|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Sept 20, 2022 9:37:10 GMT
Then the witness claims that the gas chamber was hermetically sealed then the witness is lying Interesting point. On quite a few occasions I have read that this ghetto was "hermitically sealed" or something else. I think this could be a matter of translation. Most of these witnesses were Polish or spoke Yiddish or something. I now have a thought regarding the translation and the dishonesty of the translator. |
|
Turnagain
โ๏ธ
๐๐ผ๐ป๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐๐
Posts: 2,302
|
Post by Turnagain on Sept 20, 2022 9:50:29 GMT
Then the witness claims that the gas chamber was hermetically sealed then the witness is lying Interesting point. On quite a few occasions I have read that this ghetto was "hermitically sealed" or something else. I think this could be a matter of translation. Most of these witnesses were Polish or spoke Yiddish or something. I now have a thought regarding the translation and the dishonesty of the translator. Indeed, that would be my first thought, too, but taken in context it is a lie. A single clanger in a sea of verifiable claims is most certainly a mistranslation. However, the words in question are awash in a sea of lies and the mistranslation becomes very dodgy indeed. |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,207 
|
Post by Nessie on Sept 20, 2022 12:14:28 GMT
Nessie wrote: Moron! The idiot drivers claimed that the truck could exceed 100 mph loaded on level ground was due to the fact that he WAS ignorant of the gearing and power requirements to produce such speeds. So, the truck driver was ignorant, meaning he did not KNOW the full facts or understand. A lie is when someone KNOWINGLY says something that is not true. It is not a lie to say something that is not true, when the person saying it does not KNOW it is not true. When a person states something that is not true, when they thought it was true, that is a mistake. www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie"lie - to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive www.dictionary.com/browse/lie"lie - a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth." Intention is an important part of the definition of lying. To prove lying, you need to prove intent to deceive. Being ignorant means there is no intention, it merely means the person thinks they know what they are talking about, but they are wrong. You need evidence to prove the witnesses lied. I have shown you what evidence is needed to prove the witnesses inside the AR camps lied. You know you have no such evidence, so you try to dismiss my point and pretend it is possible to prove lying without evidence, based on your opinion of the believability of what they said. You have interpreted the witness descriptions in a very literal way, where you often misrepresent and outright lie about what they said. You lie that Wiernik had said the gas chambers were hermetically sealed, when he had not. You have an odd interpretation of the gas chambers being hermetically sealed, where you argue they could not work with hermetic seals, which is nonsense. You thought that Wiernik's description of the excavator exhuming bodies, meant he was describing one excavator lifting 3000 bodies in one scoop of its bucket. That is a rather odd interpretation, and others make more sense. You claim witnesses made one clanger after another, but when I quoted how Wiernik described the gas chambers, you could not find any fault in his description, since he had not said the chambers were hermetically sealed. You ignore that there are different ways that the witnesses can be interpreted, but that there are different ways, is why your argument is logically flawed. You have determined to disbelieve pretty much everything said, such that you will call witnesses liars when you have not read all of their statements. You then find it hard to dispute the Nazi evidence, so you have to switch tactics and claim they were intimidated, despite no evidence of intimidation. I have shown you multiple sources that prove your claim that because you do not believe the witnesses, does not therefore mean they lied, but you persist in continuing to make your argument. That proves you have fallen hook, line and sinker for the denier hoax. |
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Sept 20, 2022 13:00:14 GMT
you persist in continuing to make your argument. That proves you have fallen hook, line and sinker for the denier hoax. The re examinaion of historical claims is not a hoax, but an attempt to verify the credibility. |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Sept 20, 2022 14:22:27 GMT
you persist in continuing to make your argument. That proves you have fallen hook, line and sinker for the denier hoax. The re examinaion of historical claims is not a hoax, but an attempt to verify the credibility. None of you actually know how to do that.
In any case, you are not looking to verify, you are looking for excuses to dispute the evidence.
|
|
Turnagain
โ๏ธ
๐๐ผ๐ป๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐๐
Posts: 2,302
|
Post by Turnagain on Sept 20, 2022 22:22:43 GMT
Nessie wrote:
The idiot truck driver intended to deceive his audience that his truck was capable of speeds of over 100 mph. It wasn't but the idiot didn't know that the actual speed the truck was capable of could be calculated from the engine, the transmission(s), the gear ratio of the final drive and the tire size. Based on that ignorance he thought that he could claim that he drove a "triple digit truck" and nobody would know any difference. Since he was ignorant he assumed that everyone else was equally ignorant and would accept his lie as being a truthful statement. Just as Wiernik's claim that an unaided dragline could dig a 10X25X50 meter pit was a lie due to his ignorance of the actual capabilities of the dragline. Years ago I tried to explain the workings of a dragline at the Klown's forum and it became obvious that it was beyond their comprehension. Draglines dig holes so why shouldn't it be able to dig any size hole wanted?
That is complete and utter horse frocky. You've been given evidence in wholesale lots that your supposed witnesses were liars. When some ding-a-ling truck driver tries to impress his coworkers with tales of a triple digit truck due to his ignorance it's good for a sly giggle behind his back and quips of, "Yep, ya' really had it rollin'". The lying SOBs like Wiernik, Rajchman et al. are a whole different ball game. Fools like you who suck up such vicious tripe are no better than the SOBs who spew it.
I make no claim to a perfect record for an occasional misattribution, date, etc. but your claim that I'm an habitual liar because I don't buy into your silly-assed litany of excuses, your "what ifs", "coulda' woulda'" and your "emotive language" schtick is bullshi!t.
Wiernik described a hermetically sealed gas chamber. He didn't say, "The gas chamber was hermetically sealed" but what he described was a hermetically sealed chamber. In any event, there were plenty of other so-called eyewitnesses who DID specifically describe the gas chamber as being hermetically sealed. There were others who described the chambers as being subjected to a partial vacuum amongst them your vaunted historian, Rachel Auerbach.
Nessie is pretending that Wiernik is the only person who gave false testimony. That's utter bullsh!t. There are an unknown number of witnesses who gave testimony about how they survived the camps from the Spielberg interviews. Since Hunt's video that made use of those archives they're now closed to scrutiny by the general public. Some, like the woman and her account of repeatedly swallowing and defecating her diamonds while others simply gave an account of being in Treblinka for a few days, getting "sanitized" given a shower and sent on their way. Another testified that the Germans, "Made him comfortable and gave him something to eat". A far cry from the tales of your known liars about beatings, torture, and mistreatment.
More later.
|
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Sept 21, 2022 7:27:11 GMT
... That is complete and utter horse frocky.... OK, so you do not need evidence. In that case, why do I need evidence? In my opinion the witnesses are believable, therefore gassings happened. If you don't need evidence and your test is personal believability, then same for me. |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Sept 21, 2022 7:28:35 GMT
...The idiot truck driver intended to deceive his audience that his truck was capable of speeds of over 100 mph. It wasn't but the idiot didn't know that the actual speed the truck was capable of ... You have contradicted yourself. You have said the truck driver did not know, so how could he intentionally deceive? |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Sept 21, 2022 7:34:10 GMT
... Wiernik described a hermetically sealed gas chamber. He didn't say, "The gas chamber was hermetically sealed" but what he described was a hermetically sealed chamber. Closing hermetically sealed doors and pumping in gas, does not mean the chamber was hermetically sealed. A room is not hermetically sealed when gas can be pumped into it. He did not describe a hermetically sealed room. It is yet another lie from you. You use the strawman fallacy so often, where you invent arguments that I have not made and claim I have made them. That is why I now repeatedly point to your pathological levels of lying. You lied about what Wiernik said, you lie about what I said. You cannot argue about much of what I have actually said, or the witnesses, so you make things up! |
|
Turnagain
โ๏ธ
๐๐ผ๐ป๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐๐
Posts: 2,302
|
Post by Turnagain on Sept 21, 2022 17:04:42 GMT
Nessie wrote:
There, fixed your attempted sly little lie for you, Nessie.
You have been given evidence, "evidence in wholesale lots" that your alleged witnesses were lying. Wiernik claimed that the graves were 10X25X50 meters. The M&H dragline wasn't capable of such an excavation. Nobody has ever found any such graves. Wiernik claimed that whole bodies were exhumed with a clamshell. That is an impossibility. He also claimed to have ran multiple marathons per day without stopping even for a drink of water while carrying cadavers. That's an impossibility just as his claim that a bullet bounced off him leaving only a "mark".
The idiot driver was intending to deceive. He assumed that his audience was as ignorant of the requirements for such a feat as he was. The more knowledgeable drivers knew that he was lying.
Sell your screwball definitions down the street, Nessie.
So, you do admit that there are numerous other witnesses who lied. My misunderstanding and apologies. However I don't recall you defending the witness to the electric masturbation machine, the lethal jungle gym or the supposedly factual account of a Jew thrown daily into a cage so a captive bear and and an eagle could, "tear him apart and pick his bones". Was that more cases of just "emotive language"?
|
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Sept 21, 2022 18:34:14 GMT
Nessie wrote: There, fixed your attempted sly little lie for you, Nessie. You think your argument, is evidence, it is not. Evidence that an excavator could not dig a grave as large as witnesses said the grave was, is not evidence no grave was dug. The evidence no grave was dug would come from an archaeological survey, or witnesses who were there and said no mass graves were dug. Wiernik has done what millions of other witnesses have done, get his estimations regarding size and distance wrong and use figurative descriptives not meant to be taken literally. You said he was ignorant, which means he did not know. Therefore, his deception was not deliberate. If he did not know exactly how fast the lorry could go, is not deliberately deceiving others about its speed. A chamber is not a hermetic seal, when gas can be pumped into it. You admitted that the witnesses likely knew nothing about Boyle's Law and pressure, and are ignorant. Therefore, their deception is not deliberate. You have not proved a lie, by the way the witnesses describe the gassing process. I have nevre defended those claims, I have have only ever heard them from you. You have never quoted the source. It is you equating rumour with eyewitness evidence. |
|
Turnagain
โ๏ธ
๐๐ผ๐ป๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐๐
Posts: 2,302
|
Post by Turnagain on Sept 22, 2022 18:56:52 GMT
Nessie wrote:
No, you've never defended any of those lies. You simply claim that I'm repeating rumors. The tale of eating shitty diamonds wasn't video recorded, the pedal powered brain-bashing machine is just a rumor as is Wilkomerski's book, "Fragments" and nobody except me has ever told the rumor about the Rosenblatt's world famous romance. Nobody has actually seen them on the Oprah TV show or heard him declare, "It was true in my mind". Nah, it was all just some rumor mongering by me. Kudos to Nessie for not paying any attention to just "rumors".
|
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Sept 23, 2022 8:08:28 GMT
Nessie wrote: No, you've never defended any of those lies. You simply claim that I'm repeating rumors. The tale of eating shitty diamonds wasn't video recorded, the pedal powered brain-bashing machine is just a rumor as is Wilkomerski's book, "Fragments" and nobody except me has ever told the rumor about the Rosenblatt's world famous romance. Nobody has actually seen them on the Oprah TV show or heard him declare, "It was true in my mind". Nah, it was all just some rumor mongering by me. Kudos to Nessie for not paying any attention to just "rumors".
To reliably establish witness truthfulness, dismiss rumours and look for claims that are corroborated by evidence independent of the witnesses.
The witness claims of a gas chamber are corroborated by the remains of the building found buried at the camp site.
The Jewish and Nazis, who would never cooperate, claim gassings took place, so corroborate each other.
Mass gassing claims are corroborated by the circumstantial evidence of AR, with mass arrivals at the camp, the mass seizure of property, including clothing and lack of evidence of mass departures.
You prefer unevidenced beliefs, because the evidence is not what you want to believe.
|
|
Turnagain
โ๏ธ
๐๐ผ๐ป๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐๐
Posts: 2,302
|
Post by Turnagain on Sept 23, 2022 8:41:46 GMT
Nessie drags out his lying Jews and his coerced Germans once again. Right, nobody ever left Treblinka alive except the escapees. The thousands who did leave via rail were just "selectees" so they don't count.
Oh yes, there's oodles of evidence for the gas chambers. All of the piping, the engine, the pressure relief valves for the hermetically sealed chamber...oh, wait a minute. Nessie actually has a couple of tiles. Damn straight, Nessie has all the evidence in the world.
|
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Sept 23, 2022 8:50:20 GMT
Nessie drags out his lying Jews and his coerced Germans once again. Right, nobody ever left Treblinka alive except the escapees. The thousands who did leave via rail were just "selectees" so they don't count. You have no evidence something else happened inside TII. No evidence the Germans prosecuting those who worked at the camps coerced their fellow countrymen. The worker selections is circumstantial evidence of the death camp. It is not evidence of a transit camp. Witnesses describe a tiled room in a building made of concrete and bricks. In 2014, tiles the same colour as described, along with concrete and bricks were found where the witnesses said the gas chambers had been located in the camp. That is like witnesses reporting a specific gun was used in a murder and excavations find parts of that gun. It is evidence the Nazis were destroying and hiding evidence to avoid responsibility for their criminal actions. Destroying and hiding evidence is not the act of innocent people. |
|
