What is the Revisionist Narrative??

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).
Turnagain
Posts: 8494
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: What is the Revisionist Narrative??

Post by Turnagain »

Turnagain wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2020 4:55 pm
In the "Skeptics Forum" Nessie wrote:
Are you claiming, despite the photographic evidence, that this machine could not dig up mass graves in very sandy soil?
Nessie then posted a photo from the ARC collection showing the M&H mA in the foreground and the mB in the background. Now Nessie claims:
That does not mean those were the excavators used to dig the graves in 1942, or exhume the bodies in 1943.
Nessie is apparently claiming that the M&H draglines coulda' dug the graves but the Germans decided not to use them for that purpose but instead brought in a mystery machine to dig the graves. Care to explain why the Germans would do that when, according to you, they had perfectly serviceable machines on hand?

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!


User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 7808
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: What is the Revisionist Narrative??

Post by Huntinger »

Almost 4 years ago moderator Budu Svanidze said the the following points of wisdom in the thread called 'Human tent-peg' Mattogno hammered into the ground by Hans
Budu Svanidze wrote:
Mon Oct 03, 2016 6:03 pm
Turnagain and Nessie

No more posts on this thread about excavators at Treblinka please. Thank you.
Surely one can heed the advice of a moderator. ;) :?: This was his last post at RODOH, respect the final wishes.


𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

Turnagain
Posts: 8494
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: What is the Revisionist Narrative??

Post by Turnagain »

Hunt, there are four main areas of impossibilities for the claim that Treblinka II was an execution facility. They are:

1. The hermetically sealed gas/vacuum chambers.

2. The nonexistent mass graves due to the impossibility of the draglines both digging and stockpiling the ex from the pits.

3. The exhumation of whole bodies by a clamshell equipped dragline.

4. The impossibility of the Floss method of cremation.

In 2014, Nessie claimed that the M&H draglines were capable of digging the graves. That was proven to be false. Nessie then morphed his claim into some unknown type of machine that was shipped into T-II to dig the graves and exhume the bodies. The question of whether or not the M&H draglines could have dug and stockpiled the ex from the graves is settled. They weren't capable of that so forget it.

The question remains, does Nessie alter what he claims to be the facts of the holyhoax as new information comes to light? From his previous statements and his current statements it's obvious that he does. This isn't about draglines. It's about Nessie changing his story to suit his preconceived notions.

Nessie has over 29,000 posts so going over each one to check for inconsistencies or contradictions would need something like an AI algorithm or something along those lines. Doing it manually isn't a chore I'm willing to take on. His contradiction concerning the draglines was inadvertently uncovered by AgainTurnip. Your claim that this is a rehash of the dragline argument only serves to help Nessie evade the real issue of him altering his holyhoax claims to fit his preconceived notions.

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 7808
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: What is the Revisionist Narrative??

Post by Huntinger »

Turnagain wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 3:26 am
Your claim that this is a rehash of the dragline argument only serves to help Nessie evade the real issue of him altering his holyhoax claims to fit his preconceived notions.
There is no apparent integrity from this person, enough time wasted; do as you feel is in the best interest of the forum. ;)


𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

Turnagain
Posts: 8494
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: What is the Revisionist Narrative??

Post by Turnagain »

Generally I don't reply to Nessie but this is a clear cut case of him altering his testimony to suit his preconceived notions. The fact that it's about draglines is incidental. There are other instances but I don't have the time or patience to seek out his individual posts. For example, his claims for the wood used as fuel for the magic Jew barbeque. He's tried, "The bodies burned by themselves", "firewood was harvested from the surrounding area" and "firewood was purchased and shipped to T-II by a local lumber yard".

Just as his wrangle over whether or not lethal concentrations of CO results in at least 50% of the victims presenting red or pink skin discoloration is an attempt to evade the fact that the alleged eyewitnesses claimed that CO poisoning resulted in black, grey, blue and yellow skin discoloration of the supposed victims. His claim that those were just "little mistakes" that are readily explained by the witnesses' stress and trauma of witnessing the brutality of the eeevul Narzis is pure fantasy.

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 7808
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: What is the Revisionist Narrative??

Post by Huntinger »

Turnagain wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 5:20 am
Just as his wrangle over whether or not lethal concentrations of CO results in at least 50% of the victims presenting red or pink skin discoloration is an attempt to evade the fact that the alleged eyewitnesses claimed that CO poisoning resulted in black, grey, blue and yellow skin discoloration of the supposed victims.
I agree, it was brought up in that thread how CO poisoning could result in the skin discoloration mentioned, even if the corpses were not cherry red. In most instances the skin does not appear bluish due to the CO but is normal similar to the embalming morticians use; in a few cases especially if thousands were gassed using CO, there would be enough pink corpses to be noticeable. This is one sheer probability alone and the normal distribution. This scientific analysis was just pushed aside so he could waffle more. For me and some colleagues who read his posts he is regarded as an inept waste of space and time. :P


𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29459
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: What is the Revisionist Narrative??

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 3:26 am
Hunt, there are four main areas of impossibilities for the claim that Treblinka II was an execution facility. They are:

1. The hermetically sealed gas/vacuum chambers.
Hermetic seals do not render a gas chamber inoperable. The vacuum claim is hearsay, based on rumour.
2. The nonexistent mass graves due to the impossibility of the draglines both digging and stockpiling the ex from the pits.
There is photographic and physical evidence of ground disturbances, where the mass graves had been. You are assuming draglines were the only excavators available.
3. The exhumation of whole bodies by a clamshell equipped dragline.
You are assuming it was a dragline that was used.
4. The impossibility of the Floss method of cremation.
Fire pits and BBQs work. Floss's method was scaled up.
In 2014, Nessie claimed that the M&H draglines were capable of digging the graves. That was proven to be false. Nessie then morphed his claim into some unknown type of machine that was shipped into T-II to dig the graves and exhume the bodies. The question of whether or not the M&H draglines could have dug and stockpiled the ex from the graves is settled. They weren't capable of that so forget it.

The question remains, does Nessie alter what he claims to be the facts of the holyhoax as new information comes to light? From his previous statements and his current statements it's obvious that he does. This isn't about draglines. It's about Nessie changing his story to suit his preconceived notions.

Nessie has over 29,000 posts so going over each one to check for inconsistencies or contradictions would need something like an AI algorithm or something along those lines. Doing it manually isn't a chore I'm willing to take on. His contradiction concerning the draglines was inadvertently uncovered by AgainTurnip. Your claim that this is a rehash of the dragline argument only serves to help Nessie evade the real issue of him altering his holyhoax claims to fit his preconceived notions.
I believed the dragline would work. You convinced me for a while it would not. I then noticed no witness claimed the dragline was the excavator in use, it was only secondary sources which made that claim. Blake then showed me the draglines could dig the graves. My belief has changed depending on the evidence known to me at the time. You ignore evidence (as you do not understand it) and just go with what you want to believe.

The important part is we do not know what excavator was used and what happened with the stockpile. That therefore means your claims about the M&H dragline are moot. Everyone else knows that, even Hunt wants you to shut up, but you have nothing else, so you keep on going on.
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: 29459
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: What is the Revisionist Narrative??

Post by Nessie »

Huntinger wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 5:29 am
Turnagain wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 5:20 am
Just as his wrangle over whether or not lethal concentrations of CO results in at least 50% of the victims presenting red or pink skin discoloration is an attempt to evade the fact that the alleged eyewitnesses claimed that CO poisoning resulted in black, grey, blue and yellow skin discoloration of the supposed victims.
I agree, it was brought up in that thread how CO poisoning could result in the skin discoloration mentioned, even if the corpses were not cherry red. In most instances the skin does not appear bluish due to the CO but is normal similar to the embalming morticians use; in a few cases especially if thousands were gassed using CO, there would be enough pink corpses to be noticeable. This is one sheer probability alone and the normal distribution. This scientific analysis was just pushed aside so he could waffle more. For me and some colleagues who read his posts he is regarded as an inept waste of space and time. :P
That exchange neatly sums up the denier narrative. You have no evidence to back up your claims, instead you ridicule the evidence for the claim you want to dismiss and then you suggest your unevidenced claim is what happened.

Only denial reaches a conclusion based on that method. No science or art or any other form of investigation uses that method. That is because your method is highly unreliable and indeed, it is widely known as a fallacy.
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: 7808
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: What is the Revisionist Narrative??

Post by Huntinger »

Turnagain wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 5:20 am
Generally I don't reply to Nessie but this is a clear cut case of him altering his testimony to suit his preconceived notions.
It is suggested you continue not to reply and stick to the topic. You nailed it with the analysis. To reply to any post would mean he is being fed. Most of what is said by he is off the cuff and not deeply considered; I am sure others are not so hypnic. ;)

He is entitled like anyone to comment, to say his piece: this does not necessitate a comment. To do so means the tyre is skidding in the mud.


𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

Turnagain
Posts: 8494
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: What is the Revisionist Narrative??

Post by Turnagain »

Nessie lies both in fact and by omission. Why should I reply to that?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 26 guests