Can you show me some proof/s?

Discussions
Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Thu Jan 12, 2012 4:06 pm

Sergey Romanov wrote:Duh. Of course the book is about Aktion Reinhard. However, what you wrote was: "Why do you focus on Aktion Reinhardt camps...". The question was not about the book. The question was general - what I focus on, not what the focus of the book is.
Interesting, I am the author of this question, i guess that I am the one who know if the question is general or not and I should have know it better than you since you are not the author, so you are again wrong, and your accusation too as you admited with "Of course the book is about Aktion Reinhard" Thanks.
Sergey Romanov wrote:You know the link to our blog. Go there and read.
So you can´t quote some title of your publication about Auschwizt, ok.

You missed this:

16)Isn´t correct that your article is response to other peoples and not to me? Maybe that is problem why I didn´t find any answer.
Sergey Romanov wrote:The evidence has been presented in the book. Until you respond to it, the Public Service Announcement will be posted.
Ok, your answer to my questions is some "Public Annoucement", hm.
Sergey Romanov wrote:Prove that the evidence is not in the book
Subject of this topic is not about proving your book. If you want to answer me, quote from your book, i will not discuss some book when nobody here can see what is discussed, do you understand? I haven´t problem with quoting citations and source, what is your problem?
Sergey Romanov wrote:So? And Conquest's 3,000,000 victims of Kolyma camps shrinked to around 200,000. Does that mean that claims about Stalin's crimes are now under suspicion?
You ask so? So was Majdanek extermination camp or not? Do you deny extermination camp Majdanek? Were there murdered 1,7mil or 78,000 peoples?

Stalin´s camps of Kolyma where extermination camps with gas chambers? I don´t know nothing about claim you show so I have nothing to say, start your own thread, no off topic, again.
Why should I answer? I gave you the link to the evidence about Nazi extermination policies and about the three camps of Belzec, Treblinka and Sobibor. Deal with this evidence, then we talk Majdanek.
Why not? Answer my question please.

I am not jumping from topic to topic, again, strawman.
Nessie wrote:Whilst I agree Bob is stonewalling and ignoring very good evidence
You did not adressed my questions, no problem I respect it, but can you adress at least this? What evidence I am ignoring?

Belsen gain?

The dead bodies are murdered Jews?
The dead bodies are gassed or murdered Jews or peoples?
Do you know how high was mortality rate toward the end of the war in camp Belsen?
The dead bodies are result of extermination policy so Belsen is extermination camp?

Almost the same question still await your answer long time ago.
Bob wrote:
Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:25 pm
These peoples in Belsen are gassed Jews?
Or murdered Jews?
Or they died during horrible conditions at the end of war, becuase of oveloaded camp, because of typhus?
What mortality did this camp have before toward the end of the war?
How many of them died after liberation in British hands?
Why Josef Kramer did not escaped before the British captured Belsen, when he was commandant of alleged deathcamp where the peoples/jews were allegedly murdered on enourmous scale?
Why did he and the others waited for liberation instead of escape to avoid being treated as war criminal who is allegedly responsible for gassings in Auschwitz and for murdering in Belsen?

Sergey Romanov
Poster
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 8:16 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Sergey Romanov » Thu Jan 12, 2012 4:34 pm

Bob wrote:
Sergey Romanov wrote:Duh. Of course the book is about Aktion Reinhard. However, what you wrote was: "Why do you focus on Aktion Reinhardt camps...". The question was not about the book. The question was general - what I focus on, not what the focus of the book is.
Interesting, I am the author of this question, i guess that I am the one who know if the question is general or not and I should have know it better than you since you are not the author, so you are again wrong, and your accusation too as you admited with "Of course the book is about Aktion Reinhard" Thanks.
I can't get into your head (nor would I want to, considering its contents), but the way you asked your question was general: why do I focus on Aktion Reinhard. And very simply, I don't focus on Aktion Reinhard. I (and my friends) write about all extermination camps. Among them - Aktion Reinhard camps.
Sergey Romanov wrote:You know the link to our blog. Go there and read.
So you can´t quote some title of your publication about Auschwizt, ok.
I don't have to. You know the link to the blog. It's not difficult to go there and read for yourself. The demand to provide examples when you can easily find them yourself is a stalling tactic that won't work on me.
Sergey Romanov wrote:The evidence has been presented in the book. Until you respond to it, the Public Service Announcement will be posted.
Ok, your answer to my questions is some "Public Annoucement", hm.
No, the answer is in the book, which you're unable to deal with.
Sergey Romanov wrote:Prove that the evidence is not in the book
Subject of this topic is not about proving your book. If you want to answer me, quote from your book, i will not discuss some book when nobody here can see what is discussed, do you understand? I haven´t problem with quoting citations and source, what is your problem?
But I would have to quote whole chapters, which is simply not feasible on a forum. Therefore you will have to deal with the book as a whole. I won't isolate pieces of evidence for you to nibble on and dismiss one by one. You will have to deal with the totality of evidence, at once. Of course, for that you will have to write your own lengthy response, and you're not up to this task, therefore you want me to fall into a trap of discussing evidence piece by piece. Sorry, won't happen.
Sergey Romanov wrote:So? And Conquest's 3,000,000 victims of Kolyma camps shrinked to around 200,000. Does that mean that claims about Stalin's crimes are now under suspicion?
You ask so? So was Majdanek extermination camp or not? Do you deny extermination camp Majdanek? Were there murdered 1,7mil or 78,000 peoples?

Stalin´s camps of Kolyma where extermination camps with gas chambers? I don´t know nothing about claim you show so I have nothing to say, start your own thread, no off topic, again.
If you don't have any problem with the downward revision in Majdanek, that's fine by me! If you do, deal with Kolyma also.
Why should I answer? I gave you the link to the evidence about Nazi extermination policies and about the three camps of Belzec, Treblinka and Sobibor. Deal with this evidence, then we talk Majdanek.
Why not? Answer my question please.
Deal with the book.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3079
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Nessie » Thu Jan 12, 2012 4:53 pm

Sergey Romanov wrote:My dear Nessie, your concern is noted. Rest assured that I'm not very bothered by the fact that you're growing "very suspicious". Your replies on this thread have not been especially illuminating or knowledgeable, so your opinion of my replies is not of much importance in my estimation.

That you do not seem to understand that I won't be playing by Bob's rules doesn't help you either. I'm not gonna jump from topic to topic on Bob's whim, following his red herrings. He won't be setting the parameters of the discussion. Your own discussion with Bob should have shown you that discussing particulars with him leads nowhere and only leads the Hydra to grow more heads.
Fair enough, I am no expert in a forum discussion with experts and if that means being dismissed by you instead of educated and assisted, I will keep looking myself.

But, I am not Bob with Bob's disregard for evidence and tactic of question upon question.

So for me, please, how many Jews were gassed in the camps by the Nazis during WWII?

I am being serious here as I cannot find a straight answer.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Sergey Romanov
Poster
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 8:16 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Sergey Romanov » Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:00 pm

It's hard to nail down because for example the registered Jews in certain camps would be regularly gassed when they became unable to work, but in the death books some other cause would be given.

But if we take the extermination camp numbers as the bulk, then around 2.5 million were gassed in camps, as a ballpark estimate.

PS: this does not take into account the gassings outside the camps, e.g. in Einsatzgruppen gas vans or in euthanasia institutions.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:24 pm

Sergey Romanov wrote:I can't get into your head (nor would I want to, considering its contents), but the way you asked your question was general: why do I focus on Aktion Reinhard. And very simply, I don't focus on Aktion Reinhard. I (and my friends) write about all extermination camps. Among them - Aktion Reinhard camps.
Question wasn´t general, we talked about your book, not about general camps, and as i said, I am tuhor of this question thus i know it better. End i think.
Sergey Romanov wrote:You know the link to our blog. Go there and read.
Sergey Romanov wrote:I don't have to. You know the link to the blog. It's not difficult to go there and read for yourself. The demand to provide examples when you can easily find them yourself is a stalling tactic that won't work on me.
I will not search for your alleged publications when i don´t know if even exists, if you don´t know the name of it/them, it mean that you had very bad memory or for some reason, you don´t want to quote the title.
Sergey Romanov wrote:But I would have to quote whole chapters, which is simply not feasible on a forum. Therefore you will have to deal with the book as a whole. I won't isolate pieces of evidence for you to nibble on and dismiss one by one. You will have to deal with the totality of evidence, at once. Of course, for that you will have to write your own lengthy response, and you're not up to this task, therefore you want me to fall into a trap of discussing evidence piece by piece. Sorry, won't happen.
I see, you can´t quote it because you would have to quote whole chapter = nobody can quote it because of need to quote whole chapter, congratulation Mr. Romanov, you produced interesting book. If you really mean it seriously so I think that this is end of discussion, your book is just "unquotable"

Last try

17)Can you quote citation from your book, where is clearly stated what prevent victims from blocking the gas outlets in alleged gas chambers for example in Treblinka and provide me with source?

18)Can you quote citation from your book, where is clearly stated how many peoples were responsible for wood supply in for example, camp Treblinka and provide me with source?

19)Can you quote citation from your book, where is clearly stated what type of engine (and from what vehicle) was used to gass peoples in Treblinka and provide me with source?

20)Can you show me one forensic documented report from one mass grave excavation where the alleged amount of remains of victims in Treblinka is supposed to be dig in after cremation and provide me with source?

21)If that forensic report is sooo long to quote it here, can you please show me ONE photograph/video of one of the mass grave which was taken during excavation in Treblinka and provide me with source?

Mr. Romanov, I really hope that you dont need to quote whole chapter to adress these simply questions.
Sergey Romanov wrote:If you don't have any problem with the downward revision in Majdanek, that's fine by me! If you do, deal with Kolyma also.
I did not say anything if I have problem, I want to know what happened to around 1,4 mil resp. 1,6 mil. of victims? Kolyma isnt subject of this topic. Also answer previous question about Majdanek.

EDIT - I corrected wrong quotation tags, sorry for error.
Sergey Romanov wrote:Deal with the book.
Fantastic, the book is about Majdanek? Because I asked

15)Can you tell me if the gas chambers in Majdanek were used to kill peoples? If so, tell me how many peoples did die in them and how many chambers was or are there. Answer please.


So the answer is in your book? Where?
Sergey Romanov wrote:It's hard to nail down because for example the registered Jews in certain camps would be regularly gassed when they became unable to work, but in the death books some other cause would be given.

But if we take the extermination camp numbers as the bulk, then around 2.5 million were gassed in camps, as a ballpark estimate.

PS: this does not take into account the gassings outside the camps, e.g. in Einsatzgruppen gas vans or in euthanasia institutions.
Number of Gassed is around 2,5mil. in current story without alleged vans (not Chelmno vans)?

Auschwitz - 1,1 - 1,500 000 (Franciszek Piper, in Yisrael Gutman, Michael Berenbaum (ed.), Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp, published in association with the USHMM, Bloomington and Indianapolis, Indiana University Press, 1994, p. 11 (signed by Yisrael Gutman), pp. 71f. (signed by F. Piper) Orthodox story, around 90% of them Jews and mainly gassed - so propably 1,000,0000

Second number - 470-550,000 (Jean-Claude Pressac, Die Krematorien von Auschwitz / Die Technik des Massenmordes, Munich, Piper, 1994, p. 202 (translation in German), this number is only of gassed Jews.


Treblinka - 870, 000 (Israel Gutman (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, 4 vols., Macmillan, New York 1990, vol. 4, p. 1486

Second number - 200-250,000 (Jean-Claude Pressac, “Entretien avec Jean-Claude Pressac réalisé par Valérie Igounet, ŕ la Ville-du-bois, le jeudi 15 juin 1995,” in: V. Igounet, Histoire du négationnisme en France, Editions du Seuil, Paris 2000. (note 91), pp. 640f.


Majdanek - 59,000 (Tomasz Kranz, KL Lublin , Zeszyty Majdanka no. XXIII (2005), pp. 7-53. (Majdanek Journal)

Second number - 50,000 (Raul Hilberg, Die Vernichtung der europäischen Juden, Frankfurt/Main: S. Fischer, 1990, v. II, p. 956; English edition (The Destruction of European Jewry, Chicago: Quadrangle, 1967)"tens of thousands", p. 572. (orthodox story, Jews are murdered mainly by gas)


Belzec - 600,000 (Central Polish Commision, Poznan 1947, III, pp. 43f., Adalbert Rückerl (ed.), NS-Vernichtungslager im Spiegel deutscher Strafprozesse, DTV-Verlag, Munich 1979, p. 136. Yitzak. Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka. The Operation Reinhard Death Camps, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis 1987, pp. 383-389. W. Scheffler (Arndt/Scheffler 1976, p. 122)

Second number - 100-150,000 (Jean-Claude Pressac,(Igounet 2000, pp. 640f.)


Sobibor - 250,000 (Israel Gutman (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, vol. 3-4, MacMillan, New York
1990, pp. 1373-1377.; Wolfgang Scheffler, Judenverfolgung im Dritten Reich, Colloquium Verlag, Berlin 1964, p. 40.)

Second number - 30-35,000 (Jean Claude Pressac, in Valérie Igounet, Histoire du négationnisme en France, Editions du Seuil, Paris 2000, p.640.)


Chelmno - 340,000 (USSR-340, Nuremberg trial, IMT, vol. 8, pp. 330f.) I think that current story is around 150,000, so you can subtract it from total calculation if you want

Second number - minimal 100,000 (Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, p. 572)




Total - 3,190,000 (correct me If i did mistake) This number is without other alleged gassing sites and please note, that alleged number of gassed Jews was allegedly originally around 12,000,000 (Want source? no problem, just ask)

Second Total number - 1,042,500

22) What number is correct? 2,500,000 or 3,190,000 or 1,042,000 of gassed Jews?

23)If the number of gassed Jews is around 2,5 mil. how the 3,500,000 other Jews were murdered to accomplish 6,000,000? How and where?
Nessie wrote:But, I am not Bob with Bob's disregard for evidence and tactic of question upon question.
Nessie, I don´t know what is problematic with my questions, you find it disturbing? I feel that you "complain" about them, but it looks normal to me, I just not accept everything without questions when i see some problems with information which someone try to consider as fact. Don´t know what is wrong with my tactic. You accept everything without questioning?
Sergey Romanov wrote:It's hard to nail down because for example the registered Jews in certain camps would be regularly gassed when they became unable to work, but in the death books some other cause would be given.
22)Interesting. Jews unable to work were gassed and no Jew was cured in medical buildings?

23)Is truth that Jews above age 60, 70, 80, were registered?

24)Causes of death in volumes of death books are falsified by nazis to cover true cause of death (gassing)?


Adress my questions please, thanks in advance Mr. Romanov.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 35076
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Gord » Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:10 pm

Bob wrote:
RICH-ENGLAND wrote:@bob....

you call me a believer?...
Ok, I am sorry If I called you believer which I didn´t....
Sure you did, look:
Bob wrote:
RICH-ENGLAND wrote:again ill state the obvious for you, its impossible for me to prove that any of those photos are what they claim to be
Thanks for admiting it, I have the same opinion, isn´t possible to prove captions and what the photo allegedly show (of course not generally, something can be proved) I did not expected such a honesty from believer.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:23 pm

Gord wrote:
Bob wrote:
RICH-ENGLAND wrote:@bob....

you call me a believer?...
Ok, I am sorry If I called you believer which I didn´t....
Sure you did, look:
Bob wrote:
RICH-ENGLAND wrote:again ill state the obvious for you, its impossible for me to prove that any of those photos are what they claim to be
Thanks for admiting it, I have the same opinion, isn´t possible to prove captions and what the photo allegedly show (of course not generally, something can be proved) I did not expected such a honesty from believer.
I see, you are right I missed it, my fault.

I hope that calling him a "believer" wasn´t too horrible since his attitude against me more than indicated the he is believer and he did not answered me question if he believe or not to bring some light to this problem:
"Bob » Thu Jan 12, 2012 3:02 pm
...so you want to tell me that you don´t believe in it and this sentence was incorrect from me?"
No answer.

Anyway, I am sorry, without clearly statement from him, I have no right to call him believer even despite his attitude and opinions.

nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by nickterry » Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:40 pm

Bob wrote:Hello,

I think that this is a good place for my questions.

1)Can you show me proof or proofs, that Jews were gassed in nazi gas chambers?
2)Can you show me proof or proofs, that nazis had policy to physically exterminate all Jews?
3)Can you show me proof or proofs that nazis physically exterminated six million Jews and additional five or six million non-Jews?

Please, try to choose only the best proofs and if possible, quote directly every source or information which you would like to show me instead of sending link on whole books, whole long articles and etc.
Define 'proof'.

(then demonstrate how your definition works on other historical events to show that you've calibrated your standards of proof honestly.)

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:05 pm

nickterry wrote:
Bob wrote:Hello,

I think that this is a good place for my questions.

1)Can you show me proof or proofs, that Jews were gassed in nazi gas chambers?
2)Can you show me proof or proofs, that nazis had policy to physically exterminate all Jews?
3)Can you show me proof or proofs that nazis physically exterminated six million Jews and additional five or six million non-Jews?

Please, try to choose only the best proofs and if possible, quote directly every source or information which you would like to show me instead of sending link on whole books, whole long articles and etc.
Define 'proof'.

(then demonstrate how your definition works on other historical events to show that you've calibrated your standards of proof honestly.)
I will accept as a proof everything what you present to me and what can stand my critical analysis and my questions, if you will be able to defend this proof, no problem, I will accept it. This defense is classic procedure.

As you see, definition is simple, no need to prove you some calibration, I don´t care about different events, subject of topic is clear, please, no more dinosaurs, pyramids, 9/11 and so on.

You are one of the author of book from HCblog, you can answer questions for Romanov if you want.

RICH-ENGLAND
Poster
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:20 pm

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by RICH-ENGLAND » Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:06 pm

Bob wrote:
Gord wrote:
Bob wrote:
RICH-ENGLAND wrote:@bob....

you call me a believer?...
Ok, I am sorry If I called you believer which I didn´t....
Sure you did, look:
Bob wrote:
RICH-ENGLAND wrote:again ill state the obvious for you, its impossible for me to prove that any of those photos are what they claim to be
Thanks for admiting it, I have the same opinion, isn´t possible to prove captions and what the photo allegedly show (of course not generally, something can be proved) I did not expected such a honesty from believer.
I see, you are right I missed it, my fault.

I hope that calling him a "believer" wasn´t too horrible since his attitude against me more than indicated the he is believer and he did not answered me question if he believe or not to bring some light to this problem:
"Bob » Thu Jan 12, 2012 3:02 pm
...so you want to tell me that you don´t believe in it and this sentence was incorrect from me?"
No answer.

Anyway, I am sorry, without clearly statement from him, I have no right to call him believer even despite his attitude and opinions.
what attitude and opinions would they be then? are you just inventing your own reality as you go????....

again, i will make this very very clear for you as you appear to be acting wilfully ignorant and are also playing the victim... i have NEVER ever in my whole life stated my stance or opinion of the holocaust or ww2, i am not in any way whatsoever affiliated with any believer or denier group, i am not a member of any such websites.

what i am is a skeptic, i am someone that is all for the truth whatever that may be, i am also someone that doesnt like people being disengenuous and making fallacious arguments that they cant lose.....

the points i have made are totally valid, you have come here with your mind already made up, you are not going to accept whatever evidence is given to you, and youre going to keep twisting things and taking things out of context which is a total waste of everyones time including your own...

you asked for evidence, you said you would be happy with just one gram, youve been given far far more but you just refuse to read it, and even if you do read it you will still just refute it and keep asking more questions which will get us nowhere, ive seen this kind of behaviour many times from the conspiracy nuts all over the net, its akin to putting your fingers in your ears and shouting "la la la la la la la , i cant hear you so cant be true, la la la la la la"

ive proven my points and so did you (rather unwittingly) with the answers you gave to my questions, ive proven that anyone can play your game if they so wish with any subject the mind can think of... example again, i can keep saying to your answers about 9/11 prove it to me?... prove it to me? and eventually you will fail because you have no time machine to physically take me back and show me first hand every single part of that event so i can just refute your evidence ad nausium and youll never win... JUST LIKE WHAT YOURE DOING HERE....but that does NOT mean that event didnt happen... get it?

another example, all the ufo nuts are always posting pictures of very obvious chinese lanterns, i can refute those pictures, i can show them pictures of chinese lanterns that match theirs but i can NEVER prove to them that their picture is a chinese lantern as they wont accept my evidence and i have no time machine.. do you see the points im making?...

now i have no problem with debating anything whatsoever, i have no problem with people having different beliefs or views to me, i do NOT agree that it should be a crime to deny the holocaust because thats against freedom of speech (as long as it has no racist or other agenda driven undertone), but what i do have a problem with is people doing what you are right now...

in future, please refrain from calling me a believer, and also do NOT try to imply that i am somehow saying those photos may be fake just because i was making a point about how its impossible to prove anything to people that dont want to hear it......

thanks

rich
Last edited by RICH-ENGLAND on Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:18 pm

To be honest Rich, i stopped reading your wall of text here:
RICH-ENGLAND wrote: ...you said you would be happy with just one gram, youve been given far far more but you just refuse to read it...
You lie, I stated several times that I read it.

I see you can´t post no answer and ignore my questions, I think that we have nothing to talk, try to change your mind and start to post relevant content. Thanks.

RICH-ENGLAND
Poster
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:20 pm

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by RICH-ENGLAND » Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:33 pm

Bob wrote:To be honest Rich, i stopped reading your wall of text here:
RICH-ENGLAND wrote: ...you said you would be happy with just one gram, youve been given far far more but you just refuse to read it...
You lie, I stated several times that I read it.

I see you can´t post no answer and ignore my questions, I think that we have nothing to talk, try to change your mind and start to post relevant content. Thanks.
i do not lie, unlike you, you have refused to read plenty of evidence thats been offered and keep asking for people to get quotes etc for you becuase youre too lazy, ignorant and disengenuous to do it for yourself, so no, you haven't read it all so do NOT call me a liar, do NOT call me a believer do NOT try and imply i admitted those photos might be fake.

stop with your bs fallacious arguments and stop wasting everyones time and your own.....

we have plenty to talk about while youre keeping this nonsense going, and no i didnt ignore your questions, you asked for some evidence, i gave you some, you refused to read/look through it all and refused to accept it as evidence. again proving my point that this is a fallacious argument that you cant lose.....

thanks

rich

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:53 pm

RICH-ENGLAND wrote:
Bob wrote:To be honest Rich, i stopped reading your wall of text here:
RICH-ENGLAND wrote: ...you said you would be happy with just one gram, youve been given far far more but you just refuse to read it...
You lie, I stated several times that I read it.

I see you can´t post no answer and ignore my questions, I think that we have nothing to talk, try to change your mind and start to post relevant content. Thanks.
i do not lie, unlike you, you have refused to read plenty of evidence thats been offered and keep asking for people to get quotes etc for you becuase youre too lazy, ignorant and disengenuous to do it for yourself, so no, you haven't read it all so do NOT call me a liar, do NOT call me a believer do NOT try and imply i admitted those photos might be fake.

stop with your bs fallacious arguments and stop wasting everyones time and your own.....

we have plenty to talk about while youre keeping this nonsense going, and no i didnt ignore your questions, you asked for some evidence, i gave you some, you refused to read/look through it all and refused to accept it as evidence. again proving my point that this is a fallacious argument that you cant lose.....

thanks

rich
So I am liar, hm, can you quote my lie?
you have refused to read plenty of evidence
Again, lie, see my past and future comment/s.
becuase youre too lazy, ignorant and disengenuous to do it for yourself
You propably missed Romanov´s post - isn´t possible to quote from his book since it require to qoute whole chapter, but I wait on his reaction, maybe the answers on my questions can be answered without quotation of the whole chapter.

