The logical flaws in denial.

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
Post Reply
User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29914
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:15 am
Nessie wrote:
You have no evidence to back that claim up.
Uh-huh and if a Jew said that he escaped from Auschwitz when he was a little boy by riding his tricycle to the moon, you would claim that I don't have any evidence for calling him a liar.
Your logical fallacy is strawman. ALL of the witnesses who worked at the Auschwitz-Birkenau kremas state that they were used for gassings. There are documents referring to construction work to build gas chambers. The people who did escape told the truth that there were gassings, because there is evidence to back them up.

If one witness said his escape was by bicycle to the moon, I would dismiss his evidence. There are plenty of other witnesses. That is your problem. You take what a very few witnesses said and you ignore the rest.

You also ignore that it is impossible to ride a bike to the moon, but it is possible to build a gas chamber.
Until you can produce proof beyond reasonable doubt, it's valid to say...

No cremains, no graves, no holyhoax. Finito. End of story.
Your fallacy is reversing the burden of proof. Your argument is the same as;

"Until you can produce proof beyond reasonable doubt, it's valid to say...
Yes cremians, yes graves, yes gassings. Finito. End of story."

...and I expect you to prove me wrong by you showing me the physical and other evidence to prove there are no cremains and graves at TII and there never were any gassings.

You make this too easy for me. Please keep the fallacies going, or else have the honesty to admit you are wrong.
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.

SUPPORT RODOH!
Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!


Turnagain
Posts: 8823
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Turnagain »

Nessie wrote:
If one witness said his escape was by bicycle to the moon, I would dismiss his evidence. There are plenty of other witnesses.
Really? There's just oodles of believable holyhoax eyewitnesses? I named and quoted ten (10) eyewitness Jews who claimed that the gas chamber was hermetically sealed. Four of them claimed that it also functioned as a vacuum chamber. Name and quote ten (10) Jews who tell believable stories about the gas/vacuum chambers, the mass graves and how they were excavated or how the magic Jew barbeque functioned. Links, please since you can't be trusted not to cherry-pick the testimony. And remember...

No cremains, no graves, no holyhoax. Finito. End of story.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29914
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Fri Dec 13, 2019 9:59 am
Nessie wrote:
If one witness said his escape was by bicycle to the moon, I would dismiss his evidence. There are plenty of other witnesses.
Really? There's just oodles of believable holyhoax eyewitnesses? I named and quoted ten (10) eyewitness Jews
No you did not. You included people who were not at TII when it was open!!!
... who claimed that the gas chamber was hermetically sealed.
Which means the doors and vents were hermetically sealed, not the entire chamber, since it pipes into it for the gas. The witnesses did not mean the whole chamber was hermetically sealed, since they also spoke about gas going into the chamber. A true hermetic seal would mean nothing could get in or out at all. How many times do you need that to be explained to you?
Four of them claimed that it also functioned as a vacuum chamber.
They said that, but none actually saw it happen. They were speaking about something they had heard about and thought had happened at some point with one of the gas chambers. There was more than one gas chamber.
Name and quote ten (10) Jews who tell believable stories about the gas/vacuum chambers, the mass graves and how they were excavated or how the magic Jew barbeque functioned. Links, please since you can't be trusted not to cherry-pick the testimony. And remember...

No cremains, no graves, no holyhoax. Finito. End of story.
The list of witnesses is here;

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=3196

D1) Treblinka Nazis :


1) Franz Stangl 1970 - Dussledorf
Camp commander Sobibor and Treblinka
2) Kurt Franz 1964 - Dussledorf
deputy camp commander. 'the doll'
3) Willi Mentz 1964 - Dussledorf
'the gunman of Treblinka' - 'frankenstein'
4) Heinrich Mattes 1964 - Dussledorf
'doctor'
5) Otto von Horn 1964 - Dussledorf
1990's - IvanTerrible
(witness)
6) Erwin Lambert 1964 - Dussledorf
'the flying architect'
7) Franz Suchomel 1964 - Dussledorf
8) August Miete 1964 - Dussledorf
'Angel of death'
9) Gustav Munzberger 1964 - Dussledorf
10) Otto Stadie 1964 - Dussledorf
11) Rudolf Hoess
Auschwitz camp commander
12) Dr Irmfried Erbel arrested jan 48
First commander of camp - replaced for incompetence
13) Erich Fuchs
based at sobibor

D2) Treblinka Ukranian camp staff :

1) Feodor Federenko 1.pre-trial testimony
25.05.76 hartford usa
2.denaturalisation
USA june 78
3. Russian Trial - 1950?
2) Nikolay Shalayev ( guard and motorist) 1. protokol doprosa -
18.12.50 (federenko trial?)
2. Jack Reimer trial -
usa 2004 - GX-126
3) Ivan Semyonovich Shevchenko 1. protokol doprosa -
08.09.44.
2. GARF 7445-2-34 p19
4) Pavel Leleko protokol doprosa -
20.02.45.
5) Nikolai Malagon 1. interrogation -
18.03.78 russia
(for demjanuk trial ?)
6) Prokofij Ryabtsev 1.protokol doprosa -
03.02.65.
2. Jack Reimer trial -
usa 2004 - GX-121
7) Georgij Aleksandr Skidan 1. 26.05.50
2. Jack Reimer trial -
usa 2004 - GX-141

D3) Treblinka - Jewish inmates :

1) Jankiel Wiernik - 8/42-8/43 revolt Polish Commission 1946
Eichmann Trial - 1961
2) Chil Rajchman - 9/42-8/43 revolt Polish Commission 1946
(Yechiel Reichman) Demjanuk Trial - USA 1981
Demjanuk Trial - Israel 1988
YVT - 03/3816
3) Jerzy Rajgrotski -9/42-8/43 revolt jewish historical institute
1958 no25 106-108
4) Sonia Lewkowicz - 12/42-8/43 revolt Federenko Trial - USA 1978
Demjanuk Trial - USA 1981
YVT - 03/4181
5) Abraham Goldfarb - 8/42 - 8/43 revolt Protokol doprosa - 21.09.44
GARF 7445-2-134 P31
YVT - 03/1846
6) Chaim Sztajer -9/42 - 8/43 revolt Demjanuk Trial - Israel 1988

7) Pinchas Epstein - 9/42-8/43 revolt Demjanuk Trial - Israel 1988
Eichmann Trial - 1961
8) Samuel Rajzman - 9/42-8/43 Polish Commission 1946
note - mainly hearsay nuremberg - 1946
Yad Vashem Testimony
Federenko Trial - USA 1978
1964 Dussledorf
report 1944
YVT 03/547
9) Eliyahu Rosenberg - 9/42-8/43 revolt Statement Vienna 1947
Demjanuk Trial - USA 1981
Eichmann Trial - 1961
YVA 03/4039
10) Abraham Bomba - 9/42 - 12/42 escaped
11) Abraham Kaszepicki - 8/42-9/42 for 18 days escaped report dec 42
12) Mendel Korytnicki - ?? Protokol doprosa - 23.09.44
GARF 7445-2-134 P56r
13) David Milgroim - 1942 escaped after a week report made in slovakia 8/43
note - unsure if hearsay OSS? In istanbul recd 1944
14) Leon Finklestein - 7/42 - 8/43 revolt Polish Commission 1946

That some said things you do not think are possible to have happened, such as using hermetic seals as part of the construction, does not therefore mean all of the witnesses lied.

You use of fallacies is because you have no evidence. Why should anyone 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
Huntinger
Posts: 8166
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh.Österreichisches Deutsch
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Fri Dec 13, 2019 12:04 pm
The list of witnesses is here;

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=3196

D1) Treblinka Nazis :


1) Franz Stangl 1970 - Dussledorf
Camp commander Sobibor and Treblinka
2) Kurt Franz 1964 - Dussledorf
deputy camp commander. 'the doll'
3) Willi Mentz 1964 - Dussledorf
'the gunman of Treblinka' - 'frankenstein'
4) Heinrich Mattes 1964 - Dussledorf
'doctor'
5) Otto von Horn 1964 - Dussledorf
1990's - IvanTerrible
(witness)
6) Erwin Lambert 1964 - Dussledorf
'the flying architect'
7) Franz Suchomel 1964 - Dussledorf
8) August Miete 1964 - Dussledorf
'Angel of death'
9) Gustav Munzberger 1964 - Dussledorf
10) Otto Stadie 1964 - Dussledorf
11) Rudolf Hoess
Auschwitz camp commander
12) Dr Irmfried Erbel arrested jan 48
First commander of camp - replaced for incompetence
13) Erich Fuchs
based at sobibor

D2) Treblinka Ukranian camp staff :

1) Feodor Federenko 1.pre-trial testimony
25.05.76 hartford usa
2.denaturalisation
USA june 78
3. Russian Trial - 1950?
2) Nikolay Shalayev ( guard and motorist) 1. protokol doprosa -
18.12.50 (federenko trial?)
2. Jack Reimer trial -
usa 2004 - GX-126
3) Ivan Semyonovich Shevchenko 1. protokol doprosa -
08.09.44.
2. GARF 7445-2-34 p19
4) Pavel Leleko protokol doprosa -
20.02.45.
5) Nikolai Malagon 1. interrogation -
18.03.78 russia
(for demjanuk trial ?)
6) Prokofij Ryabtsev 1.protokol doprosa -
03.02.65.
2. Jack Reimer trial -
usa 2004 - GX-121
7) Georgij Aleksandr Skidan 1. 26.05.50
2. Jack Reimer trial -
usa 2004 - GX-141

D3) Treblinka - Jewish inmates :

1) Jankiel Wiernik - 8/42-8/43 revolt Polish Commission 1946
Eichmann Trial - 1961
2) Chil Rajchman - 9/42-8/43 revolt Polish Commission 1946
(Yechiel Reichman) Demjanuk Trial - USA 1981
Demjanuk Trial - Israel 1988
YVT - 03/3816
3) Jerzy Rajgrotski -9/42-8/43 revolt jewish historical institute
1958 no25 106-108
4) Sonia Lewkowicz - 12/42-8/43 revolt Federenko Trial - USA 1978
Demjanuk Trial - USA 1981
YVT - 03/4181
5) Abraham Goldfarb - 8/42 - 8/43 revolt Protokol doprosa - 21.09.44
GARF 7445-2-134 P31
YVT - 03/1846
6) Chaim Sztajer -9/42 - 8/43 revolt Demjanuk Trial - Israel 1988

7) Pinchas Epstein - 9/42-8/43 revolt Demjanuk Trial - Israel 1988
Eichmann Trial - 1961
8) Samuel Rajzman - 9/42-8/43 Polish Commission 1946
note - mainly hearsay nuremberg - 1946
Yad Vashem Testimony
Federenko Trial - USA 1978
1964 Dussledorf
report 1944
YVT 03/547
9) Eliyahu Rosenberg - 9/42-8/43 revolt Statement Vienna 1947
Demjanuk Trial - USA 1981
Eichmann Trial - 1961
YVA 03/4039
10) Abraham Bomba - 9/42 - 12/42 escaped
11) Abraham Kaszepicki - 8/42-9/42 for 18 days escaped report dec 42
12) Mendel Korytnicki - ?? Protokol doprosa - 23.09.44
GARF 7445-2-134 P56r
13) David Milgroim - 1942 escaped after a week report made in slovakia 8/43
note - unsure if hearsay OSS? In istanbul recd 1944
14) Leon Finklestein - 7/42 - 8/43 revolt Polish Commission 1946
Mostly Juden or coereced and all under the domain of the Soviet sphere of influence. Testimony is of little value except academic interest on propaganda.

Die soziale Heimatpartei
𝖀𝖒𝖆𝖗𝖒𝖊 𝖉𝖆𝖘 𝕷𝖊𝖇𝖊𝖓, 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙 𝖆𝖚𝖘𝖇𝖊𝖚𝖙𝖊𝖓.
Amt IV

Turnagain
Posts: 8823
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Turnagain »

Nessie wrote:
No you did not. You included people who were not at TII when it was open!!!
Which of the people that I quoted wasn't an eyewitness?
Which means the doors and vents were hermetically sealed, not the entire chamber, since it pipes into it for the gas.
Attempted weasel dodge. FAIl!
They said that, but none actually saw it happen.
Of course they didn't see anyone get sucked to death. Just as they never saw anyone gassed with the exhaust from a Soviet tank's engine. The holyhoax is the big lie. Glad we can finally agree on that.
The list of witnesses is here...
I asked you for a list of Jew eyewitnesses and to quote what they said that you found believable. Oh well, I see that you included Rajchman, Rosenberg and Bomba as credible eyewitnesses. Rajchman claimed that he saw the blood of 250,000 Jews accidentally catch fire and burn for an entire night and the next day. He also claimed that the gas chamber functioned as a vacuum chamber. Do you find him to be a credible eyewitness?

Rosenberg testified that both the original gas/vacuum chamber and the newer one were both hermetically sealed before the victims were gassed. He testified to that under oath. Do you consider him to be a reliable eyewitness?

Bomba claimed to have cut women's hair inside the gas chamber. He also said that the gas chamber functioned as a vacuum chamber. Do you consider him reliable or are you going to claim that he just made a (heh-heh) little "mistake"?

Why do you include these people on your list of credible witnesses when you also claim that they're full of more shit than a Christmas goose? Are you going to try to excuse their clangers with your, "They just made some (heh-heh) little mistakes?". Where are your credible witnesses and links to their stories? Don't forget that...

No cremains, no graves, no holyhoax. Finito. End of story.

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 8166
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh.Österreichisches Deutsch
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Huntinger »

Turnagain wrote:
Fri Dec 13, 2019 5:32 pm
"They just made some (heh-heh) little mistakes?". Where are your credible witnesses and links to their stories? Don't forget that...
No cremains, no graves, no holyhoax. Finito. End of story.
I made a post the other day in response to an old thread, a very old thread. Nessie is going around in circles since at least 2014. Its first post when it put its pectorals to the keyboard is the following.
Nessie wrote:
Sun Mar 09, 2014 5:36 pm
I watched it and there is nothing new. It also falls at the main hurdle of not properly recognising Treblinka could refer to the labour camp (TI), the extermination camp (TII), the railway station and even Malkinia when it comes to transiting people.
This is reasoned and acceptable. I accept that Malkinia is indeed TII, the current TII is really TI. This is where it starts.
Nessie wrote:
Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:33 pm
Charles Traynor wrote:........ Sadly, rather than reaching for the stars our civilization is now being systematically destroyed and the majority of White Europeans living in urban areas fear for very their lives every time they leave their homes.

.........
Can you evidence that claim?

Die soziale Heimatpartei
𝖀𝖒𝖆𝖗𝖒𝖊 𝖉𝖆𝖘 𝕷𝖊𝖇𝖊𝖓, 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙 𝖆𝖚𝖘𝖇𝖊𝖚𝖙𝖊𝖓.
Amt IV

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29914
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain is trying to steer the topic away from the logical laws he relies upon, as he uses those very same logical flaws.

He only references a few witnesses, three in his last post above. He ignores all the other witnesses. It is not logical to claim that all the witnesses lied because of what some of them said. In particular, Turnagain ignores the Nazi German and Ukrainian testimony.

He then refuses to believe that witnesses make mistakes. That is a quite extraordinary claim, to say that witnesses either tell a completely accurate truthful narrative, or they lie through their teeth about the whole thing and they never make mistakes.

He also refuses to acknowledge that he is relying on translations from Polish, so we may be missing nuances or not understanding phrases that would make sense to a Pole.

Turnagain is using an argument from incredulity. He nit and cherry picks minor issues with witness testimony to claim that the witness lied and then he dismisses all of the witness evidence.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity

"personal incredulity
Because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it works, you made out like it's probably not true.
Complex subjects like biological evolution through natural selection require some amount of understanding before one is able to make an informed judgement about the subject at hand; this fallacy is usually used in place of that understanding."
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
Huntinger
Posts: 8166
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh.Österreichisches Deutsch
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 5:28 am
It is not logical to claim that all the witnesses lied because of what some of them said. In particular, Turnagain ignores the Nazi German and Ukrainian testimony.
Jude we are not in denial, we have a great idea of what really happened at the behest of Uncle Joe.
All of the witnesses were under the auspices of the Soviet Secret Police, the NKVD and other officials who could execute them or their families without any remorse. All of the Ukrainians and Germans who testified were also under the same jurisdiction. Not one of them gave their testimony or affidavit that was not forced or coerced. The Soviet Union in conjunction with the British Secret Service conspired to authorize the propaganda. What seems like suicides and executions, legal justice was in fact murder.
This is a conclusion after reading many posts here on this forum; the evidence is within these hallowed walls.

Die soziale Heimatpartei
𝖀𝖒𝖆𝖗𝖒𝖊 𝖉𝖆𝖘 𝕷𝖊𝖇𝖊𝖓, 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙 𝖆𝖚𝖘𝖇𝖊𝖚𝖙𝖊𝖓.
Amt IV

Turnagain
Posts: 8823
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Turnagain »

I wrote:
I asked you for a list of Jew eyewitnesses and to quote what they said that you found believable. Oh well, I see that you included Rajchman, Rosenberg and Bomba as credible eyewitnesses. Rajchman claimed that he saw the blood of 250,000 Jews accidentally catch fire and burn for an entire night and the next day. He also claimed that the gas chamber functioned as a vacuum chamber. Do you find him to be a credible eyewitness?

Rosenberg testified that both the original gas/vacuum chamber and the newer one were both hermetically sealed before the victims were gassed. He testified to that under oath. Do you consider him to be a reliable eyewitness?

Bomba claimed to have cut women's hair inside the gas chamber. He also said that the gas chamber functioned as a vacuum chamber. Do you consider him reliable or are you going to claim that he just made a (heh-heh) little "mistake"?
Those questions still stand, Nessie. Why don't you answer them? Remember...

No cremains, no graves, no holyhoax. Finito. End of story.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29914
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 6:56 am
I wrote:
I asked you for a list of Jew eyewitnesses and to quote what they said that you found believable. Oh well, I see that you included Rajchman, Rosenberg and Bomba as credible eyewitnesses. Rajchman claimed that he saw the blood of 250,000 Jews accidentally catch fire and burn for an entire night and the next day. He also claimed that the gas chamber functioned as a vacuum chamber. Do you find him to be a credible eyewitness?

Rosenberg testified that both the original gas/vacuum chamber and the newer one were both hermetically sealed before the victims were gassed. He testified to that under oath. Do you consider him to be a reliable eyewitness?

Bomba claimed to have cut women's hair inside the gas chamber. He also said that the gas chamber functioned as a vacuum chamber. Do you consider him reliable or are you going to claim that he just made a (heh-heh) little "mistake"?
Those questions still stand, Nessie. Why don't you answer them? Remember...

No cremains, no graves, no holyhoax. Finito. End of story.
I have repeatedly given reasonable explanations as to why the witnesses said what they said in other threads. You are just trying to go off topic because the topic here is far too uncomfortable for you.

You are now using the logical fallacy of ad nauseam;

"used to refer to the fact that something has been done or repeated so often that it has become annoying or tiresome.
"the phrase he repeated ad nauseam""

You are the gift that keeps on giving, each post you use a fallacy, instead of evidence.

Why should anyone 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.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 27 guests