ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags general discussion , holocaust , holocaust denial , World War II history

Reply
Old 26th May 2014, 06:56 PM   #1
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
General Holocaust denial discussion Part III

Mod InfoThis is a continuation from here due to the length of the previous thread. As always, all Holocaust-related discussion should be confined to this thread. Thank you.
Posted By:LashL


Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
The Smithsonian claim that they found "gas chamber" tiles is false - http://newobserveronline.com/smithso...jewish-at-all/
Mondail? This article is about the misidentification of the tiles, on screen, in the documentary by one person, Ivar Schute. You are already very aware the tiles were correctly identified prior to this on the Staffordshire University's "preliminary report". Why did you say this proves the old gas chamber isn't the old gas chamber?


Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
The above compliments the Eric Hunt documentary on Treblinka - www.gaschamberhoax.com
Modail? Can you walk us through and specify exactly where in Eric Hunt's propaganda film he calculates 10,000 people transited through Treblinka II. You have been reading Eric's interesting posts on CODOH? No?

Originally Posted by Eric Hunt on CODOH
"(My) documentary shows proof that approximately 10,000 Jews were transited"
Originally Posted by Eric Hunt on CODOH
"One of the reasons I didn't just add up the numbers on screen which add up to approximately 10,000...".
Where do you think Eric got his "10,000" figure from? Why can't he explain this to the other holocaust deniers who are now questioning his "adding up"?

Last edited by LashL; 24th June 2014 at 06:30 PM.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2014, 10:28 AM   #2
Rincewind
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ankh Morpork/Plymouth, UK
Posts: 7,443
I'd like to add a question..

Even if the transit of 10,000 people is accurate, how does it alter the accepted Treblinka II facts?

After all, it's well documented (see this thread....) that more than 750,000 people arrived at the camp....
Rincewind is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th May 2014, 01:19 AM   #3
Mondial
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 290
Michael Shermer has tried to have David Cole's new book on his experiences as a holocaust revisionist banned because it shows him in an unflattering light - www.countercontempt.com/archives/5232
The documentary that David Cole made back in 1992 - http://codoh.com/library/document/1001/
Mondial is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2014, 06:15 PM   #4
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
Michael Shermer has tried to have David Cole's new book on his experiences as a holocaust revisionist banned because it shows him in an unflattering light - www.countercontempt.com/archives/5232
No Mondail. Please read the previous posts in this thread before posting. We have already dealt with David Cole's lies. David Cole lies and misquotes Michael Shermer. Here is just one clear example already mentioned.

In 1993 Michael Shermer's recorded quote said " I think the gas chamber story, in terms of physical evidence is the weakest link." David Cole lied and claimed "Michael Shermer thinks the gas chambers are the weakest link in the whole story" in 2014.

Do you agree David Cole is misquoting Dr Shermer? Yes or No?
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2014, 08:22 PM   #5
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
The documentary that David Cole made back in 1992 - http://codoh.com/library/document/1001/
Mondail? You are posting links to David Cole as evidence that the holocaust didn't happen. Are you aware that David Cole has just released a book called "Republican Party Animal"? In his current book David Cole states:

Treblinka Gas Chambers
"They were simple creations---rooms with the exhaust of a car or truck piped in...The gas chambers were simply rooms with no windows, a locked door, and car exhaust piped in. Big outdoor pits, not crematoriums, were used for burning bodies"

AR Camps
"From 1942 through 1943, Polish Jewry was subjected to one of the most brutal campaigns of mass murder in human history. Because of the secrecy surrounding those four extermination camps, and the fact that they were ploughed under and erased from existence in 1943, it's difficult to be precise about certain details. ............. more than enough circumstantial evidence exists to show that for most Jews, the train ride to those camps was one-way, and final."

As a holocaust denier, do you agree with David Cole? If not, why do you keep linking to him if you think he is wrong?


Just for the record, have you actually watched Eric Hunt's propaganda film? I'm becoming suspicious that no holocaust denier has actually watched Eric Hunt's film, read David Cole's books or worked out where Poland is.. It appears to me that holocaust deniers are simply posting links here because they "know the links", not the content. Would that be a correct assumption?
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2014, 08:37 PM   #6
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by EtienneSC View Post
The revisionist hits just keep on coming. Here is David Cole & Bradley Smith's 2007 film on the Great Taboo -
EtienneSC? You say the "hits keep coming" in 2014 by linking us to a video from six years ago by David Cole. Did you actually watch this video yourself before linking it here? David Cole states he believes in the holocaust in this video.

Can you explain in detail why you linked this video? What was your point?

Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th June 2014, 01:55 AM   #7
MaxMurx
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 218
The point of the video is very easy to recognize: as long as one side of a discussion is undergoing massive persecution, is it ethical to discuss the topic at all?
MaxMurx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2014, 08:01 PM   #8
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by MaxMurx View Post
The point of the video is very easy to recognize: as long as one side of a discussion is undergoing massive persecution, is it ethical to discuss the topic at all?
Which video?

The David Stein video where David Stein misquotes Dr Shermer, or the American propaganda video in English, by Hunt & Berg, for Americans where no anti-holocaust denial laws exist?

Have you actually watched any of these videos and noted down the "facts" presented and then checked them? Let's do one together!

Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th June 2014, 03:17 AM   #9
uke2se
Philosopher
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,973
Originally Posted by MaxMurx View Post
The point of the video is very easy to recognize: as long as one side of a discussion is undergoing massive persecution, is it ethical to discuss the topic at all?
You're right. It's not ethical. Let's just leave it as it is. The holocaust happened, end of story.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2014, 04:11 PM   #10
CaptainHowdy
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 314
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
You're right. It's not ethical. Let's just leave it as it is. The holocaust happened, end of story.
The Holocaust is a historical event. It's not ethical to research it, write about it, publish books, give lectures, etc? What is unethical about studying the Holocaust?
CaptainHowdy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2014, 05:52 PM   #11
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
The Holocaust is a historical event. It's not ethical to research it, write about it, publish books, give lectures, etc? What is unethical about studying the Holocaust?
You are 100% correct. There is nothing wrong in studying the holocaust and questioning accepted facts about the holocaust using the historical method, peer review and public debate. The same applies to any part of history. That's why we have historians.


However, it would be hard to argue that Holocaust deniers are doing any of the above. No one is stopping Bradley Smith, Eric Hunt or Berg from enrolling in a USA university, forming their views based on facts and writing a fully cited thesis for peer review. Instead we get fake testimonies, outright lies and stolen edited video footage with entire sections removed.

The biggest argument now from holocaust deniers appears to be that poor Dr Colls from Staffordshire university "looks Jewish" and therefore is part of the "Jewish conspiracy". Not one of them will explain how this secret Jewish conspiracy works in any detail.


Eric Hunt & Fred Berg's new webpage
"According to Caroline Sturdy Colls’ actions, only well-funded (by Zionists) historical dictators like herself, who make propaganda presentations regurgitating Soviet Union derived psychological warfare on television stations owned by Jewish Zionist billionaire Murray Rothstein are allowed to have a say in determining real history."

John DeNugent / His webpage
"As for Caroline Sturdy Colls, I am chagrined how many people have missed the obvious Jewish physical characteristics of this incredibly partial “scientist.” I will endeavor below to lay out the indicators suggesting strongly, though not proving, that she is Jewish, and should so state rather than pretend to be impartial. She has every neanderthalic and thus Eastern Mediteranean feature: –dark hair (reddened by coloring), –curved nose, –protruding mouth, –thrust-forward head. Here is a semi-frontal shot of her (and note the IMO stereotypically ARROGANT Jewish look."

