|
|
Post by Turnagain on Jul 17, 2022 9:55:18 GMT
Nessie wrote:
No deportees who left Treblinka knew how many trains actually carried passengers from Treblinka. That's specious nonsense. There is a single record of Jews arriving at Treblinka that confirms that Jews left Treblinka alive. It has nothing to do with trains. You have no evidence at all of how many trains left Treblinka carrying passengers.
Because then we know whether or not the witnesses from Hunt's video were the only Jews who left Treblinka. Just as you claim to know how many Jews were sent to Treblinka from the train records.
Nessie is back to claiming that revisionists must search every archive in the world to prove that the records for trains leaving Treblinka are actually gone and can't be found.
Nessie is hanging on to his claim that there must be regular, scheduled trains for Jews leaving Treblinka or no Jews left Treblinka. Revisionists must show that trains left Treblinka daily or weekly excepting Sundays or whatever or no Jews could leave Treblinka. No irregular departures allowed.
Lukaszkiewcz stated in his report that the mass graves at Treblinka no longer existed. What the hell do you mean that he corroborated CS-C's claims for "probable" graves? The 1944 aerial photo shows nothing but the outline of the camp and a building. What do you mean by "circumstantial evidence"?
|
|
Nessie
🦕
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿 (Nessies forum)
Posts: 3,630
|
Post by Nessie on Jul 17, 2022 14:19:11 GMT
Nessie wrote: Just like the Germans can dig pits, so do Tiger tanks exist. They ARE armed with 88 mm cannons. Besides, what if the witness just made a mistake and it was an M4 Sherman tank and not a Tiger? The cannon is smaller but the Sherman was much faster so it coulda left the scene at a fairly high rate of speed. Same with Hanks building a plane from a kit that washed ashore on his island. People build kit planes all of the time. There are companies that specialize in selling such kits. Your claim that the witness to someone being shot with a tank cannon was lying and your claim that Hanks couldn't have built an airplane is horse frocky.
You can come up with all the analogies you want. Fact is that the witnesses are not claiming something physically impossible when they say the Nazis dug big pits, constructed gas chambers and set pyres. It is the way they describe how they think each worked, that you have an issue with. It is a logical fallacy of non sequitur to claim that if a witness describes how they think something that is physically possible works, in a way that includes claims that are not physically possible, then the witness lied. The reason for that is there is an alternative reasonable explanation, which is the witness did not know all the details about what they describe and they did not describe it very well.
It is also a logical fallacy, that because you do not believe the witness and cannot believe the gas chambers worked, therefore no gas chambers. That is the argument from incredulity.
You are also guilty of making false analogies, such as with the Tiger tank and Tom Hanks.
You have fallen for the denier hoax, because you just cannot get to grips with logic.
|
|
Nessie
🦕
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿 (Nessies forum)
Posts: 3,630
|
Post by Nessie on Jul 17, 2022 14:34:48 GMT
Nessie wrote: No deportees who left Treblinka knew how many trains actually carried passengers from Treblinka. That's specious nonsense. If you add up the number of witnesses who said they left TII, it comes to about 40. There are about 40 witnesses and the records of transports arriving at Majdanek from TII. Witness and documents are forms of evidence. There is evidence of transports carrying passengers that left TII. IOW, it makes no difference. There is documentary evidence at Majdanek of transports of passengers from TII. Between that and the witnesses traced that Hunt used, there is evidence of limited transports carrying passengers from TII to labour camps in Poland. There is no evidence of regular mass transports from any source. Correct, since until that is done, you cannot prove there are no such documents. Irregular transports of a few hundred adults at a time, to labour camps in Poland, are different from regular mass transports of trains packed full of people to the east. One is evidenced, the other is not. Both the Poles in 1945 and the 2014 investigation found large areas of disturbed ground and cremated remains. The Poles did not have GPR, so they could not differentiate specific disturbed and undisturbed ground, which the 2014 survey could. The 1944 aerial photo also evidences disturbed ground and there are various outlines, which tally with prisoner maps and GPR as a pits; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treblinka_extermination_camp#/media/File:Treblinka_II_aerial_photo_(1944).jpgThe circumstantial evidence is the evidence of mass arrivals, the theft of personal property which then left the camp and the lack of any evidence of regular mass transports of people leaving the camp. That logically fits with the evidence most were killed. |
|
|
|
Post by Turnagain on Jul 17, 2022 15:17:37 GMT
Nessie wrote:
Neither is it impossible for people to be killed with a tank. Lots of people have been attacked and killed with tanks. It's a rather ordinary event these days. You just have an issue with how I described the murder scene.
You are claiming that your "what ifs" and "coulda woulda" are different from the "what ifs" and "coulda woulda" that I described in my fictional scenarios. Your witnesses make ridiculous claims and you begin your "what if" and "coulda woulda" claims to excuse the obvious lies of the witnesses. "What if" they were mistaken? Exaggerating? Using emotive language? Absolutely no difference between that and my "what if" a crate containing a kit plane washed ashore on Hanks' island.
Those are scenarios that describe your "what if" and "coulda woulda" tales perfectly.
|
|
Nessie
🦕
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿 (Nessies forum)
Posts: 3,630
|
Post by Nessie on Jul 17, 2022 15:38:40 GMT
Nessie wrote: Neither is it impossible for people to be killed with a tank. Lots of people have been attacked and killed with tanks. It's a rather ordinary event these days. You just have an issue with how I described the murder scene. You are claiming that your "what ifs" and "coulda woulda" are different from the "what ifs" and "coulda woulda" that I described in my fictional scenarios. Your witnesses make ridiculous claims and you begin your "what if" and "coulda woulda" claims to excuse the obvious lies of the witnesses. "What if" they were mistaken? Exaggerating? Using emotive language? Absolutely no difference between that and my "what if" a crate containing a kit plane washed ashore on Hanks' island. Those are scenarios that describe your "what if" and "coulda woulda" tales perfectly. Witnesses making mistakes, exaggerating, using emotive descriptions and hyperbole is not a "what if". That is exactly how witnesses often behave.
