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 holocaust denial

Closed Thread
Old 17th July 2009, 04:24 PM   #201
Simon39759
Master Poster
 
Simon39759's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,285
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
OK. Forget about Leuchter. Why not concentrate on Germar Rudolf. He has a cum laude phd. He worked for the world renowned Max Planck Institute. He is a chemist.
Well, apparently Rudolf stated:

Quote:
chemistry is not the science which can prove or refute any allegations about the Holocaust "rigorously".


So... there you go


The link was ktesibios' third link, seems like a must read if you are interested on the subject.
Simon39759 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 04:25 PM   #202
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
When did you jump on the Holocaust Denial Train to Disaster,guy?
You still believe in the 'soap from Jewish fat' myth, dudalb? Even yad vashem has retracted on this issue.

Here again the link to the Alfred Hitchcock propaganda flick about the holocaust. This movie is the core of the holocaust.

http://www.qaranc.co.uk/belsen_concentration_camp.php

34:30 - Dachau is portrayed as an 'extermination center' (nobody believes that anymore)
41:15 - lamp shades from human skin, a complete fabrication
41:30 - they show 'shrunken heads', an absurd claim

And here is the thorough debunking of the Hitchcock lies:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n1p-2_Faurisson.html

Situated near Hannover, Bergen-Belsen was originally established as a camp for wounded soldiers. In 1943 it became a detention center for European Jews who were to be exchanged for German civilians held by the Allies. In the middle of the war, Jews were transferred from that camp to Switzerland or, by way of Turkey, even to Palestine (yet another proof, as may be pointed out in passing, of the absence of an extermination program)….

Until the end of 1944, conditions for inmates at Bergen-Belsen were about normal…
Germany, on its last legs, could no longer deal with the influx of its own eastern refugees arriving by the millions. It could no longer manage to supply its army with weapons and ammunition, or its population with food. Finally, it could no longer remedy the tragic conditions in camps where even guards were dying of typhus…
The Jew Sydney Lewis Bernstein, London head of the Home Office cinema section, called on Alfred Hitchcock to make a film on these “Nazi atrocities.” Hitchcock accepted, but, in the end, only fragments of his film were made public, probably because the complete version contained assertions that might cast doubt on its authenticity. note 53
On the whole, the “shock of Bergen-Belsen” was a great success for Allied propaganda. In every possible way, the media exploited it to show dead and dying camp inmates to the world at large, but while at the same time leading viewers, through commentary, to think that these inmates had been killed, murdered, or exterminated, or else were walking corpses condemned to perish as victims of killing, murder, or extermination. Thus, on the basis of the ghastly conditions in a camp that, as already noted, had neither crematories nor (as conventional historians acknowledge) any homicidal gas chamber, was built the general myth of the existence and use, at Auschwitz and elsewhere, of “gas chambers” coupled with crematories…
Among the most famous casualties of epidemics in that camp were Anne Frank and her sister Margot who, for nearly 40 years, were widely and persistently said to have been gassed at Auschwitz (from where, in fact, they had been brought), or killed at Bergen-Belsen. Today, it is generally conceded that they died of typhus at Bergen-Belsen in February-March 1945.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 04:30 PM   #203
stateofgrace
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,843
It’s a paradox that holocaust deniers face when they accuse the USG of being a Nazi state.

If the US really was a Nazi state capable of mass murder , i.e. 911, Iraq etc then surely to really compare the US to Nazi Germany it would be better to promote the holocaust rather than deny it.

After all, how can the US government be comparable to Nazi Goverment when all holocaust deniers do is excuse one Government of mass murder and accuse the other of it.

Last edited by stateofgrace; 17th July 2009 at 04:32 PM.
stateofgrace is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 04:33 PM   #204
HereticHulk
Muse
 
HereticHulk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 714
Originally Posted by Simon39759 View Post
Well, apparently Rudolf stated:





So... there you go


The link was ktesibios' third link, seems like a must read if you are interested on the subject.
Quote:
[C]hemistry is not the science which can prove or refute any allegations about the Holocaust 'rigorously'."
Well that would take care of the The Chemistry of Auschwitz paper then.
__________________
"Religion provides the solace for the turmoil that it creates.” ~ Byron Danelius
HereticHulk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 04:34 PM   #205
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Simon39759 View Post
Well, apparently Rudolf stated:

So... there you go


The link was ktesibios' third link, seems like a must read if you are interested on the subject.
OK. Do you want to suggest that Rudolf basically went to jail for nothing? That he actually had orthodox views on the holocaust?

Of course not.

The point is, the revisionists do not need to solely rely on chemistry to debunk the claims.

The holo-orthodoxists are unable to deliver positive proof that it happened as alleged.

Even holocaust pope Raul Hilberg had to admit during the Toronto Zundel trial that there were no documents whatsoever that referred to the holocaust.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 04:44 PM   #206
FineWine
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,070
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
Eichmann was a bureaucrat. He never killed anybody. The only thing he did was organizing the deportations of the Jews to the East. Just like present day logistics managers organize the transport of containers.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p237_Okeefe.html

he persistently rejects the accusation that he was the organizer of the "Final Solution" or the "flywheel of the extermination machine."

And what SS guard are you talking about? Just give me the name and I'll debunk it for you for free.

I like being a debunker for a change.

You'll have to try again. I'm afraid that Eichmann disagreed very strongly with your latest feeble lies.
FineWine is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 04:44 PM   #207
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by stateofgrace View Post
It’s a paradox that holocaust deniers face when they accuse the USG of being a Nazi state.
USG=USA? I'll never accuse the US of being a Nazi state. Nazi Germany was a totalitarian racialist state ('blonde communism'). The US is not (yet) a totalitarian state but it is a 'racial communist state'. And the designers of 9/11 had their legal framework ready on the very day of 9/11 (Patriot Act) in order to turn the US into a totalitarian state.

[COLOR]If the US really was a Nazi state capable of mass murder , i.e. 911, Iraq etc then surely to really compare the US to Nazi Germany it would be better to promote the holocaust rather than deny it.

It seems impossible for you to view the holocaust as an event seperated from political context. In your view one has to be a partisan. Historical truth is not very high on your agenda.

Quote:
After all, how can the US government be comparable to Nazi Goverment when all holocaust deniers do is excuse one Government of mass murder and accuse the other of it.
I don't excuse the Nazi government at all from their misdeeds which were plentyful.

What I don't like is that people are being accused of crimes they did not commit. And I certainly don't like that this mythological event is being used to push my society into a direction (multiculturalism) I don't like at all.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 04:46 PM   #208
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by FineWine View Post
You'll have to try again. I'm afraid that Eichmann disagreed very strongly with your latest feeble lies.
Vague, FineWine, very vague.

Could you please put a little more effort in trying to formulate a real answer to my assertions?

1:47 am in Holland I sign off. Have a good weekend.

Last edited by 9/11-investigator; 17th July 2009 at 04:48 PM.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 04:58 PM   #209
GreNME
Philosopher
 
GreNME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,276
Originally Posted by HereticHulk View Post
You made the claim, not me. How do I know what you think is demonstrably false!?
You see, HH, this is the kind of word game nonsense that makes these types of conversations turn away from rational, critical thinking. How about you try again without the attempts at a "gotcha!" game? If you're curious as to what I was saying about statements on the crematoriums that were false, then do so. Don't play intellectually dishonest with me.
__________________
Like love, criminals will always find a way. -- foxholeatheist

The kind of pacifism I endorse is brought about by eliminating one enemy combatant at a time.-- JoeyDonuts
GreNME is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 05:01 PM   #210
catbasket
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,476
It's probably been said previously ...

Recommended reading: 'Why People Believe Weird Things' by Michael Shermer.


ETA - aimed at 9/11-investigator, but probably missed by miles.

Last edited by catbasket; 17th July 2009 at 05:02 PM.
catbasket is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 05:04 PM   #211
oldhat
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 997
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
Even holocaust pope Raul Hilberg had to admit during the Toronto Zundel trial that there were no documents whatsoever that referred to the holocaust.
Yes and if watch the Errol Morris film to get a specific answer to this question. I know you won't but it's worth addressing. Morris attacks and defeats this weak line of Holocaust denialism head on, unequivocally.

The Nazis themselves denied what they were doing -- there was no order "to viciously round up and murder Jewish civilians and any other undesirables using enormous death machines." Your Nazi heroes used abstract technocratic bureaucratic language on purpose they spoke about "neutralizing" or "liquidating" "populations."

Historians have shows that the Nazis themselves were the first Holocaust deniers. Let me go out on a limb here and guess that you, being a modern Dutch Nazi sympathizer, would have happily gone along with the Nazi butchery of your countrymen after the Wehrmacht overran your nation during WWII, so long as it was dressed up, to you, the collaborator, as "deporting populations" and "work camps."

Watch the Morris film, look at the Nazis' own memoranda. Go to Auschwitz and read the Nazis' documentation. Read the Nazis' orders. It's all there. You're so blinded by your impotent rage and scapegoating of Jews for whatever is wrong in your life you cannot see the facts even if they are staring you in the face. So you flail around desperately for loopy charlatans like Fred Leuchter to lend your crackpot views an ounce of credibility or a patina of scientific verification.

It's truly pathetic.

And read "The Banality of Evil" if you ever want to make an attempt to extracate whatever is left of your humanity and whatever is left of your soul from the miserable, hate-filled cauldron of racism, resentment and lies you stew in every day of your life.
__________________
"I predict a complete rollover in Congress in 2010 to the Republicans. Bank on it. Laugh, but file it away in the back of your mind." -Beerina
oldhat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 05:35 PM   #212
stateofgrace
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,843
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
USG=USA? I'll never accuse the US of being a Nazi state. Nazi Germany was a totalitarian racialist state ('blonde communism'). The US is not (yet) a totalitarian state but it is a 'racial communist state'. And the designers of 9/11 had their legal framework ready on the very day of 9/11 (Patriot Act) in order to turn the US into a totalitarian state.
Oh I see where you are coming from now, the US is not a Nazi State it is just becoming a Nazi state right? Is this the same country that has just had a democratic election and voted Bush out? That want to be Nazi State?

