Read The Forum Rules: We have a clear set of rules to keep the forum running smoothly. Click here to review them.

Post Reply 
Holocaust fact finding thread
Author Message
scorpion Offline
Ostrich
****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,605
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 260
Post: #129
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread
(01-02-2017 01:59 AM)Gorgiass Wrote:  I'm going to steal a page from the denialist playbook and take the quote out of order to set the frame, but this is a good one.

Gorgiass reveals his bias from the get-go. The term "denialist" is a dismissive slur. It would be like calling those who promote the official narrative "credulists" or "true believers". As someone who has taken time to peruse the literature, Gorgiass is no doubt aware that the proper term is "revisionist", because no one is "denying" that wide scale persecution and death took place during the Holocaust. The main contention is simply the actual number of victims and the methods of execution. Thus we are attempting to revise the record, not deny it. Indeed, from the revisionist perspective, people like Gorgiass are the true denialists, since they continue to deny there is any problem with the official narrative despite it being full of holes and having had its own numbers revised down repeatedly and substantially over the years.

(01-02-2017 01:59 AM)Gorgiass Wrote:  Your article deals with a completely different gas methodology, so different as to be nearly irrelevant; clearly however, the very text you quoted indicates that suffocation alone isn't an ideal option, as the Jews survived several hours in the chamber (albeit a non-hermetically sealed one) before the engine started.

However, I'm glad you brought that site to my attention, as I happen to know my way around an engine. Again, several glaring falsehoods jumped out, and on further reading the volume of lies in that single piece is truly staggering - a prime example of the sort of misleading denialist literature I already mentioned. Your article takes 17 pages attempting to explain why diesel exhaust couldn't be used for execution (and therefore the Holocaust couldn't have happened), I will explain in just a few paragraphs why it can.

Ideal burn (stochiometric) ratio for gas and diesel engines is nearly identical, approx 14.5:1, there is no diesel engine which runs at 200:1. A diesel engine is not “nothing more than an unusual kind of blower” it is the original internal combustion engine. Every single phrase like this in that article is designed with an end goal in mind - to set a false frame and deliberately mislead the readership into falling for their lies.

A running engine consumes several hundred cubic feet per minute of ambient air and expels several times this volume in heated exhaust. According to your quote the room was 1883 cubic feet. If the other translation is correct, the room was 7000 sqft. Either way, it's pretty obvious that in virtually no time at all, every bit of ambient air in this room will be displaced by exhaust. At these volumes, as soon as exhaust is vented into this room every air leak becomes an exhaust point in itself and becomes irrelevant, thus the lack of need for hermetic sealing.

But what is diesel exhaust?
[Image: v2n4a3i5.jpg]

Nearly all of your article focuses on CO, this is an attempt at misdirection (more on that later). But what does it say about CO2? (While reading below, note the weasel words and deliberately misleading verbiage - “not really any more” poisonous, “harmless” stimulant, “gradually” increases).

IHR.com= Wrote:Carbon dioxide is not really any more poisonous than ordinary water.
IHR.com= Wrote:Carbon dioxide can be beneficial and therapeutic. 2-5 It is commonly used in clinical medicine as a harmless stimulant for respiration, for which purpose it is supplied under pressure in cylinders
IHR.com= Wrote:Levels of 3% carbon dioxide are quite tolerable for exposures lasting several days. For example, in the 1950s the U.S. Navy experimented with gas mixtures containing 3% carbon dioxide and 15% oxygen
IHR.com= Wrote:For Diesel engines, the carbon dioxide level at or near idle is only about 2% and gradually increases to about 12% at full load as shown in Figure 6. A carbon dioxide level of 12% may cause cardiac irregularity and may, therefore, be dangerous for people with weak hearts.

What do Wikipedia, scientists, and health professionals say about CO2?
Quote:Concentrations of 7% to 10% (70,000 to 100,000 ppm) may cause suffocation, even in the presence of sufficient oxygen, manifesting as dizziness, headache, visual and hearing dysfunction, and unconsciousness within a few minutes to an hour.
Quote:The OSHA's maximum safe level is 3% (30,000 ppm); lethal concentration (death in 30 minutes) is 10% (100,000 ppm).

Truly an incredible example of deception, even by denialist standards. But wait - note that all these examples I've given so far have dealt with diesels running above stochiometric. Although IHR tells you that diesels can run up to ratios of 200:1, they don't tell you that they can run well under stochiometric ratios as well, and when they do the lethality of the exhaust gas increases exponentially, including levels of CO they spent 17 pages trying to debunk.

This is what the denialist literature is – shills with no qualms about lying to people about things which could kill them (Oh, I read on IHR.com that I don't need to open the garage door while I preheat my car if it's a diesel!) as long as they successfully manipulate their reader's opinions, objective truth be damned.

The above is a bunch of complete nonsense intended to come across as a scientific rebuttal. Are you an expert on chemistry and/or the biological interactions of respirated gas inside the human body? Oh, no. But you "know your way around an engine." And this somehow makes you qualified to handwave away a detailed 17 page analysis in a few paragraphs? What Gorgiass cannot refute is that we have eyewitness testimony telling us that hundreds of victims were alive in a small gas chamber for over three hours (which is impossible, they would have asphyxiated long before). Why does this matter? Because this testimony forms the basis of the entire gas chamber mythology. And its patently impossible on its surface. Full stop. So is witness testimony invalid in this case when it clearly suggests something impossible happened? If so, why is witness testimony suddenly 100% reliable in other cases? Or better still: why is witness testimony entirely contradictory much of the time? (i.e. wearing gas masks or no gas masks). There is simply no consistency in regards to the eyewitness accounts of the alleged gas chambers, which is a huge red flag.

(01-02-2017 01:59 AM)Gorgiass Wrote:  You're attempting to create a straw man, and using rhetorical tools. Note the incredulous phrasing and adjectives to sway readers - “easily” put on a mask, “highly” poisonous (not with a mask), “rough” physical labor (as opposed to gentle?). No one has said it was easy or without risk, but it's certainly no incredible feat to put on a gas mask and drag bodies up some stairs. Neither has anyone said it was without incident – they were disposable slave labor so worker's comp claims weren't a concern. I have worn a gas mask before. It's cumbersome but not much more so than a good P95 respirator. I wore a respirator regularly for several years for work, and I performed plenty of physical labor while wearing it. Not a problem at all, and I had a choice. Regardless, on further reading I also learned that the chambers were power ventilated (and in fact there are existing letters from the manufacturer of Zyklon B detailing ventilation requirements), gas masks were only worn if there was a backup of those awaiting execution.

First, let's look at what we're talking about here. This is a WW2-era gas mask. So supposedly the Sonderkommando and SS men would be wearing these gas masks while they emptied the chamber of bodies. But not just a few bodies. Hundreds of bodies. Which they would be physically lifting and carrying around and upstairs to be placed in crematoria. So this is incredibly physical and sweaty labor. This is the equivalent of performing a weightlifting routine while wearing a gas mask. The mask would be getting fogged up constantly. Breathing would be extremely difficult. And all the while, the knowledge that if the airtight seal on your mask opens at any time, you would be exposed to highly toxic cyanide gas. What kind of idiot would design an execution system like this that put his own men at such risk?

It just doesn't strike me as plausible.


(01-02-2017 01:59 AM)Gorgiass Wrote:  But this is another interesting link you have here which we should explore. The misdirection is more subtle than the last one but still present throughout, using weasel words and selective phrasing to paint any contradiction between thousands of accounts as something sinister. For example, the image in question, drawn by a survivor with no explanation given as to artistic license -

[Image: lectureFichiergw.do?ID_FICHIER=1454167446863]

You're accusing me of using rhetoric and weasel words at the same time you attempt to dismiss the gross conflicts present in eyewitness testimony as artistic license. Let us be very clear: this picture was drawn and presented as evidence during a trial as being an accurate portrayal of the gas chambers. You don't get to dismiss its irregularities as "artistic license" when they conflict with basic logic or other testimony. Again we see the bias on display: you accuse your opponents of intellectual dishonesty while flagrantly engaging in it yourself.


