Skeptic Project

You know, I am having serious doubts about the official story of the Civil War.

The government tells us that there was a Civil War in the USA from 1861 to 1865 and that about 600,000 people died in it. However, I think there's a serious case to be made that these figures are highly inflated, or possibly that the Civil War never really happened at all.

First, take the casualty figures. There were supposedly 50,000 casualties at Gettysburg in a battle that lasted 3 days. That's 16,666 a day. However, the main weapon of the Civil War, so the government tells us, was the rifled musket which fires a lead bullet called a Minie ball. The muskets could be reloaded only twice a minute. Even if every man killed at Gettysburg fired 2 shots a minute for 24 hours straight, that's only 2,880 shots per man per day. Even assuming a 10% accuracy rate, that's 288 shots per day, for our superhuman soldiers, that actually hit anything. Therefore, the maximum number of enemy troops a single soldier could kill during the whole battle was 864. That's not nearly enough to make 50,000 casualties. Obviously the numbers must be lower.

The photos taken by Matthew Brady at the battlefields show some bodies lying around, but Brady himself admitted he posed some of the photos. Thus, we can't trust the photos. And all the casualty lists from the battles came in via telegraph. They were using Morse code. How long would it take to spell out the names of 600,000 casualties in Morse code? A lot longer than 4 years, for sure. So this also proves that less than 600,000 died.

Then there's this Andersonville thing. It's obvious that the Northern historians just wanted to make the South look bad. So they invented the "atrocity" of the Andersonville prison camp. It was wartime so obviously conditions were bad. There's not a single piece of evidence that anyone actually died of starvation at Andersonville. The numbers just don't add up.

One might ask, has anyone actually looked at any of the evidence, particularly first generation evidence of the Civil War, eg. photos of the scenes before, during, after the war, maps of the battlefields, eqiupment orders, conflicting reports by soldiers.

I think you can raise a substantial question that the Civil War was greatly exaggerated. With the exception of Colonial Williamsburg, all the top historical-themed tourist attractions in Virginia are Civil War battle sites. That's big business, millions a year. Look how Ted Turner has made out on the Civil War and all the thousands of re-enactors. Somebody is making and profiting from all those replica uniforms, hats and weapons that the re-enactors wear every weekend. Plus you have historians like Ken Burns and Bruce Catton who built their whole reputations on the war. Questioning the Civil War is taboo, so no one has the guts to do it.

Why shouldn't we question it? After all, history is about asking questions, right?

Someone prove to me the Civil War happened. Until you can, I ain't buying it.

"First, take the casualty figures. There were supposedly 50,000 casualties at Gettysburg in a battle that lasted 3 days. That's 16,666 a day."

"666"

OMG

He he, I met some Austrian economic doomsayer-wannabe a while back who insisted that it was really Teddy Roosevelt who took the US off the gold standard in 1910. I called his bs out online and he has backed off.

I am going to suggest this to my conspiracy theorist room mate and see what he says.

Finally someone speaks the truth, I saw right through my history teacher!