NationStates

That a few Norwegians hiding in the forest single-handedly won WW2. K, not really, but you could get that impression.

I don't really recall much from the top of my head from history textbooks, but in 9th grade we had a textbook in science that claimed that glass is a liquid and that's the reason old windowpanes often are distorted.

Vecherd wrote:

Mr Bananagrabber wrote:
Because they are socialist. None of them are classless, stateless or have removed wage labour. There are no communist nations in the world.

China
Cuba
Laos
North Korea
Vietnam

This countries are all communist by normal standards.

See Abdju's post. One thing I'd add though: I actually produced the 3 conditions in the normal standard for communism in my post. Just as a suggestion, if you think I'm wrong it'd help if you either showed that these conditions do in fact apply to said countries or produce what you think are 'normal standards'.

Herpusderpus wrote:That a few Norwegians hiding in the forest single-handedly won WW2. K, not really, but you could get that impression.

I don't really recall much from the top of my head from history textbooks, but in 9th grade we had a textbook in science that claimed that glass is a liquid and that's the reason old windowpanes often are distorted.

Are you trying to tell me Milrog didn't win the war without help!

During my school period my history tekst books were either silent or undetailed about the Aceh war and the Politionele acties (indonesian war of independence) and other colonial wars.

1) That the Japanese were going to invade Australia
2) That all Australians deliberately set out to massacre the Aboriginal people without exception and that the missions never helped the Aboriginals in any way, shape or form. Ever.
3) That the only noteworthy explorers were those who died from sheer stupidity or who disappeared mysteriously. Those who never loose a man despite exploring first extremely arid terrain and then braving the crocodiles of the Northern Territory and who manage to do all this despite travelling cumulative total of 11 995 km by land should no be mentioned at all.

Munathanura wrote:3) That the only noteworthy explorers were those who died from sheer stupidity or who disappeared mysteriously. Those who never loose a man despite exploring first extremely arid terrain and then braving the crocodiles of the Northern Territory and who manage to do all this despite travelling cumulative total of 11 995 km by land should no be mentioned at all.

I have seriously never heard of this person.

Meowfoundland wrote:

Munathanura wrote:3) That the only noteworthy explorers were those who died from sheer stupidity or who disappeared mysteriously. Those who never loose a man despite exploring first extremely arid terrain and then braving the crocodiles of the Northern Territory and who manage to do all this despite travelling cumulative total of 11 995 km by land should no be mentioned at all.

I have seriously never heard of this person.

Like I said, Australian history books love to look at Burke and Wills, despite the entire expedition failing due to Burke's incompetence (and the stupidity of whoever put him in charge). In comparison, Gregory was highly intelligent, cultured and an experience bushman. He never lost a man or a horse on his two expeditions into the arid heart of WA, and the only reason he lost any animals on his expedition in the NT/NQLD was because of the incompetence of a few people working under him (aka the crew of the ship who offloaded some sheep into deep water or the geologist 2IC who went mad with power).

Munathanura wrote:

Meowfoundland wrote:I have seriously never heard of this person.

Like I said, Australian history books love to look at Burke and Wills, despite the entire expedition failing due to Burke's incompetence (and the stupidity of whoever put him in charge). In comparison, Gregory was highly intelligent, cultured and an experience bushman. He never lost a man or a horse on his two expeditions into the arid heart of WA, and the only reason he lost any animals on his expedition in the NT/NQLD was because of the incompetence of a few people working under him (aka the crew of the ship who offloaded some sheep into deep water or the geologist 2IC who went mad with power).

See, we learned about Burke & Wills (died while exploring), Leichhardt (still missing after 130 odd years) and Sturt (well, at least he didn't die while exploring). Gregory seems interesting.

That the first metal movable type was invented by Gutenberg.

Vecherd wrote:

Mr Bananagrabber wrote:
Because they are socialist. None of them are classless, stateless or have removed wage labour. There are no communist nations in the world.

China
Cuba
Laos
North Korea
Vietnam

This countries are all communist by normal standards.

China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam are all stateless and classless?

Meowfoundland wrote:

Munathanura wrote:
Like I said, Australian history books love to look at Burke and Wills, despite the entire expedition failing due to Burke's incompetence (and the stupidity of whoever put him in charge). In comparison, Gregory was highly intelligent, cultured and an experience bushman. He never lost a man or a horse on his two expeditions into the arid heart of WA, and the only reason he lost any animals on his expedition in the NT/NQLD was because of the incompetence of a few people working under him (aka the crew of the ship who offloaded some sheep into deep water or the geologist 2IC who went mad with power).

See, we learned about Burke & Wills (died while exploring), Leichhardt (still missing after 130 odd years) and Sturt (well, at least he didn't die while exploring). Gregory seems interesting.

