The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Holocaust denial and related subjects.
Im_Not_Creative_Enough
Poster
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 7:32 pm

The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Im_Not_Creative_Enough » Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:27 pm

Don't worry, this ain't a Ryu type "I'm not confident enough in my own beliefs so I ask people to debunk {!#%@} for me" question.
I simply remember that a long time ago I saw a response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response to Zundl's famous 66 questions, but I couldn't find it since. This is simply a link request, if anyone has it.
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6441
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:43 pm


Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:12 pm

Isn't this Zündel's response?

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6441
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:26 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:Isn't this Zündel's response?


Yes, I think that’s what INCE wants.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:49 pm

I think he rather wants this: "I saw a response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response to Zundl's famous 66 questions".

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6441
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:09 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:I think he rather wants this: "I saw a response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response to Zundl's famous 66 questions".



I think you are right. Well, if he wants a response to Zündel’s response to Nizkor’s response, I’ve run out of options.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6441
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:10 pm

Unless Nizkor has it.....

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 17439
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:11 pm

I will check my bookmarks for this when I am on my laptop this evening.
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6441
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:19 pm

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a response to Zündel’s response.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:27 pm

Me neither.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:28 pm

Time for one of my "short debunkings"? ;)

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6441
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:31 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:Time for one of my "short debunkings"? ;)


Absolutely.

:D

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 17439
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Nov 30, 2017 11:45 pm

unable to find a link to this in my bookmarks - and I'm getting a malware alert on some old Nizkor links that looked remotely possible . . . sorry
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

Balmoral95
Regular Poster
Posts: 955
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Balmoral95 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 1:01 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:I don’t think I’ve ever seen a response to Zündel’s response.



I've no recollection of one either.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6441
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 1:21 am

I don’t think INCE phrased his request well. Maybe he can explain it better.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 17439
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Dec 01, 2017 1:43 am

I read it the same way Sergey read it. I thought it pretty clearly asked for the response to what Zündel had replied to Nizkor's debunking of the 66 questions.
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6441
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 1:55 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:I read it the same way Sergey read it. I thought it pretty clearly asked for the response to what Zündel had replied to Nizkor's debunking of the 66 questions.



I’m not sure that such a thing exists. I checked Nizkor, I don’t see anything like that posted.

Granted, I haven’t checked everywhere there.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 17439
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:02 am

I'm not looking past my bookmarks! ;)
. . . I mean Negative Capability, that is, when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason—Coleridge, for instance, would let go by a fine isolated verisimilitude caught from the Penetralium of mystery, from being incapable of remaining content with half-knowledge. - John Keats, 1817

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6441
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:07 am

I sense Sergey will give us something on this.

Sergey_Romanov
Poster
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:45 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:I don’t think INCE phrased his request well. Maybe he can explain it better.

I think he phrased it clearly.

Im_Not_Creative_Enough
Poster
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 7:32 pm

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Im_Not_Creative_Enough » Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:13 am

Hmmm. Looks like I had a false memory, than.

However I agree with Jeff, it would be nice to see something like this in reality. Your call, Sergey.
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far.

User avatar
NathanC
Regular Poster
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:19 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby NathanC » Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:21 am

This was where the late Zundel claimed that his trial was the first and only time so far that Courts examined Holocaust survivors, because the “Jewish conspiracy” stopped them from doing so.

It only really needs one response: it’s a lie. The Germans were doing that since the 60s, and they were rigorous in their examination because they needed detailed information because of Section 211 ( the base motives requirement). Zundel lied and has no credibility. He also made a lot of whoppers such as continuing to cite Leuchter and claiming that Höss was the “only” piece of evidence for the Holocaust at the IMT. Sounds like someone deserved their “false news” lawsuit.

Roberto’s eulogy for Russ Granata’s Really appropriate here.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6441
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 11:58 am

Im_Not_Creative_Enough wrote:Hmmm. Looks like I had a false memory, than.

However I agree with Jeff, it would be nice to see something like this in reality. Your call, Sergey.



Sorry, INCE. It’s entirely possible that something like that existed but it’s now disappeared down a hole somewhere. Of all people I figured Nizkor would link something like that but I didn’t see anything when I took a quick look around.

I get it, though. I’ve found good stuff on-line before.....only to never find it again when I want it.

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1729
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Denying-History » Fri Dec 01, 2017 4:33 pm

I remember this... He makes poor points in rebuttal.

He in response only confirms Nizkor's claim that the gas would not reach concentrations of 6% for an explosion... Which it seems he accidently concedes.

He argues cremation in pits is not what the Germans would have used because its not the most effective way to cremate people, despite the fact Nizkor sited a cremation in a pit of hundreds of corpses that took only an hour, and uses the same old argument of "the Nazis wouldn't waste fuel".
« Lies written in ink cannot disguise facts written in blood. »
- Lu Xun

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6441
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 4:40 pm

Denying-History wrote:I remember this... He makes poor points in rebuttal.

He in response only confirms Nizkor's claim that the gas would not reach concentrations of 6% for an explosion... Which it seems he accidently concedes.

He argues cremation in pits is not what the Germans would have used because its not the most effective way to cremate people, despite the fact Nizkor sited a cremation in a pit of hundreds of corpses that took only an hour, and uses the same old argument of "the Nazis wouldn't waste fuel".



