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:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 3:33 pm
Werd wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 2:35 pm
Therefore I was right to say that your style is, "witnesses said there were holes in the roof. There are holes in the roof. So gas chamber."
....
Wrong. My "style" is, witnesses said there were gassings in a building with holes in the roof. That building has been found to have had holes in its roof. That corroborates and gives credibility to the witness claims of gassings.
He keeps denying that he's saying exactly what I say he's saying. It's comical at this point. :lol:

Witnesses claim gassing and holes. There are holes. Therefore gassing.

Non sequitor! Too bad we've already seen the holes in the "reconstruction" aren't consistent with the original floor plan of the so called gas chamber. Too bad they're consistent with the reconstruction by the Poles. Too bad Nessie's retort of "that doesn't mean the Nazis didn't make them" translates as "this is the only time, here in Krema I, where the nazis didn't make even holes." Nice ad hoc, Nessie. Nobody's buying.
Last edited by Werd on Sun Jun 28, 2020 11:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.


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


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:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 3:38 pm
Werd wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 2:35 pm
....
The new troll is on ignore until he furnishes:
1. Where scrapbookpages got their dates of Krema I gassing from.
2. The citation about traces of cyanide in Krema I consistent with mass gassing.
3. Explanations for all the problems and issues raised by Bob in the old topic that I provided about 15 links to.
Stop trying to reverse the burden of proof.
And Nessie's back to his equivocation fallacy of what it means to "prove his side."

Watch me expose his deliberate linguistic trickery: He is deliberately conflating HIM assuming HIS OWN BURDEN of proof to prove his case, with disproving mine. In a POETIC way, it could be said that arguing for one's position is a way of disproving the other side. But in the FIRST PREFERENCE, PRIMARY DICTIONARY DEFINITION, him proving his case is him proving a positive, it is NOT him ACTIVELY proving or disproving my side. So since me demanding he provide his own evidence is NOT IN AN ACTUAL SENSE, me flipping my burden of proof on to him, but DEMANDING HE FULFILL HIS, he is just lying when he says I'm reversing the burden. I've already put up my links and evidence. Where is his? The fact that he is trying to get out of giving us:

1. Proof of the dates cited by scrapbook pages
2. The citation about traces of cyanide in Krema I consistent with mass gassing.
3. Explanations for all the problems and issues raised by Bob in the old topic that I provided about 15 links to.

shows that he's really just engaging in special pleading which he bolsters with said above equivocation. You have to provide evidence and do homework and give links and quotes but I don't. Special pleading and equivocation. A double fallacy.

Turnagain
Posts: 8322
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Turnagain »

Nessie's modus operandi:
What if => coulda/woulda => factual statement.
Example:
WHAT IF the Germans had a giant excavator? They COULDA' shipped it to Treblinka to dig the graves. The Germans shipped a giant/mystery machine to Treblinka to dig the graves and exhume the bodies.

Another example:
WHAT IF the Germans had access to lots of firewood. They COULDA' shipped thousands of tons of wood to Treblinka. The Germans shipped thousands of tons of firewood to Treblinka to cremate the Jews.

When the "what if" and the "coulda, woulda" gambit fail, he simply lies.
Example:
There were no eyewitnesses to the Treblinka vacuum chambers.

As you say, Werd, Nessie relies on linguistic trickery. Proof? Nessie don't need no steenkin' proof.
Last edited by Turnagain on Mon Jun 29, 2020 12:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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 »

Turnagain wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 4:42 am
Example:
There were no eyewitnesses to the Treblinka vacuum chambers.

As you say, Werd, Nessie relies on linguistic trickery. Proof? Nessie don't need no steenkin' proof.
Do you have evidence that Nessie don't need no steenkin proof :mrgreen: If he had no steenking proof where did they all get clothed, fed, housed and mass transported huh :mrgreen: I bet he has evidence of the tilted floor electrocution chamber at Belzec OY VEY :mrgreen:
Image
A teen at Birkenau Pierre Berg after being brought back to health by Dr Mengele at Birkenau was transited to Dora; perhaps Nessie or Flipper :? could tell us how Pierre and colleagues were clothed, fed and where they were sheltered in transit; the records would be helpful.

That aside we should stick to the Krema issues, except that Pierre being on the ramps as a Kapo mentions nothing about people being sent for gassing only a separation of the sexes and his experience in quarantine against disease.


𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

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:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 11:22 pm
Nessie wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 3:33 pm
Werd wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 2:35 pm
Therefore I was right to say that your style is, "witnesses said there were holes in the roof. There are holes in the roof. So gas chamber."
....
Wrong. My "style" is, witnesses said there were gassings in a building with holes in the roof. That building has been found to have had holes in its roof. That corroborates and gives credibility to the witness claims of gassings.
He keeps denying that he's saying exactly what I say he's saying. It's comical at this point. :lol:

Witnesses claim gassing and holes. There are holes. Therefore gassing.

Non sequitor!
Phrased that simplistic way, it looks like a disjointed argument. It shoud be

Witnesses claim gassings in a building with holes in the roof. There is a building with holes in the roof. That adds credibility to the witness claims of gassing.

If witnesses claimed corpse storage in a building with holes cut into the roof for venting and you found that holes had been cut into the roof, even though the holes do not prove corpse storage, they give credibility to the witness claims about corpses being stored there. The corroborating witness evidence of gassing is supported by physical evidence.

The primary evidence of gassings is from the witnesses. A check to establish witness credibility finds they describe a building and that matches their description. The same is true for gassings at TII. Witnesses described a building with tiles, brick and concrete. A recent excavation found remains of a building with that construction.

Like the analogy of witnesses describing a stabbing and a later search finds a knife hidden in a drain at the locus of the stabbing.
Too bad we've already seen the holes in the "reconstruction" aren't consistent with the original floor plan of the so called gas chamber. Too bad they're consistent with the reconstruction by the Poles. Too bad Nessie's retort of "that doesn't mean the Nazis didn't make them" translates as "this is the only time, here in Krema I, where the nazis didn't make even holes." Nice ad hoc, Nessie. Nobody's buying.
Too bad that is an argument from incredulity which does not prove that no holes had been cut into the building roof in 1941.
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: 29220
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Nessie »

Werd wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 11:26 pm
Nessie wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 3:38 pm
Werd wrote:
Sun Jun 28, 2020 2:35 pm
....
The new troll is on ignore until he furnishes:
1. Where scrapbookpages got their dates of Krema I gassing from.
2. The citation about traces of cyanide in Krema I consistent with mass gassing.
3. Explanations for all the problems and issues raised by Bob in the old topic that I provided about 15 links to.
Stop trying to reverse the burden of proof.
And Nessie's back to his equivocation fallacy of what it means to "prove his side."

Watch me expose his deliberate linguistic trickery: He is deliberately conflating HIM assuming HIS OWN BURDEN of proof to prove his case, with disproving mine. In a POETIC way, it could be said that arguing for one's position is a way of disproving the other side. But in the FIRST PREFERENCE, PRIMARY DICTIONARY DEFINITION, him proving his case is him proving a positive, it is NOT him ACTIVELY proving or disproving my side. So since me demanding he provide his own evidence is NOT IN AN ACTUAL SENSE, me flipping my burden of proof on to him, but DEMANDING HE FULFILL HIS, he is just lying when he says I'm reversing the burden. I've already put up my links and evidence. Where is his? The fact that he is trying to get out of giving us:

1. Proof of the dates cited by scrapbook pages
2. The citation about traces of cyanide in Krema I consistent with mass gassing.
3. Explanations for all the problems and issues raised by Bob in the old topic that I provided about 15 links to.

shows that he's really just engaging in special pleading which he bolsters with said above equivocation. You have to provide evidence and do homework and give links and quotes but I don't. Special pleading and equivocation. A double fallacy.
The topic of this thread are your claims that you can evidence no gassings. I get suspended for going off topic. In threads where the topic is about the evidence for gassings, I can show that 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: 29220
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Rudolf once again destroys Krema I propaganda

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 4:42 am
Nessie's modus operandi:
What it => coulda/woulda => factual statement.
Example:
WHAT IF the Germans had a giant excavator? They COULDA' shipped it to Treblinka to dig the graves. The Germans shipped a giant/mystery machine to Treblinka to dig the graves and exhume the bodies.

Another example:
WHAT IF the Germans had access to lots of firewood. They COULDA' shipped thousands of tons of wood to Treblinka. The Germans shipped thousands of tons of firewood to Treblinka to cremate the Jews.

When the "what if" and the "coulda, woulda" gambit fail, he simply lies.
Example:
There were no eyewitnesses to the Treblinka vacuum chambers.

As you say, Werd, Nessie relies on linguistic trickery. Proof? Nessie don't need no steenkin' proof.

That is off topic, which is OK for deniers, but not for me.

No evidence has been presented to show that Krema I was in continual use as a corpse store until it was converted to an air raid shelter. Fallacious arguments about a certain type of door, a ventilation system and where the holes were placed are not evidence of no 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:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:43 am
The primary evidence of gassings is from the witnesses.
Correct and nothing else. Those witnesses are all juden and liars; the commandant was tortured but worse his son was in English captivity under threat of intense duress as was his family. This has been said before many times but little cognizance is taking of these facts. Torture and lying witnesses are not admissible anywhere. The prosecutor Jackson was a well known friend of der Juden. His legal advisor was der Jude Sheldon Gluck, while der Jüdisch Colonel B.J.S Andrews delivered the verdict.

Just rumours not fact is all the poster has.
In threads where the topic is about the evidence for gassings, I can show that evidence.
What is produced is just hearsay and lie-witness testimony.


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:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:45 am
The topic of this thread are your claims that you can evidence no gassings. I get suspended for going off topic. In threads where the topic is about the evidence for gassings, I can show that evidence.
Funny how Nessie was bragging THIS ENTIRE TOPIC, that he could produce PRIMARY EVIDENCE of gassing, now suddenly he won't do it. :lol:

The reason you were suspended Nessie is NOT because you threatened to release this primary evidence. It's because YOU HAVE REFUSED TO DO SO CONSISTENTLY!

Until this troll starts a new topic shoving all this evidence in our faces about Krema I, or until he produces it in here (which he is lying, saying that if he does, the mods will attack him again), it's safe to say he has no case. He is free to embarrass us revisionists about Krema I any time he wants. He failed years ago as the old topic with Bob shows and he failed in this topic. The ball is in his court. He took the ball and ran home. If he wants to bring it back, it's up to him. No need to waste time with this guy who likes to artificially extend topics to 30 and 40 pages, claiming he has witnesses, chemical studies, AND WON'T LIST A SINGLE WITNESS NAME ALONG WITH AN EXAMINATION OF THEIR TESTIMONY, OR SO MUCH AS A PAGE NUMBER AND PARAGRAPH FOR THE OTHER THING! :lol:

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:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 12:28 pm
Nessie wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:45 am
The topic of this thread are your claims that you can evidence no gassings. I get suspended for going off topic. In threads where the topic is about the evidence for gassings, I can show that evidence.
Funny how Nessie was bragging THIS ENTIRE TOPIC, that he could produce PRIMARY EVIDENCE of gassing, now suddenly he won't do it. :lol:

The reason you were suspended Nessie is NOT because you threatened to release this primary evidence. It's because YOU HAVE REFUSED TO DO SO CONSISTENTLY!
The reason why I got suspended was going off topic and being forthright about your failure to tell the truth.
Until this troll starts a new topic shoving all this evidence in our faces about Krema I, or until he produces it in here (which he is lying, saying that if he does, the mods will attack him again), it's safe to say he has no case. He is free to embarrass us revisionists about Krema I any time he wants. He failed years ago as the old topic with Bob shows and he failed in this topic. The ball is in his court. He took the ball and ran home. If he wants to bring it back, it's up to him. No need to waste time with this guy who likes to artificially extend topics to 30 and 40 pages, claiming he has witnesses, chemical studies, AND WON'T LIST A SINGLE WITNESS NAME ALONG WITH AN EXAMINATION OF THEIR TESTIMONY, OR SO MUCH AS A PAGE NUMBER AND PARAGRAPH FOR THE OTHER THING! :lol:
In this topic you evidence no gassings at Krema I. You have no witness, no documents, nothing to do that. Instead, you rely on fallacious arguments. You are trying to distract from your failure by switching 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.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 17 guests