Originally Posted by Out of the Box
No, I don't know the different between both. That's why I started this thread. From a conspiratory point of view, "history" and "alternate history" seem to cover pretty much the same topics.
I just see no reason to distinguish "history" from "alternate history" on a conspiracy forum, nor do I see any objective criteria on how to seperate both.
I can't imagine why it would anger you so that the ADMINSTRATOR of this forum has found it prudent to add an "Alternative History" section to the forum. In my opinion, seperating "history" and "alternate history" will only reduce the quality of this forum by decreasing the exposure of some topics.
Talk about splitting hairs, but this way there is a forum for those who want to discuss conventional history, and one for those who want to discuss theoretical or revisionist history. Its pretty basic.