Taking a dogmatic view against Believers is only another form of belief, however. Skeptics always ask questions and seek to challenge even their own assumptions.
I completely disagree with this point. (In regard to the Hoax, that is.)
Also, with respect to the Big H, I do not like the word 'skeptic'.
Is it appropriate to use the word 'skeptic' when it comes to whether Elvis is alive or not? Or whether or not Big Foot exists? Or if some people were indeed abducted by aliens? Especially when no credible evidence exists?
Of course, initially, it is ok to have an attitude of non-dogmatic skepticism towards the H.
I'm sure most revisionists, if not all, fit this category. But, after a while, when you see just what type of gigantic, sloppy, crude, Lie the H is, it is no longer appropriate to be 'skeptical'. My attitude, for one, is that it (the Captial H) is a ing, cheap, shameless, swindle, which serves to further punish a great people. And, of course, there are many other fringe benefit$.
I don't simply not 'Believe'. After 4 years of being into this, I'm as certain as reasonably possible, that there were NO Gas Chambers, No 6e6, etc. Why? Because 1)No physical evidence 2)The people making the claims are KNOWN to have lied about MANY things. 3)Many of the claims are IMPOSSIBLE 4)There is great motive for perpetuating the Lie, 5,6, ...) etc.
If someone told me he could read my mind, I would be fairly certain he could not (for obvious reasons). But, I admit, it MAY be possible. Now, I would then simply tell him I was thinking of a number between 1 and 1 Trillion. If he could indeed read my mind, he could strongly support his claim by telling me the number. Right? Well, if he does not do so, for whatever reason, I would NOT be 'open-minded' if I afforded him any credibility whatsoever. On the other hand, I'd be dogmatically opposed to the idea that he was simply a charlatan.
I am NOT a Holocaust Skeptic. I am someone who, after being involved with the topic, have come to the conclusion that the H is simply a Lie. And an evil one at that.
A Believer explains to me what he believes is true and why, and then I will explain what I believe is true and why I think so. And that should be the end of it. No need to get angry at each other, no need for calling each other names.
I disagree. For I feel that many of the so-called 'believers' are lying. Or, at best, are not being fair. After a while, it is simply not credible to buy into many of the H legends.
Let me make an example. If a "Holocaust Eyewitness' claimed he personally saw 100,000 people stuffed into a room the size of a normal bedroom, and an alleged believer said he believes the so-called witness, what can you make of that? There is no point in being polite to a person like that. As a minimum, don't even discuss things with him any more. Actually, I think a person like THAT should be booted off the board.
Some things are indeed worthy of doubt and discussion. Not everything.
Finally, the H is a serious topic. It has been used as an excuse to kill Pals, Germans, etc. Not to mention extort, thru guilt, Billions (Trillions) of bucks from gentiles. Any decent person SHOULD react with anger after a while.