vast network of Maya cities could recast history
<In Guatemala, scientists map well-organized network of 417 cities dating to circa 1000 B.C.

>Beneath 1,350 square miles of dense jungle in northern Guatemala, scientists have discovered 417 cities that date back to circa 1000 B.C. and that are connected by nearly 110 miles of “superhighways” — a network of what researchers called “the first freeway system in the world.”


>Scientist say this extensive road-and-city network, along with sophisticated ceremonial complexes, hydraulic systems and agricultural infrastructure, suggests that the ancient Maya civilization, which stretched through what is now Central America, was far more advanced than previously thought.


>Mapping the area since 2015 using lidar technology — an advanced type of radar that reveals things hidden by dense vegetation and the tree canopy — researchers have found what they say is evidence of a well-organized economic, political and social system operating some two millennia ago.


>The discovery is sparking a rethinking of the accepted idea that the people of the mid- to late-Preclassic Maya civilization (1000 B.C. to A.D. 250) would have been only hunter-gatherers, “roving bands of nomads, planting corn,” says Richard Hansen, the lead author of a study about the finding that was published in January and an affiliate research professor of archaeology at the University of Idaho.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2023/05/20/mayan-civilization-pyramid-discoveries-guatemala/

Graham Hancock - absolved
His detractors - BTFO
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
280 posts and 99 image replies omitted.

>>17982
>why does he insist the Yonaguni monuments are artificial
I don't recollect him claiming this but Kimura Misaaki has stated such and has the education in tectonics, geology, archeology etc. to know what he's talking about. The idea of a sunken city or remains of such are not far-fetched. Russia has many legends of such sunken ancient cities, with at least a few accounts of Soviet explorers finding such places in the early 1930s but being unable to locate them again because they lacked the mapping equipment to mark the mountains and canyons they were exploring.

>>21850
yes and various other geologists insist they are a natural phenomena

>>21945
>various other geologists insist they are a natural phenomena
<The mainstream assertion claims the opposite
No shit.

>>16648
>Graham Hancock - absolved
this does not absolve graham hancock's schizo thesis




Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]
[ 1 /2 /3 /4 /5 /6 /7 /8 /9 /10 /11 /12 /13 /14 /15 /16 /17 /18 /19 /20 /21 /22 /23 /24 /25 /26 /27 /28 /29 /30 /31 /32 /33 /34 /35 /36 ]
| Catalog | Home