Werd wrote: ↑
Mon Mar 15, 2021 10:53 pm
Nessie wrote: ↑
Mon Mar 15, 2021 9:32 am
If he failed, then every single historian who uses the historical method and who looks for corroborating, converging evidence is wrong. that means the entire of history has been inaccurately investigated
You're such a loser!
Nobody disagress with corroborating evidence. MATTOGNO FOUND THE REAL DOCUMENTARY RECORD CORROBORATES NON HOMICIDAL ACTIVITY! THAT'S THE POINT! When Pressac stacks up his 27 criminal traces IT DOES LOOK LIKE CORROBORATION. I UNDERSTAND A SIMPLETON LIKE YOU WOULD FALL FOR IT. But once you RIP APART THE STACK, and check each "criminal trace" individually, and then find 5 or 6 documents per criminal trace to establish the real context, THE HOMICIDAL CONTEXT DISAPPEARS LIKE FOG! TOO BAD. CRY ME A RIVER!
Mattogno is the REAL ONE who is showing true corroboration. And that just pisses you off. Which is why you always end up saying "well where did the Jews go then?"
Mattogno cherry picks certain evidence and he refuses to look at other evidence that does not suit him. Pressace looks at all of the evidence. That makes Pressac's conclusion more reliable than Mattognos. Pressac's conclusion special referred to gassing people is more credible and reliable than Mattogno's suggestion it may have been about delousing clothing or showering that he cannot prove actually took place.
Documents are written by people. You cannot claim total accuracy and reliability from documents and no accuracy and reliability from people. There are plenty of documents that deniers claim are fake, because they say things deniers do not want to hear. Mattogno is wrong to concentrate only on documents and ignore all other evidence. That methodology is flawed and wrong.
Blah blah blah. You're using vague words,
No I am not, it is very clear what I am saying there. You claim certain documents are fake and that people may submit false reports, so you know that documents are not necessarily 100% reliable.
You contradict yourself when you claim documents are the most reliable form of evidence, but you often claim documents have been forged or otherwise faked.
....but you can't show ONE FUCKING EXAMPLE of where Mattogno screwed up in his response to Presasc.
GO AHEAD AND FIND ONE. I DARE YOU!
Werd wrote: ↑
Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:05 am
Nessie can't cite a paragraph, much less a page number to show where Mattogno went wrong. I suspect he is most angry at sections 5.7 (since that dealt with the March 29 document he is so fond of as seen in my OP above), 4.3 and 4.4
Why are you so afraid of this after over a year, Nessie? Why can't you answer this challenge? Go ahead and show Mattogno is wrong. Don't just try to "logic" him as false a priori. That's like trying to prove God exists via ontological argument. You need to do better than that.
The point you are trying to dodge is that it evidences there was a special action going on that involved dead people, rather than clothes or delousing.
I'M THE ONE THAT WENT AND LOOKED INTO THAT VERY DOCUMENT THAT YOU POSTED ABOUT DENTAL WORK. AND FOUND OUT IT WASN'T ABOUT GASSING LIVING PEOPLE! SO WHAT IF IT DEALS WITH EXTRACTING DENTAL GOLD FROM CORPSES? I NEVER DENIED THIS!
Mattogno is wrong about the dental document. He is wrong to conclude it has an innocent reference to "special". It, along with ALL of the other evidence, proves "special" was an action to kill Jews.
It involves extracting gold teeth from corpses. Thanks for agreeing with me.
Glad you agree with me, special actions involved dead people.
AND HOW DOES THAT PROVE GASSING? OH IT DOESN'T? GREAT! THEN YOU HAVE NO POINT AND YOU NEVER WILL! YOU CAN KEEP TRYING TO STRETCH FROM GOLD IN CORPSES TO PEOPLE IN GAS CHAMBERS ALL YOU WANT. YOU CAN TRY TO EXTRAPOLATE WITH THIS LONE DOCUMENT ALL YOU WANT, BUT IT'LL END UP GETTING YOU NOWHERE EXCEPT FALLACY LAND, FOOL!
I'm not trying to do that, Werd.
THEN SHUT UP AND STOP WASTING TIME!
You are panicked. I am not claiming the dental document on its own is proof. What is does prove is that "special" included an action to remove teeth from people. That is people, not clothes or showering.
Inside the Kremas, there were special actions involving Jewish people,
Where are those documents that specifically say "special action" or "special treatment" that is connected to any Krema? Is it anywhere in that 2012 Holocaust controversies index? Or are you just going to keep repeating this bullshit over and over again pretending you have already proven it with JUST ONE EXAMPLE - AND YOU HAVEN'T EVEN DONE THAT? I mean you came close at one point, talking about windows and doors, but that went nowhere.
Find me a document that says special treatment
or special action
was going on in a leichenkeller or shut the hell up!
This proves a special action took place inside the Kremas, which were being constructed to enable that action
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... ce-on.html
"Letter from Karl Bischoff to SS-WVHA of 13 October 1942 on “due to the situation created by the special actions, the construction of the crematorium had to be begun immediately just this past July”
This identifies that the special action involved one of the underground rooms in the Krema;
"Report from Karl Bischoff of 4 November 1942 on “special cellar” in crematorium 2 [ A new document mentioning "special cellars" (Sonderkeller) in the crematoria 2 and 3 at Birkenau ]"
"Memo from Fritz Wolter of 27 November 1942 on “special cellars” in crematorium 2 [Schüle, Industrie und Holocaust, p. 180]"
This shows that the special action was not just limited to one room in the Kremas;
"Memo from Heinrich Swoboda of 29 January 1943 on “cremation with simultaneous special treatment” in crematorium 2"
It does not matter that special action can be identified specifically to a Liechenkeller, it involved the use of the whole building.