The holocaust denier cult was one of the strangest cults ever. It is pure entertainment reading the last blogs of the last few remaining members.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2014, 06:02 AM   #12
MaxMurx
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 218
The point is that the video shows Ernst Zündel and other deniers being rigorously persecuted. Pro Holocausters do not speak up against that unusual practice, which means: they support it. In this case a discussion is not a discussion, science is not science. Thesis without anti thesis cannot lead to sythesis, is unscientific, if not unethical. Everybody being involved in such a pseudo discussion behaves this unethical way - deniers as well as all others. First persecution has to be removed everywhere. Then discussions can be called discussions.
MaxMurx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd July 2014, 11:54 AM   #13
MaxMurx
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 218
"Ethics" does not mean "something being convenient for you" (although that is not excluded).
MaxMurx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd July 2014, 11:29 AM   #14
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
what a weird idea pro-holocausters..........

The deniers from what I have seen over the years have had their "beliefs" for that is what they are thoroughly shown to be wanting, due to lack of any academic rigour or real hard evidence to back any of their "beliefs", as opposed to the mountain of hard evidence and academic rigour deployed by actual real historians.
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd July 2014, 05:46 PM   #15
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by MaxMurx View Post
The point is that the video shows Ernst Zündel and other deniers being rigorously persecuted.
Which video Max?

Bradley Smith and Fred Berg happily print their home addresses on their webpages, so other deniers can send them donations. ( Not sure what for). Graf fled a Swiss assault charge and worked happily for Iran spreading anti USA propaganda. Jerzy Rek is in gaol for 815 illegal weapons charges. Eric Hunt spend two years in psychiatric care to avoid gaol on a kidnapping charge. Irving got his day in court and lost. David Stein is using holocaust deniers to promote his book where he confirms there was a holocaust. Richard Toben was bankrupted for slander under civil law.

Ernst Zundel is simply a "bit nutty" and publishes books claiming there are secret Nazi Arctic bases, Nazi UFOs and no holocaust. Nutty people do stupid things and get arrested.


"Secret Nazi Polar Expeditions" [1978] Ernst Zundel
"Hitler at the South Pole" [1979] Ernst Zundel
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/z/...whats-new.html


Originally Posted by MaxMurx View Post
Pro Holocausters do not speak up against that unusual practice, which means: they support it.
You mean conventional historians vote for parties that reflect their opinion and thus most countries don't have specific holocaust denial laws. Has it occurred to you that Germans may not want to have German neo Nazis promoting holocaust denial for historical reasons?



Originally Posted by MaxMurx View Post
In this case a discussion is not a discussion
That's right, the holocaust deniers now rely on YouTube video propaganda that doesn't allow for any discussion at all. Have you watched Eric Hunt's propaganda videos? Are you aware of the errors and direct lies in those propaganda videos? Tell me, as you are a "revisionist" what mechanism exists to peer review and remove those errors from Eric's propaganda videos? What? No such mechanism exists?

Are you telling me that "revisionists" don't actually revise historical errors made by other "revisionists"? (Don't you think "revisionists" are rather hilarious and a huge joke?)

Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd July 2014, 06:02 PM   #16
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by Dcdrac View Post
what a weird idea pro-holocausters..........
The names holocaust deniers give to conventional historians get weirder and weirder. My favourite is "Exterminationists" which implies that conventional historians somehow knocked off the victims themselves.

My favourite entertaining holocaust denier at the moment is John Denugent. He doesn't attempt to justify his beliefs and basically regurgitates anti-Jewish propaganda from the 30's The Sturmer propaganda magazine. He's got some ongoing gripe with the clowns at CODOH, that would take a team of psychiatrists to explain.

Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd July 2014, 11:42 PM   #17
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by MaxMurx View Post
The point is that the video shows Ernst Zündel and other deniers being rigorously persecuted.

