Some books that I have read have turned my world view upside-down... Some of the stuff we were taught at school - or have since absorbed via the media - turns out to be complete fabrication, other ideas are just a total revelation - and are then so obvious you can't understand why they aren't common knowledge!
In no particular order I offer "10% Human," by Alanna Collen (see https://cheslive.koha-ptfs.co.uk/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=503770) about how the micro-organisms on and inside us are essential to our health and wellbeing, even affecting mental health.
Another is 1421: The Year China Discovered the World by Gavin Menzies. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Menzies) Together with the later 1434: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance. Both are completely unarguable, and a big lump of both is the documentation of all the sources. It seems to me that the people who "have rejected Menzies' theories and assertions[4][5][6][7][8]: 367–372 and have categorised his work as pseudohistory" (to quote Wikipedia) are deluding themselves. I like the quote in the Wikipedia page "He is a very English eccentric and people like him often hit on truths."
Has anyone else read these books and had the same reaction, or felt the same after reading other books?
In no particular order I offer "10% Human," by Alanna Collen (see https://cheslive.koha-ptfs.co.uk/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=503770) about how the micro-organisms on and inside us are essential to our health and wellbeing, even affecting mental health.
Another is 1421: The Year China Discovered the World by Gavin Menzies. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Menzies) Together with the later 1434: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance. Both are completely unarguable, and a big lump of both is the documentation of all the sources. It seems to me that the people who "have rejected Menzies' theories and assertions[4][5][6][7][8]: 367–372 and have categorised his work as pseudohistory" (to quote Wikipedia) are deluding themselves. I like the quote in the Wikipedia page "He is a very English eccentric and people like him often hit on truths."
Has anyone else read these books and had the same reaction, or felt the same after reading other books?