Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,740
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 2, 2022 16:06:52 GMT
My quotes about Hall... "You repeatedly go on about academics, such as Hall, who have fallen foul of other academics and been condemned for their views."which again, turned out to be wrong and I have accepted that and stand corrected. You are using Hall to weasel dodge your constant lying that there is no evidence, when you KNOW there is.I used Professor Tony Hall to explain how the holocaust hoax works. It works by forbidding debate PLUS by intimidation/persecution of anyone โincluding academics โ who dare try to raise the obviously problematical core of the narrative and certain important details. You denied that occurs. So Prof. Hall was given as just one example of that. Debate is not forbidden. I have given you numerous examples where deniers and others debate. It is restricted in some countries, because denying key aspects of the Holocaust is illegal. Most historians do not debate deniers, because they regard it a waste of their time, as denial has nothing to offer them. The academics who have fallen foul of others have largely done so because they have fallen for the denier hoax. Examples being Rudolf and Weber. I am not denying that have run into trouble over their opinions and claims. I made a mistake, which I have explained to you. You were right about Hall, he was unjustly criticised and treated very badly. You are ignoring that I quoted where I said that knew nothing about Hall and the first source I found then turned out to be wrong. I was open that knew nothing about Hall, I then made a mistake due to false information I found on the internet, which I have since acknowledged. You are dishonestly refusing to acknowledge that. You copy and paste and plagiarise sources you think support your view, but cannot answer my questions about those sources and what you think they claim. You have failed to understand the disconnect between there being such a thing as mass delusion and then having to evidence and prove historians have been deluded. Your constant suggestions to see a psychologist is just your sad way to try and bully me into agreeing with you. |
|
|
|
Post by been_there on Jun 2, 2022 16:45:51 GMT
I used Professor Tony Hall to explain how the holocaust hoax works. It works by forbidding debate PLUS by intimidation/persecution of anyone โincluding academics โ who dare try to raise the obviously problematical core of the narrative and certain important details. You denied that occurs. So Prof. Hall was given as just one example of that. Debate is not forbidden. I have given you numerous examples where deniers and others debate. No you havenโt. So that is another lie that shows a literally insane denial of reality to avoid admitting error. You gave examples of chat shows using pasted text from links that admitted Cole wasnโt engaged in fair debate but was โvilifiedโ. So your every reply demonstrates that you DO have a literally insane disconnect from reality. One that you refuse to acknowledge, even when the evidence is blatant and irrefutable! Give it up now, and seek professional help.๐ No court โhistoriansโ fairly and publically debate anyone skeptical or critical. That would be career suicide. So stop lying about that OBVIOUS reality. It just proves you are clinically insane.Stop denying what you REALLY did, which I have exposed (below). You still havenโt acknowledged that if you admitted you โknew nothingโ then only a dishonest person arguing deceitfully would make false claims in order to defend the racist, anti-German hoax hate-trope. Only someone who was literally, clinically insane would think such an argument justifies themselves. Seek help and do yourself a favour. Your arguments are so absurd and illogical they are literally crazy! |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,740
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 2, 2022 17:08:03 GMT
Debate is not forbidden. I have given you numerous examples where deniers and others debate. No you havenโt. So that is another lie that shows a literally insane denial of reality to avoid admitting error. You gave examples of chat shows using pasted text from links that admitted Cole wasnโt engaged in fair debate but was โvilifiedโ. So your every reply demonstrates that you DO have a literally insane disconnect from reality. One that you refuse to acknowledge, even when the evidence is blatant and irrefutable! Give it up now, and seek professional help. Just because Cole got a hard time, does not mean the TV debates he went on were not debates. I also linked to online debates, such as between Holocaust Controversies and Mattogno and to two radio debates between Berg and Muhlenkamp. I could also add forum debates from ISF, TSSF, CODOH and obviously here. Debates have also cropped up on various social media platforms such as Facebook. There is plenty of opportunity for deniers to air their views and to debate others. Nick Terry has been posting today on TSSF. The main denier there is called Gibson and he and Dr Terry have been debating there. It is public and since both follow forum rules about civility etc, the debate is fair as nothing that I know from either party has been subject to any form of censorship. I acknowledge that I should not have said Hall was attacked by other academics, that was wrong. I incorrectly picked Hall's name from a list you had given me. I should not have done that, when I knew nothing about him at the time. You are right to point out my error, I have accepted it, but you are now labouring the point. If you had any decency, you would accept my correction. Instead, you act like a child. You are very wrong there. My arguments are based on corroborating, contemporaneous evidence which logically converges to produce a rational conclusion. Denier arguments are based on logical fallacies, where they demand belief in something that you cannot evidence. It is you who is crazy. |
|
|
|
Post by been_there on Jun 2, 2022 17:37:53 GMT
No you havenโt. So that is another lie that shows a literally insane denial of reality to avoid admitting error. You gave examples of chat shows using pasted text from links that admitted Cole wasnโt engaged in fair debate but was โvilifiedโ. So your every reply demonstrates that you DO have a literally insane disconnect from reality. One that you refuse to acknowledge, even when the evidence is blatant and irrefutable! Give it up now, and seek professional help. Just because Cole got a hard time, does not mean the TV debates he went on were not debates. Godโs teeth. Your delusional denial of reality is relentless! ๐คฆโโ๏ธ Yes, yes, yes it does mean that! The Phil Donahue show is proof there was no fair, open dabate! Stop denying that like a [loo-ny] from the Loch! The persecution of Prof. Hall proves genuine fair debate is NOT wanted nor allowed! Just calling for it gets you called a โdenierโ. A demonisation you STUPIDLY, dishonestly believed and repeated without checking. Face it finally. Be honest! ๐คฆโโ๏ธ That you INSIST on demonising skeptics, doubters and revisionists with the pejorative โ deniersโ PROVES you are not interested in fair, open, reasonable debate. That you canโt see that proves you are delusional to an insane degree. Get help! Gibson gets reams of snide and personal abuse. If he gave his real name he would certainly get intimidation and attacks at home and work. The fact that most revisionists get abuse and then permanent bannings for trivial, trumped up charges is further proof the H-hoax is not a genuine historiography. Again, showing YOU are in denial to an alarmingly delusional degree. Ha ha! Very mature. ๐๐คฆโโ๏ธ |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,740
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 2, 2022 19:00:46 GMT
Just because Cole got a hard time, does not mean the TV debates he went on were not debates. Godโs teeth. Your delusional denial of reality is relentless! ๐คฆโโ๏ธ Yes, yes, yes it does mean that! The Phil Donahue show is proof there was no fair, open dabate! Stop denying that like a [loo-ny] from the Loch! I said "not debates". I made no comment on the openness and fairness, which on Phil Donahue was suspect, as Cole was given a harder time than Shermer. Anyone who debates knows that if they are putting forward an unpopular opinion, they are likely to get a harder time. What happened to Hall is not proof that an open and fair debate is not wanted or allowed, full stop. It merely proves that some will try to repress debate. Just because you do not like the term denier, does not mean it is an unacceptable term. If I was not interested in an open and fair debate, I would not be here. I post here because it is one of the most open and fair debate sites. I get lots of abuse and snide remarks, along with posts being moved that are clearly on topic, but just inconvenient. You campaigned to get me removed, or at least my posting restricted. Grow up and accept controversial topics result in hot heads, anger and strong opinions. You are such a hypocrite. If you are going to call me crazy, then expect the same back. Mass gassings are evidenced. There is no evidenced alternative. It is crazy to demand belief in what is not evidenced, over what is evidenced, even if you are unhappy with that evidence. |
|
Turnagain
โ๏ธ
๐๐ผ๐ป๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐๐
Posts: 2,302
|
Post by Turnagain on Jun 2, 2022 23:40:59 GMT
Nessie presents a false dichotomy:
Historians are aware that the holyhoax is the third rail of academia. If they want to continue being employed as historians then they had best keep their mouths shut, agree with it or end up like Nick Kollerstrom. It's not a question of academics being fooled or being part of the hoax. It's a question of wanting to maintain their livelihood and their status. Who is willing to give up both to honestly discuss the holyhoax?
|
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,740
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 3, 2022 8:45:49 GMT
Nessie presents a false dichotomy: Historians are aware that the holyhoax is the third rail of academia. If they want to continue being employed as historians then they had best keep their mouths shut, agree with it or end up like Nick Kollerstrom. It's not a question of academics being fooled or being part of the hoax. It's a question of wanting to maintain their livelihood and their status. Who is willing to give up both to honestly discuss the holyhoax?
Historians understand evidence. For a historian to question whether gassings happened, means they need evidence. They do not question gassings, because there is no evidence. Occasionally a historian will fall for the denier hoax, but their mistake is some pointed out to them. Some will admit to their mistakes, others double down and refuse.
Due to their training, it is not credible to suggest that historians have been fooled by the denier hoax, due to the lack of evidence to support the denier hoax. That would their role in the supposed hoax is to maintain it. That is also not credible, as it assumes all of the historians are dishonest.
|
|
nazgul
๐ต๏ธ
๐ฐ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ฒ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
Posts: 1,113 
|
Post by nazgul on Jun 3, 2022 8:51:18 GMT
Nessie presents a false dichotomy: Historians are aware that the holyhoax is the third rail of academia. If they want to continue being employed as historians then they had best keep their mouths shut, agree with it or end up like Nick Kollerstrom. It's not a question of academics being fooled or being part of the hoax. It's a question of wanting to maintain their livelihood and their status. Who is willing to give up both to honestly discuss the holyhoax? Historians understand evidence. For a historian to question whether gassings happened, means they need evidence. They do not question gassings, because there is no evidence. Occasionally a historian will fall for the denier hoax, but their mistake is some pointed out to them. Some will admit to their mistakes, others double down and refuse.
Due to their training, it is not credible to suggest that historians have been fooled by the denier hoax, due to the lack of evidence to support the denier hoax. That would their role in the supposed hoax is to maintain it. That is also not credible, as it assumes all of the historians are dishonest.
The historians that promulgate the hoax are all juden. |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,740
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 3, 2022 8:58:23 GMT
Historians understand evidence. For a historian to question whether gassings happened, means they need evidence. They do not question gassings, because there is no evidence. Occasionally a historian will fall for the denier hoax, but their mistake is some pointed out to them. Some will admit to their mistakes, others double down and refuse.
Due to their training, it is not credible to suggest that historians have been fooled by the denier hoax, due to the lack of evidence to support the denier hoax. That would their role in the supposed hoax is to maintain it. That is also not credible, as it assumes all of the historians are dishonest.
The historians that promulgate the hoax are all juden. So the no Jewish historians all think there were no mass gassings? What about the Arab universities? Do their Islamic historians all claim no mass gassings? There is no denial law in any Arab country and exposing a hoax would be very much in their interests. |
|
nazgul
๐ต๏ธ
๐ฐ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ฒ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
Posts: 1,113
|
Post by nazgul on Jun 3, 2022 9:16:49 GMT
So the no Jewish historians all think there were no mass gassings? What about the Arab universities? Do their Islamic historians all claim no mass gassings? There is no denial law in any Arab country and exposing a hoax would be very much in their interests. It has been mentioned numerous times the Historian ruined due to nonconformist writing. As to the Arab Historians they are probably not interested, but that is just a guess. |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,740
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 3, 2022 11:44:19 GMT
So the no Jewish historians all think there were no mass gassings? What about the Arab universities? Do their Islamic historians all claim no mass gassings? There is no denial law in any Arab country and exposing a hoax would be very much in their interests. It has been mentioned numerous times the Historian ruined due to nonconformist writing. As to the Arab Historians they are probably not interested, but that is just a guess. Arabian universities and historians not interested in blowing the hoax! Pull the other one!
"Zionism is perceived as cynically using the Holocaust..."
If there was one group of historians who would not be fooled by or would be prepared to cooperate, it would be the Arabs.
|
|
mrolonzo
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ญ๐ซ๐ข๐๐ข๐๐ง
Posts: 869
|
Post by mrolonzo on Jun 3, 2022 11:50:18 GMT
The point I raised in this post has not been dealt with. Historians have either been fooled into believing mass gassings took place and are victims of the hoax, or they know those gassings did not take place and are part of the hoax.
That is not a false dichotomy. There is no other option. There are no historians who have published works to say they are not sure if mass gassings happened or not. The vast majority say that they did happen. They must then either know that is not the case, or they have been hoaxed. Why are you unable to openly say whether they are victims of the hoax, or part of the hoax and discuss the issue around that?
How has it been possible to fool all the historians? Claim about mass deception and manipulation do not cut it, there is no credible way to fool all of those people. They have the most detailed knowledge of what happened, they have seen much of the evidence and to convince them mass gassings too place, would need the faking of huge amounts of evidence, without anyone noticing. It is not a realistic proposal. Mass deception and manipulation do indeed cut it. They do not have the most detailed knowledge. |
|
Nessie
๐ฆ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,740
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 3, 2022 12:09:21 GMT
The point I raised in this post has not been dealt with. How has it been possible to fool all the historians? Claim about mass deception and manipulation do not cut it, there is no credible way to fool all of those people. They have the most detailed knowledge of what happened, they have seen much of the evidence and to convince them mass gassings too place, would need the faking of huge amounts of evidence, without anyone noticing. It is not a realistic proposal. Mass deception and manipulation do indeed cut it. They do not have the most detailed knowledge. Historians do not have the most detailed of knowledge? Really? |
|
mrolonzo
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ญ๐ซ๐ข๐๐ข๐๐ง
Posts: 869
|
Post by mrolonzo on Jun 3, 2022 13:02:30 GMT
Mass deception and manipulation do indeed cut it. They do not have the most detailed knowledge. Historians do not have the most detailed of knowledge? Really? Obviously not as was proven. |
|
