Such a concept as "victims of the exam" appeared relatively recently, and almost immediately with its appearance, polls conducted among graduates of secondary schools began to gain popularity. Representatives of the older generations make fun of the ignorance of young people who, without the help of the Internet, are unable to name even the dates of the beginning and end of the Great Patriotic War.
The bitterness and sarcasm of those who grieve for the lost standards of the Soviet system of public education and enlightenment is understandable. However, I have valid concerns. The fact is that there is a high probability that the popularity of such polls is based not only on disappointment with the degradation of the modern school, but also on completely mundane human vices. Those who have long ago received their "A's" in history are flattered by the very thought that, they say, "they themselves know everything, they are good fellows and heroes," and young people are not suitable for them.
Agree, condemnation is not the noblest method for self-exaltation. Raising one's own self-esteem due to irony over those who are weaker in some way is a very characteristic "disease" for many representatives of humanity. In my opinion, a decent person should strive to improve his own qualities and abilities, and not indulge his laziness and infantilism by the fact that there is someone nearby who knows and knows less than himself.
But this often happens in our country: a person who is not capable of critical thinking, does not possess the basics of logic, who simply memorized school lessons (read - dogmas) that have little to do with reality, makes fun of everyone who dares to express an excellent point of view from the axiom set forth in textbooks. They are not called “victims of the exam”. So another label is hung - "a poor student, skipped school, did not learn the elementary basics."
But if you look at it, the difference between the "victims of the exam" and those who thoughtlessly ridicule them is actually barely distinguishable. The former lost their memorization skills, and the latter learned nothing but memorization. Well, what's the point in remembering fictions? How can the fantasies of various writers help in real life, if the difference between an unburdened brain and a brain full of useless knowledge is practically indistinguishable?
Suppose the “victim of the exam” does not remember how and when the Egyptian pyramids were built. But the "excellent students of education" likewise do not have answers to the same questions, only for a different reason: they think they know these answers. Think! But in fact, neither one nor the other have any idea about how and when the Egyptian pyramids were built. Well, isn't it so funny anymore? Here's something. In fact, it turns out that we are all so poorly aware of what surrounds us, what is actually happening, and what processes affect what is happening, that it’s time to sob, and not make fun of the unfortunate graduates.
Who taught schoolchildren? Aren't they the same "know-it-alls" who learned from the school lessons in the Soviet school for the "five"? What is the use of the knowledge gained if it is useless even to teach your own children! Checkmate and checkmate, comrades, excellent students! You cannot not only transfer the accumulated information to your students, but even teach them to think independently and self-study. Well, what is the value of your knowledge, allowing you to answer the question of what year Ivan the Terrible died or who ruled “Ancient Rome” after the death of Emperor Trajan without hesitation?
Or take, for example, this fact: I ask the "most educated" person, candidate of philological sciences:
Promotional video:
- Explain to me, siroma, the etymology of the hydronym "Selesnya"?
- Well … I won't tell you offhand. Most likely, from the verb "to settle" or from the noun "village". It may be that the semantics of the name of the Selesnya River in the Volokolamsk District of the Moscow Region is akin to the mechanism of the formation of the name of the Lutosnya River, which is also located in the Moscow Region.
- I am not a philologist and I can be wrong, of course, but, in my amateurish opinion, "selesnya" is two words, not one. The article "se" fell out of use, and the name Se Lesnya remained in a distorted form. Initially, it was most likely used as "Se Lesnya", which means "Forest". But Lutosnya is one word. The word “lutosh” (“lutosh”) in pre-revolutionary Russian meant “a stick made of linden”, so it is logical to assume that Lutosnya is a river, the banks of which were covered with thickets of young lime trees. Therefore, the origins of the names of the Selesnya and Lutosnya rivers can hardly be similar.
By the way, the philologist in question wrote his Ph. D. thesis on the Old Norse languages, so he is forgiven. But here's another example.
If you take any of the available dictionaries of the Russian language and find the verb "to hurry" in it, then the verb "to hurry" will certainly be indicated among its synonyms. What's the catch? Let me explain: most of us use the usual language of communication - Russian so thoughtlessly, that they do not even realize that at the same time it looks funny and ridiculous, like a student who is at the first stage of learning a foreign language.
When someone says, “Don't go there! If the head gets snow, it will be completely ill,”the people around laugh. But why does it not occur to anyone that using the verb "haste", implying fast movement, is as absurd as "snow will fall." And all because everyone has long forgotten that the word "hurry" means a short path straight through the forest. Simply put - a path. Therefore, "to hurry" means "to arrive somewhere quickly, directly."
But the verb "haste" has a different semantics. It is formed from the concept of "force to dismount". That is, to force the rider to get off the horse, in other words, to stop. Thus, the verbs "haste" and "haste" have exactly the opposite meaning. This means that they cannot be synonyms, because in their meaning they are antonyms. But we, like foreigners who do not know the Russian language, continue to say: "You hurry up, otherwise you won't be in time." Absurd? Evident. We live in a country whose language we do not understand, the meaning of geographical names we do not know and about whose history we have the most vague ideas.
So … Are we occupiers in Russia? Or would it be more logical to ask: "Are we the descendants of the occupiers?" I suppose not. But how did this situation become possible? To understand the reasons for this phenomenon, it is necessary to look at the events of the past, getting rid of the ballast of existing knowledge as much as possible, gleaned from modern history textbooks. It is enough to take data from open sources and find reasonable and simple answers to the questions that have arisen.
I gave examples of the contradictions in the field of linguistics and geography, but the picture most close to reality can only be formed if the problem is considered as a complex. Well, it is impossible to make a description of the painting by I. I. Shishkin and K. A. Savitsky "Morning in a pine forest", if you consider it, leaning your forehead to the canvas. Otherwise, one of the observers will assert that the picture shows a fragment of a fallen pine tree with branches, another will tell about the "sirloin" part of the bear, the third expert will see the blue sky, etc.
The complete picture can be seen only by moving a few meters away in order to be able to see all the objects depicted by the artists at the same time. This is the only way to understand what exactly is happening in reality. And even then … Different observers may have versions of what is captured that do not fit together. Someone will say that the unfortunate hungry animals are desperate to find food in the deep forest, and someone will see the dances of ferocious predators who heartlessly devoured a group of peaceful naturalists.
So that's it. An attempt to decipher the meanings of geographical names and words that make up native speech will not give us anything for the good of the case now. Of course, I will do this … I certainly will, but within the framework of another study.
I propose to leave for later all controversial versions, such as star fortresses, atmospheric electricity, vimanas with whitemars, etc. Let us touch only on the issues that we come into contact with literally every day. Below I will give a list of "historical misunderstandings" that allow you to discern strange failures in the level of technology used and no less suspicious "insights" of engineering thought, which occur too inappropriate for this moment, which defy the laws of probability theory.
In my personal list, which continues to remain open, because it is still far from being close to an exhaustive one, the first is geopolymer concrete:
1. GPB. He's an artificial, or philosophical, stone. It had the broadest application all over the world until the beginning of the twentieth century, was "forgotten" and "invented" again by the French chemist Joseph Davidovitz in 1972.
2. Megalithic structures. Most of them are created using geopolymers. The range of such structures is unimaginably wide: from the Egyptian pyramids to street urns, tombstones and high-quality cheap bricks produced without firing. There are also details, structures and decorative elements of such famous buildings as the Louvre, La 3. Scala, the Hermitage, the Montferrand column and the like.
Efficient pneumatic heating systems for buildings and structures that were widely used even in the early Middle Ages and were suddenly forgotten in the eighteenth century. In the nineteenth, they had to be reinvented, so that with the beginning of the twentieth century, this technology was again lost for as much as a hundred years.
4. Locomobile. It is a compact mobile steam engine designed to drive stationary agricultural machines (threshers, winnowing machines, mills, etc.), pumps, and electric generators. Some structures had their own course, others were towed. They were widely used in the period of steam power engineering. In Russia they have been produced since 1875 at factories in Lyudinovo, Nikolaev, Kolomna and Votkinsk.
Locomobile Ruston & Proctor at the Vadim Zadorozhny Museum of Technology.
Serial assembly of locomotives in Votkinsk, photo of the 1940s.
5. Internal combustion engine designed by the Russian sailor Ogneslav Kostovich, which he tested in 1879.
6. Objects of transport infrastructure created using technologies forgotten at the beginning of the twentieth century and widely used today: airfields, railways and highways.
7. Radio-controlled aerial bombs and surface-to-air missiles, invented by the engineer of the Third Reich Kumerov and consigned to oblivion until the seventies of the twentieth century.
8. Multiple launch rocket systems for unguided rockets put into service with the Russian army in 1814 (designed by engineer A. Zasyadko) and "invented" again in 1941 (BM-13 "Katyusha").
9. Flamethrower systems, used in the army of Genghis Khan, which were "remembered" during the First World War.
10. Mortars, which were used in the Middle Ages, were then re-invented by midshipman SN Vlasyev during the defense of Port Arthur in 1905. Before the Second World War, they were again "forgotten".
11. Canned food in self-heating cans was also invented and produced in the Russian Empire during the Russo-Japanese War, but the Soviet people learned about the existence of such only during the Great Patriotic War, when similar canned food began to come to the front from the United States under the Lend-Lease program …
12. Chemical weapons, well known since the mid-nineteenth century, were actively used during the First World War and almost completely lost their role during the Second World War.
13. Forgetting the true role of armored forces, aviation, automobiles, motor vehicles, artillery and small arms during the First World War. The layman firmly believes that the main types of weapons of that period were the horse, saber and revolver. But in fact, the variety and number of equipment and weapons that took part in the hostilities did not differ much from those that were used during the Second World War.
14. The role of the submarine fleet in the First World War was also consigned to oblivion. The first submarines were adopted by the Russian fleet in the Baltic during the lifetime of A. S. Pushkin and took part in hostilities against the Anglo-French fleet during the defense of St. Petersburg during the "Crimean" war of 1853-1856. In 1914, the Russian fleet was already armed with entire squadrons of submarines. By the way, at the beginning of World War II, 800 out of 1000 submarines in service with the German Kriegsmarine were built at the shipyards of the USSR (information taken from A. G. Kuptsov's book "A Strange History of Weapons. Deserters of War and Peace").
15. Balloons and airships. This is a very serious issue that also requires careful study. Few people are satisfied with the usual explanation of the lack of demand for this type of transport. Having stopped taking their word for it, everyone who studies the history of aeronautics comes to the only reasonable explanation for the "retirement" of lighter-than-air aircraft: someone artificially limited the capabilities of the armies. Talk about the explosiveness of hydrogen, which supposedly filled all airships, cause nothing but bewilderment. Indeed, at the time when the famous Zeppelin "Hindenburg" (1937) crashed, there were already factories producing helium. Let me remind you that it was this disaster that put an end to the entire world airship construction.
16. The same is true for helicopters and autogyros, which could radically change the tactics of warfare, giving the Red Army colossal advantages over the Wehrmacht, and, therefore, the Great Patriotic War could develop in a completely different scenario from its first days. By a strange "accident" the production of helicopters began just when the war was over. And the gyroplane had to wait almost seventy years more, until finally it was recognized as a full-fledged aircraft and mass production began.
Twin-engine helicopter "Omega", created in OKB-3 by B. N. Yuriev and I. P. Bratukhin. 1939 g.
Autogyro A-7, created at TsAGI under the leadership of N. I. Kamov in 1933
17. Perhaps one of the most difficult to explain phenomena is the sudden degradation of communications. In 1941, the USSR did not have radio communication devices, not only tanks, but even aircraft. And this despite the fact that the radiotelegraph, invented by the Russian engineer BS Yakobi in 1839, during the "Crimean" war, was already a common means of command and control and connected the Baltic forts not only with the General Staff, but also among themselves. How could this happen? Why did the Russian military of the first half of the nineteenth century understand the importance of technical means of communication, and their descendants, a hundred years later, had already forgotten about it?
But God bless him, with the telegraph. Much more impressive is the fact that in 1914 there were already … faxes in the Russian army. Yes Yes! They were called differently, phototelegraphs, but this does not change the essence. Moreover, the symbol of the beginning of the twenty-first century - a fax machine for transmitting information - requires the connection of wires, and the photographic telegraphs of the beginning of the twentieth century were wireless. A note written on a special sheet with a special slate was inserted into the transmission apparatus, a button was pressed, and after 2.5-3 minutes, the note was reproduced at the receiving station. Moreover, there were devices capable of transmitting images, for example, photographs, without any special slates. Exactly like today, only wirelessly, on the radio.
But that's not all. Have you heard anything about the walkie-talkies used during the First World War? But they were successfully used by the troops. A special transducer made it possible to transmit the correspondent's speech through a light beam, received on headphones. To solve the problems of transmitting messages during the day, sources of ultraviolet and infrared light began to be used, which made it possible, even in advanced positions, to transmit invisible and inaudible speech at distances of 3 km during the day and 8 km at night with a small device the size of a motorcycle headlight.
Agree, even concepts such as "ultraviolet" and "infrared" are in no way consistent with what we know about the First World War. Indeed, even during the Great Patriotic War, signalmen ran across the battlefield under fire of small arms and enemy artillery with telephone cable coils. But let's finish with the connection, because you can write a whole book about it.
18. Television. Here, too, it turns out, the picture is about the same as with the cliché about horses, checkers, revolvers and telephonists, who, before their death, clenched their teeth with a field telephone wire broken by a shell fragment. Now many people already know that regular television broadcasting began in Germany in 1935. But few people know that back in 1928 the USSR was already testing "far-sighted" systems for reconnaissance and adjusting artillery fire. An airplane was rising into the sky, on board of which there was an operator with a camera and a repeater, and on the ground, the image was received in real time. And only today modern unmanned aerial vehicles have learned to do the same: drones, quadcopters, etc.
19. The fortification is also wonderful. We were so convinced that during the Great Patriotic War, the soldiers themselves dug their own trenches and trenches by hand, that the testimonies of the officers of the tsarist army about the arrangement of defensive lines during the First World War seem like a fantasy cleaner than the "Lord of the Rings": mechanical means working with compressed air were used …
I have not met a single person who saw with his own eyes the trenches of the First World War, made of reinforced concrete. But the above quote is not a fiction, but an excerpt from an article in the Great Soviet Encyclopedia of 1928, volume XII. Just do not rush to leaf through this volume. The article was published once, and only in 1928.
20. Electricity. This is another "unplowed field" that can break the minds of most contemporaries who believe in stories about "Ilyich's lamp". In fact, in the Russian Empire, everything was fine with electrical appliances.
The townspeople used electric washing machines, vacuum cleaners, hair dryers, and many, many similar things that we used to consider the achievements of the last decades.
From the brochure of engineer V. A. Aleksandrov "What you need to know in order to spend less on electricity." Ed. Moscow, 1910
Note that this is not an advertisement, not a story about the achievements of science and technology. The brochure helps the layman learn to save on electricity, and does not describe outlandish electrical appliances. But even more bewilderment and mistrust is caused by the advertisement of the Petrograd company "ACEA", which sells imported electric machines.
What electrical devices in 1917 had a capacity of twenty-five thousand horsepower ?! This corresponds to 18387.47 kilowatts. For example, I will say that the total power consumed by a city tram averages 240 kilowatts. So what kind of monstrous mechanisms were supposed to rotate the machines that ASEA traded? Well, and one more question: what power plants at the beginning of the 20th century were capable of generating such volumes of electricity?
Okay. Let's leave it for now. Within the framework of one article, it is impossible even to finish a simple listing of all that could radically change our world in the distant past, but did not. Therefore, I will focus on the twenty-first point, leaving the most "tasty" for the last.
21. Many have heard that in reality the Third Reich not only created a working nuclear charge, which was tested on October 11, 1944 on the island of Rügen, but also managed to produce a sufficient number of ready-to-use warheads and means for their delivery. The only mystery is the question of why we were all able to be born. After all, Hitler had every opportunity to incinerate Britain and inflict such tangible damage on the USSR and the United States that it is still unknown who would have emerged victorious from this war and our parents and grandparents could have survived under such circumstances.
But few people realize that their own nuclear program could have been born in Russia even earlier than the German one. Yes, I can already hear the hooting of skeptics and critics who brandish the "authentic" documents according to which the Soviet Union stole the secret of making the atomic bomb from the United States. But let us not be like the flock that believes everything that the shepherd says. For starters, the facts.
35 years before the test of the first atomic bomb, Academician V. I. Vernadsky wrote:
And in 1928, the same TSB, severely cut down later, contained the following fragment:
Does this remind you of anything? But what about the statement by the Russian president about the systems in service with the army, navy and aerospace forces, which are based on "new physical principles"? So that's it. Elementary logic dictates that innovations of this scale are not created in a day, week or month. Projects of this level have been implemented for decades. And then from the date of the test of the first nuclear charge in the history of modern civilization it is necessary to "rewind" at least thirty years into the past. Whatever system of calculations we use, but in reality they began to develop nuclear weapons, most likely even before the start of the First World War. Here is another quote from the speech of Academician Vernadsky from 1922:
And in 1916, V. I. Vernadsky spoke no less mysteriously. What did he mean when he said the following: "The new war will meet with such weapons and methods of destruction that will leave far behind the disasters of military life in 1914-1915 …"? One could not pay attention to a single statement, but vague hints uttered at different times testify to one thing: Academician Vernadsky was a carrier of state secrets of the highest level and, due to the lack of special training, naturally could not withstand the psychological stress inevitable in such a situation.
On an unconscious level, the bearer of a secret often divulges information known to him against his own will. And the existence of this effect is known to everyone who has studied a course in criminal psychology. I studied this discipline many years ago, on duty, that's why I drew attention to the interconnected quotes of Vernadsky.
Now the matter is small. To add together the named circumstances with the facts about which we know from all history textbooks, in the part that sets out the history of "the development of nuclear energy." The fact is that all fundamental research in this area was carried out in the second half of the nineteenth century. Becquerel, Rutherford, Lorenz, Poincaré, Umov, Pierre and Maria Curie, Roentgen, Crookes, Kelvin, Pauli, Mendeleev and others laid the foundation for the beginning of practical experiments aimed at creating atomic weapons even before the start of the First World War.
And, as history shows, in Russia most often breakthrough technologies appear earlier than in the West. It's just that all this time they have been a state secret. And when they are made public abroad, the priority in the discovery or invention remains with the country in which they were made public.
I hope that now many will agree that the nuclear program of the Russian Empire could actually exist. I will say more: it simply had to exist. But even if we discard these assumptions, we now understand how much we were mistaken about the level of development of humanity before the First World War. What we previously only vaguely guessed about finds multiple evidence. In reality, the civilization of the nineteenth century is radically different from the image formed in the mass consciousness.
Moreover, it is "formed" and not "formed". Deliberate external interference is no longer just idle fiction or a working version. This is an indisputable fact. Science and art are in the hands of those who playfully manipulate the consciousness of the masses with their help. Using such tools, it cost them nothing to convince the whole world that windmills are exclusively the heritage of enlightened Holland, and the "ancient Greeks" only did what they feasted on fruit, drinking wine in between writing works on philosophy and writing poems …
And no one cares about the fact that there were much more windmills in Russia than in Holland, and the Greeks practically did not live in Greece, but were engaged in piracy, smuggling and legal trade in countries far enough from Hellas, which is considered the country of “ancient Greeks.
Nobody asks the question of how the accordion can be considered a "Russian folk instrument" if it could not have been born before steam locomotives and instrumental steel. It's much easier to believe what the teachers say. After all, teachers have read thousands of wise books and know exactly what color of sandals Alexander the Great preferred to wear on holidays.
All the same teachers explain to us that due to the complete absence of chewing gum and microwave ovens, our ancestors had very little chance of developing intellectual abilities. Their denseness knew no bounds, therefore they constantly forgot to keep the drawings or recipes and therefore periodically fell into a state of medieval feudal fragmentation, then into a slave system. And on holidays, their memory magically returned, so periodically lost technologies again began to serve the cause of progress.
Now see what happens. Every time when something appears in the minds of scientists and inventors that can turn the course of history with little blood, immediately this “something”, as if by magic, becomes inaccessible, and the troops of the opposing sides with frenzy begin to destroy each other. Researcher A. G. Kuptsov voiced in his book “The Strange History of Weapons. Deserters of War and Peace”is a thought that at first glance seems inhuman. But this is only at first glance, because, according to the laws of logic, this is the only correct conclusion, and everything else is from the evil one: pure Jesuitism. The essence of the conclusion is as follows:
I will decipher: humanism is not the prohibition of the death penalty for criminals, but the creation of conditions under which not a single criminal who has committed a particularly grave crime or crime against humanity will escape the death penalty.
Kuptsov rightly asks: why is it humane to be shot in the stomach, and to be poisoned with phosgene or mustard gas is inhumane? What is the difference? Is there a single survivor who will confirm that he would rather die from a bullet or shrapnel than from poison gas? That's it! Here everyone will already think, is it true that those who determine what is humane to kill and what is inhumane are so concerned about the soldiers! War is immoral and inhuman a priori. In it, all means are criminal, from brass knuckles to an atomic bomb.
But if, when an atomic bomb explodes, a soldier evaporates without understanding what happened to him, then if he is wounded in the stomach, he will die for hours. And if he does not go crazy with pain, then, most likely, he will shoot himself, not waiting for the arrival of "natural" death. Well, how? Have you already decided what kind of death you would like to die? But this is the lyrics.
And physics is this:
If one of the parties used the so-called "weapons of mass destruction" and achieved a cardinal superiority of forces in the operational tactical situation in its favor, then it would instantly end the war and the enemy's desire to continue aggression. This is what is called the "deterrent." But if such a weapon is artificially outlawed, the bloody massacre will last for years. And over the years, many times more people will die than they could have died if the defending side had the right to use effective weapons. Well, what kind of philanthropy can we talk about ?!
Someone or something deliberately creates situations on the political and civilizational "chess field", in which humanity over and over again loses more and more human lives and increasingly falls under the influence of exploiters. I do not believe in such "tragic coincidences of circumstances" in which the simple introduction of mastered inexpensive technologies nullifies the very possibility of starting a war. I also don’t believe that "by misunderstanding" an effective type of weapons began to be mass-produced at a time that coincidentally coincided with the end of hostilities.
Twice is a coincidence. Three is already a pattern. Therefore, we have every right to assert that all wars and revolutions, as well as other social upheavals, as a result of which the masses of the population begin to migrate to territories remote from their traditional habitats, are conceived, orchestrated and cold-bloodedly carried out in pursuance of certain goals of certain groups of persons. It turns out that the "worldwide conspiracy" is the delirium of the inflamed consciousness of marginal conspiracy theorists, and the very real results of the worldwide conspiracy are nothing more than a mere coincidence.
Well, yes, yes … We readily believe! And we agree that advanced construction technologies using GPB were replaced by poor reinforced concrete ones by accident. After all, just imagine how the course of the First World War could have changed if the Russian army had the same opportunities for the construction of fortifications that the builders of the Kazan Cathedral or the Winter Palace in St. Petersburg had!
It turns out that the theory of a worldwide conspiracy is not the fruit of idle fiction. Someone or something super-powerful controls the course of history, and for him influencing progress or regression is just as common a control tool as the steering wheel and pedals are for the driver of a car. Where necessary - turned, where necessary - slowed down or, on the contrary, added speed. And at this time we are naively surprised at "strange coincidences".
And, unfortunately, as long as we groan and gasp, wonder and delight, shudder with horror and misunderstanding, our fate will continue to be in the hands of the unknown. Moreover, not only are their goals unknown to us, but we do not even know who they are. To believe that the notorious Illuminati, Freemasons and other interest clubs like Bilderberg can have such power is, in my opinion, the height of naivety.
And our future and the future of our children depends on whether we are able to think. Let me emphasize: to think, not to think that we are thinking. They are not the same thing. It is not the same thing to believe and know.
Well, what do we choose? Will we continue to believe or will we try to find out?
Author: kadykchanskiy