Do you have a link?

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1729
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: The response to Zundl's response to Nizkor's response

Postby Denying-History » Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:06 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Denying-History wrote:I remember this... He makes poor points in rebuttal.

He in response only confirms Nizkor's claim that the gas would not reach concentrations of 6% for an explosion... Which it seems he accidently concedes.

He argues cremation in pits is not what the Germans would have used because its not the most effective way to cremate people, despite the fact Nizkor sited a cremation in a pit of hundreds of corpses that took only an hour, and uses the same old argument of "the Nazis wouldn't waste fuel".



Do you have a link?


Zundel admitting the buildings wouldn't explode unintentionally:

To answer the question, here is the scientific answer as of today:

HCN is explosive in a range between 6 and 41 vol.-%. Since the concentration normally used for disinfestation as well as - according to eyewitness accounts - allegedly used for mass killings never exceded 2 vol.-%, a danger of explosion exists only in the neighbourhood of the carrier where the concentration can rise occasionally up to 60 vol.-%.

Had an explosion from a glowing cigarette resulted, the smoker would already have consumed an extremely lethal amount of HCN due to the high, explosive HCN concentration. So he would have died by two causes: poisoning and explosion.


http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/english/debate/032_jam.html

Zundel claiming cremation was not effective:

There are problems with burning in pits that make it impractical. Traditionally, open air cremations are done on a pyre, with wood most frequently used as fuel. In India, where open air cremations are still widely practiced for religious reasons, it takes approximately 480 kg of good quality, dry wood to cremate a body. It should also be indicated that after massive civilian casualties caused by the Allied bombings, the Germans also used pyres to incinerate corpses. They did not do so in pits.

Worse yet, the bulk of "cremations in the pits" has allegedly been performed at Birkenau, but that is simply impossible because of the high level of the ground water table, where it is often just a foot or two from the surface of the earth and the entire area is practically flooded when the snow begins to melt in the spring.

[...]

It is not clear what they mean by "motor oil". If they mean lubricating oil, then it was just as precious as gasoline. Theoretically those "evil nazis" could, of course, have been using the old motor oil. All they had to do was to issue an order to the frontline and other troops to save the old motor oil each time they did an oil change and to send it to Auschwitz. Tanks, trucks, ships, submarines, airplanes, steam engines do consume plenty of lubricants, and the Germans, being so frugal, would, no doubt, have found a way to collect it from the Afrika Corps, from the Eastern and Western fronts, from Italy, Norway, Finland, the shipyards, ports and airfields - just to make sure that all those hundreds of thousands of bodies would be disposed of.

As for the methanol, it is not cheap; it takes a rather involved technological process to produce it in industrial quantities, and that kind of a plant cannot be hidden in an underground factory. Whatever facilities to produce methanol Germany had were busy supplying the needs of the underground Dora factories producing V-2 rockets.

Nizkor would be well advised to talk to the car racing aficionados and to find out the main reason why alcohol and not gasoline is used as fuel in formula car racing. It is done for safety sakes, as alcohol fires, which can take place during a crash or a spill in a pit, are not as "hot", since methanol releases less heat during combustion. Such fires, obviously, are easier to contain. They do not burn as well.


http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/english/debate/041_jam.html

Three problems with this claim.

1. Water table

2. Cremation pits not being effective = Germans would never use them. Nizkor however provides a report to the contrary:

In addition, there is the report quoted in Hugo Erichsen's 1887 work Cremation of the Dead which documents the cremation of over 200 bodies within an hour. The bodies were not "totally consumed," -- a phrase of value only as a straw man with respect to the burning of bodies in pits during the Holocaust.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/qar/qar41.html

3. That the Germans were not willing to waste fuel, which they definitely were:

Would the RSHA have a problem with granting Globocnik’s request? Hardly so, considering what is known about the amount of motor gasoline (Vergaserkraftstoff) delivered monthly to the General Government. About 6 million liters were delivered in July 1942 alone, thereof 2,935 t for civilian authorities and 3,612 t for military authorities[148]. German authorities didn’t consider it a waste to spend 68,000 liters of gasoline within 13 days[149] to burn the bodies of civilian air raid victims at Dresden in February/March 1945, at a time when the Reich had lost almost all of its petrol resources and its war machine was bogging down for lack of fuel. Why should they have minded allotting higher amounts of gasoline[150] to a state project of vital importance like the extermination of a minority of perceived dangerous subversives and useless eaters harmful to Germany, and that moreover at a time when the Third Reich still had access to its main sources of petrol, especially the Romanian oilfields? The daily petrol requirements of a single armored regiment were higher than those of corpse cremation at Sobibór if carried out with petrol as the main combustion agent, and even the daily requirements of Treblinka shown in Table 3.23 would have been below those of the 21st Panzer Division[151]. Globocnik’s request would thus have hardly been outrageous. Who claims that the Third Reich could not have "wasted" gasoline or other liquid fuels "in such a manner" fails to take into account Nazi Germany’s overall fuel resources and expenditure at the time on the one hand and the importance that the Nazis gave to this particular project on the other.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.pt/2011/03/mattogno-graf-kues-on-aktion-reinhardt_18.html
« Lies written in ink cannot disguise facts written in blood. »
- Lu Xun


Return to “Holocaust Denial”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests