A recent article that detonated the Internet revealed the astonishing discoveries of Sanxingdui, including anomalous lead, burnt bone debris, turquoise bronze medals, seashells, and words. In an online lecture at Nanjing University's School of History, some people questioned this finding, but the author of the article directly countered it, accusing him of not knowing the profession.
The article revealed that a ** reporter once objected to the author's views, claiming that Feng Qiyong and Cai Yijiang are authoritative authorities on red studies and cannot be questioned. However, the author firmly asserts that he is the real authority and refutes his critics to the fullest.
The author describes himself as a modest and studious person, but he repeatedly emphasizes his position of authority in the text. He accused other professionals of not being able to refute his views, expressing a strong confidence in his position.
The article goes on to a series of major topics, including the origin of Chinese civilization, pre-Qin ancient astronomy, the Xia, Shang and Zhou dynasties, and the Sanxingdui bronze civilization site. The author declares that these are his appetizers, implying that other professionals cannot reach his level.
In the article, the author boldly speculates on the epoch of Chinese civilization, calling it the winter solstice on March 23, 12897 BC. The move caused an uproar and was seen as a challenge to conventional wisdom. The article also claims that the history of Chinese civilization dates back 15,000 years, as far as the ruins of Göbekli Tepe on the Turkish plateau.
The author disputed the geographical location of Sanxingdui and denied that it was related to the ancient Shu Kingdom. He pointed out that the age of Sanxingdui is far back around 1600 BC and has nothing to do with the ancient Shu Kingdom. The article emphasizes this point in an exaggerated tone, showing the author's insistence on his own opinion.
Next, the author gives a detailed interpretation of the astronomical calendar features in the Huayang National Chronicles, claiming that this is one of his snacks. He challenges his readers to understand the meaning of the sixteen words as a way to criticize the level of other professionals.
The article ends with a call for unity and struggle to achieve the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. The author once again expressed his firm belief in the Chinese civilization and emphasized his research results.
Through an exaggerated tone, disparagement of other professionals, and overconfidence in the author himself, the article constructs a compelling headline that draws the reader's attention to Sanxingdui's surprising discovery.
Sanxingdui Truth Revealed" captured the reader's eye with its exaggerated, confident tone and criticism of other professionals. However, this kind of arbitrary expression is contrary to the objective and scientific attitude that academic research should have.
First of all, the author is so confident in his own authority that he even mixes some emotional rhetoric when criticizing other professionals. This kind of overly personal expression may affect the reader's evaluation of the objectivity and scientific nature of the article's opinions. In the academic world, respect and discussion of different points of view are the key to advancing knowledge, rather than just being based on one's own opinions.
Secondly, although the speculation about the epoch of Chinese civilization in this paper is eye-catching, it lacks sufficient empirical and academic support. There are many opinions in the academic community about the exact date of the historical period, and this article seems to absolutize the author's point of view, lacking sufficient consideration of other possibilities**. This presentation of a single point of view may mislead readers when dealing with historical issues, and more attention should be paid to comprehensive research and the presentation of evidence.
In addition, the negative attitude in the article towards the relationship between Sanxingdui and the ancient Shu Kingdom is also too absolute. In the field of archaeology, the interpretation of culture and history often requires multiple sources of evidence and argumentation. Directly denying that Sanxingdui is related to the ancient Shu State may be oversimplifying the complex historical background and losing the inclusiveness of multiple interpretations.
Finally, while the headline party's approach is indeed eye-catching, such headlines can mislead readers into having overly high expectations of the article's content. Although this method may be able to attract more clicks and attention in online communication, it is also easy to cause distortion and misleading information.
Overall, although Sanxingdui Truth Revealed presents its views in a compelling way, its overly subjective and lack of objective evidence may make it subject to some skepticism in the field of scholarship and knowledge dissemination. In the future, when writing similar articles, more attention should be paid to respecting and comprehensively arguing from multiple perspectives, in order to promote a deeper understanding of history, culture and other issues.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!