Auschwitz Holocaust Claims Are Unsubstantiated

[steampunk]

If only there was a place where many books were gathered togther in one place, and accessable to the general public. Could such a thing exist?

So the argument is, no one cared enough about the Holocaust to make a scientific proof in the age of the Internet accessible to all. Instead, we must read a library of books to reinvent this argument, each and every one of us, to come to a proof.

[steampunk]

I don't believe anyone is claiming that 6 million were gassed at Auschwitz. That was, afterall, just one stop on the world tour.

Why do you think that is? Could be that people were lying and couldn't back up their claims? OH my God, Racists!!! Jew Haters!!! They proved a lie was being propagated! This number was debunked more than once, and it's still being proven to be false at it present figure.

[Trippy]

So the argument is, no one cared enough about the Holocaust to make a scientific proof in the age of the Internet accessible to all. Instead, we must read a library of books to reinvent this argument, each and every one of us, to come to a proof.

Another example of reductio ad absurdum - and you're touching on the many questions fallacy.

The suggestion (I put forward no argument) is that:
1. Not every resource is available on the internet, and this is especially true for older publications.
2. There is a place that is publicly accessable within which you can find such publications, that real scientists are regular visitors to,

But what?

Are your fingers painted on?

Are you some kind of a vegetable?

Are you unable to copy the title of Grumpy's book, open up a second window (computers can multi task now, you know), go to google.com, paste the title of the book as the search item, and press the enter key?

Maybe you should familiarize yourself with concepts such as 'Copy', 'Paste', multi tasking, tabbed browsing and what they mean in relation to the internet.

[steampunk]

How convenient, in the age of the Internet, all you have is physical book. Typical, make your argument out of reach so you can't be easily rebutted.

It's called a library - look into it.

Let me remind you, this is argument is not occurring in a library, it's on the Internet. This go find a book argument of theirs is just a way of saying they don't have links to a scientific proof of the gassing at Auschwitz.

[Trippy]

Let me remind you, this is argument is not occurring in a library, it's on the Internet. This go find a book argument of theirs is just a way of saying they don't have links to a scientific proof of the gassing at Auschwitz.

No, the argument is that a book isn't out of reach, so your assertion that by referring to a book, rather than a website, Geoff P isn't "mak[ing] [his] argument out of reach so [he] can't be easily rebutted."

[steampunk]

Another example of reductio ad absurdum - and you're touching on the many questions fallacy.

And you have the burden to prove this. What statement proves this?

The suggestion (I put forward no argument) is that:
1. Not every resource is available on the internet, and this is especially true for older publications.
2. There is a place that is publicly accessable within which you can find such publications, that real scientists are regular visitors to,

A scientific model in this day and age can be made by middle schoolers to represent the gassing claims. Yet, your stalling technique is to send me to a library of books to create this proof myself. Your ignorance is transparent.

Are you unable to copy the title of Grumpy's book, open up a second window (computers can multi task now, you know), go to google.com, paste the title of the book as the search item, and press the enter key?

Maybe you should familiarize yourself with concepts such as 'Copy', 'Paste', multi tasking, tabbed browsing and what they mean in relation to the internet.

Such great tech advances you question, I love copy and paste, but the argument you bolster has yet taken advantage of them?

Your statements imply: The proofs are hidden in a bunch of books and no one has taken the time to represent such a scientific models of the gassings online.

Pathetic. Out of reach nonsense argument.

[Syzygys]

So the argument is, no one cared enough about the Holocaust to make a scientific proof in the age of the Internet accessible to all.

Because nobody was stupid enough to ask, because all proof was already available???

What is this scientific you keep talking about?? What makes a proof scientific??

[steampunk]

No, the argument is that a book isn't out of reach, so your assertion that by referring to a book, rather than a website, Geoff P isn't "mak[ing] [his] argument out of reach so [he] can't be easily rebutted."

The point is that the ideas in that book, if they form a scientific proof, can be easily transferred to a model which a middle schooler can create. But, you or no one else, seems to be able to provide a link to such a proof.

[Syzygys]

Why do you think that is?

Your lack of reading and math ability? Nobody claimed 6 million, but just for education, here is a top Nazi, he either remembered incorrectly or was exagerating:

"The camp's first commandant, Rudolf Höss, testified after the war at the Nuremberg Trials that up to three million people had died there (2.5 million gassed, and 500,000 from disease and starvation), a figure since revised to 1.3 million, around 90 percent of them Jewish."

That is about over a million Jews killed there...

Is a top Nazi's testimony scientific enough for you???

[steampunk]

Because nobody was stupid enough to ask, because all proof was already available???

What is this scientific you keep talking about?? What makes a proof scientific??

Blind acceptance by a bunch of followers is the only proof you are offering and book chasing tactics.

You ask what proof scientific? No wonder you don't know what I mean by sending me a link.

Why don't don't just try one link, and I'lll debunk it for you.

[Trippy]

And you have the burden to prove this. What statement proves this?

The proof is self evident.

A scientific model in this day and age can be made by middle schoolers to represent the gassing claims. Yet, your stalling technique is to send me to a library of books to create this proof myself. Your ignorance is transparent.

The only person stalling is you.

Such great tech advances you question, I love copy and paste, but the argument you bolster has yet taken advantage of them?

For someone who doesn't 'believe' things, you're awfully fond of making assumptions. Where is your emperical proof that I haven't? How do you know I don't currently have it open as a PDF on my other monitor?

Your statements imply: The proofs are hidden in a bunch of books and no one has taken the time to represent such a scientific models of the gassings online.

No, that's not what I said. However here you're reiterating a logical fallacy. And I know you know it's crap, because one of the sources you've linked to previously is one such repository of information. Other such repositories of information can be found in the footnotes and references sections of the wikipedia articles on Zyklon-B and Auschwitz Concentration Camp.

Your disingenuity in this matter is verging on ban-worthy.

Pathetic. Out of reach nonsense argument.

And here you are again reiterating that same bogus argument, and logical fallacy.

[Trippy]

The point is that the ideas in that book, if they form a scientific proof, can be easily transferred to a model which a middle schooler can create. But, you or no one else, seems to be able to provide a link to such a proof.

No. The point is that the book is freely available to anybody interested enough to look for it.

What you want is to sit back and be spoonfed, meanwhile in your hubris you feel all superior because such spoonfeeding is not forthcoming, and seem to assume that because the spoonfeeding is not forthcoming, the proof is non-existent.

Which is total crap.

The irony of this is that he expects us to sit through 2 and a half hours of documentary based on ten years worth of research in order to extract his point, which he is unable to state cogently or succinctly. And he doesn't see the hypocrisy of that situation?

[parmalee]

I have always been open to the many people claiming they were eyewitnesses to the gassing process. I've watched several videos of their eyewitness testimony. Where their stories fail is when they begin their details concerning the entire process. They all surprisingly say things that are physically impossible, which creates a situation where their testimonies are not acceptable as evidence. Perhaps you can provide just one proper interview that doesn't have these physically impossible claims.

You call this being "open"?

Originally Posted by steampunk
You say there are thousands of eyewitnesses. Provide one link to a survivor who is an eyewitness of gassing who is properly interviewed to express the facts surrounding the event. I will show you how they are confused or possibly lying.

So how is it that you already know that such a person will be "confused or possibly lying?" Might it have something to do with you already having your mind made up? How very scientific of you.

[steampunk]

Your lack of reading and math ability? Nobody claimed 6 million, but just for education, here is a top Nazi, he either remembered incorrectly or was exagerating:

http://morris108.wordpress.com/2009/...erican-hebrew/

[steampunk]

You call this being "open"?

Yes. Provide a link.

So how is it that you already know that such a person will be "confused or possibly lying?" Might it have something to do with you already having your mind made up? How very scientific of you.

When a person makes statements that phsycially can't occur. THe so-called witness have made several of these remarks. Only if you study evidence would this be apparent. If you don't study the evidence it's amazing how easy it is to believe them.

[Syzygys]

I didn't ask for DNA to prove the Holocaust,

You might as well, DNA is science!!!

I asked for, but did not demand, DNA to be used to authenticate an alleged diary of the Auschwitz camp director.

You mean that after 70 years, fingerprints and fiber and such can be lifted from the diary? And what can we compare that to??? Do we still have the director's DNA??? Because if not, it is impossible to do the comparison.

a survivor who is an eyewitness to the gassings that is properly interviewed about the gassings

Excuse my French, but what the fuck is properly interviewed??? People asked them questions, and wrote books about their answers. How proper do you want to be??

[steampunk]

Which is total crap.

What's total crap is that it easy to make a model these days of such argument claiming the gassings occurred. We can make entire worlds with physical models inside video games for kids that follow the laws of physics without errror, but no one has shown the scientific model proving the gassings. You think a book is going to do as good as modern science and cgi?

[Syzygys]

http://morris108.wordpress.com/2009/...erican-hebrew/

You are quoting a newpaper from 1919 when talking about Auswitz????? You dumbfuck, idiot, should be castrated, and never born anyway mindfuck.

Moderators, seriously, ban this creep. I enjoy idiocy as much as the next guy, but there is a limit to stupidity.

After this link provided (what proved the mindset of steampunk) there is really no point in any discussion with you....

Oh yes, anybody is just as dumbfuck as you who still continues any intelligent discussion with you....

[steampunk]

Excuse my French, but what the fuck is properly interviewed??? People asked them questions, and wrote books about their answers. How proper do you want to be??

How about careful request of explanation of the chronology of the event.

Ask questions about details involved when they are unclear in their explanation.

Do not ask leading questions.

That would be a good start.

[steampunk]

You are quoting a newpaper from 1919 when talking about Auswitz????? You dumbfuck, idiot, should be castrated, and never born anyway mindfuck.

That 6 million figure was repeated several times and can be historically proven to be a repeated figure. How many times can 6 million Jews die? It's evidence of war propaganda which led to the abject beliefs propagated today.