Denier reliance on fallacies.

Do your trolling, venting, goofing-off, and testing here. "Siberian Exile" is the proverbial "cooler" for over-heated RODOH participants. "Siberian Exile" is an almost uncensored free-speech landfill--and readers be warned: Free-Speech ain't always pretty. Please exercise your free-speech rights wisely and judiciously. You Have Been Warned!

Moderator: Joe Future

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 25033
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Denier reliance on fallacies.

Post by Nessie » Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:56 pm

Werd wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:29 pm
Nessie wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:17 pm
Werd wrote: I am telling you that you need to find documents with actual real time data.
What if there are none?
Then I guess no documentary evidence backs up Tauber's numbers. :lol:
Projected totals back him up. There is no actual data from a cremation in Birkenau in 1944 to back him up.
I would be delighted to have a replica of the Birkenau ovens built and then cremations of bodies are studied. I just do not think it is possible to do that.
That's an ignorant statement. It's also wrong.
OK, where would you get the bodies from?
Other witnesses and supporting evidence corroborate the numbers. The rest of Tauber's claims about fast, multiple cremations are corroborated by the documents.
What is this corroborating evidence if not documents? Who are the other idiots that are claiming that by 1943 and 1944, the Nazi ovens had quadrupled their cremation abilities by going from one smashable skeleton in 33 to 40 minutes, to four smashable skeletons in 30 minutes? :lol:
I can't find the Jews, therefore ovens.
Not my argument.
Yes it is. We know Tauber is correct because...
We know because there is no evidence they left. No witness, no document, no photo, nothing evidences those people sent to the kremas then left the kremas and the camp.
Yet again you have edited down my argument to misrepresent it. My actual argument is;

We know Tauber is correct because there are multiple witnesses who also speak to fast multiple cremations and documents which speak to the Nazis planning and working towards fast multiple cremations.

You claim he is not correct and when I ask you to evidence what did happen to those people, you have no evidence to show they left the camp. That logically means your doubts about the evidence from Tauber and others and supporting evidence are wrong.
There is no document which states the times claimed by Tauber.
Took you months, but you finally admitted it. I knew you would crack if I would outtroll your trolling.
It has taken you months to finally understand that.
Thanks for admitting you believe Tauber told the truth despite having no actual scientific evidence of it.
Since there has been no other instance of cremations on the scale at Birkenau and no chance of replicating what took place, there never will be actual scientific evidence. instead what I have is a lot of historical evidence Tauber told the truth.
That does not mean, therefore what Tauber claimed is not true.
It can also mean no such document survived or no such document was produced.
Nessie has no proof the Nazi ovens quadrupled their output but he still believes it anyway thanks to this nice ad hoc. Once again,
Other witnesses and supporting evidence corroborate the numbers. The rest of Tauber's claims about fast, multiple cremations are corroborated by the documents.
What is this corroborating evidence if not documents? Who are the other idiots that are claiming that by 1943 and 1944, the Nazi ovens had quadrupled their cremation abilities by going from one smashable skeleton in 33 to 40 minutes, to four smashable skeletons in 30 minutes? :lol:
That is not exactly what Tauber claimed;

https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=82890

"In Krematorium I, there were three, two-muffle furnaces, as I have already mentioned. Each muffle could incinerate five human bodies. Thirty corpses could be incinerated at the same time in this crematorium. At the time when I was working there, the incineration of such a charge (5 corpses in one muffle) took up to an hour and a half, because they were the bodies of very thin people, real skeletons, which burned very slowly."

"...the incineration of this charge took about 40 minutes. In continuous operation, we could burn two charges per hour. According to the regulations, were supposed to charge the muffles every half hour. Ober Capo August explained to us that, according to the calculations and plans for this crematorium, 5 to 7 minutes was allowed to burn one corpse in a muffle. Because with that quantity we were obliged to work without interruption, for as soon as the last muffle was charged, the contents of the first had been consumed. In order to be able to take a pause during the work, we would charge 4 or 5 corpses in each muffle."

"We worked in two shifts, a day shift and a night shift. On average, we incinerated 2500 corpses a day."

The other witnesses and documents have been listed on multiple occasions;

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ce-on.html

which corroborate that fast, multiple cremations were being aimed for and achieved. There is no witness nor document that I know of, which states exactly the same timings and numbers as your version of what Tauber state. But your version is a mashup of Tauber's claims and it ignores that the data you demand is not 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
Nessie
Posts: 25033
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Denier reliance on fallacies.

Post by Nessie » Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:06 pm

Werd wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:35 pm
Nessie wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:30 pm
You produce opinion that the shower heads were for a shower that was actually built and opinion that because vergasung was used elsewhere about delousing, it can never be used to refer to a homicidal gas chamber as if it is evidence.
Just because Vergasung meant delousing in other places, you can't prove it didn't mean homicide in the January 29 document.

Nice argument from ignorance fallacy.
No, it is me pointing out that you are trying to use a non sequitur. Just because that word was used to refer to delousing elsewhere, does not mean therefore it can never have been used to refer to a room used for homicidal gassings. Lock someone in a delousing chamber and they will die.
to evidence a shower was built...you need evidence of that ACTUALLY HAPPENING.
The building (leichenkeller) was already there. All it needed was real shower heads. Which it got. And given the lack of a central sauna in 1943, it makes sense that the showers were real.
"Males sense" is not evidence, it is opinion. To evidence people showering, you need evidence of people showering.
All you need is a witness who speaks to being taken into one of the kremas and showering, or a Sonderkommando who worked there speaking to people actually showering or a document that states something like, the showers have been installed and are now functioning.
Sonderkommandos that tell lies such as walls being painted to cover up the Prussian Blue, or witnesses telling absurd lies like surviving gas chambers are not interested in telling the truth, so they can be disregarded.
You cannot reasonably dismiss all witness evidence because some of it you do not believe or some did lie.
An opinion on a word is not evidence that actual delousing chambers were built and operated inside the kremas.
And your opinion that the January 29 document is the only time Vergasung meant homicide is not evidence that this is so.
I am not claiming it is. Vergasung just tells us gassings took place inside the kremas. What was gassed is found from other evidence and you have none that it was clothing.
I produce evidence to back up gassings and cremations.
Zimmerman's article is not evidence given how Mattogno tore it up years ago in the book AUSCHWITZ LIES.
I have no idea about Zimmerman. I have produced evidence from witnesses and documents.
If you locked someone inside the known and accepted delousing chambers at Birkenau, such as building BW5b they would die.
When did that happen? :lol:
I am not saying it did, idiot.
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: 25033
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Denier reliance on fallacies.

Post by Nessie » Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:06 pm

I will keep on posting this to show how Werd lacks the intelligence to deal with the use of fallacies by Rudolf.

When I examine Rudolf's claims, I find them to be flawed as explained here;

1 - he only claims it could not have happened as described, he does not claim it could not have happened at all, period. That there is limited detail and witnesses are the least reliable form of evidence, just because it could not have happened as they describe only means that. Rudolf also admits he may be wrong. So at most he casts some doubt on the evidence for gassing, he does not prove conclusively it did not happen.

2 - it is a non sequitur to claim because one thing may not have happened, therefore something else did. That something else needs to be evidenced independently. You cannot rely on evidence about one thing, to prove another completely separate thing.

3 - As for the science over how much Prussian Blue there should be, the traces in known delousing chambers is high, the traces in the kremas is low and buildings only occasionally disinfected is non-existent. So the conditions and exposure must have been different. That is all that evidences. It does not evidence, therefore no one was gassed inside the kremas. It also evidences the denier claim the kremas were used for delousing is wrong.

I have proved my point that Werd uses fallacies as he has not evidence all those selected not to work left the camp.
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: 8482
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Denier reliance on fallacies.

Post by Werd » Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:17 pm

We know Tauber is correct because there are multiple witnesses who also speak to fast multiple cremations and documents which speak to the Nazis planning and working towards fast multiple cremations.
Wash. Rinse. Repeat. Your own words convict you.
There is no actual data from a cremation in Birkenau in 1944 to back him up.
Nessie wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:56 pm
Projected totals back him up.
1. Not actual totals. Yeah I know.

2. You say that is if it means/proves something substantial. Not only is this the dumbest thing you can say, but it's also the lowest form of actual evidence. So I'm not even going to waste time on the side issue of where these documents are that even had the wherewithal to estimate that they could render 4 smashable corpses in one muffle in 30 minutes. :lol:
I would be delighted to have a replica of the Birkenau ovens built and then cremations of bodies are studied. I just do not think it is possible to do that.
That's an ignorant statement. It's also wrong.
OK, where would you get the bodies from?
I'm saying it's stupid to say it's impossible to rebuild ovens to old German specifications. The Topf literature exists to this day.
You claim he is not correct and when I ask you to evidence what did happen to those people,
Appealing to demographics to talk about ovens breaks your #2 rule.
That something else needs to be evidenced independently. You cannot rely on evidence about one thing, to prove another completely separate thing.
Ovens and documents about ovens are the only things that are admissable in a discussion about ovens and documents about ovens.
you have no evidence to show they left the camp.....

The Jews are missing and weren't successfully traced and followed down to the last Jew...
That logically means...
Therefore...
your doubts about the evidence from Tauber and others and supporting evidence are wrong.
Tauber told the truth about ovens

I can't find the Jews. Therefore ovens. That is an argument that you make, no matter how many times you lie and deny that you are making it.
There is no document which states the times claimed by Tauber.
Took you months, but you finally admitted it. I knew you would crack if I would outtroll your trolling.
It has taken you months to finally understand that.
I was the one saying all along documents did not directly reflect Tauber's numbers. I was the one saying the documents did not prove cremations were possible in the specific times Tauber claimed (such as 4 smashable skeletons in 30 minutes). Turns out when you tried to claim such on page 95 of "Ovens" i had to expose that lie of yours.
viewtopic.php?p=145022#p145022
That is not exactly what Tauber claimed///
Nessie in order to keep the debate going now has to pretend that I got it wrong to say that tauber said that 4 corpses were cremated (reduced to smashable skeletons) every 30 minutes per muffle. Turns out, that is exactly what Tauber said.
"...the incineration of this charge took about 40 minutes.
Which is the initial charge. The first one of the day when the oven hasn't warmed up to it's optimal fullest yet, but is still close.
In continuous operation, we could burn two charges per hour.
As the day went on, the charge of multiple corpses would take 10 minutes less. And how many corpses per charge?
we would charge 4 or 5 corpses in each muffle."
So why does Nessie pretend I got it wrong that tauber said 4 corpses per muffle per 30 minutes, and then go on to cite Tauber saying exactly what I said he said, 4-5 corpses per muffle per 30 minutes? Because he is a lying troll that has to waste time upon being exposed as not actually having any documentary evidence that Tauber's numbers bore resemblance to reality. I mean he tried to claim such once on page 95 of "Ovens" and then I had to slap him down for that.
Last edited by Werd on Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Werd
Posts: 8482
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Denier reliance on fallacies.

Post by Werd » Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:22 pm

Nessie wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:06 pm
Werd wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:35 pm
Nessie wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:30 pm
You produce opinion that the shower heads were for a shower that was actually built and opinion that because vergasung was used elsewhere about delousing, it can never be used to refer to a homicidal gas chamber as if it is evidence.
Just because Vergasung meant delousing in other places, you can't prove it didn't mean homicide in the January 29 document.

Nice argument from ignorance fallacy.
Just because that word was used to refer to delousing elsewhere, does not mean therefore it can never have been used to refer to a room used for homicidal gassings.
Looks like I was correct about your argument from ignorance fallacy when I used italics earlier. Your own words convict you. :lol: My pointing out your argument from ignorance fallacy is apparently a non sequitor fallacy. But it's actually not. Your whole tactic of "well I can imagine it still being at least possible" is the weakest line of argument. It's really just faith and not documented science.
And your opinion that the January 29 document is the only time Vergasung meant homicide is not evidence that this is so.
I am not claiming it is.
We just saw you doing it just now. :roll:
Vergasung just tells us gassings took place inside the kremas.
Just because that word was used to refer to delousing elsewhere, does not mean therefore it can never have been used to refer to a room used for homicidal gassings.
And Mattogno's gathered documentary evidence tells us exactly that Vergasung was not homicidal. Not even in the January 29 document.

Go ahead and just keep arguing in circles. It's amusing.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 25033
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Denier reliance on fallacies.

Post by Nessie » Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:54 pm

Werd wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:17 pm
We know Tauber is correct because there are multiple witnesses who also speak to fast multiple cremations and documents which speak to the Nazis planning and working towards fast multiple cremations.
Wash. Rinse. Repeat. Your own words convict you.
It does not matter that no document precisely matches Tauber's claims.

Your double standard is requiring two independent pieces of evidence to match precisely before you believe cremations, yet you believe those people left the camp, with no evidence at all.
There is no actual data from a cremation in Birkenau in 1944 to back him up.
Nessie wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:56 pm
Projected totals back him up.
1. Not actual totals. Yeah I know.

2. You say that is if it means/proves something substantial. Not only is this the dumbest thing you can say, but it's also the lowest form of actual evidence. So I'm not even going to waste time on the side issue of where these documents are that even had the wherewithal to estimate that they could render 4 smashable corpses in one muffle in 30 minutes. :lol:
The evidence from documents and witnesses is that the Nazis were wanting to cremate as many people as possible, as fast as possible. You do not and cannot deny that.
I would be delighted to have a replica of the Birkenau ovens built and then cremations of bodies are studied. I just do not think it is possible to do that.
That's an ignorant statement. It's also wrong.
OK, where would you get the bodies from?
I'm saying it's stupid to say it's impossible to rebuild ovens to old German specifications. The Topf literature exists to this day. [/quote][/quote]

I asked about where would you get the bodies from? Not that it is impossible to build replica ovens. Where would you get the bodies from?
You claim he is not correct and when I ask you to evidence what did happen to those people,
Appealing to demographics to talk about ovens breaks your #2 rule.
You have misrepresented my rules.
That something else needs to be evidenced independently. You cannot rely on evidence about one thing, to prove another completely separate thing.
Ovens and documents about ovens are the only things that are admissable in a discussion about ovens and documents about ovens.
Good, you get that ovens can only evidence ovens and people leaving the camp can only evidence people leaving the camp You cannot use one to evidence the other.

You can then use one set of evidence to verify if the other is correct or not.
you have no evidence to show they left the camp.....

The Jews are missing and weren't successfully traced and followed down to the last Jew...
None have been traced at all.
That logically means...
Therefore...
your doubts about the evidence from Tauber and others and supporting evidence are wrong.
Tauber told the truth about ovens

I can't find the Jews. Therefore ovens. That is an argument that you make, no matter how many times you lie and deny that you are making it.
No. You cannot find the Jews leaving the camp, therefore they did not leave the camp.

You admitted only evidence about ovens evidences ovens. It cannot evidence anything else. So, unless you have evidence they left the camp, they did not leave the camp.

It does not matter how many times you misrepresent my argument, it is still a misrepresentation.
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: 25033
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Denier reliance on fallacies.

Post by Nessie » Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:55 pm

Werd wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:22 pm
Nessie wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:06 pm
Werd wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:35 pm
Nessie wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:30 pm
You produce opinion that the shower heads were for a shower that was actually built and opinion that because vergasung was used elsewhere about delousing, it can never be used to refer to a homicidal gas chamber as if it is evidence.
Just because Vergasung meant delousing in other places, you can't prove it didn't mean homicide in the January 29 document.

Nice argument from ignorance fallacy.
Just because that word was used to refer to delousing elsewhere, does not mean therefore it can never have been used to refer to a room used for homicidal gassings.
Looks like I was correct about your argument from ignorance fallacy when I used italics earlier. Your own words convict you. :lol: My pointing out your argument from ignorance fallacy is apparently a non sequitor fallacy. But it's actually not. Your whole tactic of "well I can imagine it still being at least possible" is the weakest line of argument. It's really just faith and not documented science.
And your opinion that the January 29 document is the only time Vergasung meant homicide is not evidence that this is so.
I am not claiming it is.
We just saw you doing it just now. :roll:
Vergasung just tells us gassings took place inside the kremas.
Just because that word was used to refer to delousing elsewhere, does not mean therefore it can never have been used to refer to a room used for homicidal gassings.
And Mattogno's gathered documentary evidence tells us exactly that Vergasung was not homicidal. Not even in the January 29 document.

Go ahead and just keep arguing in circles. It's amusing.
You have no evidence of anyone actually showering or of any clothing being deloused inside the kremas.
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: 8482
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Denier reliance on fallacies.

Post by Werd » Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:04 pm

You cannot find the Jews leaving the camp, therefore they did not leave the camp.
You can not prove German ovens in the 30's could reduce 4 corpses to smashable skeletons in 30 minutes. In fact no modern oven can accomplish that, much less German ovens who are only documented to have cremated one corpse in 33-40 minutes.
Nessie wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:54 pm
It does not matter that no document precisely matches Tauber's claims.
Game over, folks.
You have no evidence of anyone actually showering or of any clothing being deloused inside the kremas.
Wrong.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 25033
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Denier reliance on fallacies.

Post by Nessie » Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:14 pm

Werd, can you use evidence about ovens and how many bodies they could cremate in a certain time, to evidence people left Birkenau?
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: 8482
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Denier reliance on fallacies.

Post by Werd » Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:35 pm

Nessie wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:14 pm
Werd, can you use evidence about ovens and how many bodies they could cremate in a certain time, to evidence people left Birkenau?
All I know is that if you can't cremate bodies as fast as Tauber and other liars have claimed, then something is amiss. The number of murdered Jews in gas chambers and thus bodies cremated is way too large. My belief is that they were not gassed in the mass claimed numbers. The resulting traffic jam as shown in Auschwitz: The Comedy (1, 2) bottleneck, would have shown hundreds if not, thousands of bodies outside to be photographed in May. That didn't happen. We also couldn't find any mass dead but yet ungassed Hungarian Jews clogging up the leichenkellers and causing an overflow since the leichenkellers in 1944 summer were already being used to store bodies from natural mortality since Hoess reinvoked an old 1943 order to take dead bodies to the leichenkellers twice a day.
viewtopic.php?p=79789#p79789

So at the very least, there were much smaller scale gassings. I'm talking not hundreds of thousands, but probably only hundreds or few thousands in order to explain the lack of activity in the photos. But how does this wash with an alleged assembly line killing machine that allegedly wanted to exterminate all the Jews? There is a disconnect...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest