RE: Definition of and evidence for the holocaust
May 12, 2013 at 4:04 pm
(This post was last modified: May 12, 2013 at 4:26 pm by A_Nony_Mouse.)
(May 12, 2013 at 4:53 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: Time to die thread.
This one knows all the evidence that we can throw at him but has decided to live in denial.
I say let him.
This false belief is at his core now and now matter what evidence we show him he will come back with "but that could be falsified", "that woman could have been lying", "show me the DNA evidence" (from before the discovery of DNA).
No this is holocaust "flat earther".
Best to ignore him.
How can anything be evidence for something no one can define? A real big non sequitur there.
I have not said anything like it could be falsified which you for a fact from reading my posts. Why do you invent that false accusation. Do you enjoy lying?
(May 12, 2013 at 8:44 am)CapnAwesome Wrote: Oh man on man. I knew this guy was nutty based on his anti-Israel threads which are full of tripe and misinformation
If in fact that is the case why do Israeli jewish newspapers publish "tripe and misinformation" in their online English language editions?
Quote: but it looks like he just took a turn to full retard. You need someone to define the holocaust for you?
Noting that believers cannot define it, it follows that holohuggers have no idea what they believe in.
Quote:People don't want to argue with you because your position has no legitimacy and we have no wish to give you any. You are dug into your own neo-nazi position and if you don't believe in the holocaust I doubt the mountains of evidence are going to convince you.
Anyone reading this thread can see the holohuggers are not arguing, are NOT defending their claims after I point out they are not relevant, because there is no answer. When it comes to the prurient but trivial human skin claim it is perfectly reasonable to ask how religion and cause of death were determined is it not? Besides look closely at them. Who ever heard of a real Jew with a tattoo?
As I noted to person who did not get involved, the failure to document this subject amounts to criminal negligence.
(May 12, 2013 at 3:09 pm)A Theist Wrote:(May 12, 2013 at 8:44 am)CapnAwesome Wrote: Oh man on man. I knew this guy was nutty based on his anti-Israel threads which are full of tripe and misinformation but it looks like he just took a turn to full retard. You need someone to define the holocaust for you? People don't want to argue with you because your position has no legitimacy and we have no wish to give you any. You are dug into your own neo-nazi position and if you don't believe in the holocaust I doubt the mountains of evidence are going to convince you.The guy's brain is poisoned by his own neonazi propaganda...there's no sense arguing with, or entertaining this nazi troll...he's going to reject any and all evidence of a holocaust anyway...what's the point...let him drag his nazi ass back to Stormfront where he has a willing and listening audience full of other bigots and racists who'll drink his Kool Aid...
Another person who enjoys being a liar. It is believers who have no idea what they believe in because they cannot define what they are talking about. Pictures without traceability and not even with attribution and which are not even interesting are claimed as evidence without even saying evidence of what.
Theists do a much better job than holohuggers. At least they do not refuse to define what they mean by god. Usually they take a shot at it. They do not say, "You know what I mean and here is a picture of a church to prove it." Admittedly some come close.
Was the claim of the resurrection of Jesus more truthful in the 2nd c. AD because that was closer in time to the claimed event?