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).
Post Reply
User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29913
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Nessie »

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.

The logical flaws in the denier claim are easy to see, except if you are a denier.

Ironically, deniers demand evidence for gassings and graves, so they know that evidence is how the existence or not of something is established. Then, hypocritically, deniers refuse to acknowledge that the lack of evidence for mass daily transports back out of the AR camps means that those transports cannot have happened.

Deniers demand that what is evidenced is ignored and what is not evidenced is believed. But ask a denier to explain or justify that and they troll and abuse.
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.

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!


Norm
Posts: 960
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2019 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Norm »

Nessie:
Ironically, deniers demand evidence for graves [at Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor and Treblinka II]

Nessie,

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits were dug at Belzec which were utilized as mass graves - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits deeper than 3.5 meters currently exist at Belzec - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?


Nessie,

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits were dug at Chelmno which were utilized as mass graves - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits deeper than 3.5 meters currently exist at Chelmno - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?


Nessie,

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits were dug at Sobibor which were utilized as mass graves - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits deeper than 3.5 meters currently exist at Sobibor - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?


Nessie,

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits were dug at Treblinka II which were utilized as mass graves - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits deeper than 3.5 meters currently exist at Treblinka II - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?
In some circumstances it can be rationally assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be easily discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of evidence of its occurrence as proof of its non-occurrence.
Such is the case for the fraudulently alleged holocaust mass graves: No graves = No holocaust - simple as that.

Norm
Posts: 960
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2019 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Norm »

Shamelessly stolen from Huntinger. (So good it has to used more than once - BTW, I did alter it some.)

In Nessie's world, ground disturbances = Mass Graves. The lack of acumen means this person does not realize or could realize that mass graves would produce ground disturbances, but not all ground disturbances are mass graves. Ground disturbances can be from natural events or from man made excavations. GPR is good for finding anomalies such as strange meteorites. In Nessie's world, the site below is a site of mass murder, genocide in the Americas of the Havasupai Indians. This is evident due to the rather obvious ground disturbances.

Image
Last edited by Norm on Tue Dec 10, 2019 5:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.
In some circumstances it can be rationally assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be easily discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of evidence of its occurrence as proof of its non-occurrence.
Such is the case for the fraudulently alleged holocaust mass graves: No graves = No holocaust - simple as that.

Norm
Posts: 960
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2019 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Norm »

Nessie:
As for trash pits, they have been found as well.

They are not phantom trash pits.

Yes TII had garbage and latrine pits.
In Nessie's world, trash pits and latrine pits magically become "huge mass graves."

:lol:

Image

It's not called a delusionalist for nothing!
In some circumstances it can be rationally assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be easily discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of evidence of its occurrence as proof of its non-occurrence.
Such is the case for the fraudulently alleged holocaust mass graves: No graves = No holocaust - simple as that.

Turnagain
Posts: 8822
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Turnagain »

Nessie's claims that the discussion of his lack of evidence is somehow equivalent to discussing real evidence are mystifying. He should bear in mind that...

No cremains, no graves, no holyhoax. Finito. End of story.

PrudentRegret
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2019 4:11 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by PrudentRegret »

Nessie wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 5:13 pm
Ironically, deniers demand evidence for gassings and graves, so they know that evidence is how the existence or not of something is established. Then, hypocritically, deniers refuse to acknowledge that the lack of evidence for mass daily transports back out of the AR camps means that those transports cannot have happened.
Nessie, I have to disagree with you here. If someone accuses you of murder, they should have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you did it. They do not have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you didn't do it.

Nessie, do you acknowledge that if revisionists have established reasonable doubt for the "pure extermination" camp theory, that mainstream historians should take the effort to find the physical evidence to justify the claim or correct the history? Or do you believe they already have?

In my mind, there are 3 hypotheses:

Hypothesis I: Treblinka was a pure extermination camp. 750,000 people that were brought there were murdered, cremated, and the remains buried.

Hypothesis II: Treblinka was part extermination camp and part transit camp. Some portion of the 750,000 were sent elsewhere, and the rest were murdered, cremated, and buried.

Hypothesis III: Treblinka was a transit camp where, excepting deaths from disease or hunger, nobody was gassed.

Nessie, I agree with you that revisionists haven't proven hypothesis III beyond a reasonable doubt. But I also don't think there's enough evidence to prove Hypothesis I or II beyond a reasonable doubt? Do you?

There's eyewitness testimony, which has failed in so many instances (i.e. Majdanek). We have GPR data suggesting some ground disturbances. Is that proof beyond a reasonable doubt to you that 750,000 were murdered?

Is it really so unbelievable that the witnesses were wrong or lying like they did at Majdanek, and that the Soviets destroyed the outbound train records? You really don't think these two things are at all possible?

I think those things are possible, but I am not convinced of the revisionist conclusion either. I think the scene should be forensically investigated as thoroughly as humanly possible so we can have better evidence for whatever conclusions we draw.

Nessie, do you support the archaeological excavation of these ground disturbances to identify, photograph, quantify, and catalog any remains that can be found? Why wouldn't you? It's the scene of the greatest crime in human history, and such a crime should require the most minimum standards of forensic investigation.

Turnagain
Posts: 8822
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Turnagain »

Excellent post, Prudent and I couldn't agree more. I would like to see the question of whether or not the holocaust is factual or is a holyhoax settled once and for all. I have mostly studied Treblinka and have concluded from my analysis that it is, indeed, a holyhoax. The tales of the alleged eyewitnesses are simply too fantastical to be believed.

However, if the graves and cremains do actually exist, then my analysis and beliefs are irrelevant. No matter how fantastic the tales are they are true and revisionists can fold their tents and quietly leave. Until that happens I'll maintain that it's a fake. I don't think that Nessie is ready to accept even the possibility that the holocaust is a hoax.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29913
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Nessie »

PrudentRegret wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 8:21 pm
Nessie wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 5:13 pm
Ironically, deniers demand evidence for gassings and graves, so they know that evidence is how the existence or not of something is established. Then, hypocritically, deniers refuse to acknowledge that the lack of evidence for mass daily transports back out of the AR camps means that those transports cannot have happened.
Nessie, I have to disagree with you here. If someone accuses you of murder, they should have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you did it. They do not have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you didn't do it.
The burden of proof falls on the accuser. The accuser in Holocaust denial, is the deniers and it is up to them to evidence that there were no gassings or mass shootings or plan that included killing Jews as part of clearing them from occupied territory (some deniers accepts some parts of the Holocaust, it varies as denial is not a fixed consistent belief).
Nessie, do you acknowledge that if revisionists have established reasonable doubt for the "pure extermination" camp theory, that mainstream historians should take the effort to find the physical evidence to justify the claim or correct the history? Or do you believe they already have?
It is up to deniers to evidence their claims. Just dismissing the evidence for gassings etc as false and then claiming therefore something else happened, is logically and evidentially flawed.

Pushing the burden of proof onto historians to show denial is wrong, is the logical fallacy of reversing the burden of proof.

It is very much my experience that deniers are shown the evidence to prove gassings etc, but they ignore it and even ridicule being asked to study the topic in more detail. They fixate on small issues, where they find something that a witness said, claim it cannot be and then illogically they claim it is now fine to dismiss all the witness evidence, even witnesses they have never heard of nor read.

Deniers absolutely refuse to look at what did happen instead of gassings, because they know nothing else is evidenced.
In my mind, there are 3 hypotheses:

Hypothesis I: Treblinka was a pure extermination camp. 750,000 people that were brought there were murdered, cremated, and the remains buried.

Hypothesis II: Treblinka was part extermination camp and part transit camp. Some portion of the 750,000 were sent elsewhere, and the rest were murdered, cremated, and buried.

Hypothesis III: Treblinka was a transit camp where, excepting deaths from disease or hunger, nobody was gassed.

Nessie, I agree with you that revisionists haven't proven hypothesis III beyond a reasonable doubt. But I also don't think there's enough evidence to prove Hypothesis I or II beyond a reasonable doubt? Do you?
Hypothesis III has no evidence at all to support it. It can be ruled out completely.

Hypothesis II is evidenced, which means hypothesis I can now be ruled out. There were a few transports of people from TII to work at other camps, the majority remained at TII and were gassed.
There's eyewitness testimony, which has failed in so many instances (i.e. Majdanek). We have GPR data suggesting some ground disturbances. Is that proof beyond a reasonable doubt to you that 750,000 were murdered?

Is it really so unbelievable that the witnesses were wrong or lying like they did at Majdanek, and that the Soviets destroyed the outbound train records? You really don't think these two things are at all possible?
There is corroborating evidence from multiple witnesses; Nazis and Jews from various countries, from documents, from photos and physical evidence, that TII was a death camp.

There is no evidence all of the witnesses lied or that the Soviets destroyed the camp records (why would they do that, it would be evidence for gassings, it makes more sense the Nazis destroyed the camp's records in 1942, when it was closed down).
I think those things are possible, but I am not convinced of the revisionist conclusion either. I think the scene should be forensically investigated as thoroughly as humanly possible so we can have better evidence for whatever conclusions we draw.

Nessie, do you support the archaeological excavation of these ground disturbances to identify, photograph, quantify, and catalog any remains that can be found? Why wouldn't you? It's the scene of the greatest crime in human history, and such a crime should require the most minimum standards of forensic investigation.
There already have been excavations and underground surveys of what can be surveyed. There is no way to quantify the cremated remains to try and do a body count. The Nazis did a very thorough cover up job, to destroy bodies to make a body count, identification and the cause of death impossible. All that needs to be done is evidence the cover up witnesses claim happened, did happen.

If witnesses claimed they saw a robbery and lots of jewellery was stolen and then they saw the robbers smash up the jewellery to try and hide the evidence when they knew they would be caught, would you not accept broken bits of jewellery as evidence that shows the witnesses are telling the truth?

You also need to note that denier critique of the archaeological and forensic work at the AR camps is not based on any academic knowledge. It is purely their desire to claim no Holocaust and to find any excuse to dismiss evidence that does not suit 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
Nessie
Posts: 29913
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 9:25 pm
Excellent post, Prudent and I couldn't agree more. I would like to see the question of whether or not the holocaust is factual or is a holyhoax settled once and for all. I have mostly studied Treblinka and have concluded from my analysis that it is, indeed, a holyhoax. The tales of the alleged eyewitnesses are simply too fantastical to be believed.
You have ignored most of the eye witnesses. It makes no logical sense to dismiss all of the witnesses because of what some of the witnesses said. It does not make logical sense to dismiss all of what one witness has said, because they said something "fantastical" about one thing.
However, if the graves and cremains do actually exist, then my analysis and beliefs are irrelevant. No matter how fantastic the tales are they are true and revisionists can fold their tents and quietly leave.
It also works that if there is no evidence that the ground was ever disturbed and it can be shown to contain no cremains, that there cannot have been mass graves or cremations. It is reversing the burden of proof to demand evidence for graves and cremains, when you claim there is none. It is up to you to evidence there is none.

Deniers have been to TII and claimed they have found nothing. Why do you not use them as your evidence?
Until that happens I'll maintain that it's a fake. I don't think that Nessie is ready to accept even the possibility that the holocaust is a hoax.
I logically believe what is evidenced and disbelieve what is not evidenced.

You demand we reject what is evidenced and believe what is not evidenced. That makes no sense.
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.

Norm
Posts: 960
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2019 6:59 pm
Contact:

Re: The logical flaws in denial.

Post by Norm »

Nessie:
There is no evidence all of the witnesses lied... There already have been excavations and underground surveys of what can be surveyed... The Nazis did a very thorough cover up job, to destroy bodies... You also need to note that denier critique of the archaeological and forensic work at the AR camps is not based on any academic knowledge. It is purely their desire to claim no Holocaust and to find any excuse to dismiss evidence that does not suit them.

Nessie,

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits were dug at Belzec which were utilized as mass graves - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits deeper than 3.5 meters currently exist at Belzec - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?


Nessie,

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits were dug at Chelmno which were utilized as mass graves - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits deeper than 3.5 meters currently exist at Chelmno - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?


Nessie,

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits were dug at Sobibor which were utilized as mass graves - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits deeper than 3.5 meters currently exist at Sobibor - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?


Nessie,

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits were dug at Treblinka II which were utilized as mass graves - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?

Has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that pits deeper than 3.5 meters currently exist at Treblinka II - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then: How many?

Of that number, how many can you prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, currently contain human remains?
In some circumstances it can be rationally assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be easily discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of evidence of its occurrence as proof of its non-occurrence.
Such is the case for the fraudulently alleged holocaust mass graves: No graves = No holocaust - simple as that.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 21 guests