Who is the best Revisionist in the world ?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
soda
Member
Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Postby soda » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Apr 17, 2005 10:38 am)

A relevant field of study to that upon which they are commenting.

In other words - if one is commenting on the chemical nature of the gas chambers - best if one knows something about chemistry.

And I think PhD because a Doctorate does demonstrate expertise in a given field. I live in a country where damn near everyone has a Masters, so it's value is in some way diminished - it's 6 years of study, but that isn't a lot in a field as complex as Holocause issues is.

User avatar
ClaudiaRothenbach
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:16 pm

Postby ClaudiaRothenbach » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Apr 17, 2005 10:59 am)

Hannover wrote:Raoul Hilberg does not have a degree in history.
- Hannover
And Pelty is PhD in something like "History of Arts" - but has been the expert for civil engineering during the Irving trial. He believs that one could refill holes in a three laver steel concrete slab so that nobody sees that there were holes before.

Green has a PhD in chemistry but does not know that the influence of moisture on the relases rate of HCN from Zyklon B is different than the realease rate from KCN in sulphuric acid.

What did Zimmerman before he started to disgrace himself with holocheese studies?
"Everything has already been said, but not yet by everyone." - Karl Valentin

Bergmann
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 382
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:29 pm

Postby Bergmann » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Apr 17, 2005 11:12 am)

soda wrote: Lets face it, without PhDs in relevant fields of study from excellent universities, and with a strong publishing history through a repitable publisher, there is no reason for anyone to take their work at all seriously.

This may not be quite so. I am thinking of Dr. David L. Hoggan and the German Dr. jur. et Dr. phil. et Dr. rer. pol. Franz J. Scheidl.

In Germany, Dr. Franz J. Scheidl started as early as 1945 to write a comprehensive work about The History of the Defamation of Germany consisting of eight volumes, four of which were dedicated to the “Holocaust” and other propaganda of WWII. The manuscript was finished in 1950, but because no publisher dared touch it, the author published a revised version himself as late as 1967.

It also seems that the careers of academics who question the holocaust story come to a sudden standstill. I am thinking here of Faurisson and Hayward.

On the other hand are the works of Hillberg, Reitlinger and Pressac quite successful, all three with no PhDs in relevant fields.

There are some strange powers at work behind the scene here.

soda
Member
Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Postby soda » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Apr 17, 2005 11:17 am)

Hilberg is a Jewish scholar, so his area of expertise is more related to the history of rabbinical study, yeshiva etc etc. However, his "The Destruction of the European Jews" from 1961 remains an archetypical book for it's oral histories and first hand witness accounts of particular events.

Hannah Arendt does have a PhD, and Gitta Sereny's qualifications are unlikely to be questioned, I think.

soda
Member
Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Postby soda » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Apr 17, 2005 11:35 am)

Bergmann - yes fair enough - there are some exceptional books written by people without an academic background, but even so, it lends a lot of weight to an argument if it is present by someones as celebrated as Arendt, for instance.

Richard Perle
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 9:45 am

Postby Richard Perle » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Apr 17, 2005 12:28 pm)

Yes, even a believer who cites the weight of academia as a reason to believe in the holocaust must admit that an atmosphere exists that makes it impossible for anyone to openly question the official version of events. If the career, reputation and perhaps even the freedom of a scholar is at stake, then no wonder a believer can point to a large body of consensus for his position.

The same kind of mass resistance to change can be seen in other areas of academic study, such as in the study into the beginnings of civilization.

Mark_Twain
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 2:08 pm

Postby Mark_Twain » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Apr 26, 2005 3:58 pm)

Toben is the best speaker and an excellent communicator.

Ratatosk
Member
Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 7:42 am

Postby Ratatosk » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Apr 26, 2005 7:54 pm)

The most important Revisionist today is without doubt Carlo Mattogno. The monographs he has written with Jurgen Graf on various camps are excellent.

I cant wait for the one on Auschwitz, due later this year I think.

Radar
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 2:25 pm

Postby Radar » 1 decade 5 years ago (Tue Apr 26, 2005 11:45 pm)

The academic credential canard is a false argument believers have latched on to in order to keep revisionists stumbling away from the real proof.

Trust me, the people who make this argument have no idea of the real technical qualifications revisionists possess.

On the other hand you have shear hearsay coming from people who have told wildly conflicting stories becoming the official holocaust story without any checking.

You don't need to be a certified genius to understand bunk when you see it. Meanwhile these same people are completely unable to discuss the actual findings of these allegedly underqualified revisionists.

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2384
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sat May 28, 2005 1:46 pm)

Lubomyr Prytulak.

And Hannover.


Luboymyr's websites come up on search engines when I'm doing the most tangential revisionist web searches and totally help me. He's completely independent it appears. His effective form is posting letters he's written to people.

I was researching Gitta Sereny, and a page of Lubomyr's came up. Devastating exposé. How she wrote Into That Darkness, after interviewing Treblinka Commandant Franz Stangl. Lubomyr pointed out some weird things: He died 19 hours after the last interview. How convenient to never be able to comment on what she wrote about their conversations.

Then he pointed out something regarding the touted 70 hours of conversations she had with him. Were they recorded? It appears they weren't. That's odd. Going by memory with 70 hours of conversation? She included on her "acknowledgements" page no person who helped with recording, or no person who helped with transcribing recordings. So I guess we take her word for it that Stangl said this stuff.

Lubomyr Prytulak is one of the best revisionists in the world. The above is one of the many times his keen investigative input has come up.

And Hannover? The evidence that he is also one of the best revisionists in the world, is right here on revforum.

Karl S
Member
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 4:07 pm

Postby Karl S » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun May 29, 2005 3:12 pm)

Carto's Cutlass Supreme wrote:Lubomyr Prytulak.
:3some:

I agree on this. Lubomyr Prytulak is outstanding in his writings. Some with very dry humour (read his articles about Simon Wiesenthal :mrgreen: ), but always to the point. Here the Holocaust Lobby has a worthy opponent. But he is actually not a revisionist.

http://www.ukar.org

FW
Member
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 10:08 am

Postby FW » 1 decade 4 years ago (Sun May 29, 2005 4:32 pm)

In these days of increased competitiveness and demands for 'productivity' in academia, it is becoming customary to include the number of times you are cited in your CV.

This is how you work out who is the "best revisionist in the world". Revisionists could be rated similarly. He or she who receives the most vilification is clearly the "best revisionist in the world".

Juan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 219
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 11:11 am
Location: Chile

Postby Juan » 1 decade 4 years ago (Mon May 30, 2005 12:57 pm)

Does Hannover investigate first hand the problem? or he is simply an extremely well connected and informed guy?

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10031
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 4 years ago (Mon May 30, 2005 1:48 pm)

We're all just messengers, the absurd stories are the message.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
Ajax
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 300
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 6:27 pm
Location: The Real World

Postby Ajax » 1 decade 4 years ago (Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:26 pm)

You are far too modest Hannover old chap. Your posts on here provide ample proof of your in-depth knowledge of the subject.

I did say earlier that I consider Rudolf to be the best of the best. However, more recent posts have reminded me of the presence of Mr. Prytulak, whose website I have found most informative and illuminating.
Scour the surface throughly until it is glistening...


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: sfivdf21 and 9 guests