Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?

This board is open for all subject matters. Post information and discussion materials about open-debate and censorship on other boards (including this one) here. Memory Hole 2 is a RODOH subforum for alternate perspectives.
User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 28129
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?

Post by Nessie »

Anyone got an answer?
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.


Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH, kindly contact Scott Smith. All contributions are welcome!


Werd
Posts: 9555
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?

Post by Werd »

Nessie wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:06 pm
Anyone got an answer?

I remember the last time Nessie got spanked.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=4119&start=70

Here are some other classics.

Green and Markiewicz destroyed.
viewtopic.php?p=145402#p145402

Nessie's general abuse of philosophy.
viewtopic.php?p=145402#p145402

Mattogno destroys Pressac's criminal traces (Siberian Exile. Be logged in to read it)
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3716

Nessie's reliance on fallacies and misunderstanding of cremation documents
viewtopic.php?p=145022#p145022

Which when pointed out to him, he always has an ad hoc ready!
viewtopic.php?p=139418#p139418
Last edited by Werd on Tue Mar 17, 2020 10:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Werd
Posts: 9555
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?

Post by Werd »

Is Nessie Destroying RODOH

A collection of random bullshit arguments from Nessie that ultimately went nowhere.
page 11.
viewtopic.php?p=125793#p125793
viewtopic.php?p=125794#p125794
page 13
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2904&start=120


The lies and distortions of Miklos Nyiszli
page 17
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2904&start=160
page 18
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2904&start=170
page 19
viewtopic.php?p=129131#p129131
viewtopic.php?p=129135#p129135
Page 20
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2904&start=190
Page 21
viewtopic.php?p=129167#p129167
viewtopic.php?p=129175#p129175
viewtopic.php?p=129183#p129183
Page 22
viewtopic.php?p=129196#p129196
viewtopic.php?p=129200#p129200

Nessie distorts rules of logic in an attempt to refute Rudolf a-priori
Page 23
viewtopic.php?p=129226#p129226

Circular reasoning about super magical Birkenau muffles
Page 32
viewtopic.php?p=129573#p129573

Oven cremations and abuse/distortion of documents by Nessie
Page 39
viewtopic.php?p=129905#p129905
Page 42
viewtopic.php?p=130002#p130002

Nessie ignores plain English from a rabbi's own mouth about Israel must remain Jewish but Europe should switch to a new majority and keep taking in Muslims and Africans so that European whites become a minority in their own land.
Page 50
viewtopic.php?p=135914#p135914

Nessie then playing dumb about not knowing where other direct quotes were given to prove my point - and thus him wrong and a liar.
Page 51
viewtopic.php?p=135990#p135990
Page 53
viewtopic.php?p=135995#p135995

Nessie falsely says I hate providing links and quotes for claims I make about what people allegedly say. That's just a cover after I expose how he has ignored what was in front of him the whole time.
Page 53
viewtopic.php?p=135996#p135996
viewtopic.php?p=135998#p135998
viewtopic.php?p=136000#p136000

Nessie shifts the goal posts, distorts context and equivocates
Page 54
viewtopic.php?p=136004#p136004
viewtopic.php?p=136005#p136005

Nessie saying I didn't give links and quotes to a certain thing at a certain time when I clearly did.
Page 56
viewtopic.php?p=136034#p136034
viewtopic.php?p=136042#p136042
Page 57
viewtopic.php?p=136045#p136045
viewtopic.php?p=136005#p136005
viewtopic.php?p=136067#p136067

After moving the goal posts and having THAT meta-debate to waste time, he tried to create ANOTHER meta-debate!
Page 58
viewtopic.php?p=136099#p136099
viewtopic.php?p=136100#p136100
viewtopic.php?p=136147#p136147
viewtopic.php?p=136173#p136173
Page 59
viewtopic.php?p=136230#p136230
viewtopic.php?p=136231#p136231
Page 66
viewtopic.php?p=137552#p137552
viewtopic.php?p=137553#p137553

Nessie continues to lie about not reading something directly in front of him.
Page 67
viewtopic.php?p=137613#p137613

Now he claims he missed it because he "skims" my posts. He always has an ad hoc, or excuse for his bullshit!
Page 68
viewtopic.php?p=137637#p137637

Nessie's claims that he dug his heels in and was waiting for me to provide direct quotes, because I allegedly gave no leads or links or quotes to such things, shows to be another bold faced lie from a dishonest troll! Observe my reductio ad absurdum that direct quotes are not actually direct quotes. I.E. Nessie claims I provided none, but he did see them and I caught him dodging them. He was just lying again to frustrate the issue!

Page 72
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2904&start=710
Page 73
viewtopic.php?p=137795#p137795
Page 74
viewtopic.php?p=137801#p137801
viewtopic.php?p=137805#p137805
Page 75
viewtopic.php?p=137832#p137832
viewtopic.php?p=137834#p137834
viewtopic.php?p=137844#p137844

Direct quotes are not actually direct quotes. Or it could be that A is A and Nessie just ignores what's in front of him or conveniently "skims" my posts and accidentally missed direct quotes every single time. LOL.
Page 81
viewtopic.php?p=138072#p138072
Page 82.
viewtopic.php?p=138080#p138080

Nessie caught lying about Thomas Kues. Kues didn't really give up revisionism in his heart.
Page 83
viewtopic.php?p=138125#p138125
Page 84
viewtopic.php?p=138190#p138190
Page 85
viewtopic.php?p=138260#p138260

Nessie back to equivocating in order to lie that cremation documents allegedly back up Tauber's wild numbers. He then tried to disown that claim, and got mad that I exposed his flip flopping.
Page 99 in toto.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2904&start=980

Nessie's precious October 30 and June 28 documents are still mere guesswork and theoretical projections written by non experts in the Central Construction Office of Auschwitz.

Page 110
viewtopic.php?p=139451#p139451
Last edited by Werd on Wed Mar 18, 2020 3:05 am, edited 3 times in total.

Werd
Posts: 9555
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?

Post by Werd »

Since a lot of those links lead to Siberian Exile, it's a good idea for the interested reader to be logged in. That's the only way they will see the bullshit that Nessie has flooded this board with.

Werd
Posts: 9555
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?

Post by Werd »

Nessie wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:06 pm
Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?
I think you're referring to the holocaust claims since it's illegal to be a revisionist and publicly state your views about lack of gas chambers, a final solution plan, etc without going to jail or getting fined in many European countries and Canada and Australia. We see what cowardice the other side has when journalists like David Baddiel, won't dare mention the big dogs of revisionism and instead pick on bloggers.
viewtopic.php?p=165976#p165976

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 6330
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:06 pm
Anyone got an answer?
One can assume this little outpouring is in relation to this post elsewhere.
I got a message that my posting restrictions at RODOH had been lifted. I did one post which did not break any rules and promptly got the restrictions imposed again. Depth Check has turned RODOH into CODOH.
It is this poster who has turned every single thread into a "we against you" mentality, using the "god of the gaps" reasoning against missing people. Just like creationists say because something is not known god did it, the poster says you do not know something therefore they were gassed. On the probability that the Soviets spent 40 years or so hiding evidence and planting their own the question has little relevance. The reality is that Hoaxers have the legal protections.

I do believe this is another way to discuss the H, quite sneaky.


𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑
Alle Trolljuden werden ignoriert

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 28129
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?

Post by Nessie »

Werd wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:26 pm
Nessie wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:06 pm
Anyone got an answer?

I remember the last time Nessie got spanked.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=4119&start=70

Here are some other classics.

Green and Markiewicz destroyed.
viewtopic.php?p=145402#p145402

Nessie's general abuse of philosophy.
viewtopic.php?p=145402#p145402

Mattogno destroys Pressac's criminal traces (Siberian Exile. Be logged in to read it)
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3716

Nessie's reliance on fallacies and misunderstanding of cremation documents
viewtopic.php?p=145022#p145022

Which when pointed out to him, he always has an ad hoc ready!
viewtopic.php?p=139418#p139418
They are all examples of how deniers have dodged evidencing what happened. Instead, you think up ways to try to discredit the evidence for gassings and then illogically and idiotically declare, therefore no one was gassed and they all left the camps.

Why should I believe what you cannot evidence?
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 28129
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?

Post by Nessie »

Werd wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 10:21 pm
Since a lot of those links lead to Siberian Exile, it's a good idea for the interested reader to be logged in. That's the only way they will see the bullshit that Nessie has flooded this board with.
As an interested reader, why do you not quote when you link? You make a claim, you provide a link and then that link leads to a random post where the connection with your claim is not clear at all.

You will dodge answering my question, so I will answer it for you. You refuse to link and quote because you cannot back up your claims with quotes. You are creating a deception. The bullshit is yours.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 28129
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?

Post by Nessie »

Werd wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 10:34 pm
Nessie wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:06 pm
Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?
I think you're referring to the holocaust claims since it's illegal to be a revisionist and publicly state your views about lack of gas chambers, a final solution plan, etc without going to jail or getting fined in many European countries and Canada and Australia. We see what cowardice the other side has when journalists like David Baddiel, won't dare mention the big dogs of revisionism and instead pick on bloggers.
viewtopic.php?p=165976#p165976
The problem that you fail to acknowledge, is that denial cannot evidence that there were no gas chambers at the AR camps and inside the kremas. The reason why denial is protected here and on other denier run forums is that lack of evidence. Deniers who run the forums refuse to allow denial to be questioned and asked to provide evidence.

Denial has been made illegal is some countries, because of that lack of evidence. Your inability to provide evidence from witnesses, documents, physical items, forensics and other sources of what did happen and the subsequent mass departures of people on daily transports to be fed, clothed and accommodated elsewhere, is why your claims are illegal. You are spreading fake, unevidenced history.

The "big dogs" of "revisionism" have accessed archives and original sources and they have found no evidence as to what did happen.

The denier claim of no gassings without leaving behind any evidence for that, is physically impossible to have happened. The reason why claims of gassings at many camps were dismissed is because no one could find any evidence that gassings took place there. Instead, what happened to those people can be evidenced. They either died at the camp or they left and we know that because of evidence from witnesses, documents etc.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Turnagain
Posts: 7271
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?

Post by Turnagain »

LOL! Nessie considers claims by alleged eyewitnesses as evidence as long as he agrees with what they say. If he doesn't agree with what they say they're a bunch of dipsticks who don't know their arse from their elbow and their testimony is nothing but "exaggerations" or "hyperbole" or just a (heh-heh) "little mistake".

Oh well, holyhoax discussion is forbidden with Nessie but I just couldn't resist sticking a pin in Nessie's "evidence" balloon. Wait for it, folks, Nessie's next challenge will be, "Where did they gooooo?". So it goes in holyhoax la-la land,

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Nessie and 4 guests