Thread Explaining in PAINFUL Detail Why Lefties/Media are 'SHOOK' Over Trump Picks a...
They Hate Me! They REALLY Hate Me! I Am OFFICIALLY One of the...
We Just Saw MSNBC's Latest Ratings and HOO Boy, Joy Reid and the...
Scott Jennings' Face Is PERFECTION as WACKO Makes CRAZY Claim About Why Biden...
Deck the FAILS! James Woods Describes Jill Biden’s White House Christmas Decor as...
Sen. Mike Lee Straight-Up NUKES 'Ponzi Scheme' Social Security with Master Class Thread...
What Dem Congressman Dean Phillips Really Thinks
DAMN! Drew Holden Drops DAMNING Receipts in DAMNING Thread Owning Media for Pushing...
'It Needs to Be Eleven!': Jon Stewart RIPS Biden and Democrats for Hypocritical...
'It's My Constitutional Right!' New Jersey Council Removes Man for ... Holding a...
The Hit Wasn't Dirty: You're Just a Racist According to Texans Linebacker Azeez...
Five-Alarm Liar: Dem Jamaal Bowman Says Biden Didn’t Lie About Hunter Pardon Because...
Costco Conundrum: Do You Really Need That Big Bottle of Vanilla Extract?
Montana Dem Senator Gets TESTY When Asked About Hunter Biden’s Pardon
Hunter Biden Cannot Plead the Fifth If Asked About His Dealings in Ukraine...

BBC: The Real Victims of The Black Death in England Were... Black Women?

Meme screenshot

History as an area of academic inquiry seems like it would be a cut-and-dried one; you look at the available data for the time period, determine what happened when and to whom and call it a day. In many ways History should be viewed as a sort of extreme ex post facto journalism, sifting through to find and report the truth as best as it can be determined.

Advertisement

Of course this view on history and the role of the historian in reporting it can be a bit of a problem when you've got a social agenda to be pushing, so sometimes you'll find 'historians' who just try to wedge whatever agenda item it is they're looking to push in to their research, no matter how absurd the end product is. See this excellent example from the UK's BBC:

Now it's not easy to peg exactly how many people of sub-Saharan African descent lived in England during the years that the Plague was sweeping through Europe (England experienced the Bubonic Plague beginning in 1348 A.D.) but that's largely because... there weren't many people of sub-Saharan African descent. This isn't to say that there weren't any but they weren't a common thing at the time, as the BBC itself acknowledges in a different article, noting for instance that 'In the cosmopolitan parish of St Botolph without Aldgate (London) Africans were 5% of the total population.' So it's not huge numbers we're talking about here, and if it seems like these numbers are probably kinda made up it's because they most likely are. 

And lest we forget, as the Community Note here mentions, this study didn't even bother to use DNA to try to figure out if the bodies under research actually were black; instead they chose to use something that sounds awfully similar to phrenology make that determination. 

Advertisement

It was right there in front of us the whole time but we never listened!

Advertisement

Yes, when your sole focus is on race then you're going to make whatever research you're doing say something about race no matter what. Maslow's hammer strikes again!

Much ink has been spilt about the loss in institutional credibility in the recent past, but this is a good reminder of why that credibility has been lost, both by the world of academic researchers who put out this insanity and by the media who uncritically publish their work. As long as they keep this up don't be expecting that credibility to be rebuilding anytime soon.

***

Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy's conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement