I wanted start a thread just to document odd lies Trump has been caught in. Not necessarily related to his presidency. I realize there's a gazillion examples already, but feel free to add any particularly notable ones.
I'll start with this.
This one is not new, but I just learned about it today and I thought it seemed a bit breathtaking in its audacity. There's a handy Wikipedia article about it:
River of Blood (monument)
Pause for a moment and consider his response: "How would they know that? Were they there?"
If that is a legitimate critique of these local historians, then obviously the same thing applies to Trump and to the alleged "numerous historians" who told "his people" about this event.
Then I wonder, who are these "numerous historians"? Did he ever produce a single one? All the actual historians other than the ones Trump claims to have heard from seem to be in agreement that no such event occurred.
His "reasoning" that there was a civil war going on at the time, and people crossed the river here and therefore a lot of people must have been shot here is also not at all how historians go about establishing facts.
So, Occam's razor seems to be that he just made it all up himself. Does it matter? Maybe not in the grand scheme of things, but it's another example of how he approaches things. It's a little bit like the fake Time magazine cover he had made and put up at his country clubs. He is willing to simply make up convenient "facts" out of thin air. Almost always these "facts" flatter him (or his properties in this case) in some way.
Is it possible that somebody else told him this story and he believed it? Maybe, but why? He has not been able to produce the alleged "historians" who told him or "his people" about it. So all we have is an unverifiable claim. Much more likely I think is that he made this one up by himself, out of whole cloth. To add a bit of a historical touch to his golf course.
I'll start with this.
This one is not new, but I just learned about it today and I thought it seemed a bit breathtaking in its audacity. There's a handy Wikipedia article about it:
River of Blood (monument)
Quote:
|
The River of Blood monument is a monument located on a golf course on Lowes Island, Virginia, owned by US President Donald Trump. A plaque signed with Trump's name states that the monument marks the site of numerous deaths in the American Civil War, but no battle or other event with mass casualties took place there. |
Quote:
|
On one of the courses, between the 14th and the 15th hole, Trump had a stone pedestal built with a flagpole on it, and had a plaque placed on the pedestal,[1] with the inscription: Many great American soldiers, both of the North and South, died at this spot. The casualties were so great that the water would turn red and thus became known as "The River of Blood".[1] The plaque bears Trump's name and the Trump Organization's crest.[2] The accompanying text reads, "It is my great honor to have preserved this important section of the Potomac River!"[1] |
Quote:
|
Historians say no such event ever took place at this site. One local historian, Craig Swain, cited the killing of two soldiers by citizens in 1861 as the only Civil War event that occurred on the island.[3] The site lies near Rowser's Ford, over which on June 27, 1863, General Stuart led 5,000 Confederate soldiers with no record of fatalities, and according to the president of the Mosby Heritage Area Association, the only Civil War battle in the area was the Battle of Ball's Bluff, 11 miles away.[1] Other historians consulted by The New York Times for a story in 2015 agree; one of them had written to the Trump Organization about the falsehood. Trump himself disputed the historians' statements: "That was a prime site for river crossings. So, if people are crossing the river, and you happen to be in a civil war, I would say that people were shot — a lot of them."Trump said that "numerous historians" had told him the story of the River of Blood, though he later changed that to say they had spoken to "his people".[1] |
If that is a legitimate critique of these local historians, then obviously the same thing applies to Trump and to the alleged "numerous historians" who told "his people" about this event.
Then I wonder, who are these "numerous historians"? Did he ever produce a single one? All the actual historians other than the ones Trump claims to have heard from seem to be in agreement that no such event occurred.
His "reasoning" that there was a civil war going on at the time, and people crossed the river here and therefore a lot of people must have been shot here is also not at all how historians go about establishing facts.
So, Occam's razor seems to be that he just made it all up himself. Does it matter? Maybe not in the grand scheme of things, but it's another example of how he approaches things. It's a little bit like the fake Time magazine cover he had made and put up at his country clubs. He is willing to simply make up convenient "facts" out of thin air. Almost always these "facts" flatter him (or his properties in this case) in some way.
Is it possible that somebody else told him this story and he believed it? Maybe, but why? He has not been able to produce the alleged "historians" who told him or "his people" about it. So all we have is an unverifiable claim. Much more likely I think is that he made this one up by himself, out of whole cloth. To add a bit of a historical touch to his golf course.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/2uXkXnz
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire