主题：程碧波：纹明，《几何原本》来自中国的证据及其在西方的错误传播 -- hwd99

可是他的考古成果，有哪个去否认？还不是因为他是白人。

爱因斯坦参加的只有4年的学制，Diplom是出来的第一个学位，可是说是理工科的最低一级学位，和今天的学士学位相同。

今天的Diplom标准学期数是9个学期，不是5-7年，基础阶段4个学期，专业阶段4个学期，毕业论文1个学期。德语区的大学没有围墙，没有班级，每人根据自己的情况和进度选课和登记考试，因此也没有年级，英语里的freshman, sophomore, junior, senior在德语里没有对应的词。所以每人用时差距很大，好的学生在标准时间内完成，一般的学生在12个学期左右，各专业情况有区别，机械平均用时最长，14学期。德国评价一个大学生是否优秀两个标准，分别是成绩和用时。

爱因斯坦四年也就是8个学期毕业，说明他比较优秀。他拿到Diplom后可以直接攻博，说明他那个时代的Diplom也等价于硕士，而不是本科。

我当年一个德国女同学，学统计学的。用了5个学期拿到Diplom，再用了3个学期拿到博士，读博期间还顺便生了个孩子。不过她读博时拿奖学金，可以专注于博士论文，所以比较快。

爱因斯坦同班同学一共6个，4年后毕业了5个，有一个是他老婆，被留级一年。很显然，当年的学制不像今天的学制。

爱因斯坦的成绩排名倒数第二，说好肯定说不上。

这是最核心的问题。你在哪里看到爱因斯坦还补了一个硕士学位再去读博的？

不是那种硕转博的。

不掺水，不死读书，公认的，令人赞不绝口的天才。

我过去一个朋友也见过，说的话，现在都属于政治不正确了：外国人真的有天才。

但现在再也见不到了。

我虽然不敢说气运不在了，至少这些天才没有再投入于过去那些领域。

Schliemann's magnificent residence in the city centre of Athens, the Iliou Melathron (Ιλίου Μέλαθρον, "Palace of Ilium") houses today the Numismatic Museum of Athens.

Along with Arthur Evans, Schliemann was a pioneer in the study of the Aegean civilization in the Bronze Age. The two men knew of each other, Evans having visited Schliemann's sites. Schliemann had planned to excavate at Knossos but died before fulfilling that dream. Evans bought the site and stepped in to take charge of the project, which was then still in its infancy.[citation needed]

Further excavation of the Troy site by others indicated that the level Schliemann named the Troy of the Iliad was inaccurate, although they retain the names given by Schliemann. In a 1998 article for The Classical World, D.F. Easton wrote that Schliemann "was not very good at separating fact from interpretation"[32] and claimed that, "Even in 1872 Frank Calvert could see from the pottery that Troy II had to be hundreds of years too early to be the Troy of the Trojan War, a point finally proven by the discovery of Mycenaean pottery in Troy VI in 1890."[32] "King Priam's Treasure" was found in the Troy II level, that of the Early Bronze Age, long before Priam's city of Troy VI or Troy VIIa in the prosperous and elaborate Mycenaean Age. Moreover, the finds were unique. The elaborate gold artifacts do not appear to belong to the Early Bronze Age.

His excavations were condemned by later archaeologists as having destroyed the main layers of the real Troy. Kenneth W. Harl, in the Teaching Company's Great Ancient Civilizations of Asia Minor lecture series, sarcastically claimed that Schliemann's excavations were carried out with such rough methods that he did to Troy what the Greeks could not do in their times, destroying and levelling down the entire city walls to the ground.[33]

In 1972, Professor William Calder of the University of Colorado, speaking at a commemoration of Schliemann's birthday, claimed that he had uncovered several possible problems in Schliemann's work. Other investigators followed, such as Professor David Traill of the University of California.[34]

A 2004 article of the National Geographic Society called into question Schliemann's qualifications, his motives, and his methods:

In northwestern Turkey, Heinrich Schliemann excavated the site believed to be Troy in 1870. Schliemann was a German adventurer and con-man who took sole credit for the discovery, even though he was digging at the site, called Hisarlik, at the behest of British archaeologist Frank Calvert. [...] Eager to find the legendary treasures of Troy, Schliemann blasted his way down to the second city, where he found what he believed were the jewels that once belonged to Helen. As it turns out, the jewels were a thousand years older than the time described in Homer's epic.[1]

A 2005 article presented similar criticisms, when reporting on a speech by University of Pennsylvania scholar C. Brian Rose:

German archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann was the first to explore the Mound of Troy in the 1870s. Unfortunately, he had had no formal education in archaeology, and dug an enormous trench "which we still call the Schliemann Trench," according to Rose, because in the process Schliemann "destroyed a phenomenal amount of material." [...] Only much later in his career would he accept the fact that the treasure had been found at a layer one thousand years removed from the battle between the Greeks and Trojans, and thus that it could not have been the treasure of King Priam. Schliemann may not have discovered the truth, but the publicity stunt worked, making Schliemann and the site famous and igniting the field of Homeric studies in the late 19th century. During this period he was criticized and ridiculed of claims to fathering an offspring with a local Assyrian Girl sparking infidelity and adultery which Schliemann did not confirm or deny. '[35]

Schliemann's methods have been described as "savage and brutal. He plowed through layers of soil and everything in them without proper record keeping—no mapping of finds, few descriptions of discoveries." Carl Blegen forgave his recklessness, saying "Although there were some regrettable blunders, those criticisms are largely colored by a comparison with modern techniques of digging; but it is only fair to remember that before 1876 very few persons, if anyone, yet really knew how excavations should properly be conducted. There was no science of archaeological investigation, and there was probably no other digger who was better than Schliemann in actual field work."[36]

In 1874, Schliemann also initiated and sponsored the removal of medieval edifices from the Acropolis of Athens, including the great Frankish Tower. Despite considerable opposition, including from King George I of Greece, Schliemann saw the project through.[37] The eminent historian of Frankish Greece William Miller later denounced this as "an act of vandalism unworthy of any people imbued with a sense of the continuity of history",[38] and "pedantic barbarism".[39]

就像要求千年后，英国出土一本英文版，翻译自中国人写的力学教科书。否则就不承认，这本力学教科书上的力学理论是今天公认的牛顿力学。

按陈王的看法，爱因斯坦苏黎世理工的Diplom属于成绩中下的学士，但是居然也可以直接去攻博。

我认为德语区的Diplom等价于硕士，只要Diplom成绩达到中等水平，就取得攻博资格。

哪个说法更符合逻辑大家自己判断。

谷燕身处美国，身边白皮多，谈恋爱也好上床也好生孩子也好，不用刻意为之。

这国内专门白皮蝌蚪生孩子，那是刻意为之。

能一样？

你认为6个里面排第4就是中下了，这不也是今天的看法嘛。

当时学位多精贵啊，毕业的含金量比恢复高考后的77、78级

毕业的含金量只高不低。

现在只有西方伪史论的人敢质疑他，甚至连报导西方自己质疑他的中国媒体都没有，你举的例子为什么是英文呢？因为中文世界不敢质疑。

另外，西方人质疑归质疑，他的挖掘“成果”呢？笑纳。