I wander what should historians do?
It is common there are different opinions about the same event in the history.
It seems that some historians are creating history rather than pursuing the truth.

People have been creating history since history began. Its up to you to gather the facts, arange then in the right order and pick out the dirty laundry.
If you do your research well, you can see the truth between the hipe.

'''Dont always look for the easy answer, some one else already has, look, listen, and research to find the truth"""

You also have to keep in mind that historians often do not have all the facts and have to speculate or extrapolate based on what is known. Sometimes the records passed down by the people who were actually there are biased, or have been edited by others, and the historian has to make a best guess as to where the truth is.

And, yes, sometimes historians have their own point to make on an issue and are biased. As Truthismyaim indicates, it is best to get a variety of input. If it's a really an important subject there is usually a lot of information to choose from.

I agree mostly with the previously offered perspectives and will add my own. What an individual learns about the history surrounding a particular event is a product of the cultural source from which the information is obtained. It seems that in History all perspectives are subjective. An example would be a Native American learning about Custer's Last Stand. If he were reading a book written by a member of the Anglo-culture then it would be a "massacre". If he were reading a book written by a member of a Native American Tribe it would have been a "Great Victory" I have learned to take a particular approach to matters of history that has served me well in sifting through all the cultural bias. That is to consider the possible motives that each side could have for distorting the truth. The side with a greater invested interest in distortion is usually the lesser quality source.