|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 04/07/2010 : 12:59:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Rudolfo
I quit after the first two or three instances, e.g. the 'evidence' idiocy, and the photo idiocy. I realized your intent even then, how could one not? To claim that a link that explicitly states that no mass graves were found refutes the claim that there are mass graves with bodies is prima facie stupid, or, more accurately, idiotic, as it does not rise to the level of stupidity. |
Yeah, neither you nor dantheman understand why his challenge is dishonest. The existence of mass graves shouldn't even be an issue. The evidence of mass murder exists even if the graves do not.| You probably should look prima facie up. |
No, you should. You keep using it as if it means "proof." It doesn't. After all, the prima facie evidence is that the Sun goes around the Earth once a day.| That's why dantheman called you a dullard. How else to respond to such idiocy, as there is no rational response. |
Thank you for admitting that dantheman wasn't rational.| Of course, he probably understood your real intent, that is, to use aggressive stupidity to avoid rational discussion... |
Actually, it was dantheman who was (is!) trying to avoid rational discussion by having a laser focus on some alleged claims about "mass graves," and thus ignoring all the other evidence.| And, of course, you succeeded in your goal. |
I would have much preferred that dantheman actually tried to discuss the issues he brought up, but instead he decided to be insulting.| I'll summarize the thread with respect to the OP - there has not been a single rational response to the OP, much less a counter-argument. |
That's because you (like dantheman) think that the absence of mass graves means something with regard to the entire Holocaust hypothesis. At Treblinka, the evidence for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people wasn't in a mass grave, so the challenge to provide evidence of one is itself a fraud (who says that mass graves should be found there? Anyone?), and so the fact that nobody has met the challenge cannot be logically used as evidence against the entire Holocaust. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
Rudolfo
Banned
124 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 05:37:52 [Permalink]
|
[That's because you (like dantheman) think that the absence of mass graves means something with regard to the entire Holocaust hypothesis. ]
Once the 'skeptics' rules of logic and their application are familiar to all, I can respond to a comment like this just by simply citing the rules invoked, so, in this case my response would be -
Rules 3 and 4.
However, since the rules may be new to some, I'll explicate ...
Rule 3 - First there is the implicit appeal to the 'consensus of experts', that is, we know the entire holocaust 'hypothesis'(?) is correct, so nothing else matters, and anything that seems to contradict it doesn't 'mean anything'. So, any challenge to the holocaust hypothesis is automatically meaningless. The 'consensus of experts' explains everything, so any other argument is invalid.
Rule 4 - Then the usual aggressive idiocy - the claim that the fact that there are no bodies to show for a massacre of six million people 'doesn't mean anything' is, prima facie, idiotic, not reaching the level of stupidity.
As the comment is fully accounted for by the standard rules, no further remarks are necessary.
Next |
| Edited by - Rudolfo on 04/08/2010 06:09:39 |
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 06:04:13 [Permalink]
|
These rules from where did you get?
Provide link you will
These rules made up I think you did. |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Rudolfo
Banned
124 Posts |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 04/08/2010 : 06:38:46 [Permalink]
|
More bullshit. The llnk takes you to Yahoo, which claims it doesn't exist.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 07:09:30 [Permalink]
|
So NOW you reply to me, when I have an easy question. That link is as valid as your arguments.
Jackass you are. Much cowardice you display. |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 07:20:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Rudolfo
Rule 4 - Then the usual aggressive idiocy - the claim that the fact that there are no bodies to show for a massacre of six million people 'doesn't mean anything'... |
And there is the Big Lie in action. The challenge was for mass graves, but now it's suddenly about "no bodies." The absence of graves doesn't imply anything about the absence of bodies. We've got human remains. Lots of them. Greg Gerdes even cites a report about them.| ...is, prima facie, idiotic, not reaching the level of stupidity. |
Again: you don't know what "prima facie" means.| As the comment is fully accounted for by the standard rules, no further remarks are necessary. |
Except you needed to lie in order to apply your "rules."Another lie. If your argument is so good, why do you need to lie, Rudolfo? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Rudolfo
Banned
124 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 08:03:05 [Permalink]
|
[Another lie. If your argument is so good, why do you need to lie, Rudolfo?]
Rule 1.
Next |
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 08:12:32 [Permalink]
|
It looks like all our dear friend will do now is make up rules on someone else's website. And answer questions with only "Rule #"
Nice non-debate.
Get back to me when you stop being a gutless turd coward.
The Holocaust happened. Accept it and get over it. No amount of postings to an internet forum will change that.
Get a job and move out of the house. |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 08:21:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Rudolfo
[Another lie. If your argument is so good, why do you need to lie, Rudolfo?]
Rule 1. |
Wow. Saying that you're lying means I'm ignoring your argument?
You were right in your email: the world of Holocaust deniers really is upside-down.
Here, I will address the arguments - again - just to make you happy. The challenge is a sham because it seeks to "disprove" the Holocaust narrative without actually engaging with the Holocaust narrative. Specifically, the official Holocaust story is that the mass graves at Treblinka were dug up and the bodies burned long before the end of the war, so there's no reason to find any mass graves there. Demanding evidence for mass graves at Treblinka ignores the narrative, it does not disprove it. The Challenges are examples of Rules #1 and #4.
Even better, the challenges are examples of four of the five classic denialist tactics, only missing out on "fake experts." And that link isn't a lie. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 08:21:48 [Permalink]
|
Again, I will go back to the photo of the seemingly healthy smiling kids. The photo that Rudolfo says is one thing that fuels his skepticism. First we determine that the kids are indeed Jews. That works for Rudolfo. But we also learn that the photo might not be an anomaly that shouldn't exist because there is an explanation for why the children look healthy that doesn't fit Rudolfo's scenario. Rather than considering the evidence for why those kids were taken care of, Rudolfo simply ignores the evidence and calls us stupid without explaining why we should ignore the (for us) newly found evidence or why he shouldn't consider it.
In other words, any evidence or hypothesis that doesn't fit Rudolfo's conclusions are either false or stupid. That's his analysis and excuse enough to not consider any competing evidence. He did the same thing with the so called children's zoo photos. He says it and we are supposed to just say, oh yeah, gosh, you are right Rudolfo. Any other reply deemed as stupid by him.
The good news is it's all here for everyone to see. His sour grape analysis of how skeptics operate will not work because anyone with half a brain can see that he avoided addressing the evidence that was found in favor of his conclusion, made before the evidence was in. We have seen this kind of disregard for competing evidence before. It's the mark of the true believer, a person who is certain of his own conclusions. He said he wanted to discuss the evidence for the holocaust narrative and demonstrate its flaws, but what he really wanted to do is use this forum as a soap box. He isn't interested in competing evidence. It's all stupid and so are we. That's his position and he is sticking with it. I just can't think of a better example of closed mindedness than Rudolfo's refusal to look honestly at the evidence that doesn't support his hypothesis.
And so it goes. Insults are probably the best we will get out of him from this time forward. The irony is that he claims to be the real skeptic while refusing to consider any competing evidence. It's come down to this. We're stupid if we don't agree with him.
Rudolfo actually believes his own bullshit but recognizes his inability to convince us. He is down to ridicule because it's the only tool he has left. But again, no matter, because his dodges are here for everyone to see...
On a side note, I think maybe Rudolfo is trying to get banned. That way he can claim that we were not willing to hear him out, or that his idea's were such a threat to us that we had to get rid of him.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
podcat
Skeptic Friend
435 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 20:24:21 [Permalink]
|
| I think Rudolfo's Rule 1 is: "I get to make up my own rules". |
“In a modern...society, everybody has the absolute right to believe whatever they damn well please, but they don't have the same right to be taken seriously”.
-Barry Williams, co-founder, Australian Skeptics |
| Edited by - podcat on 04/08/2010 20:30:58 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 23:40:50 [Permalink]
|
| "Holocaust deniers" is not a bad term, but I think we should look at those like dantheman and rudolfo, consider what we see them they doing, and ask if other terms might be even more apt. Like "Nazi apologists," "Nazi enablers" or just plain "Nazis." |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 04/09/2010 : 03:00:21 [Permalink]
|
Rudolfo's posts read almost like a Chick Tract soaked in Zyklon B. Like ol' Jack, he makes shit up and gets sillier as he goes along. For example, we now find ourselves in dantheman's one and only thread and I cannot help but wonder why. Is it because he realized that his own threads were so lame that he's ashamed of them? I dunno.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Rudolfo
Banned
124 Posts |
Posted - 04/09/2010 : 05:54:25 [Permalink]
|
[Wow. Saying that you're lying means I'm ignoring your argument?]
Rule 1 - ignore the OP.
Apparently even the simplest things require explanation to the 'skeptics' here. Let's make it real simple, if you write a sentence with the word 'you' in it, then Rule 1 is invoked, unless the 'you' in question is the subject of the OP.
Now, the subject of this thread is the existence/non existence of mass graves at the Reinhard camps. Therefor I am not the subject. So, your comment invokes Rule 1.
I note that the 'skeptics' like to use the word 'liar'. That is an application of Rule 1, unless the 'liar' in question is the topic of the OP. Using the word 'liar' is not a counterargument, it's an ad hominem attack. There is a difference
I'll also note that ALL of the skeptics' posts since the rules were introduced in this thread are applications of Rule 1. |
| Edited by - Rudolfo on 04/09/2010 06:18:55 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
A literal Jewish conspiracy
