Misconceptions We Learn in School.

Don't count the electoral vote, count the popular vote. Factor in campaigning, as well. Treating "northern states" as a bloc and "southern states" as a bloc is further unhelpful, for what it's worth.

Dude, it's an AP class. In high school. You're lucky if you get much of anything right at all. Protip: this is a thread called misconceptions we learn in school.

High school history textbooks are usually poor sources of information on anything except high school-level history.

Do you even know what an AP class is? It's college level, with college textbooks. And yes, that class did debunk several myths from regular history class. I hope you're not calling William S. McFeely a liar (he's the one that wrote the Civil War chapters).

Btw, my school district is one of the top in the country.
 
Do you even know what an AP class is? It's college level, with college textbooks.
When I was in high school, I 5'ed the AP US History exam. I know what it is. Undergraduate college courses arguably aren't much better at a lot of universities, fwiw.
deanej said:
And yes, that class did debunk several myths from regular history class. I hope you're not calling William S. McFeely a liar (he's the one that wrote the Civil War chapters).
I'm not calling anybody a liar; I'm indicating that [whomever's] opinions and interpretations of the extant data are contrary to the general tenor of ACW academic scholarship today.
deanej said:
Btw, my school district is one of the top in the country.
That's nice. Doesn't say much about what you're learning, to be honest.
 
Do you even know what an AP class is? It's college level, with college textbooks. And yes, that class did debunk several myths from regular history class. I hope you're not calling William S. McFeely a liar (he's the one that wrote the Civil War chapters).

Btw, my school district is one of the top in the country.

I don't think I've seen a more blatant argument from authority in my life. "I've been to college and read college-level authors. Don't tell me I'm wrong."

I don't know what McFeely said, but you've provided (a) no citations that can be traced with ease, and (b) nothing with any sort of primary source evidence.
 
LightSpectra said:
"I've been to college and read college-level authors. Don't tell me I'm wrong."

Woah give credit where its due! "I'm in high school and I've read a college-level author. Don't tell me I'm wrong."
 
Speaking of AP courses and misconceptions we learn in school, one of the books we were assigned to read over the summer for AP Euro when I took it back in high school was A World Lit Only By Fire by William Manchester.

Despite its crappiness, I can't blame my teacher too much as at least it got students interested in the subject with its entertaining rambling.
 
deanej don't get in fight about history with Dachs he will destroy you and then some.

Misconception: DD tanks had a fault causing them to be useless on D-Day: The tanks' only fails were on Omaha beach where the waves were 6 feet high far above the 1 foot waves they were tested at. And they were sent out to far from the coast just to add insult to injury.
 
Woah give credit where its due! "I'm in high school and I've read a college-level author. Don't tell me I'm wrong."

I read War and Peace in Elementary School

Yeekim, a properly balanced sword feels of negligible weight
 
civ_king said:
I read War and Peace in Elementary School

I read the Lords of the Rings? I don't get your point.
 
I read War and Peace in Elementary School

Yeekim, a properly balanced sword feels of negligible weight

Doesn't necessarily mean you comprehended it...
 
that seems hard to believe. but apparently the Roman gladius was about 3.5 lbs.. no self-respecting broadsword, maybe a rapier ?
It was not meant to slash, but to stab.

understood, we were classifying which swords fell in the "<4 lb. category", which I don't think say, an 11th cent. broadsword does. I thought a Gladius, despite its short length, was a bit sturdier, thick in the middle of the blade (as well as wider) enough to put it over 4 lbs.
 
MYTH: China, Korea, and Japan basically only existed from 1942-1955, give or take a few years, for America to fight wars against and win.

FACT: American history classes are beyond terrible, only surpassed by the Brits.
 
understood, we were classifying which swords fell in the "<4 lb. category", which I don't think say, an 11th cent. broadsword does. I thought a Gladius, despite its short length, was a bit sturdier, thick in the middle of the blade (as well as wider) enough to put it over 4 lbs.

Considering hand and a half swords were rarely more than 4.5lb. I'm pretty sure broadswords are under 4lb.
 
I think it depends on the era - you dont always want one which is perfectly balanced. A long sword that could chop through mail and leather was heavy towards the working end. Falchion is an extreme example of an unbalanced sword.

Considering hand and a half swords were rarely more than 4.5lb. I'm pretty sure broadswords are under 4lb.

where do you get this info civ king >? Wallace's sword was 6 lbs as someone already noted. Do you think this sword, belonging to el cid, was only 4 lbs ? Its as wide as a gladius over much of its length and almost three times as long. In order to be balanced that pommel would have to be very heavy.
Espada_Tizona.jpg
 
This reminds me of the enormous blackened sword which hung on the wall of my old college dining hall, under a big portrait of Edward II, who founded the college. We used to wonder if the sword was actually the implement by which he met his ignominious end. It certainly looked extremely heavy. No doubt it was a dodgy Victorian fake of some kind.
 
When I was in high school, I 5'ed the AP US History exam. I know what it is. Undergraduate college courses arguably aren't much better at a lot of universities, fwiw.

Heh, those were the days. I think my AP US exam had an essay on Roosevelt's New Deal. Speaking of which, I came across another myth [admittedly not in school] from the Master Tearjerker of Craziness, Glenn Beck:

Myth: Roosevelt passed the damaging Hoot-Smawley Tariffs in 1932, prolonging the Great Depression.

Fact: The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act was passed in 1930, two years before Roosevelt was elected. Smoot and Hawley were in fact both Republican senators. The legislation was signed by Hoover. Roosevelt attacked the tariffs in his stump speeches during the next election cycle. Somehow, Beck got everything backwards...imagine that.
 
Hoover intervened in the economy more than FDR did. The latter originally campaigned on a platform of free-market capitalism because of how detested Hoover's economic leftism was.
 
Back
Top Bottom