[ARC5] The Green Books

[millerke6f at aol.com]

Dave


    Me thinks you just enjoy being the Contrarian and all round Curmudgeon in the group.  Be that as it may; continue your mission.  But if you're going to bring contrary or critical commentary to an argument, bring a few facts along with the posting rather than feigning forgetfulness or blabbing glittering generalities without support.  As to Group Think... Oh Please!  I brought up the Green Books on WWII communications to perhaps introduce to current or new List Members as just one more resource for those, like myself, who have a sincere interest in the who what where when and why of our beloved Surplus Radio junk.  No one is gushing as though the Green Books are the Rosetta Stone of radio.  BTW  Napoleon made a number of quotes and two regarding history... essentially I prefer the the line that History is written by the fellow with the biggest gun,  Other historical citations like those attributed to Pliney The Elder are mostly the rants of a crazy old fart but even today are taken as fact.  So my advice is to look at the citations in the books to see where they take you on the quest to find confirmation or error in the narrative. 


73


Bob, KE6F



-----Original Message-----
From: David Stinson <arc5 at ix.netcom.com>
To: millerke6f <millerke6f at aol.com>; joeconnor53 <joeconnor53 at yahoo.com>
Sent: Fri, Jun 16, 2017 4:18 am
Subject: Re: [ARC5] The Green Books


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <millerke6f at aol.com>
Subject: Re: [ARC5] The Green Books


> Well, as a professional historian by training, I will admit 
> that one can always find errors in any publication and I'm sure 
> the Green Books have their share. However, Dave, if you're 
> going to play the Skunk role, perhaps you could enlighten us 
> with some of the errors in the publications.  Please do bring 
> up the points for us all to evaluate  Have you actually read 
> all three volumes?
------------------

Speaking of "reading..."
I clearly said it was many years ago and
that I, like Robert, did not now remember
what was in contention, only that some issues were.

As a "professional historian by training," I"m sure you're 
familiar
with an aspect of "group-think" whereby, once a source has been
presented and "gushed-over" by a group,  members of that group
can be very hesitant about being the first to debate any point
in the source.  Try contending St. Paul's writings for an example
of fear-of-group-disapproval stifling debate.
Well, there was a lot of "gushing" about the books,
which can stifle discussion and debate in our group.
My point was not to denigrate the books, but to encourage
questioning and discussion by removing the "not me first" fear.

As a trained historian, I'm sure you are familiar with what
Napoleon said about "history."

73 Dave S.




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/arc5/attachments/20170616/e0582576/attachment.html>