That in itself means nothing. What matters is what specifically they are being prosecuted for.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th July 2014, 06:07 AM   #18
MaxMurx
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 218
How can you expect any "academic discussion" if one side at every sentence, every word which is written or said, has to evalute if that is threatened with severe legal or social consequences. That can never lead to any discussion. Even academics with sincere background like here must abstain from asking any questions in order not to provoke their contra parts into illegal activities. Therefore ANY discussion, even any commemoration is unethical as long as it is a legal offense in 20 countries of the Western World to say ones true opinion.
MaxMurx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th July 2014, 06:32 PM   #19
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by MaxMurx View Post
How can you expect any "academic discussion" if one side at every sentence, every word which is written or said, has to evalute if that is threatened with severe legal or social consequences.
But that's not true is it? Before an academic "goes public", a paper goes through the peer review process in private. Do you have any examples of someone being charged under Sec130 "Public incitement" whilst undergoing peer review at a normal university in Germany?

List all those people for us.

Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2014, 04:44 AM   #20
MaxMurx
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 218
The video I was talking about is the one which was linked in the quotation of a reply by Matthew Ellard in posting #6 by clicking on "Here".
MaxMurx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2014, 01:01 PM   #21
CaptainHowdy
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 314
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
But that's not true is it? Before an academic "goes public", a paper goes through the peer review process in private. Do you have any examples of someone being charged under Sec130 "Public incitement" whilst undergoing peer review at a normal university in Germany?

List all those people for us.

It wouldn't be "public incitement" if an academic paper was being passed among professors in private. So the law wouldn't apply in the early stages of peer review.
CaptainHowdy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2014, 12:12 PM   #22
Rincewind
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ankh Morpork/Plymouth, UK
Posts: 7,443
I wonder, given the volume of evidence available, if any denier academic papers would progress through peer review at all - even if in private.
Rincewind is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2014, 01:12 AM   #23
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard
But that's not true is it? Before an academic "goes public", a paper goes through the peer review process in private. Do you have any examples of someone being charged under Sec130 "Public incitement" whilst undergoing peer review at a normal university in Germany?
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
It wouldn't be "public incitement" if an academic paper was being passed among professors in private. So the law wouldn't apply in the early stages of peer review.
So therefore there is no problem. Max is under no legal risk, in enrolling at a German university and lodging his alternative thesis for peer review.

Edited by Gaspode:  Edited for moderated thread.


Last edited by Gaspode; 8th July 2014 at 01:10 PM.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th July 2014, 07:26 PM   #24
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by Rincewind View Post
I wonder, given the volume of evidence available, if any denier academic papers would progress through peer review at all - even if in private.
I'd prefer an academic to offer us an overview, but I think that's the whole point. The objective evidence is overwhelming. That is why holocaust deniers prefer to use "one way" propaganda media, such as You tube, as they can ignore facts that don't match their propaganda and can't get criticised, on the spot, for doing just that.

In the Eric Hunt propaganda video, on Treblinka, he directly states there has never been a forensic investigation at Treblinka, yet he happily talks about the 1945 Polish investigation on forums.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th July 2014, 12:41 AM   #25
Rincewind
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ankh Morpork/Plymouth, UK
Posts: 7,443
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
I'd prefer an academic to offer us an overview, but I think that's the whole point. The objective evidence is overwhelming. That is why holocaust deniers prefer to use "one way" propaganda media, such as You tube, as they can ignore facts that don't match their propaganda and can't get criticised, on the spot, for doing just that.

In the Eric Hunt propaganda video, on Treblinka, he directly states there has never been a forensic investigation at Treblinka, yet he happily talks about the 1945 Polish investigation on forums.
I have noticed that the deniers often fixate on the trivial - as if that's going to make a difference...
Rincewind is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th July 2014, 06:12 PM   #26
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by Rincewind View Post
I have noticed that the deniers often fixate on the trivial - as if that's going to make a difference...
Yes, I agree. "Nit picking" is a good description.

I imagine that holocaust deniers avoid "over all" views because it makes their own claims ridiculous. For example, I can never get a holocaust denier to explain what the Secret Jewish conspiracy is?

If the first eyewitness reports concerning mass executions start appearing in 1942 in Poland by escapees, then how does Adolph Eichmann claim the same events happened in an Israeli court in 1960? There are around a hundred eyewitness reports from both Jewish slave workers, Poles, Ukrainians and Germans saying the same thing over decades.

Who exactly do Holocaust denier claim is coordinating the instructions telling these eyewitnesses what to say if they are all fake (according to holocaust deniers)? Why would German SS officers follow instructions from a secret Jewish organisation? If the British army supposedly beat up Hoess to make him confess, then is not the British army part of this secret Jewish conspiracy, as they had to share the same eyewitness information?

The whole holocaust denial movement is just silly. Now that Treblinka is being excavated, I imagine the few remaining deniers will become even weirder in their claims.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2014, 05:47 AM   #27
Dash80
Rave on, Not Fade Away
 
Dash80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,105
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Yes, I agree. "Nit picking" is a good description.

I imagine that holocaust deniers avoid "over all" views because it makes their own claims ridiculous. For example, I can never get a holocaust denier to explain what the Secret Jewish conspiracy is?

If the first eyewitness reports concerning mass executions start appearing in 1942 in Poland by escapees, then how does Adolph Eichmann claim the same events happened in an Israeli court in 1960? There are around a hundred eyewitness reports from both Jewish slave workers, Poles, Ukrainians and Germans saying the same thing over decades.

Who exactly do Holocaust denier claim is coordinating the instructions telling these eyewitnesses what to say if they are all fake (according to holocaust deniers)? Why would German SS officers follow instructions from a secret Jewish organisation? If the British army supposedly beat up Hoess to make him confess, then is not the British army part of this secret Jewish conspiracy, as they had to share the same eyewitness information?

The whole holocaust denial movement is just silly. Now that Treblinka is being excavated, I imagine the few remaining deniers will become even weirder in their claims.
I predict there will be so much hand waving of the Treblinka study that you could probably generate power for a small town , like some giant human freakin' wind farm.

My uncle visited Sobibor a few years ago, not sure about now but you could find bits of bone all over the place. A denier "explained" this to me, saying "they" scatter bones on the site to make it seem authentic. You just can't win with this kind of lunacy.
__________________
I see that the No-Planers still travel Air Elastic-Band with their fleet of innovative rubber Boeings.
Dash80 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th August 2014, 09:55 PM   #28
afree87
Scholar
 
afree87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 80
Mod InfoMoved from here. Please keep to the general discussion thread.
Posted By:LashL


For some reason I thought that checking this forum would finally resolve my doubts as to whether Elie Wiesel has a tattoo.

Edited by LashL:  Edited for moderated thread.


The best argument this forum can give is that the "tattoo faded away" when he has clearly stated that he looks at it every day and has shown it to people even recently.
__________________
Why should we subsidize intellectual curiosity?
-- Ronald Reagan (campaign speech, 1980)

There is nothing which can better deserve our patronage than the promotion of science and literature. Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness.
-- George Washington (address to Congress, 1790)

Last edited by LashL; 17th August 2014 at 06:26 AM.
afree87 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th August 2014, 11:05 PM   #29
nomuse
Muse
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 779
Originally Posted by afree87 View Post
For some reason I thought that checking this forum would finally resolve my doubts as to whether Elie Wiesel has a tattoo.

Edited by LashL:  Edited for moderated thread.


The best argument this forum can give is that the "tattoo faded away" when he has clearly stated that he looks at it every day and has shown it to people even recently.
That's a remarkable reading.

I just read the thread through when you resurrected it, and what I grasped was rather different; to wit, that the tattoo -- done, mind you, without the vivid colors or long-lasting inks of modern work -- might not be visible in a small blurry photograph.

This is Apollo Hoax level here.

Last edited by LashL; 17th August 2014 at 06:27 AM.
nomuse is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th August 2014, 01:28 AM   #30
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 7,816
So the guy might not want a photo taken with the resolution required to see a faded old tattoo?

And assuming this one guy was fraud, how does that overturn the people with known and proven tattoos? Just out of interest?
__________________
@tomhodden

Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW).
Tomtomkent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th August 2014, 01:32 AM   #31
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 7,816
Originally Posted by Dogzilla View Post
For people like lionking, TSR, and uke2se, whether or not what Elie Wiesel says is true doesn't matter. What matters is whether or not what Elie Wiesel says about the holocaust sounds bad.

What Elie says sounds bad so it doesn't matter if it's true. Remember, some things are true that never happened.
So, is there a context in which the holocaust, even as a concept or notion, was not something that sounds bad? How else does it sound?
__________________
@tomhodden

Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW).
Tomtomkent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2014, 08:17 AM   #32
afree87
Scholar
 
afree87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 80
Originally Posted by Tomtomkent View Post
So the guy might not want a photo taken with the resolution required to see a faded old tattoo?
Sounds plausible. I don't know why he wouldn't just say so, and instead claims "modesty". Then again, from his other public statements it's clear that he is a weird person and not representative of Holocaust survivors.

Originally Posted by Tomtomkent View Post
And assuming this one guy was fraud, how does that overturn the people with known and proven tattoos? Just out of interest?
It doesn't. I am not a Holocaust denier, I am just suspicious of Wiesel in particular -- he has only admitted very begrudgingly that his book is fictional and I don't know where else in his life story he has deviated from the facts.
__________________
Why should we subsidize intellectual curiosity?
-- Ronald Reagan (campaign speech, 1980)

There is nothing which can better deserve our patronage than the promotion of science and literature. Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness.
-- George Washington (address to Congress, 1790)

Last edited by Gaspode; 19th August 2014 at 01:06 PM. Reason: Corrected quote tags
afree87 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th August 2014, 09:24 AM   #33
Nessie
Philosopher
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 9,226
ERic Hunt's video on the TII investigations is riddled with logical fallacies. For example, poisoning the well as he describes C S-C as an alleged scientist.

He continually claims people were transited through TII, but the witnesses are describing a selection process and then leaving the area without having entered the camp at TII. Only one claims she ended up in the gas chamber. None mention hair cuts, showering, medicals, nothing. There is a gaping hole in his claim about TII as a transit hygiene camp. There are no witnesses to such.

He constantly goes back to past mistakes such as use of diesel and tries to make out such mistakes continue. They do not with the academics and it is him who is preserving such errors in the public mind. It seems very odd for a so called revisionist to be critical of revision of the narrative.

He makes an odd point about how the Rabbi is not consulted with regards to the dig at the Christian cemetery. That will because he is not Christian.

His does not distinguish between bone finds by the Staffordshire Uni team on the surface of the ground and ash scattered on rocks at the pyre memorial. he claims many do such, but only evidences one man doing so. In any case the ash will soon blow away and be scattered, unlike the bones.

He goes into red herring mode over the Star of David mistake and fails to acknowledge the mistake was made on site, at the time and has since been corrected. Denier/revisionists do not appear to like it when historians make revisions and correct mistakes.

He fails to understand he is watching a made for TV documentary. So it uses imagery such as the opening photo of the boy with his hands up and the darkened colouration to make it more interesting for the lay person target. He spots the finding of the tile is badly edited and concludes (maybe correctly) it was acted out later for the cameras. Yet again, it is a documentary. There will also be scientific results published.

Then he launches in to Jews control the media and fails to understand his bias will clearly affect his conclusions.

The final finding of horse bones in the woods is evidence he went for a walk and found some horse bones. His attempts at conclusions from that are just fallacies of incredulity and further show his bias.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2014, 12:39 AM   #34
KDLarsen
Illuminator
 
KDLarsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,520
Interesting reading on the excavation at Sobibor: http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-993733.html
KDLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2015, 04:28 PM   #35
Saggy
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,384
Where is the holohoax discussion ?

I cannot find the holohoax denial forum?

Is discussion of the hoax still allowed?

How do I find it?

For those interested, the best intro to the subject is provided by 'The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, the Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry' by Northwestern prof Arthur Butz. This is a great book, every skeptic should read it.
Saggy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2015, 04:39 PM   #36
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 35,655
Originally Posted by Saggy View Post
I cannot find the holohoax denial forum?

Is discussion of the hoax still allowed?

How do I find it?

For those interested, the best intro to the subject is provided by 'The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, the Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry' by Northwestern prof Arthur Butz. This is a great book, every skeptic should read it.
Butz's book is a steming pile of crap, pure nonsense, and should be read only as an example of crackpot history at it;s worse.

Funny you should come back the day that Leonard Nimoy died, since he earned the hatred of the deniers by producing and starring in the TV Movie "Never Forget" about Mel Melmerstein, the Holocaust survivor who sued The IHR (a holocaust denial organization) when they refused to pay him a 50'000 dollar reward they offered for definent proof the Holcaust happened, and won. The case established the Holocaust as a legally recognized fact,and wrecked what little reputation the IHR had.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2015, 05:02 PM   #37
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,657
Originally Posted by Saggy View Post
I cannot find the holohoax denial forum?

Is discussion of the hoax still allowed?

How do I find it?

For those interested, the best intro to the subject is provided by 'The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, the Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry' by Northwestern prof Arthur Butz. This is a great book, every skeptic should read it.
Why read a book filled with lies and BS? What is great about lies and ignorance, which the book is based on at best.

Last edited by beachnut; 27th February 2015 at 05:26 PM.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2015, 12:19 AM   #38
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,735
Originally Posted by Saggy View Post
I cannot find the holohoax denial forum?

Is discussion of the hoax still allowed?

How do I find it?

For those interested, the best intro to the subject is provided by 'The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, the Case Against the Presumed Extermination of European Jewry' by Northwestern prof Arthur Butz. This is a great book, every skeptic should read it.
Your text proving the holohoax is a thoroughly debunked bunch of nonsense from a racist engineer? Oh well.
__________________
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2015, 05:33 AM   #39
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,939
Originally Posted by MaxMurx View Post
The point is that the video shows Ernst Zündel and other deniers being rigorously persecuted. Pro Holocausters do not speak up against that unusual practice, which means: they support it. In this case a discussion is not a discussion, science is not science. Thesis without anti thesis cannot lead to sythesis, is unscientific, if not unethical. Everybody being involved in such a pseudo discussion behaves this unethical way - deniers as well as all others. First persecution has to be removed everywhere. Then discussions can be called discussions.
In my experience persecution can be summed up as people, especially academics disagreeing with them.

They seem top have this mindset that because the holocaust is accepted that responding to their claim is persecution, they don't want a two way conversation, they want to just make a statement and let whatever fish bite, bite.

And when this doesn't happen, they claim persecution.
sadhatter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2015, 05:43 AM   #40
sadhatter
Philosopher
 
sadhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,939
I've always wanted an answer to this.

To preface, i do not have a drop of Jewish blood (full disclosure, I'm adopted, and only know half my ethnic make up. I'm often told i "look Jewish" and get mistaken for a Jewish person, though personally i am a huge fan of the Jewish people and i don't see it.) And in fact my family is a tad on the racist side. Not overly but in that old school sense.

My grandfather was in the war, and had a leg broken for assisting Jewish folks, in addition to many horror stories.

He was never an academic, never had a reason to lie about this, so why would he?

(don't be afraid of offending me because its my relative, i wouldn't ask the question as bait. And i have a very thick skin)
sadhatter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:33 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.