Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

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).
Werd
Posts: 10181
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Werd »

Nessie wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 7:46 pm
Rudolf is a builder specialising in fitting metal doors?
He knows more than you do. Your own incredulity doesn't refute him!
The article is here. Scroll down and read the section "The Blueprints." It's the last section. Also you can read the introduction of the letter from an ITALIAN ARCHITECT who thought of this problem FIRST! So yeah I will take an architect over YOU, Nessie. :lol:
Your admission other gas proof doors fit, hands the victory to me. That one type of gas door would not fit does not mean no gassings
And the POSSIBILITY of fitting a less satisfactory door inside the doorway is not proof that it happened so you have no victory. We're both stuck in the middle about the door.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=4238&p=173202&hilit=month#p173202
"If the ventilation work was continuing until October 1941, all that does, is mean the secondary source is one month out. Instead of gassings starting in September, they start in October."
If work is being done IN THE SAME MONTH AS GASSING IS CLAIMED, YOU STILL HAVEN'T ANSWERED MY QUESTION:
Did they clear out the corpses before they started gassing or were they gassing Jews with corpses still in the room?
I do not know where scrapbookpages sourced their information from.
That would make scrapbook pages a SECONDARY source, not a primary one. Learn the difference.
I have produced corroborating evidence it was used for a number of months as a gas chamber.
You have not listed the witnesses, nor examined their testimony. You've "cited" without actually showing anything. Saying "these witnesses agree on gassings and holes, and there are holes, therefore gassings are correct" is a non sequitor. I mean you claim you have evidence of Zyklon B residue but you can't link or quote that either. LOL.


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


User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29220
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Nessie »

Werd wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 9:05 pm
Nessie wrote:
Tue Jun 23, 2020 7:46 pm
Rudolf is a builder specialising in fitting metal doors?
He knows more than you do. Your own incredulity doesn't refute him!
The article is here. Scroll down and read the section "The Blueprints." It's the last section. Also you can read the introduction of the letter from an ITALIAN ARCHITECT who thought of this problem FIRST! So yeah I will take an architect over YOU, Nessie. :lol:
I got the point about not being able to fit the large metal door. It was the suggestion that there is no door that would work that was unconvincing, especially since Rudolf's article had a photo of a door that would work :roll:
Your admission other gas proof doors fit, hands the victory to me. That one type of gas door would not fit does not mean no gassings
And the POSSIBILITY of fitting a less satisfactory door inside the doorway is not proof that it happened so you have no victory. We're both stuck in the middle about the door.
It is enough that I have pointed out the failure in Rudolf's argument from incredulity. As to what did happen, we need to do what he and you avoid, look at all of the evidence.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=4238&p=173202&hilit=month#p173202
"If the ventilation work was continuing until October 1941, all that does, is mean the secondary source is one month out. Instead of gassings starting in September, they start in October."
If work is being done IN THE SAME MONTH AS GASSING IS CLAIMED, YOU STILL HAVEN'T ANSWERED MY QUESTION:
Did they clear out the corpses before they started gassing or were they gassing Jews with corpses still in the room?
I have answered your question. Since it would be odd to gas people in a room being used to store corpses, I would suggest that gassings started later once the corpses had been cleared.
I do not know where scrapbookpages sourced their information from.
That would make scrapbook pages a SECONDARY source, not a primary one. Learn the difference.
I know the difference. It is you who is just learning about it. You keep citing a witness as if he saw gassing, showing you do not understand hearsay.
I have produced corroborating evidence it was used for a number of months as a gas chamber.
You have not listed the witnesses, nor examined their testimony. You've "cited" without actually showing anything. Saying "these witnesses agree on gassings and holes, and there are holes, therefore gassings are correct" is a non sequitor. I mean you claim you have evidence of Zyklon B residue but you can't link or quote that either. LOL.
That witnesses and the physical evidence are consistence and corroborate is not a non sequitur.

I did reference the source of traces of Zyklon B, but what I am not doing is letting you switch the debate to me proving you wrong. The burden of proof is on you. You have no evidence that the Leichenkeller was only ever used to store corpses in 1941 -1942. I dismiss your claim.
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.

Werd
Posts: 10181
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Werd »

Nessie wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:50 am
Since it would be odd to gas people in a room being used to store corpses, I would suggest that gassings started later once the corpses had been cleared.
Work on the ventilation system was being done in September AND October because Grabner was complaining in June that the ventilation system FOR CORPSES ONLY AT THE TIME IN JUNE, needed work. Now you are claiming that the work was done in October, corpses were moved out and people were gassed.
I know the difference. It is you who is just learning about it. You keep citing a witness as if he saw gassing, showing you do not understand hearsay.
Do you understand that Hoss doesn't count as a witness? who are these witnesses that you claim prove gassing?
That witnesses and the physical evidence are consistence and corroborate is not a non sequitur.
Witnesses "agreeing" isn't proof of anything. What's your physical evidence?
I did reference the source of traces of Zyklon B,
All you said was "Leuchter report." I then reminded you that you needed a reference from the updated, Rudolf report which fixed many of Leuchter's errors.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29220
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Nessie »

Werd wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:57 pm
Nessie wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:50 am
Since it would be odd to gas people in a room being used to store corpses, I would suggest that gassings started later once the corpses had been cleared.
Work on the ventilation system was being done in September AND October because Grabner was complaining in June that the ventilation system FOR CORPSES ONLY AT THE TIME IN JUNE, needed work. Now you are claiming that the work was done in October, corpses were moved out and people were gassed.
The ventilation installation is ideal for gassings. You incorrectly claimed that is somehow evidenced no gassings.
I know the difference. It is you who is just learning about it. You keep citing a witness as if he saw gassing, showing you do not understand hearsay.
Do you understand that Hoss doesn't count as a witness? who are these witnesses that you claim prove gassing?
That witnesses and the physical evidence are consistence and corroborate is not a non sequitur.
Witnesses "agreeing" isn't proof of anything. What's your physical evidence?
I did reference the source of traces of Zyklon B,
All you said was "Leuchter report." I then reminded you that you needed a reference from the updated, Rudolf report which fixed many of Leuchter's errors.
It is not up to me to prove you wrong. You have clearly given up with the failed arguments by Rudolf and Mattogno. That is the end for you, you have no evidence and I can dismiss your claim that Krema I was never used for gassings.
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: 7615
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 8:38 am
The ventilation installation is ideal for gassings. You incorrectly claimed that is somehow evidenced no gassings.
Where is the evidence this installation is Ideal. From what technical background of executions by gas is this poster using?
Imagination perhaps :?:


𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

Werd
Posts: 10181
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Werd »

Nessie wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 8:38 am
Werd wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:57 pm
Witnesses "agreeing" isn't proof of anything. What's your physical evidence?
All you said was "Leuchter report." I then reminded you that you needed a reference from the updated, Rudolf report which fixed many of Leuchter's errors.
It is not up to me to prove you wrong.
Nessie knows he has to prove his own case since he has his own burden of proof. He has to prove himself right. But he falsely RECONSTITUTES that as having to prove me wrong, whereas it's actually having to prove him right. He engages in this deception of language to excuse himself from having to prove his own case. He won't link and quote the Rudolf report or even the Leuchter report. He won't name the other witnesses and examine their testimony. He won't show traces of Zyklon B. He won't demonstrate where scrapbook pages got their dates from.
That is the end for you, you have no evidence
This is the end for Nessie. He has no evidence. Remember when he previously claimed he had "primary evidence?" I then challenged him, and all he did was cite scrapbook pages that didn't even specify where they got their dates of gassing from. In other words, it was a "secondary source," and Nessie admitted it wasn't primary. That was pretty hilarious. :lol:

The rodoh hoaxsters Nessie and Das Prussian years ago tried to invent THEIR OWN theories about hole placements in the roof when they realized that McCarthy, et al theory was bunk and stupid!
viewtopic.php?p=53299#p53299
the idea that Germans would create unevenly spaced holes in the roof of Krema I, but had evenly spaced holes elsewhere in other alleged chambers (nice contradiction), but that these Krema I holes made uneven by Germans would perfectly match a Polish reconstruction is amazing!
viewtopic.php?p=37949#p37901
viewtopic.php?p=38002#p38002
viewtopic.php?p=38056#p38056
viewtopic.php?p=38155#p38155
viewtopic.php?p=38209#p38209
viewtopic.php?p=38221#p38221
viewtopic.php?p=38239#p38239
viewtopic.php?p=38241#p38241
viewtopic.php?p=38567#p38567

viewtopic.php?p=38699#p38699
viewtopic.php?p=38734#p38734

viewtopic.php?p=38877#p38877
viewtopic.php?p=39053#p39053
viewtopic.php?p=53297#p53297
viewtopic.php?p=53300#p53300
viewtopic.php?p=53311#p53311
viewtopic.php?p=53330#p53330
viewtopic.php?p=53335#p53335
viewtopic.php?p=53399#p53399
Your style is, "witnesses said there were holes in the roof. There are holes in the roof. So gas chamber." Sorry, it's not that simple.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29220
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Nessie »

Werd wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:11 am
Nessie wrote:
Thu Jun 25, 2020 8:38 am
Werd wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:57 pm
Witnesses "agreeing" isn't proof of anything. What's your physical evidence?
All you said was "Leuchter report." I then reminded you that you needed a reference from the updated, Rudolf report which fixed many of Leuchter's errors.
It is not up to me to prove you wrong.
Nessie knows he has to prove his own case since he has his own burden of proof. He has to prove himself right. But he falsely RECONSTITUTES that as having to prove me wrong, whereas it's actually having to prove him right. He engages in this deception of language to excuse himself from having to prove his own case.....
In this thread, you set out to try and disprove gassings. It is your job to evidence your claims. You have failed to disprove gassings and you are now trying to switch the debate around to avoid dealing with your fail.
Your style is, "witnesses said there were holes in the roof. There are holes in the roof. So gas chamber." Sorry, it's not that simple.
That is not my argument, you lying POS.
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.

Werd
Posts: 10181
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Werd »

Nessie wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 1:45 pm
In this thread, you set out to try and disprove gassings. It is your job to evidence your claims.
I have done my job the best I could. If you disagree, produce your own evidence that is better. Get those witnesses statements quoted and analyzed, show where scrapbooks pages gets their dates from, and link and quote Leuchter and/or Rudolf. Otherwise, shut up.


Your style is, "witnesses said there were holes in the roof. There are holes in the roof. So gas chamber." Sorry, it's not that simple.
That is not my argument, you lying POS.
Yes it is:
Werd wrote:
Mon Jun 22, 2020 1:50 pm
Nessie wrote:
Mon Jun 22, 2020 1:43 pm
Werd wrote:
Mon Jun 22, 2020 1:29 pm
Witnesses agreeing about holes in the roof for Zyklon B isn't enough evidence.
"I look for corroboration and convergence of evidence."
It's just like I said before:
Your style is, "witnesses said there were holes in the roof. There are holes in the roof. So gas chamber."
:lol:
That is not how I phrased any argument,
Corroboration refers to more than one source. Plural. In other words, multiple witnesses agreeing on holes in the roof is what you call corroboration. I pegged you correctly.

[...]
the witnesses who worked there to prove gassings.
It's just like I said you said.

Your style is, "witnesses said there were holes in the roof. There are holes in the roof. So gas chamber."
WITNESSES AND WITNESSES ALONE PROVE GASSINGS! Eyewitness testimony is good enough for Nessie. It's okay when he says it. But when I say that's what he says, suddenly it's a problem.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29220
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Nessie »

Werd wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 2:14 pm
Nessie wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 1:45 pm
In this thread, you set out to try and disprove gassings. It is your job to evidence your claims.
I have done my job the best I could...
Presenting arguments from incredulity and ignorance are all you ever do. You cannot prove what happened by merely cherry picking some evidence and disputing it.
Your style is, "witnesses said there were holes in the roof. There are holes in the roof. So gas chamber." Sorry, it's not that simple.
That is not my argument, you lying POS.
Yes it is:
Werd wrote:
Mon Jun 22, 2020 1:50 pm
Nessie wrote:
Mon Jun 22, 2020 1:43 pm
Werd wrote:
Mon Jun 22, 2020 1:29 pm
Witnesses agreeing about holes in the roof for Zyklon B isn't enough evidence.
"I look for corroboration and convergence of evidence."
It's just like I said before:
Your style is, "witnesses said there were holes in the roof. There are holes in the roof. So gas chamber."
:lol:
That is not how I phrased any argument,
Corroboration refers to more than one source. Plural. In other words, multiple witnesses agreeing on holes in the roof is what you call corroboration. I pegged you correctly.

[...]
the witnesses who worked there to prove gassings.
It's just like I said you said.

Your style is, "witnesses said there were holes in the roof. There are holes in the roof. So gas chamber."
WITNESSES AND WITNESSES ALONE PROVE GASSINGS! Eyewitness testimony is good enough for Nessie. It's okay when he says it. But when I say that's what he says, suddenly it's a problem.
I have not said witnesses alone are good enough and they alone prove the gassings. Stop lying you POS.

I have done my best to explain eye witness over hearsay, how eye witness evidence can be checked for credibility, how what is not evidenced is an important means of verification and how the evidence converges to a conclusion.

You are unable to understand and instead you constantly misrepresent and lie about what I have said by missing out stages of the process. I demonstrated that here, when you quoted me, splitting the quote into different colours, but you missed out part of the actual quote and then misrepresented the rest of what I had said.

viewtopic.php?p=173277#p173277
viewtopic.php?p=173282#p173282
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: 7615
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Fri Jun 26, 2020 2:33 pm
I have not said witnesses alone are good enough and they alone prove the gassings. Stop lying you POS.
The POS acronym is part of a collection of acronyms, abbreviations, and terms that are used as code by teenagers. This sort of behaviour is not accepted in this forum. The poster Nessie should simply state his point and leave it without cluttering the information with his (((logic)))


𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 19 guests