The claim of no Holocaust needs evidence.

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).
User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8516
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: The claim of no Holocaust needs evidence.

Post by been-there » Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:55 am

Nessie wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:35 am
Been-there's analogy about Salem fails because there are alternative forms of witch; the pagan believers in witchcraft and witches who can cast spells and have actual powers. It is possible to believe in one and not the other, or both or neither. There are various alternatives.

The gassings at the AR camps are binary. They either took place or they did not. If they did not, then millions of people were not gassed and they had to have left the camps.
Oh Boy: dishonest AND moronic. :roll:

DO YOU believe there WERE PAGAN BELIEVERS IN WITCHCRAFT who were tried IN SALEM IN 1692? Yes or no?
If not, can you prove that there were none?

We are dealing with a dishonest idiot who won't concede even the simplest point of error in his argument.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26797
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The claim of no Holocaust needs evidence.

Post by Nessie » Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:06 pm

been-there wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:55 am
Nessie wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:35 am
Been-there's analogy about Salem fails because there are alternative forms of witch; the pagan believers in witchcraft and witches who can cast spells and have actual powers. It is possible to believe in one and not the other, or both or neither. There are various alternatives.

The gassings at the AR camps are binary. They either took place or they did not. If they did not, then millions of people were not gassed and they had to have left the camps.
Oh Boy: dishonest AND moronic. :roll:
You are getting desperate when you resort to breaking forum rules and insulting your opponent.
DO YOU believe there WERE PAGAN BELIEVERS IN WITCHCRAFT who were tried IN SALEM IN 1692? Yes or no?
If not, can you prove that there were none?
It is obvious what you are trying to do, use the Salem witch trials to claim deniers are excused from evidencing their claims.

I do not believe in witches, as in flying broomsticks, spells etc, as that is totally unevidenced. I do believe that some people self identify as witches as a form of paganistic belief, because I have met one and there is evidence there are others.

I have not looked at the Salem witch trials and do not know what is evidenced and what is not, so I cannot answer your question. The answer will be from what can be evidenced and what cannot. Whatever my answer is, I know that the burden of proof will be on me.
We are dealing with a dishonest idiot who won't concede even the simplest point of error in his argument.
It is neither dishonest, nor idiotic, to point out that deniers are the ones claiming no mass gassings and therefore they are the ones to provide the evidence for that. That is the burden of proof. I have made no error.

A much better analogy that Salem witches, is the claim that the British did not gas any German, Austrian, Italian who was interred on the Isle of Man during WII. That is evidenced by;

1 - no witnesses, no document, no physical evidence of gassings and instead they speak to those being interred living in camps and working locally.
2 - being able to evidence those sent to the Isle of Man also left the island.

So, in the same way, if the Nazis did not gas anyone at the AR camps or A-B kremas, there will be witnesses who worked inside the AR camps and kremas who will speak to there being no gassings, there will be no documents about gassings or documents about other functions for the kremas, there will be no physical evidence of gassings and there will be evidence that those people then left the camps.

The problem for you is that there is no such evidence to prove no gassings. Hence you desperate attempt to reverse the burden of proof and claim it is up to others to prove there were gassings and not up to deniers to prove there were not.
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.

Turnagain
Posts: 5955
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: The claim of no Holocaust needs evidence.

Post by Turnagain » Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:21 pm

Nessie wrote:
The problem for you is that there is no such evidence to prove no gassings.
Of course there's proof that gassing with an IC engine at Treblinka did NOT occur. The exhaust from a large IC engine can't be turned into a hermetically sealed building for as long as 20 minutes. That's an impossibility. Therefore no gassing occurred.

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

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8516
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: The claim of no Holocaust needs evidence.

Post by been-there » Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:38 pm

Nessie wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:06 pm
been-there wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:55 am
Nessie wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:35 am
Been-there's analogy about Salem fails because there are alternative forms of witch; the pagan believers in witchcraft and witches who can cast spells and have actual powers. It is possible to believe in one and not the other, or both or neither. There are various alternatives.

The gassings at the AR camps are binary. They either took place or they did not. If they did not, then millions of people were not gassed and they had to have left the camps.
Oh Boy: dishonest AND moronic. :roll:
DO YOU believe there WERE PAGAN BELIEVERS IN WITCHCRAFT who were tried IN SALEM IN 1692? Yes or no?
If not, can you prove that there were none?
I do not believe in witches, as in flying broomsticks, spells etc, as that is totally unevidenced.

I have not looked at the Salem witch trials and do not know what is evidenced and what is not, so I cannot answer your question. The answer will be from what can be evidenced and what cannot. Whatever my answer is, I know that the burden of proof will be on me.
We are dealing with a dishonest idiot who won't concede even the simplest point of error in his argument.
It is neither dishonest, nor idiotic, to point out that deniers are the ones claiming no mass gassings and therefore they are the ones to provide the evidence for that. That is the burden of proof. I have made no error.
The people who were accused of witchcraft in Salem WERE accused of flying on broomsticks, casting spells etc. :roll:
So again you have been arguing from a position of wilful ignorance.

You don't believe they were witches presumably BECAUSE there is no physical evidence that people can fly on broomsticks, cast spells, etc. Right?
So I am asking you to provide evidence of 'no witches in Salem'.

I am asking you to do that because you cannot do it. It is not possible to prove the absence of a thing like that. Just as no-one can prove there are no unicorns or fairies or leprechauns, etc.

We who don't believe in such things DO NOT HAVE TO provide evidence supporting our skepticism.Those who maintain such things are the ones who are required to prove they do exist.

This is basic logic.

E.g. In exactly the same way, asking those who doubt there are mass graves with tons of cremains and millions of human teeth in the ground at Treblinka are NOT the ones who are making a claim. That is a moronic misrepresentation. A claim has been made that over 700,000 people were buried at Treblinka and then disinterred then cremated.
We who doubt that claim because of the lack of evidence for it, need not prove there is no evidence for it. It is the prerogative of those who are making the claim that there is, to just provide it.

And the reality is that after seven years research at Treblinka, a University of Staffordshire archeological team appear to have failed to find that evidence. The reality is that they haven't produced it, anyway. They have produced evidence, but NOT any that proves the 'extermination of 700,0000' claim. They failed in their intended mission. And further evidence of that is that Caroline Sturdy Colls pulled out of a lecture that was open to the public after she heard there were people who were going to turn up and question her about this lack of evidence.

Q1: Why would someone bottle out of that challenge IF they had the physical evidence to support the T2 extermination camp claim?

Image

You are a total dimwit and that is not an insult that I regard as a statement of proven fact of many years. In my view you should be banned from this forum because you add NOTHING to any discussion. You can't understand basic logic. You only create irritation and frustration with your obvious idiocy.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26797
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The claim of no Holocaust needs evidence.

Post by Nessie » Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:29 pm

been-there wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:38 pm
.....

The people who were accused of witchcraft in Salem WERE accused of flying on broomsticks, casting spells etc. :roll:
So again you have been arguing from a position of wilful ignorance.
I have no idea what the alleged witches at Salem were accused of doing. I am not claiming that they were or were not accused of flying brooms or spells or anything.
You don't believe they were witches presumably BECAUSE there is no physical evidence that people can fly on broomsticks, cast spells, etc. Right?
Not just no physical evidence, no evidence at all. If something did not happen, then there will be no evidence of it happening. Just like there is no evidence of mass daily departures from the AR camps or A-B kremas, which is evidence it did not happen.
So I am asking you to provide evidence of 'no witches in Salem'.

I am asking you to do that because you cannot do it. It is not possible to prove the absence of a thing like that. Just as no-one can prove there are no unicorns or fairies or leprechauns, etc.
Rubbish. Proving no unicorns, fairies etc is done by failing to find any evidence of their existence.

Just like denial cannot find any existence of the millions of people claimed not to have been gassed and who had to have been transported back out of the AR camps and A-B as those camps could not have accommodated millions of people between them.
We who don't believe in such things DO NOT HAVE TO provide evidence supporting our skepticism.Those who maintain such things are the ones who are required to prove they do exist.

This is basic logic.
It is the non sequitur fallacy, whereby deniers claim that because they do not believe the evidence for gassings, therefore no gassings took place.
E.g. In exactly the same way, asking those who doubt there are mass graves with tons of cremains and millions of human teeth in the ground at Treblinka are NOT the ones who are making a claim. That is a moronic misrepresentation.
The claim that there are no mass graves and tons of cremains, including teeth is for that claimant to evidence and prove.
A claim has been made that over 700,000 people were buried at Treblinka and then disinterred then cremated.
We who doubt that claim because of the lack of evidence for it, need not prove there is no evidence for it. It is the prerogative of those who are making the claim that there is, to just provide it.
If deniers just doubted the evidence then they would not go around making claims of no gassings and Holocaust.

If there was just doubt, then there would be a sceptical examination to find out what did happen instead of gassings. But deniers refuse to do that.
And the reality is that after seven years research at Treblinka, a University of Staffordshire archeological team appear to have failed to find that evidence. The reality is that they haven't produced it, anyway. They have produced evidence, but NOT any that proves the 'extermination of 700,0000' claim. They failed in their intended mission.
It was not the intended mission to prove gassings, mass graves and cremations purely through a physical examination of the camp. The Nazis did such a thorough cover up of the camp that they made proving what happened by physical evidence alone impossible. That in itself is evidence of criminal conduct, as criminals often try to cover up their crimes.
And further evidence of that is that Caroline Sturdy Colls pulled out of a lecture that was open to the public after she heard there were people who were going to turn up and question her about this lack of evidence.

Q1: Why would someone bottle out of that challenge IF they had the physical evidence to support the T2 extermination camp claim?

Image

You are a total dimwit and that is not an insult that I regard as a statement of proven fact of many years. In my view you should be banned from this forum because you add NOTHING to any discussion. You can't understand basic logic. You only create irritation and frustration with your obvious idiocy.
I do not know anything about C S-C pulling out of a lecture. You want me banned because you know my argument is correct and the burden of proof of no Holocaust is on deniers and that deniers cannot find any evidence to back up their claims. Instead, you are reversing the burden of proof. You claim TII was not a death camp and then demand others prove you wrong.
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: 26797
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The claim of no Holocaust needs evidence.

Post by Nessie » Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:32 pm

Turnagain wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 3:21 pm
Nessie wrote:
The problem for you is that there is no such evidence to prove no gassings.
Of course there's proof that gassing with an IC engine at Treblinka did NOT occur. The exhaust from a large IC engine can't be turned into a hermetically sealed building for as long as 20 minutes. That's an impossibility. Therefore no gassing occurred.

No cremains, no graves, no holyhoax. Finito. End of story.
Or, the claim that the engine was being run into a perfectly sealed building is wrong.
Or, the claim that an engine cannot be run for 20 minutes into a hermetically sealed building is wrong.

To prove no gassings you need witnesses, documents, physical evidence that the building was not used as a gas chamber or it was used for another purpose.
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: 4894
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: The claim of no Holocaust needs evidence.

Post by Huntinger » Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:40 pm

Nessie wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:32 pm
To prove no gassings you need witnesses, documents, physical evidence that the building was not used as a gas chamber or it was used for another purpose.
This thread is not about the method of alleged execution and is off topic. It is on the alleged holocaust in that its absence needs evidencing. As no clear definition is given of what is meant by the term holocaust the thread is totally invalid as its meaning is more shiftier than the sands of the Sahara. Even Jude use the word Shoah now which means "calamity" in Hebrew.
Bier trinken und das Leben in vollen Zügen genießen.

