When Dr. Hans-Ulrich Niemitz introduces his paper on the "phantom time hypothesis," he kindly asks his readers to be patient, benevolent, and open to radically new ideas, because his claims are highly unconventional. This is because his paper is suggesting three difficult-to-believe propositions: 1) Hundreds of years ago, our calendar was polluted with 297 years which never occurred; 2) this is not the year 2005, but rather 1708; and 3) The purveyors of this hypothesis are not crackpots.
Views:
RKae
“Neimitz uses the lack of documentation of the wide expansion of the Islam religion throughout Persia…”
OK. Sooooo… there’s no documentation. Then he’s saying it didn’t happen? It happened. The Muslims are there. So if the 600s-900s didn’t happen, then that means the Muslims took over Persia (and North Africa, and Spain, and nearly France) all on a single Tuesday. Wow. Their horses would be damned tired.
todayifoundout.com
Anonymous
There is very little archaeological evidence which can be reliably dated to this period; our account is based on a quite limited number of written sources (which could be faked or just wrong).
qi.com