There are no facts, only opinions

After reading the comment below in response to my post on the Azeris in Iran I responded with some exasperation. Sometimes you have a "Eureka!" moment, and this is one of them. Even if I agree with John that a positivistic project is near impossible in history because of the nature of the topic, I do think that some of the distortions that I see individuals engaging in are egregious. Meta-facts, conclusions which are extracted from the broad trends of history, maybe disputable, but specific facts can be quite solid. I have a passion for various historical topics, most of them rather distant from the modern era. My passion is not utilitarian in that it is a means toward any end, it is the end. That being said, when it comes to the Azeri question I've done a fair amount of research on Central Asian history, and the Turks, and to a lesser extent Persia. As a lay person I know my shit. The commenter below has read my weblogs for years now (I've seen the referrals from his weblog), so I assume that I could attain some credibility, but obviously I haven't. People can say whatever the shit they want based on whatever data they have on hand, ideology and personal credulity is king over all. Newton might have been the last of the Sumerians, but the age of magical thinking continues.... Everywhere, everywhere, the is of thought overwhelms the is of nature, because ought is leading by the leash. In truth, is does not dictate ought, ought demands is.