Your suggestion that we should take the witnesses literally is a "what if", because that is not how witnesses behave when giving evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Turnagain on Jul 17, 2022 15:41:44 GMT
Nessie wrote:
That has absolutely nothing to do with the number of trains that left Treblinka with passengers.
Where are the train schedules from Majdanek that show trains delivering deportees to that camp? As far as I know the train records for trains outbound from Treblinka no longer exist. You claim that they are located at Majdanek. Let's see your source and link for that.
So, you're claiming that people who didn't leave Treblinka by a regularly scheduled train don't count but trains that arrived at Treblinka at irregular intervals do count. What is your basis for claiming that? Why must trains be regularly scheduled?
The graves have now become just "disturbed ground"? Lukaszkiewcz DID write in his report that the graves no longer existed. CS-C did NOT show her GPR profile of the camp. Of course there's disturbed ground at Treblinka. The Germans built a transit camp there.
|
|
Nessie
🦕
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿 (Nessies forum)
Posts: 3,630
|
Post by Nessie on Jul 17, 2022 15:49:07 GMT
Nessie wrote: That has absolutely nothing to do with the number of trains that left Treblinka with passengers. Why is witness evidence of passengers leaving TII not evidence of passengers leaving TII? We have discussed that before. Mattogno reported, in his book about Majdanek a source that found the dates, times and sex of people transported from TII to Majdanek. Evidence of occasional limited transports to camps in Poland that are south and west of TII, is not evidence of regular mass transports to somewhere to the east of TII. It is the area and depth of the disturbed ground that fits with witness claims of mass graves, where the bodies were exhumed, cremated and mixed back into the ground and subsequent grave robbing. |
|
|
|
Post by been_there on Jul 17, 2022 17:56:10 GMT
That has absolutely nothing to do with the number of trains that left Treblinka with passengers. Why is witness evidence of passengers leaving TII not evidence of passengers leaving TII? The level of miscomprehension in this reply from Nessie is quite astounding. |
|
|
|
Post by Turnagain on Jul 18, 2022 1:32:06 GMT
been-there wrote:
"Why is witness evidence of passengers leaving TII not evidence of passengers leaving TII?".
Just part of Nessie's non-answers. It isn't supposed to make sense. It steers the discussion away from the obvious answer that the number of witnesses who left Treblinka via rail has nothing to do with the total number of trains that left Treblinka with passengers. Rather like asking, "How many trains leave London daily" and receiving an answer of, "I and ten others left London on a train".
The same for my question about the outbound train records from Treblinka. Nessie answers:
That has absolutely nothing to do with the outbound train records for Treblinka. Those records don't exist but Nessie is attempting to avoid and obfuscate that fact. It isn't a misconception but a rather clumsy attempt to avoid facts that interfere with his narrative.
Then we have Nessie's claim that there must be evidence of "regular mass transports". What is a "regular mass transport"? Does he mean a regularly scheduled transport? One that departs from a location and arrives at a destination at regularly scheduled intervals? Nessie refuses to define his term but but insists on using it as though it's some sort of magic talisman. If it wasn't "regular" then it doesn't count. Nessie is trying to avoid the fact that outbound train schedules from Treblinka don't exist and the number of people who were sent to alternate destinations from Treblinka is unknown. It isn't part of his narrative so he must deflect, divert or obfuscate that fact.
|
|
Nessie
🦕
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿 (Nessies forum)
Posts: 3,630
|
Post by Nessie on Jul 18, 2022 9:31:41 GMT
been-there wrote: "Why is witness evidence of passengers leaving TII not evidence of passengers leaving TII?". Just part of Nessie's non-answers. It isn't supposed to make sense. It steers the discussion away from the obvious answer that the number of witnesses who left Treblinka via rail has nothing to do with the total number of trains that left Treblinka with passengers. Rather like asking, "How many trains leave London daily" and receiving an answer of, "I and ten others left London on a train". You are trying to suggest that inbetween the trains that arrived full and left empty to go back to the ghettos, and the trains that left carrying some passengers to labour camps in Poland, hundreds of other trains arrived empty and picked up the rest of the people, transporting hundreds of thousands to unknown destinations. You are trying to weasel dodge that there is no evidence from any source whatsoever, of that happening. The other transports all left evidence from a combination of documents and witnesses. The mass departures left no evidence at all. That appeals to your belief in conspiracies, where you claim all the evidence for those transports has been hidden and destroyed. I point out that it is physically impossible to hide and destroy all that evidence, and in any case, why would the Nazis cooperate with such an action, when it the evidence that proves they are innocent of the accusation of mass murder? There are no known records from TII itself. There are records elsewhere that reference TII. There are records of transports to TII and arrivals from TII. How did the historians find out about the date, number transported and their sex, other than from documentary records at Majdanek? If hundreds of thousands of people left TII on hundreds of transports, even if all the records from TII are destroyed, there are still the records at the destinations. The documents at TII were destroyed, the documents at Majdanek were not. I have defined regular mass transport. There were regular mass transports of hundreds of trains that took c860,000 people to TII. Those trains arrived on almost a daily basis. The trains arrived full and left empty For those people to have left TII, there need to be other regular mass transports of trains arriving empty, to leave full. The records of the full trains arriving from the ghettos and returning empty to the ghettos exist. They are at the ghettos. If other trains arrived empty and left full, there would be records at the places they arrived at. There is no evidence of that happening and it is physically impossible for it to happen without leaving any evidence. |
|