Oh he was indeed. He was a bushman, surveyor, geologist and chemist at various times, an excellent leader of men and an all around good guy. If you can get a copy of it, Hard Country, Hard Men : In the Footsteps of Gregory is a good book to read. It follows one modern day guy as he tries to follow in the footsteps of Gregory and finds out just how hard and dangerous it was, as well as giving a lot of information on Gregory.

Munathanura wrote:

Meowfoundland wrote:
See, we learned about Burke & Wills (died while exploring), Leichhardt (still missing after 130 odd years) and Sturt (well, at least he didn't die while exploring). Gregory seems interesting.

Oh he was indeed. He was a bushman, surveyor, geologist and chemist at various times, an excellent leader of men and an all around good guy. If you can get a copy of it, Hard Country, Hard Men : In the Footsteps of Gregory is a good book to read. It follows one modern day guy as he tries to follow in the footsteps of Gregory and finds out just how hard and dangerous it was, as well as giving a lot of information on Gregory.

I'll check my library.

Legionica wrote::palm: Um, are you being sarcastic? 'Cause those things are both true.

So late but no they aren't.

Vecherd wrote:

Herpusderpus wrote:That a few Norwegians hiding in the forest single-handedly won WW2. K, not really, but you could get that impression.

I don't really recall much from the top of my head from history textbooks, but in 9th grade we had a textbook in science that claimed that glass is a liquid and that's the reason old windowpanes often are distorted.

Are you trying to tell me Milrog didn't win the war without help!

Considerig Milorg didn't actually do much active resistance until late 1944 it would be odd. The most active norwegian resistance was independent groups (independent from both the British controlled resistance, and the communist/soviet resistance). The most active group was the Osvald group, which was under the command of the NKVD.
Of course, that doesn't get mentioned at all in our textbooks. Our tenth grade history teacher found non-school sources so that we got a more complete picture.


On the Cuba Crisis, our history books essentially said the USSR put nuclear weapons in Cuba for the lulz. No mention of american nukes in Turkey at all.

Polska rzczpolspolita wrote:

H-Alba wrote:My history text book referred to Russia as a Communist state... And it was not referring to the Russian SFSR, nor the Soviet Union... It was a chapter on The Russian Federation today.

Apparently America can't get over itself.

Ah I'm afraid this was in the UK, and not America. I'm Scottish, not American.

I had a science textbook that showed how to correctly wire a plug. The earth and live wires were the wrong way around.

Well I can't remember one that my book got wrong, but I have had a teacher that said soething very wrong. She said that Remus killed Romulus, and named Rome after his brother in memorium.

My AP World History book has a photo of a guy getting kicked in the nuts, if that counts...

Science.

Image in the book somewhere says 'This is an image of [insert celestial body here]' Then proceeds to make observations on said image

that counts, right?

Italiani a Roma wrote:Well I can't remember one that my book got wrong, but I have had a teacher that said soething very wrong. She said that Remus killed Romulus, and named Rome after his brother in memorium.

If teachers count, mine said tanks didn't exist in WW1

Legionica wrote::palm: Um, are you being sarcastic? 'Cause those things are both true.

Which things?

Abdju wrote:

Galloism wrote:Imhotep's not the ruler anymore, btw.

Imhotep never was. He was a vizier.

To Djoser, specifically.

Though given how prominent Imhotep was - even down to taking credit for designing the first [step] pyramid - it's not unfair to see him as a ruler, even if he wasn't the ruler.

Anyway, Galloism was speaking rhetorically; Farnhamia was being worshipped as a Goddess in Sumeria when Djoser was on the throne, and didn't get out much at the time. I doubt she made it much further than Sippar for a couple of centuries.


As to the topic of the OP, I can assure everyone here that the textbooks I write are a paragon of accuracy, and don't contain a single error. Well, there's that embarrassing typo on page 56 of the most recent handbook, but don't let that worry you.

AlexJacobii wrote:Anything about Columbus. Most of the sections about Scandinavia. The Crusades were only in the Middle East according to one textbook I had. That one was genius...

What was it wrong about about Scandinavia.

Also, WWII was about the holocaust and Japanese agression. Nothing else.

Munathanura wrote:1) That the Japanese were going to invade Australia
2) That all Australians deliberately set out to massacre the Aboriginal people without exception and that the missions never helped the Aboriginals in any way, shape or form. Ever.
3) That the only noteworthy explorers were those who died from sheer stupidity or who disappeared mysteriously. Those who never loose a man despite exploring first extremely arid terrain and then braving the crocodiles of the Northern Territory and who manage to do all this despite travelling cumulative total of 11 995 km by land should no be mentioned at all.

The IJA did have plans for invasion as Austrailia was a huge thorn in the side of the empire. They did take over New Guinea capturing 15,000 Austrailion troops and if they had not engaged the United States an invasion would have commenced.

Niur wrote:

Legionica wrote::palm: Um, are you being sarcastic? 'Cause those things are both true.

Which things?

He was referencing the post above him, I think.