Turnagain
Posts: 5955
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: The claim of no Holocaust needs evidence.

Post by Turnagain » Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:42 pm

been-there wrote:
You are a total dimwit...
I'm entertaining the notion that Nessie is unhinged. Gone bonkers, slipping his clutch, whatever. Even when presented with the gross impossibilities of the claims for the holyhoax, he simply dismisses them with they were just (heh-heh) little "mistakes" That or he simply invents some fantasy to explain anomalies such as the impossibilities of the mass graves being excavated and the ex stockpiled by the M&H Mb dragline. The same for the cremation of cadavers with essentially no fuel. I really doubt that we're dealing with a rational person, been-there.

Edit.
Nessie wrote:
Or, the claim that the engine was being run into a perfectly sealed building is wrong.
Or, the claim that an engine cannot be run for 20 minutes into a hermetically sealed building is wrong.
Nessie presents more evidence of my notion that he's slipping his clutch. The eyewitnesses claim that the building was hermetically sealed and Nessie simply claims that they were "mistaken", were wrong. He then claims that a conventionally built brick building could withstand multiple ATMs of pressure without collapsing. That, folks, is NOT rational.

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 4894
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: The claim of no Holocaust needs evidence.

Post by Huntinger » Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:49 pm

Turnagain wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:42 pm
been-there wrote:
You are a total dimwit...
I'm entertaining the notion that Nessie is unhinged. Gone bonkers, slipping his clutch, whatever. Even when presented with the gross impossibilities of the claims for the holyhoax, he simply dismisses them with they were just (heh-heh) little "mistakes" That or he simply invents some fantasy to explain anomalies such as the impossibilities of the mass graves being excavated and the ex stockpiled by the M&H Mb dragline. The same for the cremation of cadavers with essentially no fuel. I really doubt that we're dealing with a rational person, been-there.
The word holy cost is an emotional word which has as many meanings as listeners. It is simply an emotional construct designed to elicit emotions. This emotional feeling was enhanced by Spielberg etc otherwise it is meaningless nonsense. The word Shoah has more meaning.
Bier trinken und das Leben in vollen Zügen genießen.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26797
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The claim of no Holocaust needs evidence.

Post by Nessie » Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:11 pm

Turnagain wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:42 pm
been-there wrote:
You are a total dimwit...
I'm entertaining the notion that Nessie is unhinged. Gone bonkers, slipping his clutch, whatever. Even when presented with the gross impossibilities of the claims for the holyhoax, he simply dismisses them with they were just (heh-heh) little "mistakes" That or he simply invents some fantasy to explain anomalies such as the impossibilities of the mass graves being excavated and the ex stockpiled by the M&H Mb dragline. The same for the cremation of cadavers with essentially no fuel. I really doubt that we're dealing with a rational person, been-there.

Edit.
Nessie wrote:
Or, the claim that the engine was being run into a perfectly sealed building is wrong.
Or, the claim that an engine cannot be run for 20 minutes into a hermetically sealed building is wrong.
Nessie presents more evidence of my notion that he's slipping his clutch. The eyewitnesses claim that the building was hermetically sealed and Nessie simply claims that they were "mistaken", were wrong. He then claims that a conventionally built brick building could withstand multiple ATMs of pressure without collapsing. That, folks, is NOT rational.
You do not know exactly how the gas chambers were constructed, how they were sealed, vented, the pipe work, the pressures caused and many other unknowns in their workings. All you can do is speculate and fill in the gaps. That is not evidence, let alone proof. It is a series of arguments from incredulity and ignorance.

You cannot produce any evidence of an alternative to gassing, such as showering in the building. If it was showers, then c850,000 people would have showered there, but you cannot find one single witness to that. Not one.
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], Google [Bot] and 5 guests