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).
User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 6359
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Huntinger »

Turnagain wrote:
Tue Feb 04, 2020 5:43 am
It's ICE fishing. Only a cheechako would call it snow fishing.
Ice with piles of snow can increase the pressure and decrease the safety on the hard water. Snow fishing is more dangerous than ice fishing. :geek: Man up, icefishing is for :ugeek: Be good to take flipper ice fishing :mrgreen: It can cuddle a polar bear or sea lion.
Image


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


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


User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 28143
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Tue Feb 04, 2020 5:18 am
Nessie wrote:
There has been an assumption, possibly based on the models, that all of the graves were dug and prepared at the same time. I cannot find any evidence to support that. It could be that graves were dug and then filled as required and not all at the same time. So the ex from one grave could be piled onto a previously filled grave.
Once again, Nessie puts his innumeracy on display. Even if we allow 150 meters of space for the stockpile it requires over a nine meter (9.12 meters) high stockpile. The M&H model B couldn't stockpile higher than about five meters. Enter the mystery machine again.
We also do not know if the ex was removed from the camp or not.

Well, since there aren't any records of dump trucks or other conveyances to remove the ex that means that the ex COULDA' been hauled away. After you post that a few times you can morph it into the ex being hauled away is absolutely proven. Kinda' like your attempt to morph the mass graves of the alleged eyewitnesses into smaller, more easily managed by the M&H dragline graves. You betcha', Nessie. That's the ticket.
Which means that the witnesses likely overestimated the size of the graves and the smaller ground disturbances found by GPR are more accurate. No morphing, the physical evidence shows smaller pits than the witnesses describe.

Your argument from incredulity about what you do believe happened inside TII, is not evidence of what did happen there.
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: 6359
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Tue Feb 04, 2020 10:05 am
Which means that the witnesses likely overestimated the size of the graves and the smaller ground disturbances found by GPR are more accurate. No morphing, the physical evidence shows smaller pits than the witnesses describe.

Your argument from incredulity about what you do believe happened inside TII, is not evidence of what did happen there.
What has grave sizes and gpr got to do with logical flaws in denial? :roll:


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

Turnagain
Posts: 7291
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Turnagain »

Here is the first paragraph from Nessie's first post from page one:
Rather than evidence their claim of no mass graves and gassings at the camps at Sobibor, TII, Blezec and Chelmno, deniers claim that there is no evidence for those gassings and cremations, whilst discussing the witness and physical evidence FOR the gassings and graves, therefore no mass graves and gassings.
Apparently revisionists are only allowed to present evidence of events that didn't happen and not debunk the lies of the alleged witnesses. How are we to present evidence of a nonexistent gas chamber? You claim to have evidence of a gas chamber. You have evidence of a building. It could have served any purpose buildings are built for but you declare it to be a gas chamber. That's your "evidence".

You have statements from witnesses who obviously lied. You claim that any discussion of those lies constitutes a discussion of "evidence" given FOR the holyhoax by the so-called witnesses. In Nessie's la-la land, witnesses' claims are sacrosanct and can't be debunked by revisionists. Tell me, Nessie, what are the "logical flaws" in pointing out the impossibilities of witness claims and debunking their lies?

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 28143
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:15 pm
Here is the first paragraph from Nessie's first post from page one:
Rather than evidence their claim of no mass graves and gassings at the camps at Sobibor, TII, Blezec and Chelmno, deniers claim that there is no evidence for those gassings and cremations, whilst discussing the witness and physical evidence FOR the gassings and graves, therefore no mass graves and gassings.
Apparently revisionists are only allowed to present evidence of events that didn't happen and not debunk the lies of the alleged witnesses.
Strawman. You are being positively encouraged to present evidence of what did happen. I have asked you on many occasions to evidence TII was a transit camp and that there were daily mass transports.
How are we to present evidence of a nonexistent gas chamber?
The same way the non-existent gas chambers have been evidenced at numerous other camps where gas chambers were claimed, like Bergen-Belsen. Or the same way I can evidence the non-existence of gas chambers used by the British or Americans to gas internees in the camps they had. By pointing out that the people who worked and lived in those camps did not see anyone being gassed, or any gas chambers.
You claim to have evidence of a gas chamber. You have evidence of a building. It could have served any purpose buildings are built for but you declare it to be a gas chamber. That's your "evidence".
If you had the remains of a tiled building that numerous witnesses described as and said they saw being used as a shower facility, you would claim to have evidence to prove it was a shower.
You have statements from witnesses who obviously lied. You claim that any discussion of those lies constitutes a discussion of "evidence" given FOR the holyhoax by the so-called witnesses. In Nessie's la-la land, witnesses' claims are sacrosanct and can't be debunked by revisionists. Tell me, Nessie, what are the "logical flaws" in pointing out the impossibilities of witness claims and debunking their lies?
Your claim that because you think some witnesses lied, therefore all of the witnesses lied, is logically flawed.

Your claim that because some witnesses said some things about how the gas chambers functioned which you do not think could have worked, therefore all of the witnesses lied, is logically flawed.

To prove that all of the witnesses lied, you need to prove that there was no gas chamber, which you can do by providing evidence that there were no gassings and/or with evidence that something else happened, such as showering, in the building. You have two ways to do it and you are unable to do either of them.
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: 6359
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Wed Feb 05, 2020 4:59 am
To prove that all of the witnesses lied, you need to prove that there was no gas chamber, which you can do by providing evidence that there were no gassings and/or with evidence that something else happened, such as showering, in the building. You have two ways to do it and you are unable to do either of them.
There was air sucked out, steam blown in to cook people, there was chlorine, then finally carbon monoxide and chlorine, carbon monoxide and zyklon b, diesel exhaust with additives, diesel, finally petrol exhaust. Good choice, which one should be chosen, all were testified at Nurnberg.


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

Turnagain
Posts: 7291
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Turnagain »

Nessie wrote:
Strawman. You are being positively encouraged to present evidence of what did happen.Strawman.
Uh-huh, revisionists are positively encouraged to prove the innocence of the Germans. According to Nessie, the accusation of mass murder is proven by the accusation. Obviously there's no need for the hoaxers to prove their accusation.
The same way the non-existent gas chambers have been evidenced at numerous other camps where gas chambers were claimed, like Bergen-Belsen.
Right, just hop into a handy time machine and go back to when the AR camps were still in existence and inspect them for evidence of homicidal gas chambers and gassed Jews.
If you had the remains of a tiled building that numerous witnesses described as and said they saw being used as a shower facility, you would claim to have evidence to prove it was a shower.
Huntinger's answer shows how ridiculous your claim of "...you would claim to have evidence to prove it was a shower". Your "evidence" that it was a poison gas/vacuum chamber falls apart faster than a cheap watch.
To prove that all of the witnesses lied, you need to prove that there was no gas chamber...
The fact that the witnesses couldn't agree on even get the number or size of the graves shows that three of your principle witnesses were liars. That's in addition to their other clangers such as the flammable blood. The only witnesses who tell a coherent story of arriving at Treblinka, staying for a short time and leaving with other deportees are the deportees who transited through Treblinka and survived the war. Your steam chambers, hermetically sealed vacuum chambers, gassed with numerous different substances gas chambers have been thoroughly debunked. You then claim that revisionist must prove that gas/vacuum chambers didn't exist.

It is you who must prove the existence of gas chambers and that isn't done by someone claiming to have found a tile and the foundation of a building. Your attempt to reverse the burden of proof is a colossal FAIL.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 28143
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Wed Feb 05, 2020 6:03 am
Nessie wrote:
Strawman. You are being positively encouraged to present evidence of what did happen.Strawman.
Uh-huh, revisionists are positively encouraged to prove the innocence of the Germans. According to Nessie, the accusation of mass murder is proven by the accusation. Obviously there's no need for the hoaxers to prove their accusation.
Yet another strawman lie from you.
The same way the non-existent gas chambers have been evidenced at numerous other camps where gas chambers were claimed, like Bergen-Belsen.
Right, just hop into a handy time machine and go back to when the AR camps were still in existence and inspect them for evidence of homicidal gas chambers and gassed Jews.
You do not need to go back in time to evidence there were no gas chambers at Bergen-Belsen.
If you had the remains of a tiled building that numerous witnesses described as and said they saw being used as a shower facility, you would claim to have evidence to prove it was a shower.
Huntinger's answer shows how ridiculous your claim of "...you would claim to have evidence to prove it was a shower". Your "evidence" that it was a poison gas/vacuum chamber falls apart faster than a cheap watch.
Huntinger is a troll who cannot evidence any of his claims. If there had been mass showering at TII, it would be easy to evidence that, just as it has been easy to evidence showering at Majdanek, with the witnesses who remember showering on arrival.
To prove that all of the witnesses lied, you need to prove that there was no gas chamber...
The fact that the witnesses couldn't agree on even get the number or size of the graves shows that three of your principle witnesses were liars.
No it does not. It is normal for witnesses to disagree on details. They all agree that there were mass killings and burials.
That's in addition to their other clangers such as the flammable blood.
You say that as if all of the witnesses made that claim.

It makes no logical sense to claim because a witness lied about something, that means all of the witnesses lied.
The only witnesses who tell a coherent story of arriving at Treblinka, staying for a short time and leaving with other deportees are the deportees who transited through Treblinka and survived the war.
You happily accept discrepancies in their claims.
Your steam chambers, hermetically sealed vacuum chambers, gassed with numerous different substances gas chambers have been thoroughly debunked. You then claim that revisionist must prove that gas/vacuum chambers didn't exist.
It is your claim they did not exist, your claim, you evidence it.
It is you who must prove the existence of gas chambers and that isn't done by someone claiming to have found a tile and the foundation of a building. Your attempt to reverse the burden of proof is a colossal FAIL.
I produce evidence to back up my claim of gassings, you discuss that evidence constantly. That is because you have no evidence of anything else happening at the camp. It is you who is reversing the burden of proof.
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: 28143
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain is a liar.

He constantly lies that I have no evidence, yet all he ever discusses are the witnesses who speak to gassings and the photos and the examinations of the camp that have found cremated remains and ground disturbances consistent with graves.
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: 6359
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Wed Feb 05, 2020 4:07 pm

Huntinger is a troll who cannot evidence any of his claims. If there had been mass showering at TII, it would be easy to evidence that, just as it has been easy to evidence showering at Majdanek, with the witnesses who remember showering on arrival.
That deserves a complaint, but I cannot be bothered with this thing posing as a human. Like Sobibor whose function cannot be determined, the myth surrounding TII falls into the same category. Simply one does no know what one does not know. However, deductions can be made from what is known. That is:
  • There are too many variations of the atrocity, execution stories, like religions none of them are true.
  • All of the AR camps were on the German Russian borders; there are credible reports of Belzec being in operation long before the claimed time, the Photos of Sobibor show that it was in existence longer than the 17 months claimed, due to the growth of the shrubs; the question is why these military facilities were on the Russian border? One can only postulate, for transit or for defense.
  • 40% of all Poles were annexed into the Soviet Union including the proportion of Ashkenazi. 600 000 perished on one transport alone, while the majority perished in the intense cold of the Siberian Interior.
    When the Red Army invaded eastern Poland on September 17, 1939, they began the first of three waves of
    Sovietization - the execution of thousands of Polish intelligentsia, and mass deportations. Hundreds of thousands of
    Poles, military and civilian, were arrested, and deported to the Russian gulags. They were shoved into trains headed
    for the farthest reaches of Russia. The voyage took over a week - there was no food, no water, no heat (in sub-zero
    temperatures), no window, no toilets. Many people died - standing. Upon arrival, those who were too weak to work
    were shot. Within two years, over 1.5 million Poles were interned in Russian labor camps and concentration camps
    throughout Russia. Fifty-two per cent of them were ethnic Poles, 30% were Jewish, and 18% Ukrainians and
    Byelorussians.

    Stalin's objective was to finish what the tsars, emperors and kaisers could not accomplish in the past centuries: the
    total destruction of the Polish nation off the face of the earth. Lenin established the first totalitarian rule, but Stalin
    perfected it. The entire Russian territory literally became an open prison with thousands of internment camps. Stalin
    imposed the death penalty on children as young as twelve years old - just for stealing a loaf of bread. He treated
    animals better than human beings. While horses were well fed, kept in separate stalls with warm blankets, the
    prisoners were helpless - trying to keep warm by covering themselves with dirty rags, and were given rotting fish
    heads to eat, and very little water.
  • The Russians annexed most of Europe, restricting travel, dictating where people could live. People were prisoners within the Soviet Union.
  • The Soviets administered a series of internal purges resulting in millions of deaths. While Ezhovshchina "The Great Purges" - took place between 1934 and 1939, over 20 million people were sent to labor camps, where nearly half of them died. With the start of the Second World War, Stalin's terror transformed into the extermination of war prisoners and "traitors". The largest of several simultaneous executions of prisoners of war - the infamous Katyn massacre - took place in April and May 1940 in the Smolensk region. It was a mass execution of Polish nationals, prompted by Lavrenty Beria's proposal to execute all members of the Polish Officer Corps. This official document was approved and signed by the Soviet Politburo, including its leader, Joseph Stalin. The number of victims of Katyn is estimated at about 22,000. Of the total killed, about 8,000 were officers taken prisoner during the 1939 Soviet invasion of Poland, another 6,000 were police officers, with the rest being Polish intelligentsia arrested for allegedly being "intelligence agents, gendarmes, landowners, saboteurs, factory owners, lawyers and priests."

    The thinking and tyranny carried on into Eastern Europe.
After nasty Uncle Joe did all that, does one think he would flinch at framing the Germans (as he tried at Katyn) to the death by neglect of people under his jurisdiction. The holocaust is Russian.


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

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 6 guests