(01-02-2017 01:59 AM)Gorgiass Wrote:  I learned about this guy earlier tonight, and spent some time reading about him and others in this book - Deniers of the Holocaust: Who the are, What they do, Why they do it Have you read it? I'm guessing not, but if you're only interested in the truth, as you said, then it would make an eye-opening read.

Wow, a little light bedtime reading, huh? Does that illustrious tome also contain the revisionists' home addresses and telephone numbers so that you can better harass them? Why would anyone read (or publish for that matter) a book on the individuals presenting an argument rather than the argument itself? I believe that's known as "shooting the messenger", and it's unfortunately par for the course when it comes to Holocaust revision. Revisionists face legal persecution across the world, with some sitting in prison cells as we speak simply for dissenting with the official Holocaust narrative. Those that escape official prosecution can expect to be harassed endlessly by groups of deranged Jews and their shabbos goy allies for daring to disagree with them. This is the type of behavior one expects from a mafia group protecting its racket or a religious order crushing heresy. This is not the proper behavior of historians and researchers debating the historical record. It's indicative of the extreme levels of paranoia and anxiety on the side of those who promote the official narrative: they are so terrified of honest researchers actually investigating their claims that they make doing so illegal everywhere they can, and where they cannot they employ harassment and character assassination as much as possible.


(01-02-2017 01:59 AM)Gorgiass Wrote:  I ask you the same question. How many of your links do I need to factually debunk before you entertain any other possibilities? Crushed testicles and torture was a lie. Your major source for your post above was proven to be lying through their teeth. Your second source relies primarily on a man who was paid $30,000 to gather evidence to exonerate a Holocaust denier who used methods so unscientific my elementary science teacher would be rolling over in her grave. There is overwhelming evidence, it comes down to whether a person want to accept it or let their personal biases lead them astray. Critical thinking doesn't mean only attempting to see the other side of an issue when presented with a mainstream view, it also means considering the mainstream view when presented with an alternate.

For me? My belief requirements are somewhat simpler - I require sources which don't spend 17 straight pages lying to me.

If you could debunk one that would be a good start. Which you've failed to do so far. You accuse me of setting up strawmen but you entire post has been nothing but a collection of assorted fallacies of argumentation (i.e. claiming false expertise, handwaving arguments, shooting the messenger, dismissing grossly conflicting evidence as "artistic license", etc...). You have proven nothing. Absolutely nothing. The fact that you have tried so hard to do so while accomplishing so little is indicative of the strong bias you hold, which I pointed out from the beginning. You are not interested in the truth, you are simply interested in proving the "denialists" (whom you clearly despise so much that you read entire books that defame them) wrong.

(01-02-2017 01:59 AM)Gorgiass Wrote:  The "fake" image is not the famous one, the "fake" is the one in NYTM. It was retouched for publication to get rid of the mostly nude man front and center. People were prudes in 1945 - http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.c...amous.html

It doesn't matter which picture in this instance is the original, the point is that the Allies and the Soviets are proven to have been doctoring photos. And we know for a fact that they doctored photos to prove Nazi atrocities (i.e. the famous photo of the soldier with a rifle about to shoot the woman at point blank range - a total fake). There are millions of people walking around today who regard doctored atrocity photos as "proof" that six million Jews were murdered in gas chambers. Again, your dishonesty is shocking: these doctored photos are presented as evidence of atrocities and war crimes, and yet you attempt to dismiss the editing as being for reasons of "indecency". Utterly preposterous.

