You coloured in an area with no trees the same colour as areas with trees.theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:I didn't make an error. I've explained it to you in kindergarten terms already what areas I coloured, so you can't still be misunderstanding something so simple; you're choosing to lie about my images.Nessie wrote:From the aerial photo C does not have many trees in an area you coloured the same as areas which did have many trees. I am pointing out where you made an error so as to show you are discredited in your claims.
You also make minor errors which means you are discredited. She labelled part of a shower and the doorway that lead to the actual gas chamber. The shower before hand is integral to the gassing process.theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:Even if you weren't lying and I had made an error, this would still be a false equivalency. CSC labelled a shower as "gas chambers"; if a revisionist/denier made that error anti-deniers would, rightfully, point out the mistake as indicative of their shallow knowledge.Nessie wrote:The same tactic you use to try and discredit others such as C S-C. For example when you commented on her labelling a photo as the gas chamber at Majdanek because it was taken from the shower room and showed the doorway leading to the gas chamber.
I can. I can also see from this series of images of camp fences that posts with wire stretched between them is by far the most common fence used by the Nazistheblackrabbitofinlé wrote:Nessie wrote:I see fence poles with wire stretched between them as shown with small black horizontal lines at regular points on the poles.
Can you see the telephone wire too?
I see no wires or "small black horizontal lines at regular points on the poles"
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=conce ... 57&bih=613
How is saying "A fence under construction..." in any way suggestive of me not accepting what was being discussed was fence posts?theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:Nessie wrote:You claimed I had suggested they were not fence posts, which I have not done. Strawman. Just as my made up a strawman over a telephone in the gas chamber, which had Werd calling you out for a "cheap shot". Apologise to me for your strawmen.
a. You're reluctance to quote my alleged strawman speaks volumes. I'll do it for you; this is how this "strawman" occurred:
BRoI - "I would say that there is a fence under construction in the Franz photo. It should be more apparent after viewing my recreation of the scene in sketchup"
Nessie - "A fence under construction that shows up in an aerial photo would be clear in a ground photo as close as Franz was."
BRoI - "What's you're explanation for these 5 poles if you don't accept they're fence posts?"
Nessie - "I do accept they are fence posts and that is a fence, stop making up strawmen."
BRoI - *baffled at the childishness, little did he know that it would get worse; a discussion on the poles would descend into a farcical back n' forth about spurious claims about fallacies*
You coloured in an area with no trees as if it had trees. Just accept your mistake and recolour the image.theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:b. The telephone reference aimed at Alex Bay—who claims that building was a gas chamber—was obviously hyperbolic. I'm well aware Bay doesn't claim there were telephones in the gas chambers. Werd's stupider than you if in addition he thinks this was aimed at you:c. You're lying about how I labelled the map, you owe me apology for that.There are also telephone poles in the photograph. Why, Alex Bay, would the nazis need a telephone in a gas chamber?
I'll let you off apologising for your spurious claims about fallacies, I'm sympathetic to your evident shortcomings [see your comment on trees not growing in 14-17 months below ]
How high is a "tall but short" fence? It looks like this one at Majdanek;theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:I'm looking at the same pic with a 1920 x 1080 resolution monitor and don't see them. What size are you using? Anything smaller, well, frankly you're seeing things and need to clean your screen.There are horizontal black lines on each post showing where the wires are on them. They are completed fences made of wire between posts.
But assuming you're right for argument's sake; what do you suppose was the point of such a tall but short fence in T2?
OK, so now you say it is possibly not a fence at all, further discrediting your claim the aerial and the excavator photo are of the same building.theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:Nessie wrote:I am pointing out that the fence you have marked in green is not the same as the fence in the excavator photo.
It's hard to be certain what those objects are in either photos. In the gif I drew that "fence" as the frame of a structure under construction.
This is an assumption; "Indeed, but the excavator photos was taken 14-17 months before the aerial photos, and there is clearly a fence under construction in the excavator photo which would have been completed before the the aerial photos were taken." because it is not accompanied by any evidence. You are now admitting the green line may not be a fence.theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:Yet he doesn't attempt to demonstrate how I'm supposedly do this.Nessie wrote:You are making assumptions about the time line.
The original 1936 map shows no trees. So unless you can prove trees were then planted, they grow to the height in the Franz photo in 6 years and were then cut down so that the area again had no trees when the aerial photo was taken, you are making lots of assumptions.theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:FFS! The aerial photo was take 14-17 months AFTER Franz took the excavator photo.Nessie wrote:I can show trees close behind the excavator photo building and none in the areal photo. They did not grow in 14-17 months.
The green line butts onto another identical line which goes all the way around the building. There is nothing to account for the other line in the excavator photo. It is not as angled as the fence in the excavator photo.theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:Go on then, "show" it.Nessie wrote:I can show the fence you marked in green in the aerial photo is not the same as the one in the excavator photo.