Quotation Marks Policy

Have you ever wondered what quotation marks really mean on this site? Unlike ordinary usage, my quotation marks signal something important about the content: it is not necessarily true, and I often disagree with it completely.

On this site, quotation marks—whether single ' ', double " ", triple """ """, or even quadruple """" """"—are used to indicate varying degrees of disagreement with the enclosed content.

The more quotation marks used, the more academic or official the statement is, and the stronger my disagreement tends to be. These marks can appear on official statements, academic claims, myths, opinions, or previous content that I include to clarify, analyze, or challenge. Regardless of the type or number of marks, the content should not be taken at face value: it may contradict reality, be part of official narratives, or require critical interpretation.

Sometimes you may notice ' ', " ", """ """, or even more marks placed around an entire paragraph. This usually happens when the content is particularly formal, academic, or official, and I want to make clear that I do not endorse it.

You should also know that anything you find between my quotation marks referring to “history” — especially events said to have happened two thousand years ago or earlier — is considered entirely false or highly doubtful. Much that is officially accepted as “historical fact,” the so-called foundations of civilization and science, is viewed by me as a constructed narrative.

Columbus did not discover America. The airplane was not invented by two brothers. The same applies to almost every cornerstone story we are taught to accept without question.

For me, the world truly began in 1950. That was the moment when this version of reality was set in motion—when everything before it was systematically erased, rewritten, and presented as the primitive past of an enlightened present. Humanity was taught to see its ancestors as ignorant, while the true record of who they were was hidden or destroyed.

If you pause and reverse the entire narrative—seeing the so-called “ancient world” as advanced and enlightened rather than primitive, and viewing everything from 1950 onward as the beginning of a new chapter after a global reset—you may begin to glimpse a small part of what I believe. It was not the continuation of history; it was the reconstruction of a controlled version of it, carefully designed to replace what truly came before.

It is important to note that the reasoning used to dismiss claims like “everything before 1950 is false” as merely “exaggerated or unprovable by historical standards” is itself what I call an artificial academic logic. These standards and methods are constructed to appear rigorous, yet they often function to keep everyone aligned with the official narrative. What is presented as “evidence” or “method” can serve more to preserve the accepted version of events than to uncover the full truth.

This website is almost entirely academic in nature—academic in tone and presentation. Most of the information you read here would appear “official” if taken without considering the quotation marks. However, whenever I disagree with an official idea, statement, or historical claim, I mark it with ' ' or " " quotation marks as explained above. These marks are not decorative—they signal my conscious disagreement and invite the reader to examine the content critically rather than accept it as unquestionable fact.

It should be clarified that, in some cases, we may not repeat quotation marks extensively within an article. This does not imply agreement or endorsement of that content. Rather, it is a practical decision to avoid harming the article’s presentation or archival, as maintaining the site is part of earning a livelihood. In other words, the lack of repeated quotation marks is a strategic choice, not a reflection of acceptance or belief in the content.

In short: when you see quotation marks here, approach the content with a critical eye. They are a deliberate signal that the information may be inverted, misleading, or controversial, and should be considered carefully within its context.