Quote:
It seems impossible for you to view the holocaust as an event seperated from political context. In your view one has to be a partisan. Historical truth is not very high on your agenda.
Incorrect, truth is not high on your agenda.Unlike you I am more than happy to accept recorded verifiable historical events. I do not have the desire, unlike you, to cherry pick historical events and imagine that I see something that the rest of the planet missed. I leave this to the very clever or the very deluded. You fall into the later category.
Quote:
I don't excuse the Nazi government at all from their misdeeds which were plentyful.
Yes you do, you are a holocaust denier.
Quote:
What I don't like is that people are being accused of crimes they did not commit.
You accuse the Jews and the USG of mass murder with zero evidence.

Quote:
And I certainly don't like that this mythological event is being used to push my society into a direction (multiculturalism) I don't like at all.
I really don't care what you like. Facts beat your dislikes hands down. Facts kick you petty and juvenile hatred into touch everyday. Facts ride rough shot over your personnel dislikes. I personally dislike you and your entire holocaust denying ilk, but that is immaterial to this post.

Holocaust deniers have zero input to society; do not kid yourself that the larger society pays the slightest attention to your rantings. They do not, society moves quite freely with or without your input. This is because you are an irrelevance. Your twisted view of history and world events mean zero to the larger society. Maybe you should go back to the tiny insignificant, repugnant group from where you came from. Here you can spew your filth and absorb the other filth that twists your mind.

Last edited by stateofgrace; 17th July 2009 at 05:59 PM.
stateofgrace is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th July 2009, 09:44 PM   #213
Simon39759
Master Poster
 
Simon39759's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,285
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
OK. Do you want to suggest that Rudolf basically went to jail for nothing? That he actually had orthodox views on the holocaust?

Of course not.

The point is, the revisionists do not need to solely rely on chemistry to debunk the claims.

The holo-orthodoxists are unable to deliver positive proof that it happened as alleged.

Even holocaust pope Raul Hilberg had to admit during the Toronto Zundel trial that there were no documents whatsoever that referred to the holocaust.

Of course not. Rudolf is just yet another denialist scumbag.

But the reason why he is relevant, and the reason why you brought him up, is because of his expertise in chemistry.

By declaring that chemistry was irrelevant, Rudolf declared his own expertise irrelevant and, hence, relegate himself to the same level as any arm-chair historian.

Did you miss that or are you also in denial about that?
Simon39759 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 12:31 AM   #214
Undesired Walrus
Penultimate Amazing
 
Undesired Walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,583
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
Even holocaust pope Raul Hilberg had to admit during the Toronto Zundel trial that there were no documents whatsoever that referred to the holocaust.
__________________
Man's material discoveries have outpaced his moral progress. - Clement Attlee, 1945
Undesired Walrus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 01:22 AM   #215
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 23,056
It starts with the revelation of a horrible story; Joe3 had abducted 12 children named "Mike" and kept them in his dungeon of a basement where he fed them barely enough to survive. It was well known, even before this, that Joe3 had a pathological hatred for little boys named "Mike" but the depravity of such a crime took even Joe3's enemies by surprise. But, it seems, there was more to the story. Joe3 had, after the abductions began, started a shooting melee with his neighbor, Steve, but quickly realized that he didn't have enough of the special bullets he needed to have a chance of winning so he put his captive children to work. But Joe3 started losing ground and Steve was rightly pissed because, while Joe3 was temporarily occupying his front yard, several of his own kids were murdered and the one boy, named Mike, was now missing. Thus Joe3 started demanding more work from his captives while simultaneously cutting their rations. Soon the stress and starvation took its toll and the captive "Mikes" started dying from disease and malnourishment. Eventually Joe3 found he could no longer win the war with Steve and conceded defeat. In the aftermath his "Mike" abduction and slavery program was uncovered, by then only two remained alive.

But several things now emerged. In his execution of the attack on Steve, Joe3 had gone through the houses of Alan, Dina and Rose. They all had "Mike's" that had gone missing too and weren't accounted for in the 10 bodies in Joe3's basement. At this point someone notices a huge pile of ashes out back and, at the same time, the surviving Mikes tell a tale: it seems that Joe3 had been holding many more "Mikes" than people had originally thought. He had over 60 of them, but many were weak, or considered dangerous, and so, with the commencement of the war on Steve, Joe3 had taken these kids to the chicken coop and they were never seen alive again. The remaining 12 "Mikes" had been forced to burn up their bodies and dump them in a pile, after this they were worked to death making Joe3's arms of war.

The town comes together and realizes that, indeed, about 60 Mikes are missing and unaccounted for. They are rightly ticked off and a mob gathers to deliver vengeance on Joe3. But now two new guys show up, we'll call them neo-Joe3's and Irving. They argue that Joe3 wasn't that bad, that the 60 kids were not killed there because they have not seen the bodies. They continue by arguing that only the 10 who's bodies were found were killed there and that people should therefore show Joe3 mercy and, instead, go punish the still recovering Mikes for lying.

The people rightly tell neo-Joe3 and Irving to just "piss off!" After all, not even Joe3 is denying the massive death toll but is merely trying to justify it by telling everyone what a menace the "Mikes" really were. Besides, they point out, there is still the matter of the missing 60+ "Mikes," the fact that Joe3 had clearly hated them enough to start abducting them, the fact that Joe3 had not thought much of working them to death as slaves and was, finally, still undeniably responsible for the deaths of the 10 identified Mikes which is still a horrible crime in itself!

"Ah, but," neo-Joe3 and Irving counter, "those 10 died because Joe3 was at war, not only with Steve but also with Frank, Joan and Teddy and that their campaigns to cut off supplies to Joe3 were the reason he had to ration food to them and that led to their deaths." There is a collective pause before everyone points out that Joe3 had started the abductions, and was therefore responsible for them, but, more importantly, had started the freaking war that ended up cutting off his supplies!

As Joe3 is led to the gallows neo-Joe3 and Irving are driven from town, a memorial is built to the dead "Mikes" and everyone else, in their own ways, try to get on with their lives.
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com

Last edited by Travis; 18th July 2009 at 01:25 AM.
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 04:11 AM   #216
Skeptic
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 18,312
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
So you are suggesting that the Nazi's killed all the people who could have been of use for labor (grandparent and parents) but they let the children live?
Nope. I'm suggesting, of course, that they killed the children as well -- that's why there were no children above a certain age in those families. All of the children in the neighborhood were, naturally, born after the war.
Skeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 07:44 AM   #217
Skeptic
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 18,312
Quote:
Oh I see where you are coming from now, the US is not a Nazi State it is just becoming a Nazi state right? Is this the same country that has just had a democratic election and voted Bush out? That want to be Nazi State?
You'd think that he of all people would be glad the USA had become a Nazi state.
Skeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 07:48 AM   #218
Skeptic
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 18,312
Originally Posted by themusicteacher View Post
The sinking of the Titanic
OF COURSE that's the Jews' fault. Iceberg, Goldberg, Rosenberg... they're all the same.
Skeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 07:54 AM   #219
Oliver
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oliver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,394
Out of curiosity, Skeptic: How did these German names like "Berg/Rosen/Feld/Spiegel" etc. came about in the first place? - Or are those literal German translations of former hebrew names?
Oliver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 07:57 AM   #220
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
Originally Posted by Oliver View Post
Out of curiosity, Skeptic: How did these German names like "Berg/Rosen/Feld/Spiegel" etc. came about in the first place? - Or are those literal German translations of former hebrew names?
its an interesting topic. left best for another thread though. but basically, Jews were forced to adopt last names in the 17th and 18th century.
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 08:01 AM   #221
HereticHulk
Muse
 
HereticHulk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 714
Originally Posted by GreNME View Post
You see, HH, this is the kind of word game nonsense that makes these types of conversations turn away from rational, critical thinking. How about you try again without the attempts at a "gotcha!" game? If you're curious as to what I was saying about statements on the crematoriums that were false, then do so. Don't play intellectually dishonest with me.
OK, so you claim that:
Quote:
The guy doing the voice-overs made such ridiculous statements (the comments about crematoriums was the most ridiculous) that are easily and demonstrably false.
So, I guess I am not that interested in trying to determine what you think may be demonstratively false.
__________________
"Religion provides the solace for the turmoil that it creates.” ~ Byron Danelius
HereticHulk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 08:07 AM   #222
Oliver
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oliver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,394
Originally Posted by parky76 View Post
its an interesting topic. left best for another thread though. but basically, Jews were forced to adopt last names in the 17th and 18th century.

Well, in this case it doesn't need a seperate thread given your short explanation. I always wondered about that when reading those names since some Jewish people having those German names don't seem to have roots in Germany, such as polish Jews and Russian ones.

Anyway, thanks for the info, Parky.


ETA: I found a thread about that topic shedding some light into the root of Yiddish/German names.

Last edited by Oliver; 18th July 2009 at 08:48 AM.
Oliver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 08:12 AM   #223
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Hitler was obssesed with the idea he could ,by bombing the UK, break the Allied will to fight. It failed in 1940, when Germany had the edge in the air, and there was simply no chance in hell of it working in 1944.

Well, another problem there was that Germany only had twin-engined medium bombers. It never developed a four-engined heavy bomber, a type quite necessary if strategic bombing is to be done on any sort of useful scale.


Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
What might might have been an even more damaging diversion was Hitlers insistence that the emphasis in Germany's Jet production be put on bombers instead of fighters. That delayed the ME262 by nearly a year.

My understanding there is that is more myth that fact. The biggest issue with the Me 262 wasn't Hitler wanting it to be a bomber, but rather engine production. They had a lot of problems getting the 262's engines into mass production while maintaining adequate quality. There simply weren't enough reliable engines until mid-1944, regardless of Hitler's interference, and by then it was too late. (A more interesting case is the He 280, a jet fighter prototype which flew on jet engines a year before the Me 262 did. Amazingly, it generated little official interest and nothing came of it.)
__________________
"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."

Last edited by Corsair 115; 18th July 2009 at 08:16 AM.
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 Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 08:20 AM   #224
Pardalis
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 25,817
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
It seems impossible for you to view the holocaust as an event seperated from political context.

snip

And I certainly don't like that this mythological event is being used to push my society into a direction (multiculturalism) I don't like at all.
Contradiction. It's because you view the holocaust politically that you deny it.

