a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
cold beer
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 8:48 pm

a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby cold beer » 5 years 10 months ago (Sun Sep 29, 2013 7:43 pm)

In an article which aims to downplay the role of international Jews in the Bolshevik revolution the author writes...

when statements and assertions are not supported by hard evidence and where attempts to unearth hard evidence lead in a circle back to the starting point — particularly when everyone is quoting everyone else — then we must reject the story as spurious

(The Wikipedia entry for Jacob Schiff finds that the quote and most of what is written in the above article is attributed to Anthony Sutton of the Hoover Institute)

It's strange that the complete converse is applied as the standard of evidence for the holocaust.
The holocaust doesn't lose credibility as more 'survivors' go on record with eyewitness accounts of human skin lampshades, Jew hair mattresses or RIF soap.
According Michael Shermer they become additional 'data points' added to a huge pile, the enormity of which precludes the need for physical evidence.

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1091
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby Werd » 5 years 10 months ago (Sun Sep 29, 2013 11:24 pm)

Michael Shermer is a dickhead. Not only does he attack 9-11 conspiracy theories but he has violated his own standards of evidence when it suits on him. On the Donahue show when he shared the stage with Bradley Smith and David Cole he said to the revisionists, "Well absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Then years later when on the Penn and Teller Bullshit episode of "Religion" P and T interviewed a theologian who was being asked hard questions about the lack of archaelogical evidence for the hebrew exodus. He said, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." The camera then cut to Michael Shermer who then basically said that is a poor line of reasoning and it simply does not work in science.

cold beer
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 8:48 pm

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby cold beer » 5 years 10 months ago (Mon Sep 30, 2013 3:05 am)

I'll have to look for those two clips so I can splice them together

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3309
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby Hektor » 5 years 10 months ago (Thu Oct 03, 2013 8:31 pm)

Werd wrote:Michael Shermer is ridiculous. Not only does he attack 9-11 conspiracy theories but he has violated his own standards of evidence when it suits on him

He doesn't attack the governments pet conspiracy theory on this ;)
Image
https://archive.org/details/911WorldTra ... racyTheory

Werd wrote:. On the Donahue show when he shared the stage with Bradley Smith and David Cole he said to the revisionists, "Well absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Then years later when on the Penn and Teller Bullshit episode of "Religion" P and T interviewed a theologian who was being asked hard questions about the lack of archaelogical evidence for the hebrew exodus. He said, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." The camera then cut to Michael Shermer who then basically said that is a poor line of reasoning and it simply does not work in science.

Well, here Shermer is denying gas chambers, when it suits him,

User avatar
Dresden
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1411
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 5:38 pm

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby Dresden » 5 years 10 months ago (Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:09 pm)

A good rule of thumb is:

If you want to know if something is true or false.....find out what Michael Shermer says about it.

If Shermer says it's true.....you can bet it's false.

If Shermer says it's false.....you can bet it's true.

If you follow this rule of thumb on ALL important controversial issues, it's a dead certainty that you will be right almost every time.

The more important the issue, the more sure you can be that Shermer is wrong.
Maybe, just maybe, they believe what they are telling you about the 'holocaust', but maybe, just maybe, their contempt for your intelligence and your character is beyond anything you could ever have imagined. -- Bradley Smith

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9803
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby Hannover » 5 years 10 months ago (Fri Oct 04, 2013 1:17 am)

Hilarious. Shermer defends the government's bizarre conspiracy theory while attempting to negate a rational scientific analysis that is offered by, say, architects - engineers & 911: http://www.ae911truth.org
Shermer's opening strawman about Bush is just a distraction. No one says Bush was involved in all the details. Quite the opposite.

Also remember that the same racists that benefit from the absurd government 911 conspiracy theory also benefit from the impossible 'holocaust' storyline. Israel / Mossad's famous motto: "By way of deception, thou shalt do war".
The Israeli newspaper Ma'ariv on Wednesday reported that Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu told an audience at Bar Ilan university that the September 11, 2001 terror attacks had been beneficial for Israel.

"We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq," Ma'ariv quoted the former prime minister as saying. He reportedly added that these events "swung American public opinion in our favor."
http://www.haaretz.com/news/report-netanyahu-says-9-11-terror-attacks-good-for-israel-1.244044

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

cold beer
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 8:48 pm

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby cold beer » 5 years 10 months ago (Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:12 am)

Hektor wrote: Well, here Shermer is denying gas chambers, when it suits him,

I haven't watched the entire video yet, but in the first minute of the interview he makes good use of the false multiple choice (bush or Bin Laden) of who was behind 9-11.
There's a video I've seen where they talk about the use of false multiple choices in 'values based education' (teaching values to students as opposed to the three r's)

Scotsman
Member
Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 3:41 pm

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby Scotsman » 5 years 10 months ago (Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:19 am)

Am I mistaken, or are the members of this forum favorable toward '9/11 Truth'? I must confess, I agree with denierbud on that issue. I consider Holocaust Denial an anti-conspiracy theory, and it is disappointing for me to see that a number of members here speak favorably about 9/11 Truth when it is just as unbelievable as the things the Holocaustians claim.

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2469
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby borjastick » 5 years 10 months ago (Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:52 am)

Haven't seen much comment here about the 9/11 issue not surprisingly as it has nothing to do with the holocaust. From my perspective I can see two positions on the 9/11 issue; firstly that it was an inside job and was a fix up etc and secondly that some believe it was done by the jews to promote more (yawn) instability in the middle east thus dragging the US and friends of Tony Blair into the Iraq/Afghan wars that should never have been.

I could give decent and long winded answers refuting both positions but understandably the mods wouldn't like it. Suffice to say my reading of it was that it was a bunch of terrorists on a few planes who crashed into the twin towers and Pentagon. Further that claims of the like that the towers should never have collapsed the way they did, as the heat wasn't sufficient to melt the steel structure are nonsense as the steel didn't need to melt only buckle.

There are various subtexts to the whole sorry and very sad affair that do pass muster from my opinion but we cannot discuss here.
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician

User avatar
Kingfisher
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1673
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby Kingfisher » 5 years 10 months ago (Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:57 am)

Scotsman wrote:Am I mistaken, or are the members of this forum favorable toward '9/11 Truth'? I must confess, I agree with denierbud on that issue. I consider Holocaust Denial an anti-conspiracy theory, and it is disappointing for me to see that a number of members here speak favorably about 9/11 Truth when it is just as unbelievable as the things the Holocaustians claim.

Glad to see you making this point, Scotsman. I have a view on 911 truth -- neither entirely pro nor entirely sceptical, but it is not relevant to the Big H, so I don't express it here.

What concerns me is that posters who try to link 911 scepticism with Holocaust scepticism are alienating people who don't share their position. In particular they cause Holocaust Revisionism to be dismissed as "just another nutty conspiracy theory". This applies to any other sceptic/"denier" issue as well, such as global warning or Kennedy assassination. Each of these must stand or fall on its own merits and be discussed in appropriate forums.

The "members of this forum" as a group are neither favourable nor unfavourable toward 9/11 truth. Individuals have their own views, but they have no place here.

I share your view that the H itself is the conspiracy theory, rather than Revisionism.

Scotsman
Member
Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 3:41 pm

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby Scotsman » 5 years 10 months ago (Fri Oct 04, 2013 9:14 am)

borjastick wrote:Haven't seen much comment here about the 9/11 issue not surprisingly as it has nothing to do with the holocaust. From my perspective I can see two positions on the 9/11 issue; firstly that it was an inside job and was a fix up etc and secondly that some believe it was done by the jews to promote more (yawn) instability in the middle east thus dragging the US and friends of Tony Blair into the Iraq/Afghan wars that should never have been.

I could give decent and long winded answers refuting both positions but understandably the mods wouldn't like it. Suffice to say my reading of it was that it was a bunch of terrorists on a few planes who crashed into the twin towers and Pentagon. Further that claims of the like that the towers should never have collapsed the way they did, as the heat wasn't sufficient to melt the steel structure are nonsense as the steel didn't need to melt only buckle.

There are various subtexts to the whole sorry and very sad affair that do pass muster from my opinion but we cannot discuss here.


Yes, it's O/t, but this is a related issue, especially if we're talking about a 'conspiracy' (another thread idea of mine). The thing I despise about 9/11 Truth is that it misses the real point - shitty US foreign policy.

Kingfisher wrote:What concerns me is that posters who try to link 911 scepticism with Holocaust scepticism are alienating people who don't share their position.


I agree with this 100%. If Holocaust skepticism is just another notch on a conspiracy laden tin foil hat, it becomes apparent to outsiders that you're just a crank or gullible. That's why guys like Zundel, well meaning as he is, was never a good face of Holocaust revisionism.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9803
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby Hannover » 5 years 10 months ago (Fri Oct 04, 2013 11:14 am)

911 Believers, IMO, behave in a very similar manner as 'holocaust' believers; both use false arguments about what their opponents supposedly say. They both become much too emotionally involved when discussing the particulars. They cannot handle science. As in the 'holocaust' Industry inventing 'new evidence', the 911 folks have their bogus videotapes and their bogus 'assassination of Bin Laden' tale; all created to implant the original thoughts deep into the public's mind. All that wouldn't be necessary if their positions were actual fact. And BTW, the number of ordinary folks who are convinced that 911 is BS is growing ... faster perhaps than 'holocaust' Revisionism. There have been public demonstrations galore. Of course the persecution of these people is considerably less than that of 'holocaust' Revisionists

Off topic in a way, but read here as these very mainstream guys deconstruct the absurd govt. 911 conspiracy theory. Especially read their take down of 'Popular Mechanics' magazine attempt to buttress the government's physically impossible claims. I mean it's not even close.
http://www.ae911truth.org/

Anyone who wants to discuss 911 with me can do so via PMs.

- Hannover

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

cold beer
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 8:48 pm

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby cold beer » 5 years 10 months ago (Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:03 pm)

Scotsman wrote:Am I mistaken, or are the members of this forum favorable toward '9/11 Truth'? I must confess, I agree with denierbud on that issue. I consider Holocaust Denial an anti-conspiracy theory, and it is disappointing for me to see that a number of members here speak favorably about 9/11 Truth when it is just as unbelievable as the things the Holocaustians claim.

You've completely mischaracterizing my comment and I take offense to it, you have no clue what my views on 911 are, I never spoke to it.

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1634
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Re: a glaring contradiction for the standard of evidence

Postby Moderator » 5 years 10 months ago (Sun Oct 06, 2013 6:58 pm)

Scotsman wrote:Am I mistaken, or are the members of this forum favorable toward '9/11 Truth'? I must confess, I agree with denierbud on that issue. I consider Holocaust Denial an anti-conspiracy theory, and it is disappointing for me to see that a number of members here speak favorably about 9/11 Truth when it is just as unbelievable as the things the Holocaustians claim.
If you want to discuss 911 with members of this forum, please do so via PMs and then go the email route or to other forums, of which there are many. Even though some leakage has occurred, we will not be discussing that topic here any further.
M1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests