Balsamo wrote:I am the first to admit that the use - the heay use - of cherry picking and other kind of fallacies are more frequent among people with no or little real knowledge about what they are arguing about or on people - or websites - who wants to capitalize on that ignorance.
I don't have to demonstrate anything : It is obvious that either they don't know the rest of the testimony - in that case it is their fault or they lack of will to know more, or just to check...or they know the rest and just chose to ignore it as it would - and it does - diminish the impact of the chosen part of his testimony. In both case it can be consider as fallacies - cherry picking - by ignorance or by malice.
You can make everything seem real misusing quotes...This is why Historians are required to put their sources...so one check them.
You cannot accuse somebody of fallacy if, as you admit, somebody does not have the knowledge. Is it like accusing somebody of lying when the accused in fact does not know he told untrue claim because he does not have the knowledge of the truth.
To accuse somebody of cherry picking and of ignorance to not read the full source - these are two different things and cherry picking is worse. Before accusing of the fallacy, you firstly need to demonstrate that the accused was aware of the full information, hence "I don't have to demonstrate anything"
is of course false approach.
Balsamo wrote:In this case, mentioning sport activities without mentioning who was allowed to practise them, is indeed dishonnest, for the rest, Klein testimony is aailable online so everyone is free to check what he really meant.
Faurisson being on of the promoters of the "Auschwitz summer resort" bogus, i think one can assume that he knows very well the full content of Klein testimony.
Definition of cherry picking fallacy, wikipedia: "Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position."
How exactly not citing the passage: "It should be noted that only the fit and well nourished inmates, who were spared from hard labor, could get engaged in such games that attracted the vivid applause of the masses of the other inmates.”
contradicts the position, that soccer, water games and basketball were sport activities practiced at Auschwitz and that attracted vivid applause from those who were among audience?
Balsamo wrote:Another good example of fallacy is the popular 6 millions - 4 millions (should be 3 millions) = 6 millions. It is very efficient toward ingnorant people, but the people promoting the formula SHOULD be aware of the numbers they are playing with.
Maybe you should firstly explain to "ignorant people" where is the fallacy to be sure that this another alleged example is not as "good" as example above.
Balsamo wrote:Now to be perfectly clear, i join Nessie in saying that the use of fallacies are not exclusive to revisionists.
So far, you two had and still have quite big troubles to show some examples contrary to your opponents.
Germar Rudolf, Lectures on the Holocaust. Controversial Issues Cross-Examined
, 2nd Edition, The Barnes Review, 2010, p. 410.