And again, lie, I quoted several sources instead of you (not you directly, generally), for example Gerstein report and other alleged evidence. I also know everything which you provide to me, this is nothing new to me, i know it and still didn´t see proof, so you must quote somehing. If you are not able to understand that i didn´t see any proof in your links and still attack me ad hominem, I am not able to change it, it is up to you.
we have plenty to talk about while youre keeping this nonsense going, and no i didnt ignore your questions, you asked for some evidence, i gave you some, you refused to read/look through it all and refused to accept it as evidence. again proving my point that this is a fallacious argument that you cant lose.....
Wrong and again lie, I did not refused any evidence I only placed questions about every evidence to see if you can defend it. You are not able to answer those questions, so I cannot accept it as proof, simple, you failed to defend it.

If you expected me to sit and accept everything which you "throw" on me and i will uncritically accept it as a proof, you are completely wrong and naive, of course I will question these proofs, if you can´t stand this method, no problem, you can leave.

nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by nickterry » Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:14 pm

Bob wrote: I will accept as a proof everything what you present to me and what can stand my critical analysis and my questions, if you will be able to defend this proof, no problem, I will accept it. This defense is classic procedure.

As you see, definition is simple, no need to prove you some calibration, I don´t care about different events, subject of topic is clear, please, no more dinosaurs, pyramids, 9/11 and so on.

You are one of the author of book from HCblog, you can answer questions for Romanov if you want.
You haven't provided a definition of how one "proves" an event in history. All you've done is set yourself up as the sole arbiter in advance. Unless there are agreed ground-rules, then there can be no discussion.

My ground rules are the standards of evidence generally used in modern history, which relies on the philosophical methods of abduction and inference to the best explanation and which does not fetishise one type of source over another. History isn't about 'proof', it's not mathematics. It is about the most probable explanation of the totality of the evidence.

The best explanation of the totality of the evidence regarding the treatment of European Jews at the hands of the Nazis and their collaborators is that more than 5 million were murdered, half by gassing and half by shooting or being interned in camps and ghettos. (If the latter isn't part of the Holocaust, then Stalin must be considered a really nice guy since most of the dead attributed to him died in camps or famines, and relatively few were shot.)

The evidence for this is spelled out in tens of thousands of books, some of which have been recommended to you already. That evidence exists independently of both you and me.

You're asking someone - me, Sergey, whoever - to summarise a very large amount of evidence which is already summarised in several online sources.

There are hundreds of pieces of evidence discussed in the expert reports written by Robert Van Pelt (on Auschwitz), Christopher Browning and Peter Longerich for the Irving vs Lipstadt libel trial in 2000. Those reports, with complete footnotes, are available online here:
http://www.hdot.org/en/trial/defense#expert" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Many pieces of evidence related to Auschwitz are further dealt with in Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers (1989) which is online along woth other pieces of evidence about gassing and Nazi extermination policy at the Holocaust History Project website
http://www.holocaust-history.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'd say that first you should go away and read these sites which contain four full books and many individual documents. Not so much that you won't be able to manage it in a month, but not so few that it is possible to summarise all the evidence so that you can be spoonfed.

Your request for 'proofs' founders on the fact that there are so many pieces of evidence. Evaluating all the witnesses to the Aktion Reinhard camps would mean discussing 300 witnesses, not one or two. The number of witnesses who reported direct observations of the Auschwitz gas chambers is even higher. There are many dozens of documents relating to the Auschwitz gas chambers reproduced in Pressac. One cannot just pick one and say 'that is all the proof that is needed' because that is simply not how history works. It doesn't work like that for other events and it doesn't work like that for the Holocaust.

What you're asking for is a sort of top ten or top forty, but that's just stupid. No serious book on modern history ever uses only 10 or 40 sources. They use hundreds of sources as a minimum.

In the time since you started this thread, I've seen several dozen new pieces of evidence regarding the use of gassing by the Nazis and the mass murder of the Jews by the Nazis. That's because I received some new books which published documents and some which summarised documents in the usual way, i.e. wrote them up into a narrative and an explanation of an issue. Next week I will undoubtedly see more new pieces of evidence, because that's quite easy to do when you read and research.

Some of that evidence will be what is considered corroborating evidence. Like the materials in this book:

Kammerhofer, Andrea, Brigitte Kepplinger, Irene Leitner (eds), Dameron Report. Bericht des War Crimes Investigating Team No 6824 der US Army vom 17.7.1945 über die Tötungsanstalt Hartheim. Vienna: StudienVerlag, 2011

detailing the Hartheim euthanasia centre in Austria and giving a large amount of evidence on the activities of men named Gomerski, Hoedl, Bolender, Vallaster, Stangl, Reichleitner and Wirth who later went to Poland to run Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka.

Other evidence might be more direct, like the materials summarised in a very interesting book:

Lewandowska, Stanislawa, Ruch oporu na Podlasie 1939-1944. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Ministerstwa Obrony Narodowej, 1976

published over 35 years ago in Poland, covering the region in which Sobibor and Treblinka were located, which quotes from sources about those camps that I have not seen cited elsewhere, even though the book isn't about Sobibor and Treblinka, it's about the Polish underground resistance movement in the Podlasie region where those camps were situated.

What you're effectively asking for is to be educated on a subject. You're demanding that someone put in a vast amount of time to spell out the evidence and debate you, but that's something which is normally done at a university in a proper course. I already teach courses like that at a university. The students get a big reading list and are expected to engage with the material.

I don't see that it's any different for a non-student. When you include the HC work on Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka, you've got five quite substantial books online to consider, they discuss a lot of evidence but not all of the evidence. Two deal with Auschwitz and two deal with the policy of extermination, one with other camps. That covers a lot of the ground in your questions. My students are expected to write essays using 10-20 books and articles, which is the norm regardless of the topic. You've been prescribed five, plus some articles on a couple of websites.

Honestly, what do you expect? I could recommend you look at Himmler's Sonthofen speech in June 1944, which is discussed by Longerich in the online report and which is discussed by me in the HC book. But I don't agree with the 'top ten' mentality that says 'here are the best 10 sources' so I'm not going to give you a list.

You've got online links to works which discuss the sources. That's how serious discussion works. If you think you can see all the sources online, then you are deluded since that's not the case for any subject in modern history. But you can find an awful lot of the sources online since there are:

- the Nuremberg trials x 13 in published form (70 or so volumes)
- 2 complete unpublished trials, the Doctors' Trial and IG Farben Trial
- the Eichmann Trial
- the documents used at the Eichmann Trial
- published edited collections of foreign policy documents from the US, Germany, Vatican, Switzerland
- 4000 testimonies taken in 1945 from Hungarian Jewish survivors scanned and many translated (many also in German not Hungarian)
- online newspapers, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency archive with daily bulletins throughout WWII, the American Jewish Yearbook
- contemporary books scanned and online at HathiTrust Digital Library
- individual documents scanned or copied or translated on dozens of different websites
- scans and translations of many critical documents in Pressac

And no, you're not getting the links now, because I'm currently writing an article giving an overview about online sources on the Holocaust which will appear on zeitgeschichte.online on January 20th, the 70th anniversary of the Wannsee Conference. You've got more than enough to get on with in the next eight days.

It's really great that there are so many sources online, but you know what? It's not necessary to scan and upload all your sources when you're doing scholarship. A lot of the documents might be online, but some are not. Doesn't change the fact that the documents exist and can be traced once a proper reference is given. Which is how it's done in books on any topic in modern history.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:35 pm

nickterry wrote:
Bob wrote: I will accept as a proof everything what you present to me and what can stand my critical analysis and my questions, if you will be able to defend this proof, no problem, I will accept it. This defense is classic procedure.

As you see, definition is simple, no need to prove you some calibration, I don´t care about different events, subject of topic is clear, please, no more dinosaurs, pyramids, 9/11 and so on.

You are one of the author of book from HCblog, you can answer questions for Romanov if you want.
You haven't provided a definition of how one "proves" an event in history. All you've done is set yourself up as the sole arbiter in advance. Unless there are agreed ground-rules, then there can be no discussion.
Uh, lot of text, but I miss the most important, the answers!you again did not quote or provided even one single proof.

Mr. Terry, I wish to receive a penny everytime when I see "there are plenty of sources, thousands of books, use google, educate yourself in library and so on" and etc. I would be a millionaire .

I do not need to educate Mr. Terry, I am familiar with Holocaust story, but didn´t find any single proof, your referencing to "thousands of sources" is thus useless, i would be content with one and then I would like to see if your proof can stand my questions and critique. If you are claiming, that you can´t provide me with one single proof on my simple questions and you are not able to present proof without referencing to the thousand of books, we can end it now. You are telling me that you even cannot answer questions number 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23?

Ok, you don´t want to answer questions of Mr. Romanov even when you are author of that book, but I will place one exclusively for you.

Please, I beg you Mr. Terry, can you answer at least those simple questions? No vast amount of time, just say yes or no, where is problem? You need thousands of books for answering those questions? You don´t know answers directly from your head? Please see how simple they are:

22)Jews unable to work were gassed and no Jew was cured in medical buildings? (Auschwitz)

23)Is truth that Jews above age 60, 70, 80, were registered? (Auschwitz)

One bonus question for you

24)Children below age of 10 years were registered in Auschwitz?

Thanks you in advance for answers.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3079
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Nessie » Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:32 am

Bob,

please give an example of a question and then an answer to it with evidence that you would consider sufficient proof for you to believe in the answer.

Thanks
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by nickterry » Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:31 am

Bob wrote: Uh, lot of text, but I miss the most important, the answers!you again did not quote or provided even one single proof.
You asked three very broad questions at the start of this thread. They all require book-length answers. So you are recommended books to answer your questions. It's simple, really.

If you ask about gas chambers (1), then you already know that there were six camps in Poland with gas chambers and gas vans, and you may also know that there were two more camps in Belarus and Serbia which used gas vans that are also major extermination sites; just dealing with the sites where Jews were exterminated. There were also six euthanasia centres with gas chambers, plus various concentration camps in Germany and Austria which had gas chambers for execution purposes (eg Mauthausen) or for medical experiments (eg Natzweiler). Then there were more gas vans operating with the Einsatzgruppen which were used both for executions (of 'partisan suspects' etc) and for extermination (murdering the entire Jewish population of towns in the Soviet Union).

The Nazis made a considerable effort to cover their tracks but there are still surviving documents, physical buildings, gravesites, photos, air photos, even some film, witnesses, contemporary reports from non-Nazi sources, and even a few cases where corpses could be found after the war, plus chemical tests done on ruins and buildings. The volume of evidence varies depending on where you are talking about.

The total comes to about 30 sites, and all become relevant if you are expressing incredulity about gassing (which you are by asking the question on an internet forum instead of simply reading books recommended to you). For if the Nazis gassed psychiatric patients in the T4 program, then this increases the plausibility of other evidence about gassing of other groups. If the Nazis gassed Jews at Chelmno, then this increases the plausibility of the evidence for the other sites.

If you ask about Nazi extermination policy, then you are asking about a complex process which developed over many years. It involved the senior leadership of the Third Reich and was implemented by hundreds of officials in the provinces and different occupied territories. You have to take into consideration statements by Hitler, Himmler, Heydrich, Goebbels, Hans Frank, Alfred Rosenberg and many other top Nazis as a minimum.

There are plenty of statements which in the view of generations of historians constitute prima facie evidence of the existence of a policy of extermination. Many are summarised in Longerich's report and Browning's report. Many are retrospective, referring to a policy which has been carried out (eg the Posen speech, the Sonthofen speech, a speech by Hitler in spring 1944, and many other documents and sources, like a Goebbels diary entry recording his reaction to one of the Himmler speeches at Posen). There are also statements which indicate one will be carried out or is clearly desired. There are other statements indicating one is being carried out.

The catch is that Nazi policy unfolded at different tempos in different regions and was modified by bureaucratic and political conflicts within the regime, since not every Nazi agreed that all Jews had to die straight away. The first to be exterminated were the Jews of the Soviet Union, by shooting, and that's all it took to wipe out the entire Jewish population of many areas, eg in Ukraine. But in the Baltic States the killings left a small minority alive for use as forced labour, since in those regions, there was a compromise between different Nazi authorities over this issue. The decision to exterminate the Jews of Poland was taken separately from the escalation to extermination in the Soviet Union, but obviously one made the other more likely. In turn, the decision to decide to kill the Jews of the Reich was taken separately and depending on where the German/Austrian/Czech Jews were sent, might mean they died at different times.

Different regions implemented policy differently, and this policy changed over the course of the war. Labour requirements varied so the number spared for labour varied. In 1942, the goal was visibly to get Jews out of the Reich, so all the Jews in concentration camps were deported to Auschwitz. By 1944, the war situation had changed so Hitler allowed the SS to bring Hungarian Jews to concentration camps in Germany to work as labourers.

If you think that Nazi Germany was a centralised, totalitarian state that only ever implemented one policy on anything, you are simply wrong. Thus a lot of your "puzzlement" is likely because you haven't grasped some of these issues.

If you ask about the numbers, which was your question 3, then you're asking for demographic and statistical evidence relating to the murder of more than 5 million Jews (not six million). The number of non-Jews murdered in the same manner is very large and is not 'five million others', but depends on how you define murder and where you are talking about. 2.7 million Soviet POWs died in German captivity as a result of calculated restriction of rations; about 140,000 were executed directly. 70,000 Reich citizens were gassed in the euthanasia centres and more than 150,000 other psychiatric patients died in asylums by lethal injection or deliberate starvation. About 700,000 non-Jews died in Nazi concentration camps, some by being gassed, some shot, some hung, some beaten to death, some starved, some dying of diseases. Most would not have died if they had not been interned in the camps, just as most of Stalin's victims would not have died if they had not been sent to the GULag. About two million non-Jews were executed across all the occupied territories, most in Yugoslavia, Poland and the Soviet Union.

You're asking for a summary of evidence for actions taken across two dozen contemporary independent nation states. If you think that picture, even for the Jews, can be reduced to a couple of internet links, you are completely deluded.
Mr. Terry, I wish to receive a penny everytime when I see "there are plenty of sources, thousands of books, use google, educate yourself in library and so on" and etc. I would be a millionaire .

I do not need to educate Mr. Terry, I am familiar with Holocaust story,
I very much doubt that you are really familiar with the history of the Holocaust and the Third Reich. Your posts here reference a variety of denier memes and you may know a little, but I have seen nothing so far that makes me think you really grasp the full range of the evidence.
but didn´t find any single proof,
Please list all the books you have read on the Holocaust, otherwise there is no way of knowing whether you missed 'a single proof' because you didn't read the book properly or didn't understand the book.

If you have not read a book on the Holocaust written by a conventional historian from cover to cover, then the absolute first thing you have to do is read one. If you refuse to read a book from cover to cover, then you are a know-nothing. If you have read a book from cover to cover, then we need to test you on your knowledge of the book.
your referencing to "thousands of sources" is thus useless, i would be content with one and then I would like to see if your proof can stand my questions and critique. If you are claiming, that you can´t provide me with one single proof on my simple questions and you are not able to present proof without referencing to the thousand of books, we can end it now. You are telling me that you even cannot answer questions number 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23?
I am not going to answer any of your previous questions until you have indicated exactly what you have read on the subject. It will save a lot of time.
Ok, you don´t want to answer questions of Mr. Romanov even when you are author of that book, but I will place one exclusively for you.

Please, I beg you Mr. Terry, can you answer at least those simple questions? No vast amount of time, just say yes or no, where is problem? You need thousands of books for answering those questions? You don´t know answers directly from your head? Please see how simple they are:

22)Jews unable to work were gassed and no Jew was cured in medical buildings? (Auschwitz)
Jews were deported en masse to Auschwitz from March 1942, and were selected on arrival in a procedure instituted by July 1942. This practice ended in October 1944, but there were exceptions where some transports were gassed in their entirety and some were registered in their entirety.

Once registered, Jews were meant to work as slave labourers alongside the many non-Jewish prisoners in the camp complex. There were already medical facilities in the camp from the time when Auschwitz was a 'normal' concentration camp, but from 1942 it became the practice to select weakened prisoners, Jews and non-Jews, and kill them, either by lethal injection or by being sent to gas chambers. The length of time a prisoner was permitted to remain in hospital varied, but was generally short. In March 1943, selections of non-Jewish prisoners ended but continued for Jews. Later in 1943, the exigiencies of the war economy meant that the time permitted for Jewish prisoners to remain in hospital was lengthened. In other words, obviously unfit Jews were killed on arrival, able-bodied Jews were selected, registered and given some chance to recover from illness.

Thus, the number of Jews surviving from 1942 is extremely small, the number from 1943 and 1944 becomes larger, as the practices changed over time and because it was easier to survive if one only had to endure 6 months or 12 months of the camp. On the whole, 1942 was by far the worst year proportionately, but more registered inmates died in 1943 than in any other year, in absolute terms.
23)Is truth that Jews above age 60, 70, 80, were registered? (Auschwitz)
Yes. In the so-called 'Theresienstadt family camp' which existed from September 1943, for purposes of deception, the SS registered several entire transports from Theresienstadt without selecting them on arrival, in order to keep up the illusion that deportation meant 'resettlement'. The 'Theresienstadt family camp' was reduced in two actions in March 1944 and July 1944. By this time, most of the 80 year olds who arrived on those specific transports had died of starvation. I am unaware of any 70 or 80 year old Jew surviving Auschwitz and haven't heard of any 60 year old surviving, either, though it's just possible that a very fit 60 year old could have pretended to be younger.
One bonus question for you

24)Children below age of 10 years were registered in Auschwitz?

Thanks you in advance for answers.
Yes. Non-Jewish children were registered anyway. Sending children under 10 to a concentration camp is barbaric to begin with, so your puzzlement is a bit of a mystery here. There were very few children under 10 registered at any time. Gypsy children were registered from 1943 when entire Gypsy families were deported to Auschwitz. The Gypsy camp was like the Theresienstadt family camp, a gigantic internment camp within the camp complex. The Gypsy camp was liquidated in August 1944 after able-bodied Gypsies were selected for the work, and the rest killed. Very few had lived to that point, most died in the camp from starvation and disease.

No Jewish children were registered at Auschwitz until September 1943 when the Theresienstadt family camp was established. Since all the deportees from those transports were registered, these included children under 10, but as explained already, these transports were exceptions to the rule. In 1944, there were a couple of other 'privileged' transports which were likewise not subjected to selection on arrival, meaning that a few more children under 10 did slip through - again, exceptions to the rule. More famously, Josef Mengele began selecting twins for medical experiments, especially from the transports from Hungary. After October 1944, there were no more selections, so a very small number of Jewish children were registered in the camp then.

These are all well known facts which have been researched by historians from the Auschwitz museum and from other institutions, there are even whole books about the subject such as:

Buser, Verena, Ueberleben von Kindern und Jugendlichen in den Konzentrationslagern Sachsenhausen, Auschwitz und Bergen-Belsen. Berlin: Metropol, 2011
Litvinov, Vladimir, Poezd iz nochi. Kaluga, 2004 (about Russian children)

as well as chapters by Helena Kubica about children in Auschwitz in:

Dlugoborski, Waclaw and Piper, Franciszek (ed), Auschwitz 1940-1945. Central Issues in the History of the Camp. Oswiecim, 2000: ; Volume II: The Prisoners – Their Life and Work
Gutman, Yisrael and Berenbaum, Michael (ed), Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp. Bloomington, 1994

the Gutman/Berenbaum book also has a whole chapter on the Theresienstadt family camp.

the Dlugoborski/Piper series has a whole chapter on hospitals; the other volumes also discuss the practices of registration, the evolution of the camp complex, and detail all the factors I mentioned above.

You don't get any more answers to any more questions until you have spelled out exactly what you have read.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Fri Jan 13, 2012 12:12 pm

nickterry wrote:
Bob wrote: Uh, lot of text, but I miss the most important, the answers!you again did not quote or provided even one single proof.
You asked three very broad questions at the start of this thread. They all require book-length answers. So you are recommended books to answer your questions. It's simple, really.
Wrong, no book-lenght answer required. For example

1)Just show one gas chamber. Just show proof of gassing. Just show some gas van. You spoke about physical evidence
2)Just show one proof of plan of extermination, you spoke about lot of documents.
3)Just show some nazi mass grave/s with their victims. Demographic study can hardly prove if the "missing Jews" were murdered or gassed and etc. If you don´t agree tell me how is this possible to prove with demographic study.

No need to quote whole book, ...thus Mr. Romanov was more modest, he needed to quote only whole chapter.

You wrote several things which require my attention including "denying" of six million and telling that "only" more than 5 millions were exterminated, that there were six camps or eight camps, Mr. Romanov spoke about five camps (Majdanek extermination status is allegedly vague, Romanov- Jan 12, 2012 3:15 pm ) then he added Trostinec, so he spoke about six camps and etc., so you propably don´t even know how many camps there were for extermination, you didn´t mention gassing in Dachau or Belsen or Buchenwald where the witnesses testimonies and official reports speak about gassings, you speak about documents, physical evidence and etc. but first I will solve the question 22, 23, 24 before i will question you about all of your claims.
nickterry wrote:I very much doubt that you are really familiar with the history of the Holocaust and the Third Reich. Your posts here reference a variety of denier memes and you may know a little, but I have seen nothing so far that makes me think you really grasp the full range of the evidence.
Hm, that is your opinion.
nickterry wrote:Please list all the books you have read on the Holocaust, otherwise there is no way of knowing whether you missed 'a single proof' because you didn't read the book properly or didn't understand the book.
No, Mr. Terry I will not list all books because first, I say again, I am familiar with story, don´t assume that I am not familiar. Second, you self look to me like the one who are not familiar because you can´t answer. Third, in the case that I would list all books which I have read, you can easily tell me "come back after you read all books of the world to find proofs so I can´t answer you until you read them all" and avoid answering me, so no listing, my last word, just answer and don´t care if I am familiar or not with official story, there is no reason to not quote some proof even when you quote it for someone who didn´t read all books. You are using excuses, if you have read this books, you must know all alleged proofs which are allegedly in them.
nickterry wrote:I am not going to answer any of your previous questions until you have indicated exactly what you have read on the subject. It will save a lot of time.
Well, it is your decision, but good to know that you will answer those three questions 22,23,24 since you spoke only about not adressing the previous questions.
nickterry wrote:Question 22 - Jews were deported en masse to Auschwitz from March 1942, and were selected on arrival in a procedure instituted by July 1942. This practice ended in October 1944, but there were exceptions where some transports were gassed in their entirety and some were registered in their entirety.

Once registered, Jews were meant to work as slave labourers alongside the many non-Jewish prisoners in the camp complex. There were already medical facilities in the camp from the time when Auschwitz was a 'normal' concentration camp, but from 1942 it became the practice to select weakened prisoners, Jews and non-Jews, and kill them, either by lethal injection or by being sent to gas chambers. The length of time a prisoner was permitted to remain in hospital varied, but was generally short. In March 1943, selections of non-Jewish prisoners ended but continued for Jews. Later in 1943, the exigiencies of the war economy meant that the time permitted for Jewish prisoners to remain in hospital was lengthened. In other words, obviously unfit Jews were killed on arrival, able-bodied Jews were selected, registered and given some chance to recover from illness.

Thus, the number of Jews surviving from 1942 is extremely small, the number from 1943 and 1944 becomes larger, as the practices changed over time and because it was easier to survive if one only had to endure 6 months or 12 months of the camp. On the whole, 1942 was by far the worst year proportionately, but more registered inmates died in 1943 than in any other year, in absolute terms.
Simple answer that´s all, you wrote long answer but you completely avoided the subject. You for example wrote about prisoners which were in medical facilities, but I asked about Jews. You also said that medical facilities were here from the time when Auschwitz was normal camp which imply that after extermination operation started, the medical facilities were no longer used for Jews. You also wrote, that ill Jews were recovered for some strange reason of "giving the chance" which contradict official story of "unfit, ill were gassed" and this also violate logic of extermination plan. Your answer is confusing.

Mr. Terry, because you completely missed the subject of the question and your answer is confusing I will by more accurate to avoid any further problems:

22)The Jews which were ill, wounded, old and etc. and unable to work were cured/treated in medical buildings in Auschwitz or not?.

Please, answer, no dodging.
nickterry wrote:Question 23 - Yes. In the so-called 'Theresienstadt family camp' which existed from September 1943, for purposes of deception, the SS registered several entire transports from Theresienstadt without selecting them on arrival, in order to keep up the illusion that deportation meant 'resettlement'. The 'Theresienstadt family camp' was reduced in two actions in March 1944 and July 1944. By this time, most of the 80 year olds who arrived on those specific transports had died of starvation. I am unaware of any 70 or 80 year old Jew surviving Auschwitz and haven't heard of any 60 year old surviving, either, though it's just possible that a very fit 60 year old could have pretended to be younger.
Again, you missed subject, I didn´t ask if some survived, I asked if they were registered. You are also trying to tell me, that old peoples were registered only from period from September 1943 to March 1944 for some "illusion" purposes in "family camp", but I am not sure if you are really trying to tell me this, so answer this question again and be clear in your statement if I am correct in what you are telling me.

23)Is truth that Jews above age 60, 70, 80, were registered? (Auschwitz)

nickterry wrote:Question 24 - Yes. Non-Jewish children were registered anyway. Sending children under 10 to a concentration camp is barbaric to begin with, so your puzzlement is a bit of a mystery here. There were very few children under 10 registered at any time. Gypsy children were registered from 1943 when entire Gypsy families were deported to Auschwitz. The Gypsy camp was like the Theresienstadt family camp, a gigantic internment camp within the camp complex. The Gypsy camp was liquidated in August 1944 after able-bodied Gypsies were selected for the work, and the rest killed. Very few had lived to that point, most died in the camp from starvation and disease.

No Jewish children were registered at Auschwitz until September 1943 when the Theresienstadt family camp was established. Since all the deportees from those transports were registered, these included children under 10, but as explained already, these transports were exceptions to the rule. In 1944, there were a couple of other 'privileged' transports which were likewise not subjected to selection on arrival, meaning that a few more children under 10 did slip through - again, exceptions to the rule. More famously, Josef Mengele began selecting twins for medical experiments, especially from the transports from Hungary. After October 1944, there were no more selections, so a very small number of Jewish children were registered in the camp then.
What puzzlement? I asked you if the children were registered in Auschwitz since official story tell me that children, unfit for work, ill, old and etc. were gassed. I am not talking about if this is barbaric or not.

Few? What it means, how many? Why they were registered at all, for what purpose?

Really no before September 1943? Who are those examples?

Weiss, Adolf *6.6.1934 †2.11.1943 = 9 years
Weiss, Adolf *8.5.1942 †10.4.1943 = 11 months
Weiß, Waldtraud *13.3.1939 †25.3.1943 = 4 years

Only then? What it menas "then", can you be more specific when exactly? Why they were registered, for what purpose?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your answers are quite confusing, violate logic or violate official narrative. Be concrete and clarify your answers. you made lot of claims which i will adress so don´t be afraid I will pay needed attention to all of your claims and proofs , but first, i would like to take care of these three questions.
nickterry wrote:You don't get any more answers to any more questions until you have spelled out exactly what you have read.
Hm, that´s a pity, but anyway, thanks for your attempt, thank you Mr. Terry.

Sergey Romanov
Poster
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 8:16 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Sergey Romanov » Fri Jan 13, 2012 2:05 pm

Bob wrote:
Sergey Romanov wrote:I can't get into your head (nor would I want to, considering its contents), but the way you asked your question was general: why do I focus on Aktion Reinhard. And very simply, I don't focus on Aktion Reinhard. I (and my friends) write about all extermination camps. Among them - Aktion Reinhard camps.
Question wasn´t general, we talked about your book, not about general camps, and as i said, I am tuhor of this question thus i know it better. End i think.
Question was generally worded, thus general. As for you knowing better, it doesn't matter, since you asked not yourself, but me. So you asked it in the wrong way, regardless of your intent. Now is the end, correct.

Sergey Romanov wrote:I don't have to. You know the link to the blog. It's not difficult to go there and read for yourself. The demand to provide examples when you can easily find them yourself is a stalling tactic that won't work on me.
I will not search for your alleged publications when i don´t know if even exists,
I said they do, and provided the link to the blog (in every post), get off your lazy ass and research.
Sergey Romanov wrote:But I would have to quote whole chapters, which is simply not feasible on a forum. Therefore you will have to deal with the book as a whole. I won't isolate pieces of evidence for you to nibble on and dismiss one by one. You will have to deal with the totality of evidence, at once. Of course, for that you will have to write your own lengthy response, and you're not up to this task, therefore you want me to fall into a trap of discussing evidence piece by piece. Sorry, won't happen.
I see, you can´t quote it because you would have to quote whole chapter = nobody can quote it because of need to quote whole chapter, congratulation Mr. Romanov, you produced interesting book. If you really mean it seriously so I think that this is end of discussion, your book is just "unquotable"
You can't deal with it, and that's all that matters. Everybody sees your desperation.
Mr. Romanov, I really hope that you dont need to quote whole chapter to adress these simply questions.
Sorry, but why these questions? How are they related to the questions in the OP?
Sergey Romanov wrote:If you don't have any problem with the downward revision in Majdanek, that's fine by me! If you do, deal with Kolyma also.
I did not say anything if I have problem,
Good, then you don't have a problem with Majdanek revision, thank you!
Fantastic, the book is about Majdanek? Because I asked
The book is not about Majdanek, the book is about AR camps, with which you will have to deal. After you deal with AR camps, we can talk about other camps.

Adress my questions please, thanks in advance Mr. Romanov.
I was replying to Nessie, not you.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Fri Jan 13, 2012 2:48 pm

Sergey Romanov wrote:I said they do, and provided the link to the blog (in every post), get off your lazy ass and research.
Good to have you back.

Nice language, sorry, but if you don´t know even one name of your alleged publication about Auschwitz, it means to me that they didn´t exist, you are not able to quote even one, I have no reason to believe you that some exist.
Sergey Romanov wrote: You can't deal with it, and that's all that matters. Everybody sees your desperation.
Ah, hm, yes I am not able to deal with something which is not here, try to shorten your chapters to make them usable to answer simple questions without need to quote whole chapter.
Sergey Romanov wrote:Sorry, but why these questions? How are they related to the questions in the OP?
Why not? These questions are related to your book which you and other recommended to me, so I placed simple questions and you can simply answer, where is problem? Or did your forget that recommendation? Your answer on my opening questions is your book, so I am asking you about your book. See those questions again:

17)Can you quote citation from your book, where is clearly stated what prevent victims from blocking the gas outlets in alleged gas chambers for example in Treblinka and provide me with source?

18)Can you quote citation from your book, where is clearly stated how many peoples were responsible for wood supply in for example, camp Treblinka and provide me with source?

19)Can you quote citation from your book, where is clearly stated what type of engine (and from what vehicle) was used to gass peoples in Treblinka and provide me with source?

20)Can you show me one forensic documented report from one mass grave excavation where the alleged amount of remains of victims in Treblinka is supposed to be dig in after cremation and provide me with source?

21)If that forensic report is sooo long to quote it here, can you please show me ONE photograph/video of one of the mass grave which was taken during excavation in Treblinka and provide me with source?


So where is problem? Quote answer from your book, what are you waiting for? Christmas?
Sergey Romanov wrote:
Bob wrote:I did not say anything if I have problem,
Good, then you don't have a problem with Majdanek revision, thank you!
Hm, you again quoted sentence out of context, again. Here is full quote "I did not say anything if I have problem, I want to know what happened to around 1,4 mil resp. 1,6 mil. of victims?" Don´t know what are you trying here with this tactic.
Sergey Romanov wrote:The book is not about Majdanek, the book is about AR camps, with which you will have to deal. After you deal with AR camps, we can talk about other camps.
Great so why did you answer to my question about Majdanek "deal with the book?" I don´t understand. Here is question again:

15)Can you tell me if the gas chambers in Majdanek were used to kill peoples? If so, tell me how many peoples did die in them and how many chambers was or are there. Answer please.


Hope you are not going to tell me "deal with the book"
Sergey Romanov wrote:I was replying to Nessie, not you.
And? Am I not allowed to ask you? Of course i am and placed simple questions which you don´t want to adress:

22) What number is correct? 2,500,000 or 3,190,000 or 1,042,000 of gassed Jews?

23)If the number of gassed Jews is around 2,5 mil. how the 3,500,000 other Jews were murdered to accomplish 6,000,000? How and where?


Where is problem? You made claim that around 2,5 mil. were gassed, see here:
Sergey Romanov wrote:But if we take the extermination camp numbers as the bulk, then around 2.5 million were gassed in camps, as a ballpark estimate.
,

you told this to Nessie and I adressed it, you can answer, where is problem?

EDIT

Of course, don´t forget questions which tried to answer Mr. Terry who came to help you with this issue, because if you can´t answer even those, then I absolutely don´t how simple the question must be so that you can answer it.

Thanks.

P.S. I apologize for wrong numbering of those questions, they should be 24,25,26, my mistake, there are too much questions which you don´t adress that I was a bit lost.

22)Interesting. Jews unable to work were gassed and no Jew was cured in medical buildings?

23)Is truth that Jews above age 60, 70, 80, were registered?

24)Causes of death in volumes of death books are falsified by nazis to cover true cause of death (gassing)?


But this should not be problem, problem is to get answers from you.

Sergey Romanov
Poster
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 8:16 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Sergey Romanov » Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:02 pm

Bob wrote:
Sergey Romanov wrote:I said they do, and provided the link to the blog (in every post), get off your lazy ass and research.
Good to have you back.

Nice language, sorry, but if you don´t know even one name of your alleged publication about Auschwitz, it means to me that they didn´t exist, you are not able to quote even one, I have no reason to believe you that some exist.
The denier logic at its best! :mrgreen:
Sergey Romanov wrote: You can't deal with it, and that's all that matters. Everybody sees your desperation.
Ah, hm, yes I am not able to deal with something which is not here, try to shorten your chapters to make them usable to answer simple questions without need to quote whole chapter.
Sorry, you're not a boss of how to write scholarly pieces. You will deal with the book as it is.
Sergey Romanov wrote:Sorry, but why these questions? How are they related to the questions in the OP?
Why not? These questions are related to your book which you and other recommended to me,
I don't care if they're simply "related". They do not address the contents of the book. To address the contents of the book you will have to write your own lengthy response to the book, which addresses the totality of evidence. If during writing this response you will notice that some or other element is missing, be sure to point it out in the response. But nobody here will be bothered with your "questions" chipping away at the margins of the critique.


Sergey Romanov wrote:
Bob wrote:I did not say anything if I have problem,
Good, then you don't have a problem with Majdanek revision, thank you!
Hm, you again quoted sentence out of context, again. Here is full quote "I did not say anything if I have problem, I want to know what happened to around 1,4 mil resp. 1,6 mil. of victims?" Don´t know what are you trying here with this tactic.
It's pretty simple: either you have a problem with Majdanek revision, and then you will have to address the Kolyma revision; or you don't have a problem with the Majdanek revision. Take a stand and defend your position.

Great so why did you answer to my question about Majdanek "deal with the book?"
Because I don't care about your questions about other camps until you deal with the evidence which has been presented to you.

In effect, this dialogue looks like:
- I want to eat, bring me food.
- Here's a pizza.
- Um, I don't see a pizza.
- Open the box.
- I want a pizza, not a box. Bring me pasta.
- Sorry, you have a perfectly good pizza in front of you. You won't get anything else.
- What pizza? All I see is a box.
Sergey Romanov wrote:I was replying to Nessie, not you.
And? Am I not allowed to ask you?
Of course you are, it's just you won't get answers on side issues, so as not to get sidetracked. Deal with the critique.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:21 pm

I tried it, I was patient enough, but Mr. Romanov, you simply can´t or don´t want to answer even only one of my questions and still dance around.

Well, thanks anyway for your "informative" posts, but your presence here was completely useless. Such a simply questions, some of them directly related to your scholarly book which you praise to heaven and post it everywhere as I saw, but you are not able to answer even one single question even when is related to content of your book.
Sergey Romanov wrote:Sorry, you're not a boss of how to write scholarly pieces.
Yes, indeed, I see, you are the boss, but simple questions seems to be problem even for boss.

Are you actually able to answer some questions? Such a questions could possibly exist? At least one?

Sergey Romanov
Poster
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 8:16 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Sergey Romanov » Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:28 pm

There's no reason to answer your questions, until you deal with the evidence presented for your questions 1 and 2 which resides at http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... caust.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:39 pm

Bob wrote: Jan 11, 2012 9:36 am
"I am familiar with this article, but despite that article, I placed my questions anyway which means that I still didn´see answer."

Jan 11, 2012 12:47 pm I already mentioned that I know materials which you already provided me, but placed my questions anyway, this mean that I still didn´t find answers to my questions.

Jan 11, 2012 6:24 pm
I will not read your article again, I already know it and placed questions anyway.

Jan 11, 2012 7:17 pm
I have already (repeatedly) wrote, that I have read it, but don´t see any answer. You also don´t want to quote anything from it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anybody else can answer my basic simple questions regarding the most know proven fact?

Sergey Romanov
Poster
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 8:16 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Sergey Romanov » Fri Jan 13, 2012 4:11 pm

Your questions 1 and 2 have been answered.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3079
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Nessie » Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:00 pm

This is a fascinating thread.

It appears to me that there are gaps in the knowledge of the Holocaust that mean some questions are not able to be answered, which Bob capitalises on and emphasises.

I am still surprised that questions such as this from Bob

"15)Can you tell me if the gas chambers in Majdanek were used to kill peoples? If so, tell me how many peoples did die in them and how many chambers was or are there. Answer please."

cannot be simply and directly answered.

The sceptic in me is now thinking "whilst the denier side has an agenda to play down or outright deny the Holocaust, maybe at least some of the believer side has an agenda as well, to exaggerate what went on." This is a position I am uncomfortable with as I am a believer, but one who is becoming more and more revisionist.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:15 pm

Nessie wrote:This is a fascinating thread.

It appears to me that there are gaps in the knowledge of the Holocaust that mean some questions are not able to be answered, which Bob capitalises on and emphasises.

I am still surprised that questions such as this from Bob

"15)Can you tell me if the gas chambers in Majdanek were used to kill peoples? If so, tell me how many peoples did die in them and how many chambers was or are there. Answer please."

cannot be simply and directly answered.

The sceptic in me is now thinking "whilst the denier side has an agenda to play down or outright deny the Holocaust, maybe at least some of the believer side has an agenda as well, to exaggerate what went on." This is a position I am uncomfortable with as I am a believer, but one who is becoming more and more revisionist.
Only little correction, I am not denier, I only don´t believe in certain aspects of holocaust, isn´t my problem, that without these aspects, holocaust stop being a holocaust for some peoples.

This question isn´t that illustrative to show incompetence to answer, more interesting is to realize that some peole talking about "facts" don´t even know what murder weapon had been allegedly used in Treblinka.

Edit - Try to guess why did they don´t want to discuss this with revisionists and instead of discussion which is typical for every other subject, they prosecute them. Why they defend "survivors" before discussion with revisionists? Use logic and guess why.

nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by nickterry » Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:52 pm

Nessie wrote:This is a fascinating thread.

It appears to me that there are gaps in the knowledge of the Holocaust that mean some questions are not able to be answered, which Bob capitalises on and emphasises.

I am still surprised that questions such as this from Bob

"15)Can you tell me if the gas chambers in Majdanek were used to kill peoples? If so, tell me how many peoples did die in them and how many chambers was or are there. Answer please."

cannot be simply and directly answered.

The sceptic in me is now thinking "whilst the denier side has an agenda to play down or outright deny the Holocaust, maybe at least some of the believer side has an agenda as well, to exaggerate what went on." This is a position I am uncomfortable with as I am a believer, but one who is becoming more and more revisionist.
And here we have an object lesson in how deniers play on people's ignorance to try and pretend they have a case.

There are no real gaps in our knowledge; there are gaps in the sources which sometimes make it hard to be absolutely precise, but if hyper-precision is demanded, then one must conclude that nobody ever died in any 20th Century civil war or other mass terror, since uncertainties and gaps in the records are the norm for mass killings. See the discussions of margins of error on Matthew White's 20th Century Hemoclysm website:
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/marerror.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The question about Majdanek is a good example; it is by far the least important of the camps which have been called extermination camps. Like Auschwitz, it was founded as a concentration camp; unlike Auschwitz, it never became a major destination for ongoing transports to carry out industrial-scale genocide. Majdanek did not acquire gas chambers until the autumn of 1942 and they were used only sporadically through to the summer of 1943. The major killing operation at Majdanek was carried out by mass shootings using police battalions, the so-called Operation 'Erntefest' at the start of November 1943, when 18,000 Jewish workers were shot. Neither the gas chambers nor the crematoria at Majdanek could have coped with such a number in what was meant to be a surprise operation.

It's true that in 1944, the original estimate for the death toll at Majdanek was 1.5 million, based on finding warehouses full of shoes stolen from the victims of the Reinhard camps.That figure is accurate for all of the Reinhard camps plus Majdanek. Plundered property was transferred from Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka to Lublin and warehoused there. So it's easy in retrospect to see how the initial estimate could be exaggerated. The other camps were also exaggerated at the same time, and then they were cut down by 1946 - after the 1.5 million figure had been used at the main Nuremberg trial. So Majdanek was re-estimated at 360,000, Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka combined at 1.631 million. Meanwhile Auschwitz remained at 4 million.

Majdanek and Auschwitz were overestimated because it suited the East Bloc authorities to be more ecumenical and emphasise non-Jewish suffering; non-Jews died in large numbers at both camps, whereas BST were almost exclusively sites where Jews were killed. So it took until after the end of the Cold War for more realistic studies to be undertaken by historians working for those museums. However, Raul Hilberg had already estimated much lower numbers; in 1961 he gave 1 million as the figure for the number of Jews who died at Auschwitz, based on everything he had seen from his research covering every country in Europe. That was confirmed in the early 1990s by a Polish historian, and has only been slightly revised since.

Hilberg estimated "10s of 1000s" of Jews had died in Majdanek in 1961, then firmed this up in the 2nd edition of his book to 50,000 Jews killed there, presumably including 'Erntefest' although he didn't make this absolutely clear. A historian employed by the Majdanek museum, Thomas Kranz, recalculated everything about six years ago and showed that the death toll was overall, about 78,000, of whom slightly over 50,000 were Jews (I forget if he calculated 58 or 59,000 Jewish victims).

That figure is based on subtraction: number of Jews who can be proven to have been deported to the camp, versus number transferred, if there is no evidence they were transferred then one can state that the most probable explanation is that they died at Majdanek. That is all one can do, and it is no better and no worse than the situation for dozens of other mass murders in the 20th century. The sources for Majdanek are incomplete, so there are only partial death books, and one knows from numerous other examples that some of the victims would have been kept 'off the books' anyhow.

There is simply no way of knowing precisely how many Jews were gassed at Majdanek. One can take the figure of 58 or 59,000, subtract 'Erntefest' and then subtract deaths from exhaustion etc recorded in the death books, and simply state it can be not more than x number. I don't have Kranz's articles in front of me, but the number gassed may be just a few thousand. The gas chambers were not used systematically for extermination-on-arrival killing operations, they were just a nice 'toy', an execution facility, mainly used from what is known from all sources put together to kill off weakened prisoners. Majdanek was first and foremost a labour camp and reservoir for slave labourers, so the best comparison is really with Mauthausen in terms of scale. Mauthausen saw more than 100,000 die and there were gas chambers in both the main camp as well as Gusen, again used for executions rather than serial slaughter on the Auschwitz scale. However, Majdanek was 'special' since it received Jews deported from the Reich and Slovakia, whereas Mauthausen didn't (there were no really large groups of Jews in Mauthausen until 1944).

Majdanek was also 'special' because it stood at the centre of a network of camps in the Lublin district. I already mentioned how property was shipped from Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka to Lublin; many of the Jewish workers served to help further sort the property, or to fix and clean up the booty, for onward shipment.

In Auschwitz, that function, property processing, was carried out 'on site' in a section known as Kanada. So the Lublin complex simply had a different spatial arrangement and geography to the Auschwitz complex. Jews arriving at Auschwitz were selected on the old ramp and taken to be killed in Birkenau. Their property was taken to Kanada, which was located next to the main camp a couple of kilometres away. Only in late 1943/early 1944 did a new warehouse sector open in Birkenau, called Kanada II. And only in 1944 was the rail line extended into Birkenau so that the 'ramp' moved. Thus, only in 1944 were all the functions located in more or less the same place.

In Lublin, transports from outside the area were taken to the station and selected on a side platform, i.e. a 'ramp'. The lucky ones went to Majdanek, the unlucky ones had to get back on the train to be sent to Sobibor or another camp or a 'transit ghetto'. When the unlucky ones were killed, their property came back to Lublin and was sorted there. This was undoubtedly inefficient, but the decision to build Majdanek right next to Lublin city was taken in mid-1941 long before any decision to exterminate the Jews in camps was taken. Auschwitz was located a little farther from Oswiecim town, and Birkenau farther still, so it worked much better there. And different people were involved; in different regions, without any central blueprint or guidance.

So - the question 'how many were gassed at Majdanek' is not one that can be answered precisely. That means it is on a par with a thousand other questions in modern history about massacres and death tolls, which are notoriously vague. It also means that past a certain point, it is not an interesting question because it cannot be resolved down to the last decimal place. Therefore, most historians move on, because not much more can be done, and look at more interesting questions which can produce new insights and are more tractable.

Thus, it is far more interesting to place Majdanek into the context of the Lublin district and ask how did it relate to the many other camps in the region, both to the extermination camps of Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka, and to labour camps like Trawniki, Poniatowa, Budzyn and so on. Now, although the general relations are known, most historians look at one camp in more depth. However, it is just as important to see the camps as a network, which is what has been done for other camp complexes. If one only fixates on one camp, one misses how they connected together.

Historians of Auschwitz know that Auschwitz consisted of three big camps (Auschwitz main camp, Birkenau, Monowitz) and lots of little sub-camps. They all came under the same administrative command, and thus "Auschwitz" is really 20 camps. And historians know that also applied to Mauthausen and other concentration camps, which were always camp complexes.

Majdanek also had some sub-camps, but it also had clear relations with other camps that did not 'belong' to it administratively. Some of those camps were extermination camps like Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka. The local SS commander, Globocnik, through his staff, decided what would happen to the Jews in the camps in his district, and thus exerted influence over Majdanek since his staff influenced how many people were selected for Majdanek and how many were sent to die elsewhere. So there was a 'dual control' or parallel chain of command, which is not unknown in other bureaucracies and which is especially common when you have a very ambitious person, as Globocnik was.

It really shouldn't be a surprise that personalities, bureaucracies and regions are much, much more interesting to historians than gas chambers.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:55 pm

Nessie, I will try to illustrate you the logic and arguments of those who consider it as proven and fact, and i will show you what they consider as an evidence.

Mr. Romanov, you had enought time to pick up some quote which you wish, now I will do it for you, let´s the quoting from your book begin.

Treblinka
Romanov BOOK wrote:In sum, the statements of witnesses who identified the gassing engine as diesel but who did not claim to have seen it or to have a sufficient level of technical knowledge to identify the engine, who were not directly involved with the engines themselves, or had little reason to establish such a trivial and unimportant (to them) detail cannot be used to establish the type of the engine.[56] The talk of diesel can easily be ascribed to rumours and confusion within the camp by misidentifying any engine as the gassing engine, especially as diesel engines were regularly used as power generators. It is also possible that some of the later witnesses relied on the publicity of Gerstein’s diesel meme. However, all of the talk about a diesel engine used for gassing is simply mistaken. "
27)Can you tell me, why witnesse/s/reports which spoke about diesel engine are wrong and why witnesse/s/reports which spoke about gasoline engine are correct?

28)Can you tell me, why witnesse/s/reports which spoke about vacuum cambers are wrong and why witnesse/s/reports which spoke about gassing using engine exhausts are correct?

Romanov BOOK wrote:At Treblinka, the forest team originally consisted of a few dozen prisoners but was enlarged when the cremation of the corpses started.[170] To how many men the team was enlarged does not become apparent from the source, but it seems reasonable to assume that a detachment starting out with at least 24 members (a few dozen is at least two dozen) and then reinforced ended up numbering 60 to 80
29)Can you show me source for your claim, that team responsible for wood cutting was enlarged to 60-80 members? You didn´t provide source.

I look forward to your answers.

edit - I added one missing word "report" to one question.
Last edited by Bob on Fri Jan 13, 2012 6:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Fri Jan 13, 2012 6:04 pm

Mr. Terry, you making lot of claims and you are using lot text, so please adress some few questions.
nickterry wrote:It's true that in 1944, the original estimate for the death toll at Majdanek was 1.5 million, based on finding warehouses full of shoes stolen from the victims of the Reinhard camps.
29)Is correct, that in Majdanek, there was a shop or store where the shoes from other camps were stored?
"“It had been assumed that this [quantity of shoes] came from murdered detainees. We know from documents that have later come to light that there was, at Majdanek, a store which received shoes from other camps.”

Czeslaw Rajca, Majdanek Museum, (Rajca, Problem liczby ofiar w obozie na Majdanku, Zeszyty Majdanka, p. 127)
30)What source you used for your claim, that shoes are from allegedly murdered victims of Reinhard camps?

nickterry wrote:There is simply no way of knowing precisely how many Jews were gassed at Majdanek.
15)Can you tell me if the gas chambers in Majdanek were used to kill peoples? If so, tell me how many peoples did die in them and how many chambers was or are there.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3079
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Nessie » Fri Jan 13, 2012 6:39 pm

nickterry wrote:
Nessie wrote:This is a fascinating thread.

It appears to me that there are gaps in the knowledge of the Holocaust that mean some questions are not able to be answered, which Bob capitalises on and emphasises.

I am still surprised that questions such as this from Bob

"15)Can you tell me if the gas chambers in Majdanek were used to kill peoples? If so, tell me how many peoples did die in them and how many chambers was or are there. Answer please."

cannot be simply and directly answered.

The sceptic in me is now thinking "whilst the denier side has an agenda to play down or outright deny the Holocaust, maybe at least some of the believer side has an agenda as well, to exaggerate what went on." This is a position I am uncomfortable with as I am a believer, but one who is becoming more and more revisionist.
And here we have an object lesson in how deniers play on people's ignorance to try and pretend they have a case.

There are no real gaps in our knowledge; there are gaps in the sources which sometimes make it hard to be absolutely precise, but if hyper-precision is demanded, then one must conclude that nobody ever died in any 20th Century civil war or other mass terror, since uncertainties and gaps in the records are the norm for mass killings. See the discussions of margins of error on Matthew White's 20th Century Hemoclysm website:
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/marerror.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

.........
Or this is a lesson on how the believer side needs to get better at presenting its case. I agree about the demand for hyper-precision and that war in particular produces uncertainties. But there are surely simple answers to simple questions. So

"15)Can you tell me if the gas chambers in Majdanek were used to kill peoples? If so, tell me how many peoples did die in them and how many chambers was or are there."

In my threads on this forum I answer when I can, state when I do not have the answer and I link to my source and then quote the relevant parts to save people having to read the who link (but it is still there to be checked if people want to).

My way of answer the above (if I had the knowldege you do) would be, for example

Yes, the gas chambers were used to kill people (then a link and a quote), about 100,000 were gassed (link and quote) and there were 4 gas chambers (link and quote)

Now, I suspect that would not be enough for Bob (sorry Bob, but on present form that is the case), but it would be for me so long as you are clearly not quoting from nonsense. :D
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:11 pm

Nessie wrote:
nickterry wrote:
Nessie wrote:This is a fascinating thread.

It appears to me that there are gaps in the knowledge of the Holocaust that mean some questions are not able to be answered, which Bob capitalises on and emphasises.

I am still surprised that questions such as this from Bob

"15)Can you tell me if the gas chambers in Majdanek were used to kill peoples? If so, tell me how many peoples did die in them and how many chambers was or are there. Answer please."

cannot be simply and directly answered.

The sceptic in me is now thinking "whilst the denier side has an agenda to play down or outright deny the Holocaust, maybe at least some of the believer side has an agenda as well, to exaggerate what went on." This is a position I am uncomfortable with as I am a believer, but one who is becoming more and more revisionist.
And here we have an object lesson in how deniers play on people's ignorance to try and pretend they have a case.

There are no real gaps in our knowledge; there are gaps in the sources which sometimes make it hard to be absolutely precise, but if hyper-precision is demanded, then one must conclude that nobody ever died in any 20th Century civil war or other mass terror, since uncertainties and gaps in the records are the norm for mass killings. See the discussions of margins of error on Matthew White's 20th Century Hemoclysm website:
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/marerror.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

.........
Or this is a lesson on how the believer side needs to get better at presenting its case. I agree about the demand for hyper-precision and that war in particular produces uncertainties. But there are surely simple answers to simple questions. So

"15)Can you tell me if the gas chambers in Majdanek were used to kill peoples? If so, tell me how many peoples did die in them and how many chambers was or are there."

In my threads on this forum I answer when I can, state when I do not have the answer and I link to my source and then quote the relevant parts to save people having to read the who link (but it is still there to be checked if people want to).

My way of answer the above (if I had the knowldege you do) would be, for example

Yes, the gas chambers were used to kill people (then a link and a quote), about 100,000 were gassed (link and quote) and there were 4 gas chambers (link and quote)
Nessie wrote:Now, I suspect that would not be enough for Bob (sorry Bob, but on present form that is the case), but it would be for me so long as you are clearly not quoting from nonsense. :D
Nessie, I am not sure If I understand (maybe problem in mine understanding to english) so if you can formulate it better or different?

EDIT - I am sorry for later edit Nessie,but I finally understood it, no problem.
Nessie wrote:Yes, the gas chambers were used to kill people (then a link and a quote), about 100,000 were gassed (link and quote) and there were 4 gas chambers (link and quote)
This will be enough as an answer, but of course i will place again questions to reveal if the source isn´t false in its claims, questions and questions, easy. I guess, that sources for this will be witnesses again.
nickterry wrote:there are gaps in the sources
The sources for these claims are witnesses, that´s the problem of your gaps.

nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by nickterry » Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:07 pm

Nessie wrote: Or this is a lesson on how the believer side needs to get better at presenting its case.
There is no 'believer side'. There is the generally accepted historical record, with all the paraphernalia that goes with something being part of the historical record, like academic historians and websites and Wiki pages and so forth, and then there is a tiny minority of fruitcakes and nutters who have decided to troll internet forums for political reasons, either pro-Nazi sympathies, anti-Americanism or antisemitism in my experience, or because they like the attention and notoriety of being 'controversial'.

Deniers simply aren't very numerous, and they're usually either extremely obnoxious - several have been banned from this forum (rikku/Yuna, various Greg Gerdes sockpuppets, an idiot calling himself Wolfie) - or extremely tedious (see: David). The obnoxiousness of deniers tends to put people off, so that a lot of responses to deniers on the internet boil down to eff off. There are very few deniers who can start up a discussion about the Holocaust without some level of ad hominem or some implied political insult. 'Bob' has been unusually discreet for a denier, I have to say. He did however manage to fall immediately foul of the ad hominem trap from a different angle, as we saw.

The only reason 'Bob' is attracting much attention is because he's one of two deniers on the forum, the other one having become part of the furniture.

It's all very well saying why not link to this or that source, but when someone comes along to demand answers to quite enormous questions, then this doesn't seem very easy. Deniers either tend to start with very specific and usually highly predictable gambits, or they start with enormous handwaves like 'prove to me that the Holocaust happened', which is a statement worthy only of ridicule.

Or, as we have seen on this thread, they start Gish Galloping and asking multiple questions. 'Bob' is doing exactly the same thing as countless other cranks and loonies who Gish Gallop and fire off a barrage of questions, certain that no one in their right mind has the time or energy to look up all the micro-details and summarise it in a form which will meet the exacting standards of the denier/crank.

'Bob' is also typical of many deniers/cranks in coming on here trying to frame the discussion and dictate all the ground rules, setting himself up as final arbiter. That also tends to annoy people. I'll link to an example of where a denier came onto an internet forum and tried to rig the ground rules in such a blatant and crass manner than everyone told him to eff off and proceeded to ridicule him. It didn't help that the denier in question was none other than 'denierbud', the maker of the YouTube-style video series 'One Third of the Holocaust'. That video series was examined systematically and debunked on HC blog in 2006-2007. So people immediately linked to the rebuttals, which 'denierbud' then refused to discuss. He did eventually try to debate properly instead of spamming his video links, but then had his ass handed to him in several different ways. And so, 'denierbud' fled back to the safety of CODOH forum where the few remaining deniers hang out.

The ensuing carnage and hilarity on JREFcan be read here:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=151218" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In all honesty: why should anyone bother with a Gish Gallop series of questions? It's not difficult to find good quality online materials about Majdanek. Here are several articles with lots of detail about the numbers and so forth:
http://www.majdanek.eu/articles.php?acid=200" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The catch is that the articles are in Polish. I've got two really good new books (written since 2005) on Majdanek. Both in German. The camp's name is widely known but it's actually quite obscure, and isn't much discussed in the English-speaking world.

There are web pages about the camp on deathcamps.org, but as we've seen, the people there think it's OK to resort to slander to take pointless revenge for petty disputes. Someone can always link to those pages, which can easily be found on a google search. Sure, fine. But 'Bob' or whoever can always point out that deathcamps.org doesn't reference its sources properly and maybe doesn't answer whatever amazing question he can think up. That's how Gish Gallops work. They rely on God of the Gaps arguments whereby if someone cannot answer something straight away, the crank 'wins'. And yeah, maybe the crank will 'win' if they can sway a seemingly intelligent bystander with their BS rhetoric and Gish Galloping.

What, then, would you have people do? Bear in mind I only joined this thread after it was three pages long and after 'Bob' had blotted his copybook endorsing ad hominem slanders. Are you seriously suggesting that people on this forum have to dance to the tune of someone with fringe views and spend hours investigoogling or summarising the information they might have read in books - maybe even translating stuff from Polish?

I'm simply highlighting that you need to be much more aware of the meta-context of debate and think through what it entails. There are quite a few pseudo-debates (eg Intelligent Design, 9/11 Truth movement, Holocaust denial) on the internet; the ones where you find insta-rebuttals evolving to cope with every last possible dotted i and crossed t are the ones where there are large numbers of IDiots or Truthers (well, there used to be more Truthers).

That's not actually the case with Holocaust denial, which is the most fringe of the fringe crank movements out there. It has declined pretty dramatically in the past decade, ever since David Irving lost his libel case against Deboah Lipstadt. 'Bob' is like a wasp in autumn buzzing around a house; out in the cold of the real world, as opposed to the artificial environment of an internet forum for skeptics, his views are laughed at and reviled.

Denial is now so marginal that there are really very few people who bother to follow its antics. Basically, there is one blog, Holocaust Controversies, which bothers to do that. The other sites like Nizkor aren't updated because the main battle was won years ago. As you ought to be aware from this thread, the HC team recently completed a 570 page work debunking a large number of denier arguments. I think we've demonstrated that we have done the work and put in the time dealing with this crap. Yeah, sure, we could try and summarise this into nice little bullet-point highlights, or whatever else, but sorry, we have lives, too. None of us expected that the critique would 'finish off' denial, which is by now fully into zombie mode as belief systems go. The work is aimed at the gurus, who have been exposed as pseudoscholars. It's a problem for the foot-soldiers and cheerleaders, but cranks will always find a way to rationalise defeat and continue Gish Galloping. That's just how they are.

If there was any real danger then there'd be other people in the trenches doing battle, just as you find a lot of scientists monitoring and debunking IDiocy and just as a few years back, there were a lot of people debunking the 9/11 Truth Movement. Nobody is going to become PZ Myers debunking Holocaust denial. Michael Shermer took an interest in it - fifteen years ago.

(Of course, if 'Bob' wants to argue that his beliefs are 'growing', he can do the good skeptical thing and pony up some evidence for this claim.)

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3079
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Nessie » Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:29 pm

Again, sorry nickterry for repeating myself, but I still do not fully understand why can you not answer the question about Majdanek?

Is it because you want to make us read whole books ourselves to try and find the answers?

Is it to make a point that you will not play by Bob's rules for this thread?

Or do you just not have the answers, as in you don't know, but the answer is somewhere out there?

Or is there no answer as historians don't know?

My area of expertise is Scottish criminal law. It is a huge subject but I can pretty much answer most short, undetailed questions off the top of my head, or within a short time after a quick google. Considering the amount of study into the Holocaust I just do not see why it is not the same for getting answers about that.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by nickterry » Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:34 pm

Nessie wrote:Again, sorry nickterry for repeating myself, but I still do not fully understand why can you not answer the question about Majdanek?

Is it because you want to make us read whole books ourselves to try and find the answers?
It's generally considered the done thing to read books if you are seriously interested in a subject.
Is it to make a point that you will not play by Bob's rules for this thread?
Bingo!
Or do you just not have the answers, as in you don't know, but the answer is somewhere out there?
I could check on an answer from several sources on my desk. I am not going to, because I refuse to play by Bob's rules as he is blatantly Gish Galloping.

It is more interesting to discuss what is behind the question than to answer it.
Or is there no answer as historians don't know?
I have already explained that the precise number of people gassed at Majdanek is unknowable. We can estimate fairly accurately, but not more than that. This is nothing unusual in history, especially for the history of mass violence. Try finding the precise number who died in the rape of Nanking. You can't. You can, however, find a dozen different estimates. There's nothing wrong with estimates, as long as they are based on the best possible data. If historians didn't estimate we'd be utterly stuck to say much about a hell of a lot of things. But where one has precise data, then one can use it.
My area of expertise is Scottish criminal law. It is a huge subject but I can pretty much answer most short, undetailed questions off the top of my head, or within a short time after a quick google. Considering the amount of study into the Holocaust I just do not see why it is not the same for getting answers about that.
Up thread I made quite a lot of comments on Majdanek. I also specified (from memory) the most probable number of Jews who died in Majdanek as a whole (58-59,000). Isn't that enough? The number of Jews who died from gassing is probably less than the number who were shot.That alone makes the fixation on gas chambers totally bizarre in this case.

It's also just silly to reduce history to what-is-the-precise-number of anything if the precise number cannot be established with absolute certainty. It's like expecting medieval demographers to give a census-level of precision. Doesn't happen.

Pointing this out isn't dodging or whatever pathetic spin 'Bob' might place on it. It is conducting a proper discussion of the subject. Unless you examine the premises and rationales behind questions, then the chances are good that the questions might be misplaced (as they are, since 'Bob' is Gish Galloping).

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Fri Jan 13, 2012 10:07 pm

Nick Terry, you are good at producing lot of text to compensate lack of answers, you propably think that more text = the questions will be lost in the text and that will be forgotten..

edit - grammar error, not "thing" but "think"
Nessie wrote:Again, sorry nickterry for repeating myself, but I still do not fully understand why can you not answer the question about Majdanek?
Problem with these questions is that Nick Terry propably know that I a know his presumable answers, he know that I am familiar with standard narrative. Is easy to produce "proofs" to peoples without knowledge of the subject, is easy to tell to kids in the school that gassings is proven fact, but is problem to argue against someone who have the knowledge, the historians know it, that´s why they refuse to discuss the subject with the revisionists. Of course, they will use excuses such a "they don´t deserve publicity and that is the reason why not to discuss" Mr. Terry is using excuse "I will not play Bob´s game" but what game? Here are questions, so why not to answer them, what game? Please notice, that he answer all of your questions with incredible amount of text, but mine simple questions?

Regarding the question about Majdanek, of course, I know answer, I know the narrative, but the answer from Mr. Terry or Romanov would clearly demonstrate the absurdity and absence of proofs thus they will not answer and will use lot of excuses, Nick Terry is clearly able to produce "walls of text" to you about why not to answer my questions instead of few sentences which are really needed to answer them. He can make claims, but he can´t adress questions. For example he spoke about shoes from victims of AR camps i nMajdanek which served for alleged "mistake" with number of victims, but when I confronted him with simple sourced quote from orthodox historian about it and placed clear question number 30) he ignored it, guess why.

Here are no Bob´s rules, these alleged rules are standard behavior of peoples in discussion, no attacks, no dodging of questions, no strawmans, these are no Bob rules, this is normal behavior of honest debater, these rules are general, not Bob´s.

EDIT - sorry for editing, but I forgot one nice point from Mr. Terry, notice the strange logic of orthodox historian/s:
nickterry wrote:I have already explained that the precise number of people gassed at Majdanek is unknowable.
They debate about number of gassed, nice, but first they must prove existence of gas chamber, without gas chamber no need to debate about number of gassed victims, logical, right? But not for orthodox historians, they are not familiar with logic and with time order, they use time paradox, they completely violate law of causality.



Do you want dear readers to see another demonstration of dodging and lack of basic evidence or courage to answer questions about the "most proven fact"? No problem.

31)Mr. Terry, can you provide me with information about how effective was ventilation in alleged famous gas chamber and in undressing room in Krema II-III in Auschwitz-Birkenau? (Of course, this question is adressed genrally too, everyone can answer me)

Basic question, right? It can be answered in one single sentence so sit and let see what will happen.
Last edited by Bob on Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Donnageddon
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1047
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 4:07 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Donnageddon » Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:01 am

And now we are up to #31 in the JAQing off hit parade!
My name is not Donna.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3079
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Nessie » Sat Jan 14, 2012 11:37 am

I am a member of other forums about motorbikes and hifi, my other interests. Both welcome new members who are new to biking or hifi (as I was once) and are happy to answer the simple straight forward questions that new members have. That was great for me when I needed answers and now I pay it back by providing them.

But here in the Holcaust Denial part of the forum it is different, here you criticised for a lack of knowledge, told to find out yourself, your questions are not answered, you get lectured at.

Bob, I am now with you in being very suspicious of those who claim all sorts about the Holocaust and yet seriously lack evidence to back up their claims.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by Bob » Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:00 pm

Nessie wrote:I am a member of other forums about motorbikes and hifi, my other interests. Both welcome new members who are new to biking or hifi (as I was once) and are happy to answer the simple straight forward questions that new members have. That was great for me when I needed answers and now I pay it back by providing them.

But here in the Holcaust Denial part of the forum it is different, here you criticised for a lack of knowledge, told to find out yourself, your questions are not answered, you get lectured at.

Bob, I am now with you in being very suspicious of those who claim all sorts about the Holocaust and yet seriously lack evidence to back up their claims.
I appreciate your honesty, it needs lot of courage to say openly, that you are suspicous about the peoples who tell us about the "most proven fact. and about what their claims"

Is it worse than you think, here is another example.

Krema II is according to Pelt, the most lethal building, see below:
"Auschwitz is like the holy of holies."

"Crematorium II is the most lethal building of Auschwitz. In the 2500 square feet of this one room, more people lost their lives than any other place on this planet. 500,000 people were killed. If you would draw a map of human suffering, if you created a geography of atrocity, this would be the absolute center."

Robert Jan Van Pelt in Errol Morris, "Mr. Death" movie about Fred Leuchter, 1999 http://errolmorris.com/film/mrd_transcript.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
So here is my question:

32)Can you show me photographs of alleged Zyklon B introduction holes in roof of the famous gas chamber in Krema II in Auschwitz-Birkeanu which served for introduction of Zyklon B pellets or cans and provide me with measurements of these holes and with total number and location of these holes which were used for introduction of Zyklon B during gassings?

This question is damn important, without the holes, no Zyklon B could be introduced to gas chamber in Krema II and Krema III since this is mirrored copy of Krema II. But without Krema II-III no holes in Krema I, without these Kremas, who would believe in other alleged gassing sites in Krema IV-V and Bunkres 1 and 2 which are even worse in their construction? And with collapse of gas chambers of holy Auschwitz, do you think that people would believe in another alleged "extermination camps"? Is it like domino effect.

Now let see if some "believer" and expert can answer this question, they should have to, according to Mr. Romanov, holocaust-history.org is well know and credible and some of his colleagues are members and they have this kind of report on their website which was used by R. Pelt, they should have know the answer.

Do you think they will answer this important but absolutely simple question? Everything of which they are capable is to come and write some ironic sentence or write an excuse why not to answer to evil Bob, but answer my simple questions? Try to guess. They know very well why the revisionists ask these questions, very well. And I know very well why they don´t want to answer.

P.S. I ride motorbike too, choppers are my love.

nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol

Re: Can you show me some proof/s?

Post by nickterry » Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:19 pm

Nessie wrote:I am a member of other forums about motorbikes and hifi, my other interests. Both welcome new members who are new to biking or hifi (as I was once) and are happy to answer the simple straight forward questions that new members have. That was great for me when I needed answers and now I pay it back by providing them.

But here in the Holcaust Denial part of the forum it is different, here you criticised for a lack of knowledge, told to find out yourself, your questions are not answered, you get lectured at.
Just as there are forums about motorbikes and hifis, there are forums about WWII which answer questions and help people learn about the history. Axis History Forum is the best place for that
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewforum. ... fe5b5ccf5d" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Of course, Bob or whoever would have to ask motorbike or hifi forum type questions, like, 'what is the best book I could read on this subject' or, 'does anyone know the answer to this question', and not try to start a big fight. That tends to annoy people no matter what the topic.
Bob, I am now with you in being very suspicious of those who claim all sorts about the Holocaust and yet seriously lack evidence to back up their claims.
By your apparent reasoning, if a creationist comes onto a forum and comes up with 31 questions in the space of a few pages and isn't answered, then the theory of evolution is wrong.

I'm going to try one last time to get through to you about why this is nonsense. WHERE are people meant to back up their claims about the Holocaust? Here are some obvious answers.

1. In universities
2. In museums
3. In schools
4. On specialist forums like Axis History Forum
5. In books and scholarly articles

This list is not exhaustive, but it is not universal either. Bob could stop someone in the street and ask them his 31 questions and the chances are very good that the person he accosted would not be able to answer and would not want to answer.

Bob could also email a university professor and would probably be ignored, because it's not the job of university professors to answer long emails with 31 questions from strangers. Their job is to teach students and not to humour cranks. If the email wasn't ignored, then Bob would with 100% certainty be recommended a variety of books and articles or told to approach someone else for the specific answers. But we've seen that he won't accept book recommendations, he only wants to be given direct quotes and sources RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW. On this forum.

Now, it's true that someone like me could answer his questions. But I don't normally post here. The only reason I have been checking in is because I wanted to notify some forum members about the HC critique, in particular Matthew Ellard. Matthew Ellard also posts on JREF from time to time, but it's clear that SSF is more his main home whereas currently, JREF forum is my main home online.

Bob is welcome to come onto JREF and ask people the same questions and see what answers he gets. In a different situation, questions will receive different responses.

But more importantly, some of these questions are not actually questions at all. They are trick questions, rhetorical questions or posed in order to cause maximum difficulty just to cause people to jump through hoops. Some are about minutiae, some are about irrelevancies, some are too big to be answered in a single forum post, some are unknowables and therefore irrelevant, and so on.

Bob isn't coming on here to express his opinions in coherent prose which makes a series of assertions supported by evidence. He is reversing the burden of proof and insisting that other people answer questions according to his specified ground rules.

donnageddon had it exactly right, Bob is JAQing off. That's how CTs and cranks do. If you can't spot that, then you have not noticed that Just Asking Questions is the standard modus operandi for people with fringe beliefs, and that this practice is immensely irritating because it descends into Gish Galloping; and therefore after what is now 15+ years of the modern mass internet, has become something to which many people react very badly.

Do you even know what Gish Galloping is?