Your denial is 100% politically and ideologically motivated, you just proved it. You are not interested in history or facts, you don't like the way reality plays out, so you deny it.

Last edited by Pardalis; 18th July 2009 at 08:24 AM.
Pardalis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 08:31 AM   #225
Pardalis
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 25,817
BTW, despite the Holocaust denial filth, this thread is most informative. If there's one good thing about Holocaust denial, it has the adverse effect in that makes one learn even more about it and WW2.

Kind of like when one reads Creationism/Evolution debates, one learns alot about Evolution, and its truth becomes even more solid.

Last edited by Pardalis; 18th July 2009 at 08:34 AM.
Pardalis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 09:01 AM   #226
Skeptic
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 18,312
9/11 investigator is annoyed that the inferiors, the scum of the earth -- Blacks, Jews, women, Latinos, etc. -- are overtaking him in life, and needs to find a villain to blame. Naturally, it is the Jews, since, according to his thinking, surely the Latinos or Blacks won't have the brains to organize such a conspiracy.
Skeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 09:09 AM   #227
MG1962
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,252
Originally Posted by Skeptic View Post
9/11 investigator is annoyed that the inferiors, the scum of the earth -- Blacks, Jews, women, Latinos, etc. -- are overtaking him in life, and needs to find a villain to blame. Naturally, it is the Jews, since, according to his thinking, surely the Latinos or Blacks won't have the brains to organize such a conspiracy.
I fear your observation is pretty close to the mark
MG1962 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 09:17 AM   #228
HereticHulk
Muse
 
HereticHulk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 714
Originally Posted by Pardalis View Post
BTW, despite the Holocaust denial filth, this thread is most informative. If there's one good thing about Holocaust denial, it has the adverse effect in that makes one learn even more about it and WW2.

Kind of like when one reads Creationism/Evolution debates, one learns alot about Evolution, and its truth becomes even more solid.
Great point!
__________________
"Religion provides the solace for the turmoil that it creates.” ~ Byron Danelius
HereticHulk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 09:47 AM   #229
Simon39759
Master Poster
 
Simon39759's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,285
Originally Posted by Skeptic View Post
9/11 investigator is annoyed that the inferiors, the scum of the earth -- Blacks, Jews, women, Latinos, etc. -- are overtaking him in life, and needs to find a villain to blame. Naturally, it is the Jews, since, according to his thinking, surely the Latinos or Blacks won't have the brains to organize such a conspiracy.

He is Dutch, so he is most likely more concerned about Muslim immigrants.
Simon39759 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 10:57 AM   #230
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 37,258
Originally Posted by Simon39759 View Post
He is Dutch, so he is most likely more concerned about Muslim immigrants.
I think that is covered in etc in the original statment....anyway, the point that 9/11 Investigator is driven by hatred and bigotry are the same.
Ironic that his hatred of the Jews causes him to take positions a lot like that held by Muslim extremists, though....
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 Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 11:27 AM   #231
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
History teaches us that between 4.5 and 7 million Jews were murdered from 1938 to 1945.

Holocaust deniers say these Jews were not murdered. And yet there is still, even today, a deficit of around 5 million Jews from pre-WW2 numbers.

So, Holocaust deniers, where...are these missing Jews?

Its not OUR job to figure it out. Its your job.
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 02:59 PM   #232
headscratcher4
Philosopher
 
headscratcher4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,776
There's the Goodwin rule (?) first one to bring up Hitler, loses the argument. There needs to be an adendum for holocaust deniers, first one to bring up Fred Leuchter loses the argument.

I love how 9/11 raises Leuchter (as if people here didn't know who he is or how he has been completely discredited) and than once he's caught with has pants down, he than tries to argue that the next so-called expert he brings up is even stronger.

Why would you not go with your strongest proof first? After Fred Leuchter, you've lost all hope of even trying to pretend that your "experts" have any merit or are worth learning from.

Pathetic. Simply Pathetic.

BTW...for the non wing-nuts here, just finished Roland Evan's third volume, the Reich at War. Fantastic book, great trilogy. His overview of the mechanics of the holocaust is terrific and heartbreaking...not to mention exceptionally well documented.
__________________
Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel.

-- Homer Simpson
headscratcher4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 03:13 PM   #233
NWO Sentryman
Proud NWO Gatekeeper
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Quantum Gate to the NWO
Posts: 6,682
Originally Posted by parky76 View Post
History teaches us that between 4.5 and 7 million Jews were murdered from 1938 to 1945.

Holocaust deniers say these Jews were not murdered. And yet there is still, even today, a deficit of around 5 million Jews from pre-WW2 numbers.

So, Holocaust deniers, where...are these missing Jews?

Its not OUR job to figure it out. Its your job.
And the death toll may be even higher according to a french priest
NWO Sentryman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 06:01 PM   #234
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
lamp shades from human skin, a complete fabrication
Apparently the holocaust denier maggots have never heard of their Ilse Koch.
~enigma~ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 07:45 PM   #235
GreNME
Philosopher
 
GreNME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,276
Originally Posted by HereticHulk View Post
OK, so you claim that:
Quote:
The guy doing the voice-overs made such ridiculous statements (the comments about crematoriums was the most ridiculous) that are easily and demonstrably false.
So, I guess I am not that interested in trying to determine what you think may be demonstratively false.
No, I really don't think you're that interested. I think that, much like is normally the case with this subject-- which is not unlike the Dorothy Murdock automatons or the Creationism/ID followers-- you're looking for more common dismissals of Holocaust denial/revisionism to add to your confirmation-bias-dominated ignore filter. And no, I don't think you'll accept pictures that show the clearly visible smoke coming from one of the Nazi-operated crematoriums (I'd expect dismissals like "that's not the exact one she was talking about"). But for the sake of the thread and to give you the benefit of the doubt-- you have in the past shown the ability to display critical evaluation of your own positions and the positions you may initially disagree with that can be well-explained-- I'll go ahead and expand on my otherwise short remark.

The thing that made the voice-over guy's comment about crematoriums the most ridiculous, though the "explanation" for the tattoos ran neck-in-neck for the lead, was the fact that he was making horribly inaccurate statements about how much smoke crematoriums emit by making an equally inaccurate statement about the emissions of a gasoline-powered auto engine. The statement made by the voiceover is that the crematoriums couldn't have emitted thick smoke because crematoriums don't emit thick smoke, much in the same way (the voiceover claims) automobiles don't give off heavy smoke. So, for the sake of providing you with an explanation of what I mean, let's start with the false-ness of an automobile's exhaust, and then move on to demonstrating that 60+ year old crematoriums do, in fact, emit plenty of noticable smoke, and I will further display that the crematoriums were being overused above capacity, which further creates thicker and more noxious smoke.

Automobile exhaust is not like the smoke from something being burned (like in a crematorium) in the conventional sense. Smoke is a vague term (example from WP), but automobile exhaust is a form of smoke with a different makeup than smoke from a fire. Unlike smoke from a fire or incineration, auto exhaust is primarily made up of unburnt gasoline and water vapor (example from WP, again), with some particulates as well. This is due in large part to the heavier amount of concentrated hydrocarbons and other flammable chemicals in gasoline, as well as the type of controlled combustion that takes place.

Cremation, on the other hand, involves literally burning the body in an incinerator at concentrated and high temperatures, much higher than that which takes place in a combustion engine. The main reason this is necessary is because the human body isn't very flammable, and even today cremation takes hours (though it's described as being as low as two hours in the WP article) to complete. The time it takes to fully incinerate a body is notable because the time it takes now is most definitely reduced from what it used to be 60+ years ago, at least by half (though different sources will give different estimates). The reason this is notable is because crematoriums back then couldn't reach the extreme and controlled temperatures they do now for two reasons: 1) the materials were primarily brick and iron, not conducive to concentrating temperatures in excess of 2000 degrees fahrenheit; and 2) the delivery systems for the bodies required the doors being open for longer, leaking out any heat that had been concentrated up to the point the doors were opened to administer the body. This isn't just guessing about the makeup of the crematoria, it's easily verifiable by looking at examples of the fronts and backs of the crematory furnaces in use at the time (or you could track down the plans that are available from multiple locations and verify yourself). As the popular point about fire in the truther world tends to be (improperly) applied, flames burning at a lower temperature tend to give off more smoke.

That's not all, though, and if that were all I'm sure some excuse could be made about something or other in order to dismiss my accusation of demonstrable falsehood in the voiceover's statement. However, it would be lazy of me to not provide a demonstration of where modern crematory systems have had complaints or had to undergo upgrades to filtering mechanisms-- of which the crematories of 60+ years ago had none that we know-- due to their output of thick and noxious smoke. As a matter of fact, this is a sighting that is dated this year (2009), where there complaints about a crematory's smoke (in Malaysia) being obtrusive. Also, this (Hong Kong) government environmental page has a before and after picture of a facility that was upgraded to address the problem with smoke exhalation. These are modern examples, not examples from sixty years back, which would have had even fewer mechanisms in place to control the smoke coming from their chimneys. Essentially, the most demonstrable proof that the voiceover guy was completely and utterly wrong (or lying) in his statement would be to show more modern, more technologically improved, and more filtered examples where the smoke can still be a problem, which are presented in the links in the previous sentences.

The most first-hand evidence that the concentration camps had demonstrable smoke problems, however, comes from the testimonies of the Topf and other workers who manned many of these furnaces. Even if the crematories were supposed to have only a limited amount of smoke, and even if the denier/revisionist claims that the prisoner barracks were too far away (despite the above-linked posting about an apartment complex complaining of smoke from a crematorium nearby in Malaysia), the overloading of the furnaces would be sure to produce heavier, thicker smoke than was even normal for crematories of that time. Example text from Body Disposal at Auschwitz by John Zimmerman:
Quote:
The issue of oven overuse surfaced in the recently discovered post war interrogations of three Topf engineers by the Soviets. Kurt Prüfer, builder of the ovens, was asked why the brick linings of the ovens were damaged so quickly. He replied that the damage resulting after six months was "because the strain on the furnaces was enormous." He recounted how he had told Topf's chief engineer in charge of crematoria, Fritz Sanders, about the strain on the furnaces because of so many corpses waiting to be incinerated as a result of the gassings. [121] Sanders stated that he had been told by Prüfer and another Topf engineer that the "capacity of the furnaces was so great because three [gassed] corpses were incinerated [in one oven] simultaneously." [122] A Sonderkommando, one who worked in the crematoria during this period of time, wrote that cracks in the brickwork of the ovens were filled with a special fireclay paste in order to keep the ovens running. [123]
Even if the notes about the gassings is disregarded (as I'm sure they will be), the fact is that the designers and engineers who created the crematories even stated that they were often overused. A result of the cracking in the chimneys the smoke would have been even more thick (remember about the leaking heat and lower temps), more low to the ground (heavier particulates would weigh down the smoke), and depending on the way the wind blows on a given day be more present in the camps the prisoners were in. Keep in mind, also, that even if using the denier/revisionist numbers often claimed that the number of dead were only in the hundreds of thousands, that would still be several (perhaps dozens) of bodies a day that would need to be incinerated over the course of more than ten years-- maybe around 4,000 to 5,000 days, with more deaths occurring in the later years-- which would mean more single bodies than could be incinerated one at a time even under the most likely of denier/revisionist accounts of the number of bodies. Basically, even the numbers allowed by the denier/revisionist claims would have been far too high to have been cleanly disposed of, requiring the doubling (and, if the testimony is to be believed, tripling) of the bodies placed in the furnaces at a given time, run practically in a constant succession for months at a time (at best, longer and past the need for maintenance at worst).

Essentially, HH, the denier/revisionist voiceover guy can't even reconcile his claims to the facts about modern crematories, past crematory designs, and the denier/revisionist numbers themselves. This isn't simply an omission or miscalculation on the part of the voiceover guy, though. It's a clear and obvious example of the type of confirmation bias that goes on in these attempts to dismiss or disregard details that point very clearly to the conditions the people who lived in these camps were experiencing on a regular basis. The self-assured and arrogant tone of the voiceover guy's dismissal just demonstrates how little actual thought went into such a ridiculous and snide comment, meant only to "preach to the choir" in terms of context to the video.
__________________
Like love, criminals will always find a way. -- foxholeatheist

The kind of pacifism I endorse is brought about by eliminating one enemy combatant at a time.-- JoeyDonuts
GreNME is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2009, 10:39 PM   #236
Skeptic
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 18,312
Originally Posted by ~enigma~ View Post
Apparently the holocaust denier maggots have never heard of their Ilse Koch.
The lampshade story, like the soap story, ISN'T true. Quoting John Toland's excellent biography of Hitler, p. 774 of my edition:

Quote:
Morgen [one of the very, very few Germans who investigated and warned of the genocide as it was happening - Sk.] did his best [during the war] to convict Ilse Koch... he was sure she was guilty of sadistic crimes, but the charges could not be proven. After the war Morgen was asked by an American official to testify that Frau Koch made lampshades from the skins of inmates. Morgen replies that while she undoubtedly was guilty of many crimes, she was truly innocent of this charge. After personally investigating the matter, he had thrown it out of his own case [against her].
It's typical of holocaust denying scum to think that because two or three stories are not accurate, the whole thing didn't happen. But that's another issue. Also, of course, nobody ever called Toland a "holocaust denier" for publishing the claim that the lampshade story isn't true. If anything, he and other historians who checked inaccuracies and corrected errors about the holocaust have been thanked for their efforts in establishing the truth. Neither have historians who claimed the number of dead is less than exactly 6 millions (say, 5.3) been derided as "holocaust deniers", or those who claimed the number of dead is more (say, 6.7) been praised as "holocaust enhancers". Where there was real research aimed at establishing what really happened, it was judged by on its own merits.

So much for the "holocaust is a dogma that cannot be questioned" story.

I note, by the way, that 9/11 investigator had still not answered my question. Why, 9/11 investigator, were there no grandparents, uncles, aunts, or older siblings in my dad's neighborhood, a neighborhood of those who came from Europe after being there during the war?

What happened to them?

Last edited by Skeptic; 18th July 2009 at 10:43 PM.
Skeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th July 2009, 04:09 AM   #237
Nick Terry
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,950
Originally Posted by headscratcher4 View Post
There's the Goodwin rule (?) first one to bring up Hitler, loses the argument. There needs to be an adendum for holocaust deniers, first one to bring up Fred Leuchter loses the argument.

I love how 9/11 raises Leuchter (as if people here didn't know who he is or how he has been completely discredited) and than once he's caught with has pants down, he than tries to argue that the next so-called expert he brings up is even stronger.

Why would you not go with your strongest proof first? After Fred Leuchter, you've lost all hope of even trying to pretend that your "experts" have any merit or are worth learning from.

Pathetic. Simply Pathetic.
The more telling detail is that Leuchter's much vaunted and utterly bogus report was 21 years ago, and the repeat attempt by Germar Rudolf appeared 16 years ago.

9/11-investigator mentioned another 'report', by Richard Krege, claiming that GPR scans show no mass graves at Treblinka. The few scans released show contrary to Krege's claims evident ground disturbance, as can be discerned by a simple comparison with textbook examples. Unfortunately Krege has never published this report, which was first announced almost 10 years ago.

9/11-investigator has been spamming links to IHR materials, yet seems unaware that the director of the IHR, Mark Weber, announced in January 2009 that the IHR will give up promoting Holocaust revisionism (and it has produced no new revisionist materials since 2002 anyhow) to concentrate on anti-Zionism and other contemporary issues.

Taken together, what these facts indicate is something of an epic fail by 'revisionists' to convince anybody but a tiny minority of nutcases that there is anything to their claims, as well as a tacit admission by the IHR that its advocacy of 'revisionism' was politically motivated; when it became obvious that HD was counterproductive, they decided to drop it.

That the best 9/11-investigator can come up with is a 21 year old discredited report speaks volumes.

It also suggests we can predict the half-life of more recent CTs like Da Twoof.

JREF has been overrun by 9/11 Truthers over the past four years, literally 100s of them have turned up here to argue and debate. Yet in the same time-period, if there have been more than 20 people who have dared argued overtly for Holocaust denial on JREF, I would be very surprised. And that despite the public scandals over a head of state, a renegade Catholic bishop, and the jailing of big-name deniers like Zundel, Irving and Rudolf. HD is in the news all the time, yet nobody seems very convinced by it.

The other predictor is of course the declarations of imminent victory and the collapse of the 'hoax'. HDers have been making such declarations since the 1980s and early 1990s. 20 years later, the 'hoax' has not collapsed.
Nick Terry is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th July 2009, 04:16 AM   #238
~enigma~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,923
Originally Posted by Skeptic View Post
The lampshade story, like the soap story, ISN'T true. Quoting John Toland's excellent biography of Hitler, p. 774 of my edition:
There is video of the lampshades that were seen by the residents (not camp but German residents) of the town outside Buchenwald after the camp was freed.
~enigma~ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th July 2009, 08:11 AM   #239
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Nick Terry View Post
The more telling detail is that Leuchter's much vaunted and utterly bogus report was 21 years ago, and the repeat attempt by Germar Rudolf appeared 16 years ago.
Is that you Nick:

http://www.blogger.com/profile/14852758011968360596

Nick Terry used to hang out with rock stars while working as a music journalists on many different publications in Britain and America. Since 1997 he has been researching 20th Century Central and East European History at a British university and a research institute in America.

Aha: a groupy, immersed in sex, drugs and rock and roll.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...f-is-liar.html

You should not forget to respond to that accusation against you:

The liar here is Nick Terry, because he commits the Lie of Omitting. The text of Hilberg states nothing about any proof and speaks of 3 different events (in October '41, March '42 and April '42). About this so called 'witness' Mund, he: "...had HEARD (from the second or eighth hand?) that a long row of jews were forced to crowl on their knees to the station."
For nothing else does Hilberg here give any 'evidence', except for his own unreliability (Or do you seriously mean that real proof for this came in 1957 from the 'collection'(?) of a certain Friedmann from (of all places) Haifa? Me surely not.)

This is a perfect example of the 'quality' of 'proof' this imposter and exaggerator Hilberg used to produce.
And of a liar, that (as usual) only wants to throw mud on one of his scientific and intellectual superiors
.

I have read Graf's 'Giant with Feet of Clay' (about holo pope Hilberg) myself and found it rather interesting:

http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/Giant/Chapter6.pdf

(Although he could have saved me his NPD-propaganda at the end).
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th July 2009, 08:19 AM   #240
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
I am shocked, look at the Times of today!

http://entertainment.timesonline.co....cle6718913.ece

Simon Wiesental is exposed as the complete fraud that he is, a fact well known to revisionists but now it becomes official:

Since the early 1960s Simon Wiesenthal’s name has become synonymous with Nazi hunting. His standing is that of a secular saint. Nominated four times for the Nobel peace prize, the recipient of a British honorary knighthood, the US Presidential Medal of Freedom, the French Légion d’honneur and at least 53 other distinctions, he was often credited with some 1,100 Nazi “scalps”.

His reputation is built on sand, however. He was a liar — and a bad one at that. From the end of the second world war to the end of his life in 2005, he would lie repeatedly about his supposed hunt for Eichmann as well as his other Nazi-hunting exploits. He would also concoct outrageous stories about his war years and make false claims about his academic career. There are so many inconsistencies between his three main memoirs and between those memoirs and contemporaneous documents, that it is impossible to establish a reliable narrative from them. Wiesenthal’s scant regard for the truth makes it possible to doubt everything he ever wrote or said
.

My goodness, what's happening here? Has the Times been taken over by neo-nazi's or what?

Critical thinkers have long known that Wiesenthal was a complete fraud:

http://www.ihr.org/leaflets/wiesenthal.shtml
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v15/v15n4p-2_Weber.html

Mind you that Wiesenthal, together with Elie Wiesel and Deborah Lipstadt, constituted the core of the holocaust movement. It's good to know that an important member of the MSM as The Times now acknowledges the true nature of this pathetic liar.

Last edited by 9/11-investigator; 19th July 2009 at 08:20 AM.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

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 08:12 PM.
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.