Randi.org Forum Allows Holocaust Revisionists

[Mortimer]

The website of noted skeptic and debunker James Randi http://www.randi.org allows holocaust revisionists to post on its forum. At time of writing there is a post titled "Are Tattoos Proof of a Nazi Genocide?" http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=166205 If anyone wishes to sign up and start another revisionist thread do so in the History, Literature and the Arts section. Let's see some genuine skepticism towards the holocaust not the politically correct variety.

[SevenUp]

Let's see some genuine skepticism towards the holocaust not the politically correct variety.

Thanks. Should be fun.

[Halo]

Someone please mention, that taoos are against the jewish religion, and that taooed jews may not be burried in a jewish fashion by religious law. I am too lazy to register at the moment, its late here... ; )
Thx in advance!

In case its about the other tatoos, if I were a german I would be ashamed of work like this:






Folks, this is not BMW, Mercedes or Porsche standart. For sure not.
The tattoos are NOT THE LEAST standarsized. Everone knows the german character of exact working, perfection, standarts to be upkept... especially in those years.

Now we are presented obviously self made tatoos of poor quality, bad handwriting, varying in size shape and location (even when both tatoos are claimed to come from the exact same camp) a.s.o

If the germans to tattoo millions of death candidates, they would have had a machine with standartized ink for it.
Easy as that.

[GurtKerstein]

Now we are presented obviously self made tatoos of poor quality, bad handwriting, varying in size shape and location (even when both tatoos are claimed to come from the exact same camp) a.s.o

If the germans to tattoo millions of death candidates, they would have had a machine with standartized ink for it.

Were you planted here to discredit revisionists?

[Halo]

Though I think your answer is a bit unfriendly, I nonetheless please you to elaborate. I think I used common sense in my above post.

[Carto's Cutlass Supreme]

I'm curious too: why all the different styles on the forearm?

[Wahrheit]

If the germans to tattoo millions of death candidates, they would have had a machine with standartized ink for it.

Is personal incredulity all that "revisionists" have to offer anymore?

[Carto's Cutlass Supreme]

Hi Wahreit: its just a question. Can you answer it or anyone? Here it is: why are there a myriad of different styles and sizes of tattoos on Auschwitz inmate forearms?

[GurtKerstein]

I'm curious too: why all the different styles on the forearm?

To this day, I am not sure there is a computerized tattoo machine that produces exact same patterns. Although I haven't researched this subject because it is impertinent and draws revisionists closer to 9/11 conspiracy theorists, the simple explanation for the different tattoo styles is that they were made by different people, who were all inmates and were not professional tattoo artists.

[nickterry]

Hi Wahreit: its just a question. Can you answer it or anyone? Here it is: why are there a myriad of different styles and sizes of tattoos on Auschwitz inmate forearms?

p.23 of Vol II of Auschwitz 1940-45 points out that the SS tried using a metal tattooing stamp on the first prisoners to be tattooed, Soviet POWs. This was found to be impracticable so they went over to using single needle tattooing. The work was done by a group of prisoners, obviously a sizeable one to cope with tattooing so many new arrivals, so given it was essentially freehand, one would logically expect there to be different styles, quite aside from some of the prisoners wriggling or god knows what else. Also, in some cases the survivors photographed above may well have been teenagers who had not completely stopped growing, so this could be a further distorting factor, but the main one would be the tattoos were done freehand.

Thus, it wasn't "the Germans" who did the tattooing, but mostly Polish prisoners; and there were no machines.

[Wahrheit]

Hi Wahreit: its just a question. Can you answer it or anyone? Here it is: why are there a myriad of different styles and sizes of tattoos on Auschwitz inmate forearms?

GK and NT got to it before I could, but their answer is the same as mine would have been.

[Thesaint]

Is personal incredulity all that "revisionists" have to offer anymore?

We`re still waiting for your "positive evidence for gas chambers" thread,Wahrheit:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5836&start=105

Wahrheit:

Therefore, 'exterminationists' should provide positive evidence for gas chambers (as I believe they have)

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5836&start=120

Wahrheit(Sun Jan 03, 2010 11:46 pm):

Due time.

Back on Topic,can the hoax-peddlers please provide some sources re:Auschwitz tattoo procedures?

A page number in some 10-a-penny mainstream History Of The Holohoax drivel-fest does`nt cut the mustard.

[Inquisitive]

The tattoo situation:

There exist virtually no official period documents relating to the practice; what we know stems from anecdotal evidence contained in camp records and the accounts of those who were at the camps.

Why is there never any concrete evidence? ambiguity and anecdotal

On November 11, 1941, the Polish national holiday, the camp authorities executed 151 prisoners in Auschwitz. Prior to execution, the prisoner's number was written on either his chest (if he were to be shot at close range) or his leg (if he were to be shot by firing squad). The so called camp infirmary had also adopted the practice of writing a prisoner's number on his chest.5

from: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... toos1.html

This just found in bottom draw behind wall in secret Nazi hideout:
Of special concern in the camps were the prisoners who were deemed high risks to escape. Those prisoners were tattooed on their butts, that the SS could clearly see who it was as they ran. A special clear plastic was devised for the seat of the pants yet never clashed with the stripes. by D. Inkstein witness

[Mortimer]

Randi.org is still allowing revisionists a say but all threads on "holocaust denial" have been grouped into one http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=202147 Join in and have your say and hopefully reach new people who aren't aware of revisionist arguments.

[Kingfisher]

Randi.org is still allowing revisionists a say but all threads on "holocaust denial" have been grouped into one http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=202147 Join in and have your say and hopefully reach new people who aren't aware of revisionist arguments.

From what I can see it's a waste of time going there if you are looking for discussion that generates light rather than heat. In general, the posters appear to have little idea of what scepticism stands for. According to Wikipedia:

Skepticism (or scepticism) has many definitions, but generally refers to any questioning attitude of knowledge, facts, or opinions/beliefs stated as facts,[1] or doubt regarding claims that are taken for granted elsewhere.[2] The word may characterise a position on a single matter, as in the case of religious skepticism, which is "doubt concerning basic religious principles (such as immortality, providence, and revelation)",[3] but philosophical skepticism is an overall approach that requires all new information to be well supported by evidence.[4] Skeptics may even doubt the reliability of their own senses

The essential point of scepticism is that it it is the opposite of certainty. Question everything and base your views on evidence. Hold those views only insofar and as long as they seem to you to be supported by the evidence, and be prepared at any time to change your view in the light of new evidence.

Not generally the position of posters on Randi's forum.