Youtube Debate / peer review

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Mulegino1
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 263
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 4:15 pm

Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby Mulegino1 » 4 years 7 months ago (Mon Dec 29, 2014 6:25 pm)

Right now, I'm in the process of debating a predictably irritating poster on Youtube.

It would appear that his only argument is "Harvard" and "peer revue".

I would appreciate your input and any suggestions you may have for sharpening my debating skills.

The link is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIesXORjBps

(If you want to join in the debate, click on "Newest Comments") :D

PS: Excuse the foul language used by the opponent.


Applied Mathematics
5 hours ago (edited)

@mulegino1:

First off, can you cite to a single peer-reviewed study published by a major university, like Oxford that supports Holocaust denial? You can't because none exists. So, are you claiming that all of the elite universities have rejected Holocaust denial because of the Jews? Secondly, the Jews have been fighting for free speech for even Holocaust deniers. The neo-nazis who wanted to march in Chicago, through a Jewish neighborhood, were supported by the ACLU, which was headed by a Jew at the time. It's not the Jews fault that Europeans, run by non-Jewish majorities, engage in fascism and restrict free speech.
Reply



Hide replies

mulegino1
3 hours ago

Precisely how do you define "Holocaust"?

It is stipulated that the National Socialist regime's policy was, from 1933 on, to remove the Jews from the German sphere of influence. This policy was articulated via the encouragement of emigration abroad, and the removal, by retirement and pensioning, of Jews from certain positions in academia and civil service.

The Nuremberg Laws themselves enjoyed the hearty support of the Zionists, and there was a period of extensive cooperation-via the Transfer Agreement, or Haavara- to aid Jews relocating elsewhere.

There was no persecution of Jews as Jews in the pre-war Reich.

Kristallnacht was NOT carried out by the regime but was instigated by provocateurs, and was in response to an act of terrorism committed by the Polish Jew, Herschel Grynszpan, who murdered the German diplomat Von Rath in Paris.

Once the war began, particularly the war against the Soviet Union, the treatment of Jews became increasingly harsher; they were conscripted for labor, resettled into ghettos in the East, and many were expropriated. But the policy remained one of removing the Jews from the German sphere of influence, not mass murder.

Holocaust revisionists have shown the nucleus of the Holocaust Myth- that 6 million Jews were killed by Germans-mostly in gas chambers using either commercially available insecticide or (non-lethal) diesel exhaust- and subsequently burnt to ashes in ordinary crematory retorts or on outdoor wooden cremation pyres to be absolute nonsense; virtual impossibilities from a technical and logistical standpoint.
Show less
Reply




Applied Mathematics
3 hours ago

+mulegino1 Are you going to cite to an actual peer-reviewed study from a major university, like Harvard, to support your BS claim about Holocaust denial? Where is it? I don't give a shit about your deranged opinion, or Jew-hating fucks like yourself with no lives, I am interested in only peer-reviewed scholarly works. Name one. And if you can't, then you have no credible evidence to support your BS. None.
Reply




mulegino1
2 hours ago (edited)

Why don't you think for yourself, and not parrot nonsense about "Harvard, Harvard, Harvard"? Your type of argument appears to be irreducible from an appeal to authority,i.e., very weak.

Are you unable to make a factual argument by yourself? Do you really think Deborah Lipstadt is an intellectual divinity?

Give a go at it. Does diesel exhaust really kill in minutes? Do human corpses burn on their own? Do gigantic mass graves disappear? How about enormous amounts of wood ash and human cremains?

Do you really need the anodyne of academic authority to figure out that these things are impossible?
Show less
Reply




Applied Mathematics
2 hours ago

+mulegino1 No, my argument is not an "appeal to authority." My argument is an appeal to the scientific method. The major universities of the world use the scientific method to peer-review research. On the other hand, you Jew-haters use liars like Leuchter who claimed that having a history degree qualified him to do a scientific forensic investigation. Or, you use people like Arthur Butz who relied on his "psychic mind-reading" powers. Major universities, for obvious reasons, don't want people laughing at them, which is why they don't publish bullshit from such people.
Reply




mulegino1
47 minutes ago (edited)

+Applied Mathematics

You know very well why universities do not publish revisionist papers, and it has nothing to do with them being pseudo-scientific. Norman Finkelstein accepts the official narrative of the Holocaust and he lost his professorship merely because he was critical of its commercialization. (It was pleasing to watch him expose "brilliant" Harvard luminary Alan Dershowitz's plagiarism of Joan Peters' "From Time Immemorial", but I digress.)

Indeed your argument is an appeal to authority, and does NOT appeal to the scientific method- it attempts to circumvent it with ad hominem attacks- for example, Leuchter not being qualified, Germar Rudolf using a pseudonym, calling revisionist arguments "bulls---", etc.

I personally don't care whether Leuchter had a degree in chemistry or not; his results, never falsified or disproven, were vindicated by Germar Rudolf's more extensive and rigorous investigation. And to top it all off, the Jan Sehn Institute from Cracow refused to look for iron cyanide in the brickwork of Morgue I of Krema II, because they simply could not imagine how blue stains could be caused by the outgassing HCN (the active ingredient in Zyklon-B) binding with the iron in the masonry when it was clear (from both the interior and exterior walls of the delousing chambers that it did- showing abundant stains visible to this day. I believe their report stated that such a search would possibly rehabilitate fascism or some such "unscientific" wording.

Even the Jan Sehn Institute did vindicate Leuchter's results in one sense: it showed extremely minute traces of non-ferrous cyanide in Morgue I, which did not differ substantially from the control samples. So, the complete lack of iron cyanide, combined with the infinitesimal traces of non-ferrous cyanide are pretty much the icing on the cake: Morgue I of Krema II at Birkenau- the literal holy of holies of the Holocaust legend- was just what it was planned and constructed to be- an underground mortuary for bodies awaiting cremation in the crematory retorts located across and above it- and nothing more.

Of course, this was merely another nail in the narrative's coffin. The technical and logistical absurdities of the official Holocaust story are legion.
Show less

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

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby Werd » 4 years 7 months ago (Mon Dec 29, 2014 6:41 pm)

Peer review tells us about the widespread acceptence of a theory, not its credibility.

User avatar
Mulegino1
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 263
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 4:15 pm

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby Mulegino1 » 4 years 7 months ago (Mon Dec 29, 2014 6:45 pm)

Werd wrote:Peer review tells us about the widespread acceptence of a theory, not its credibility.


He doesn't seem to understand this. I believe he actually believes that higher academia can manufacture reality out of thin air.

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

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby Werd » 4 years 7 months ago (Mon Dec 29, 2014 6:53 pm)

I got that from Professor Henry Bauer of Virginia Tech who has exposed pseudoscience in many books. Specifically relating to the HIV=AIDS scam that dissidents started speaking about in the late 80's. But that's another topic for another board. Henry Bauer is 'on the inside' but he has not been dismissed. Probably because he has tenture like Arthur Butz. At least I suspect Henry Bauer has tenure.

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby hermod » 4 years 7 months ago (Mon Dec 29, 2014 8:58 pm)

Welcome to 1984!

"And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'"

"Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct; nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record. All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary."

-- Orwell,1984


Where were the academic scholars' intellectual freedom and scientific method about the Katyn massacre before the Soviet finally said "We, not the Nazis, did that"?

If the academic world was consistent with its own "Holocaust" evidential standards, i.e. dubious testimonies, extracted confessions and inocuous documents in an alleged code language, every major university in the "free world" should have research departments studying witchcraft, alien abductions, bigfoots, ghosts, dragons, elves, Marian apparitions, the Belzec electrocution chambers and the WW1 gas chambers in Serbia. There are millions of testimonial evidence for those things.

The use of normal evidential standards concerning the "Holocaust" led the Princeton Jewish professor Arno Mayer to concede that “Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable” (The “Final Solution” in History, New York, Pantheon Books, p. 362).
"But, however the world pretends to divide itself, there are ony two divisions in the world to-day - human beings and Germans. – Rudyard Kipling, The Morning Post (London), June 22, 1915

User avatar
Mulegino1
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 263
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 4:15 pm

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby Mulegino1 » 4 years 7 months ago (Mon Dec 29, 2014 9:32 pm)

hermod wrote:Welcome to 1984!

"And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'"

"Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct; nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record. All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary."

-- Orwell,1984


Where were the academic scholars' intellectual freedom and scientific method about the Katyn massacre before the Soviet finally said "We, not the Nazis, did that"?

If the academic world was consistent with its own "Holocaust" evidential standards, i.e. dubious testimonies, extracted confessions and inocuous documents in an alleged code language, every major university in the "free world" should have research departments studying witchcraft, alien abductions, bigfoots, ghosts, dragons, elves, Marian apparitions, the Belzec electrocution chambers and the WW1 gas chambers in Serbia. There are millions of testimonial evidence for those things.

The use of normal evidential standards concerning the "Holocaust" led the Princeton Jewish professor Arno Mayer to concede that “Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable” (The “Final Solution” in History, New York, Pantheon Books, p. 362).


I think that even Orwell would have been shocked by the level of sheer idiocy demonstrated by so many of our fellow citizens. They make the proles in "1984" look Socratic by comparison!

User avatar
Jurgen
Member
Member
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 6:17 am

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby Jurgen » 4 years 7 months ago (Tue Dec 30, 2014 4:01 am)

The peer review process is in and of itself a little broken as it is biased to a viewset or a world view.

People (Historians/Scientists) of a particular world view will not peer review papers written by folk who hold a different view to their own (ie Creationists vs Evolutionists/Holocaust Deniers vs Believers. And seeing that the orthodox hold the positions of power you can GUARANTEE no unbiased peer review will ever take place on non-orthodox material.
"The Holocaust narrative actually breaks down on a discrete, factual level, and is only tenable when it is presented as some vague or nebulous larger than life metahistorical event" Mulegino1

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2470
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby borjastick » 4 years 7 months ago (Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:49 am)

I have read the thread on the youtube video and have made a couple of points as well.

The argument he pursues, that nothing revisionists claim as evidence can be serious because it hasn't been peer reviewed, is total nonsense and an avoidance structure. That suggests that all pro holohoax papers and evidence has actually been peer reviewed, which it hasn't, at least not under the academic peer review system. This guy is just making trouble and cannot back up his claims in any other way than to try avoiding the issue.

As for the video maker, Pat Condell, he is an interesting character and has made some very strong statements over the years. He is also very funny. His basic thing is he hates all religions but mainly Islam. However of late he has been raging against the Islam faith and always couples it with support for jews and israel.
'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

EtienneSC
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 498
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby EtienneSC » 4 years 7 months ago (Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:32 am)

The critic has a fair point that revisionists have tended to operate outside academia, though they often have academic qualifications. However, it does not follow that work done outside universities is of no account or does not respect scientific method. Much professional work is carried on outside academia for example.

Or we might ask, when has there been a scientific study, peer reviewed, published by a university or otherwise, showing that there was a homicidal gas chamber at Auschwitz?

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9805
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby Hannover » 4 years 7 months ago (Tue Dec 30, 2014 2:10 pm)

'Peer review' is a process that intentionally excludes diversity of opinion. It helps maintain Jewish privilege and the falsely constructed reputations & salaries of those that bow down to them. Facts are that the 'peer review' argument has been used to denounce, exclude great thinkers through the ages. Your opponent is desperately clutching at straws.

Ask your opponent to debate here and let's see what he really has. Also, posting links to threads at this forum might save you some time.
Typically YouTube has a reputation of censorship and deletion when it comes to free speech about the 'holocaust' storyline. Chances are the debate will be wiped away.

Clearly your opponent is avoiding the specifics, aka: dodging, much like the troll 'Nessie' who laughably says everything is a 'fallacy', see his posts at this forum.

Try asking your Believer to show you real, verifiable excavations of the alleged enormous mass graves. Show, not claim. Game, set, match.

Also, put this in his face, it puts and end to it, from an earlier post:
Hannover said:

The two main 'gas chambers at Auschwitz / Birkenau were exactly the same, supposedly in Kremas II & III. So let's play along with the storyline. Up to 2000 Jews were supposedly gassed until dead, then they were supposedly taken via an elevator to the crematorium directly above.

Fact: as seen in the plans, this elevator is hand drawn, and is only 4 ft X 9 ft. How in the world could 2000 Jews have been loaded onto a 4 ft x 9 ft. hand drawn elevator in just a few minutes? Remember, the storyline says that the gassings and resultant cremations were non-stop for much of the period in question.

We supposedly have another batch of 2000 Jews waiting outside, supposedly being tricked into thinking they were about to receive showers. It would have been impossible to disentangle all the supposedly dead Jews and load 2000 of them onto to this postage stamp of an elevator, hoist them by hand up to the crematory 'ovens' in just minutes.
And this repeated process meant that the crematory ovens above would not have been capable of cremating them in the time alleged, which meant a build-up, a backlog occurred.
The storyline even states that the backlog of the to-be-cremated-gassed-Jews required stacking them outside. Once again, the alleged 2000 Jews were outside in full view of this laughable backlog claim, but supposedly they still thought they were getting 'showers'. Of course, timely aerial reconnaissance photos show nothing of the kind.

Furthermore, while the Jews were waiting outside, the storyline says that a SS man with a gas mask climbed upon the roof of the Kremas (only maybe 18 inches, or close to it, above the ground, Kremas II & III were largely underground) and dropped Zyklon-B granules into a container and lowered it down into the 'holes' in the roof, into the morgues which were supposedly converted into a gas chamber. The waiting 2000 Jews would have a clear view of the man on the roof's activity, yet these 2000 Jews were supposedly not concerned and still thought they were going to get innocent showers. The storyline is utterly ridiculous.

We're not done.

The Zyklon-B pesticide granules took/take hours to complete the outgassing of their cyanide load. The storyline says that this same SS man on the roof, supposedly wearing a highly visible gas mask, withdrew the container up from the 'gas chambers' in just minutes. Remember, the Zyklon-B pesticide granules were allegedly dumped and lowered into the 'gas chambers'. And since we know that the Zyklon-B pesticide would have taken hours to finish releasing it's cyanide load we have a situation where anyone in the entire area would have been vulnerable to gassing.
Yes, the storyline also says that there were vents which were used to remove the gas, but then we are still in a situation where the entire area is vulnerable to cyanide. Not to mention that this certainly would have been noticed by the alleged waiting 2000 Jews. And where does this SS man in a gas mask put the outgassing Zyklon-B pesticide granules which he has supposedly withdrawn, which would be releasing cyanide for hours?

The entire, bizarre story is unsustainable with even the slightest scrutiny. It's no wonder why Jewish supremacists trot out senile, lying 'survivors' (who wouldn't have even survived if the tall tales were true) for emotional impact. No wonder that there are Thought Crime laws against examining this absurd process. 'House of cards' is an understatement.
and:
Hannover @ D. Keren lies about open 'gas chamber' doors / see IMAGES!
scroll down to post: 'THE GREAT GAS CHAMBER TRAFFIC JAM'

- 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 Internet is demolishing the false narrative promoted by arrogant Jewish supremacists. From the slaughter of the Palestinians to the lies of Auschwitz the world is recognizing the dangers of Jewish supremacism.
The tide is turning.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby hermod » 4 years 7 months ago (Tue Dec 30, 2014 11:26 pm)

The 'Peer review'/academic thing as far as the "Holocaust is concerned amounts to saying: "You see that the Palestinian Arabs are not the legitimate owners of Palestine, otherwise we would read anti-Zionist articles in our newspapers." only because U.S. media are owned by Zionists and the voice of Palestinian Arabs is never heard by American citizens. Holocaust academic historians are a gang of boxers jumping triumphantly in a ring after their opponents were prevented from coming for the fight...
"But, however the world pretends to divide itself, there are ony two divisions in the world to-day - human beings and Germans. – Rudyard Kipling, The Morning Post (London), June 22, 1915

EtienneSC
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 498
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby EtienneSC » 4 years 7 months ago (Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:08 am)

Hannover wrote:'Peer review' is a process that intentionally excludes diversity of opinion. It helps maintain Jewish privilege and the falsely constructed reputations & salaries of those that bow down to them. Facts are that the 'peer review' argument has been used to denounce, exclude great thinkers through the ages. Your opponent is desperately clutching at straws.

Rubbish. Peer review is a legitimate procedure in academia or elsewhere. It is common sense that a fresh pair of eyes can see faults in a piece of reasoning. Some revisionists peer review each other's work. As for academia, it is high time that revisionists began submitting work to academic journals where it is of a sufficient quality - if only to publicize their work.

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2470
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby borjastick » 4 years 7 months ago (Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:43 am)

The peer review system is in theory a fine route to evaluate and assess positions and papers submitted by the established academic hierarchy. It looks after its own though and does not allow free thinking and openness. It is in effect put in place to ensure those in ivory towers can enjoy their stay in them for longer. After all if you don't want credibility to be conferred just ensure a paper isn't peer reviewed...

This is what the youtube poster is claiming.

As for revisionists submitting papers for peer review, just how would that work and to whom would these papers be submitted? Look at what happened to Nick Kollerstrom, who was a very senior professor in UCL London when he submitted a paper on the holocaust. His game was up, he was ostracised and booted out. He was not the first nor will he be the last.

Academia is somewhat in the control of jews in many universities, thus free thought and assessment of the holocaust isn't allowed.
'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
Creox
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 152
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:32 pm

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby Creox » 4 years 7 months ago (Wed Dec 31, 2014 11:16 am)

borjastick wrote:The peer review system is in theory a fine route to evaluate and assess positions and papers submitted by the established academic hierarchy. It looks after its own though and does not allow free thinking and openness. It is in effect put in place to ensure those in ivory towers can enjoy their stay in them for longer. After all if you don't want credibility to be conferred just ensure a paper isn't peer reviewed...

This is what the youtube poster is claiming.

As for revisionists submitting papers for peer review, just how would that work and to whom would these papers be submitted? Look at what happened to Nick Kollerstrom, who was a very senior professor in UCL London when he submitted a paper on the holocaust. His game was up, he was ostracised and booted out. He was not the first nor will he be the last.

Academia is somewhat in the control of jews in many universities, thus free thought and assessment of the holocaust isn't allowed.



I agree mostly. I don't see why or that having Jews in many universities is the central problem. I think that the propaganda of the Holocaust has infiltrated academia and society to the point that it is blasphemy to deny it in any way. That is changing but at a grassroots level. It will be some time before we see any public figure announce "hey, does anyone else notice how strange the Holocaust story is?" :( :)

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9805
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Youtube Debate / peer review

Postby Hannover » 4 years 7 months ago (Wed Dec 31, 2014 11:42 am)

EtienneSC:
Rubbish. Peer review is a legitimate procedure in academia or elsewhere. It is common sense that a fresh pair of eyes can see faults in a piece of reasoning. Some revisionists peer review each other's work. As for academia, it is high time that revisionists began submitting work to academic journals where it is of a sufficient quality - if only to publicize their work.
An uninformed response. Revisionists have repeatedly submitted work to academic journals only to have them rejected out of hand. 'Peer review' is an illegitimate argument, an easily exposed canard.

borjastick:
Look at what happened to Nick Kollerstrom, who was a very senior professor in UCL London when he submitted a paper on the holocaust. His game was up, he was ostracised and booted out. He was not the first nor will he be the last.
Look at Germar Rudolf, who lost his PhD from the Max Planck Institute. Look at what happened to Dr. Joel Hayward. Look at what happened to Professor Steven Salaita at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.


Creox:
I don't see why or that having Jews in many universities is the central problem.
Please, no strawmen. It's a problem when Jews dominate influential academic positions when qualified non-Jews are readily available (aka: hiring discrimination) and when these Jews demand adherence to a racist Zionist / Marxist agenda. True there are some non-Jews who tow the party line, but fear of job loss means there is no real option. Universities / 'academia' typically are the most non-diverse environments imaginable.

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


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests