I was starting a thought last night on our perception of history.

(To contextualize this, my overall theory of reality is that all of our theories are suspect, and anything we think happened in the past is only available to us through our present perception of it, not necessarily through the actual past event.)

I've heard some theories about missing time, maybe some time during the dark ages. I was trying to pin this down a bit, and I'm thinking that anything that happened over 1,000 years ago is highly suspect, both as to WHAT happened, and WHEN it actually happened. History just wasn't being recorded very well in the first millennia AD. The year 1066 is pounded into my head, but anything older than that just seems to be estimated.

Then I'm also questioning the accuracy of calendars during and prior to that time. I don't know when the current 365.25 day calendar was adopted, but I don't think it was all that long ago.

Do I think an extra hundred or thousand years of time happened in the first millennia? Not ruling it out, but not really convinced either way.

Go back further. Looking at passed-down history (recorded later on) from any time prior to the Great Flood. Pick your cultural preference of which Great Flood. I have a theory about this, which is that prior to that flood there was a thick outer-atmospheric band of water vapor covering the earth, and the flood was actually the collapse of that atmospheric layer. It explains a lot, including sub-marine ruins of prior civilizations.

I also think that atmospheric layer of water vapor gave the earth a very different greenhouse effect-like climate, where things grew differently, like megaflora and megafauna. Also I think the mass of the earth was much greater, and its orbital path much different. The collapse of the vapor layer resulted in much of that mass escaping into space, after an impact or near-impact with something else in space. So the years after the flood were an adjustment period as the earth found its new orbital path and distance from the sun. This means "years" were of a different length, and not always a consistent length. Makes any dating of events prior to that time or even fairly close thereafter highly suspect.

This also explains humans living hundreds of years. If the years were shorter, or less UV, or just different climate conditions... it wouldn't be as much of a stretch as living hundreds of our current 365 day years, in our current climates.

It explains giant reptiles (dinosaurs). Reptiles generally don't really stop growing, as I understand it. So what does a 1000 year old reptile look like? Maybe pretty big. Same with trees.

But it means when "science" says something happened 4,000 or 40,000 years ago, I take that to just mean "a long time ago", or "a really long time ago. They can sometimes sequence it into other known events, sometimes not.

But I think similarly about events happening in the first millennia AD - I'm not sure the sequence of events we are taught is actually how it happened. They've already been shown to be wrong about european activity in the Americas. What else from before that did they get wrong?

This doesn't even get in to the possibility that extra-terrestrials played a part in this planet's history, or in our chain of civilizations' history. I prefer to think this is almost a certainty, because I am an ancient alien theorist, or whatever.

I'm starting to think more in Mayan (or what I believe to be Mayan) phases of time, rather than years and dates. There was the age of American power, which we are nearing the end of. Before that, the age of European power, which lasted for quite a while, and overlapped with a very long age of Chinese power. The beginning if the Euro age was also the age of Roman Catholic power. Before that, the ages of the Romans, Egyptians, and so on. There were others in power in the Mesopotamian region well prior to Egypt. Again, look east, and there was a lot going on in India and China as well. No idea what was happening to the south in the rest of Africa.

I'm actually quite curious what the histories of India have to say about the last 6,000 or so years, or how far they actually go back. It may be much more accurate than our western histories.

Just a little dive into what came before. I'm sure there is a lot to learn there, but if it isn't true, then does that diminish the value of the lessons?

To bring this around, if I can only experience past events through my perception of them, a myth may be just as important and experiential as a factual event.

Just don't believe the lies that you are being told without first putting them into perspective and properly evaluating them.