The use of logical fallacies / Nessie craps out

[Bob]

From the thread:
The most important Photograph / corpse color

Last time that I looked, Nessie was over at Skeptic, posting replies to me and other CODOH members. He's claiming that challenging the functionality of the Kula columns is a fallacy of ignorance since nobody has built an actual Kula column and tested it with Zyklon B, under Auschwitz conditions. Well, nobody has ever built and tested a Kula column to see if it would work, either. Uh, Nessie, care to post your replies here on the CODOH forum?

Objection of the following "value": "challenging the functionality of the Perpetuum mobile is a fallacy of ignorance since nobody has built an actual Perpetuum mobile and tested it."

Contrary to Nessie´s another misuse of fallacy, revisionists know from various testimonies, most notably from Kula, how this alleged column device looked like/worked. Based on the description it can be ruled out the functionality or the idea of such device for claimed purpose. Hence it belongs to realm of fantasy unless Nessie cares to finally present his arguments. Last but not least, Nessie is again wrong as revisionists of course built a version of this alleged device, yet is virtually impossible to test it under "Auschwitz conditions" as demonstration for exterminationists who without explanations do not accept backed up objections regarding this alleged device. Hence to make validity of opponent´s arguments dependent on the experiment he knows is impossible to do is "pass the buck" approach to put it mildly and hence irrelevant.

Problem with Nessie´s heavy use of accusation of fallacy is he has little or no knowledge of what is a fallacy and is not able to recognize it like in this case, hence his claimed "fallacies" are virtually only demonstration of his incompetence. As I noted, his new strategy in latest month(s) is misuse of fallacies and to virtually only accusing of "fallacies" to simply discredit opponents and their positions without actually addressing them. Ad hominem is probably overplayed for him, so a new strategy.

[Hektor]

From what I am reading in the latest comments, it appears the debate is now about what in the testimony/report is a lie, what a mistake, what is result of trauma, why etc. hence not related to the topic of "logical fallacies", but more a topic "analysis of testimonies" or something like that.
...

That's right logical fallacies in testimony or exterminationist hypothesis are a different issue from logical fallacies when arguing for or against the Holocaust thesis.

[Mulegino1]

Nessie wrote:

"If denier/revisionists want to be taken seriously they need to avoid logical fallacies like the plague and construct arguments that are properly reasoned and have lots of evidence."

From this statement, one can conclude that exterminationists are also bound by these rules of logic.

Petitio principii or "begging the question" is also a logical fallacy, and it also appears to be a major component in official Shoah historiography:

A classic example of this was brought to the attention of revisionists by none other than Dr. Faurisson himself:

“Pierre Vidal-Naquet is professor at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (School of Higher Studies in the Social Sciences) in Paris and has been a very determined adversary of mine. He has attacked me in the academic and journalistic worlds and even in the courts. Along with Léon Poliakov, he is the author of a declaration, published in Le Monde on February 21, 1979, p. 23, which was signed by 34 historians" :

“It is not necessary to ask how, technically, such a mass murder was possible. It was possible technically since it took place. That is the necessary point of departure for any historical inquiry on this subject. It is our function simply to recall that truth: There as not, there cannot be, any debate about the existence of the gas chambers.”

In other words, 34 of France’s most prominent historians can come up with no better argument for the existence of the gas chambers than: “It happened because it happened.”

[borjastick]

"If denier/revisionists want to be taken seriously they need to avoid logical fallacies like the plague and construct arguments that are properly reasoned and have lots of evidence."

-Nessie

The problem for the holocaust industry is the absolute lack of evidence. Where are the gas chambers, the missing people, the bodies, the method, the fuel for the mass cremations as claimed, the film, photos, verifiable witness statements?? As I have said here before, if Ms Sturdy Colls really believed she had found the gas chambers at Treblinka in her recent film, why on earth did she stop digging and thus not reveal the full extent of what she claimed?

It is all these missing links of hard evidence and the masses of bizarre claims and so called 'proofs' that have been found wanting that have left the door so far open for decades.

They simply do not have any proof so it's a bit strong for revisionists to be accused of lacking evidence.

[Hannover]

This thread represents the ultimate in desperation by those like Nessie who to cling to the impossible. I'm sure they really believe that Moses held out his staff and the Red Sea was parted.

Hey, don't blames us! They are the ones who make this nonsense up.

- Hannover

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.