How many times history is destroyed and placed with lies?

Did just read the topic title, but:
"History is written by the victors"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#The_bombings_as_war_crimes

"Let me say only this much to the moral issue involved: Suppose Germany had developed two bombs before we had any bombs. And suppose Germany had dropped one bomb, say, on Rochester and the other on Buffalo, and then having run out of bombs she would have lost the war. Can anyone doubt that we would then have defined the dropping of atomic bombs on cities as a war crime, and that we would have sentenced the Germans who were guilty of this crime to death at Nuremberg and hanged them?"

And i did find irony in this part:
These observations have caused Michael Walzer to state the incident was an act of "war terrorism: the effort to kill civilians in such large numbers that their government is forced to surrender. Hiroshima seems to me the classic case."[116] This type of claim eventually prompted historian Robert P. Newman, a supporter of the bombings, to say "there can be justified terror, as there can be just wars."

So yeah, it happen all time.

just a balpark estimate of how much of the worlds "history" is acurate

20xx-present: all or most of it (except in rare cases of deliberate manipulation in dictatorship states) thank the FSM for the internets over 2 billion posible points of view on an issue (and at least 1% of those is archived somewhere)

2000-~1950: major events are accurate and recorded in newspapers, higher precision information is not available other then through unreliable first hand acounts and (sealed/"lost") paper records stored by goverments and large corporations

~1950-~1700 writen records can be taken as accurate only if they have been coroberated by atleast 1 other independent source from the time, large use of cencorship and obfuscation of information occured. archeological data can be taken as accurate if it has been coroberated by writen records

~1700-~500 period during wich larga amounts of information was actively destroyed and/or rewriten only major events can be taken as accurate, and even then would require coroberation by at least archeological evidence and other independent sources

~500-~1000bc information is more sparse, but of marginaly higher accuracy, large segments are encoded using allegory and myth

~1000bc-XXbc only sparse first hand written accounts, and archeological records exist

thats my general guidline
tl:dr
almost evrything you read in the history books is a lie
alot of things you read in reaserch reports are just guesses (but are usualy still MUCH beter then the actual history books)

an example:
hitler was a man (true)
hitler was insane(or the like) (probably not)
hitler was a charismatic leader (true)
hitler killed 7million jews (true(ish) was probably manipulated in some way)
hitler was the worst war criminal of that era (false, see russia, USA)
hitler could have won WW2/taken over the world/europe/expanded more then he did (extremly unlikley, due to the large scale overexpansion mass similtaneous revolts from every anexed country were likely the instant the war ended, or it would have teken centuries to achive total conquest)

I'm just going to say this:
"History is an argument"

In the video that i posted where it has english translations it sayis exactly that my country is not derived from the Romans, as World Historians say. We have clear evidence that we descend from Thracians, Thracians that are the founding fathers of Romans. And yet world wide historians lie to us in face even if we have clear EVIDENCE. So much unfair in this world.

Yes we have evidence that are researched from different countries.We even have the oldest writings in history.The Tartaria stons, even older then sumerians and no1 accepts that.