"For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.” - Romans 8:18
01-02-2017 08:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 22 users Like scorpion's post:
YoungBlade, MiscBrah, Chevy Woonsocket, RaccoonFace, SirTimothy, Monty_Brogan, brick tamland, Nevsky, Valentine, dain_bramage, Matrixdude, Enigma, iop890, Geomann180, Yurtley, rotekz, estraudi, DJ-Matt, Mekorig, MMX2010, Professor Fox, Charles Martel
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
Holocaust fact finding thread - Valentine - 12-31-2016, 01:57 AM
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread - scorpion - 01-02-2017 08:51 AM
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread - Sp5 - 01-01-2017, 10:14 PM
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread - Sp5 - 01-02-2017, 04:05 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Delta - 01-02-2017, 12:37 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Zep - 01-02-2017, 10:21 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Zep - 01-03-2017, 08:56 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - atlant - 01-03-2017, 12:33 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - atlant - 01-03-2017, 01:17 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Kona - 01-03-2017, 03:32 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Kona - 01-03-2017, 06:10 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - XPQ22 - 01-07-2017, 10:11 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - XPQ22 - 01-07-2017, 10:55 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Delta - 01-17-2017, 07:25 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Teedub - 01-17-2017, 02:23 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - amity - 02-20-2017, 11:44 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - amity - 03-01-2017, 10:54 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Menace - 04-12-2017, 09:32 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Teedub - 04-12-2017, 02:33 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - amity - 09-01-2017, 01:08 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Kona - 09-02-2017, 11:06 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Kona - 09-03-2017, 01:43 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Zep - 09-03-2017, 01:54 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - amity - 09-03-2017, 12:21 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Zep - 09-03-2017, 01:35 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Kona - 09-03-2017, 02:00 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Laska - 09-05-2017, 06:14 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Zep - 09-05-2017, 11:43 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Laska - 09-05-2017, 08:35 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Laska - 09-05-2017, 09:10 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Laska - 09-05-2017, 09:21 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Kona - 09-06-2017, 12:25 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Laska - 09-06-2017, 12:42 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Teedub - 09-06-2017, 12:33 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Nowak - 09-11-2017, 02:07 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - 911 - 01-28-2018, 05:07 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Kona - 01-27-2018, 06:20 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Teedub - 01-29-2018, 12:39 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Ruslan - 01-29-2018, 04:53 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - rotekz - 04-11-2018, 03:05 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - amity - 04-11-2018, 02:04 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - rotekz - 04-11-2018, 03:20 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Dusty - 04-12-2018, 07:42 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Suits - 04-12-2018, 10:56 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Kona - 04-13-2018, 07:44 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Kona - 04-14-2018, 07:17 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - rotekz - 04-13-2018, 11:45 AM
RE: Holohoax - blck - 05-24-2018, 02:01 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Teedub - 04-15-2018, 06:00 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Teedub - 04-15-2018, 01:50 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Teedub - 04-15-2018, 01:56 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Kona - 04-15-2018, 03:59 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Teedub - 04-17-2018, 03:12 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - amity - 04-19-2018, 12:55 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Suits - 05-02-2018, 09:35 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - kamoz - 05-19-2018, 07:52 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Lika - 05-23-2018, 03:15 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - fokker - 05-20-2018, 04:04 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - nola - 05-23-2018, 04:22 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - rotekz - 07-26-2018, 03:06 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - rotekz - 07-26-2018, 03:55 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - rotekz - 08-02-2018, 01:06 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - storm - 10-22-2018, 04:56 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - rotekz - 10-23-2018, 01:34 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Teedub - 10-24-2018, 01:54 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - Teedub - 10-24-2018, 02:56 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - 911 - 10-25-2018, 10:15 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - rotekz - 10-27-2018, 04:00 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - 911 - 10-25-2018, 10:24 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - amity - 11-08-2018, 08:33 AM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - 911 - 11-08-2018, 09:00 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - 911 - 04-06-2019, 04:48 PM
RE: Holocaust fact finding thread - 911 - 04-07-2019, 01:11 PM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  20-30% of dads in UK are finding out that they are NOT the father Roosh 53 10,217 06-02-2019 05:33 AM
Last Post: Cumlluminates
  Does anybody find it odd Bernie Saunders doesn't have a woah is me holocaust schtick quaker13 14 2,997 02-26-2019 04:03 AM
Last Post: Sp5
  I’m an Ugly Loser and I’m starting a Youtube Channel around that fact. UglyLoser 39 9,007 04-22-2018 11:15 AM
Last Post: Cr33pin

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | RooshV.com | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication