Hitler Question

History is just random, guys.

 

I am British

 

Yeah-but only recently LOL

 

Aha.
I was born in England. Not that, that matters much anyway.
We're all equal here.

 

Ok, with a simple google search, i found a very interesting link, which, IMO sums up the Holocaust Deniers position very well.To deny the Holocaust, you have to believe there is a worldwide Jewish Conspiracy.
Here is the link.
Please read at least the first question and it's answer.
If anybody is still unconvinced after reading that, then i guess you also believe aliens built the pyramids, Bush knocked down the twin towers, and Global Warming is a myth.
Because they are all in the same rank of crazy.

 

I am confused by what you just put, could you explain it a bit more please?

 

Well, did you read the first question and answer of the link i presented?
It basically gives you a primer on how we know what we know about the Holocaust, and it debunks the deniers claims.
If you did read the link, please be more specific about what you didn't understand.
My comment in and of itself provides no explanation, as it is just my presentation of the link.
You will need to read the first question and answer on that link to understand what i am talking about.

 

I read the first question and the answer.

I think we can safely say that there is no proof. Like the topic was searching for. Which is what I have been trying to say until we all got off topic.

 

How so?
Do you just dismiss the hundreds of survival testimonies, the hundreds of confessions by Nazi officials, the entries in Goebbels diaries, the top secret letters referencing the gas vans,the letters and memos talking about the gas chambers,the inventories with showerheads and gas tight doors,the diaries, the speeches, the court verdicts, the piles of human ash, piles of eyeglasses, piles of shoes, piles of gold teeth, piles of burned corpses, piles of unburned corpses, piles of artificial limbs, piles of human hair, piles of ransacked luggage, piles of shaving-brushes, piles of combs, piles of pots and pans, piles of clothes,human skin ornaments presented in trial and known to a US Senate investigation committee, and the studies made through population statistics?
I guess if you dismiss that, then you're right...there is no proof.

 

Nope I don't dismiss those, as I said earlier, that could have happened, but it might have also not happened.

There's no proof to prove that it did happen, and there's no proof to show that it didn't happen..

All those entries and little pieces of information, they could (I'm not saying that they are) be false, but then they could also be true... Do you expect me to blindly accept the proposal without asking questions? If I did that then I would be a very ridiculous person, you could tell me that the sun is actually a halogen light in the sky and get away with it.

It's not a big deal anyway, everyone grows their own opinion, I'm not going to come onto this forum and tell you you're wrong when you could very well be right, even though you may actually be wrong. The point of history is that we can speculate and analyze it as much as we like, but we'll be no nearer the 100% than we started.. It is argueable that we can get nearer to the truth, but we will never hit the nail on the head.

Anyone can show as much evidence as they like, all I will do is accept their opinion and continue to analyze it from an external perspective. I will not deny other peoples beliefs.

 

Holocaust isn't a big deal compared to what the Zionis are doing to Palestine right now...

 

So you're telling me that creationism is as credible as evolution, that the flat earth theory is as credible as the spherical earth theory, that geocentrism is as valid as heliocentrism, that prayer might work as well as medicine.
Ok, if that is your position, i won't be able to convince you.
But if that's the case, why try to know anything at all?
Post Merge: [time]1263924112[/time]

What's happening in Palestine has fault on both sides.
The Holocaust was entirely one sided.
There is no comparison.

 

I'm saying that anything is possible, why look at things with a one-sided perspective, when there are more ways to look at it?

Why don't you ask yourself that?

Ask yourself what is your purpose.

 

Why suddenly talk about Cretionism.I need to create a new post then.

 

There are no more ways to look at it.
You either look at the evidence and accept that it's true, or you deny the evidence and keep living your dream.

My purpose is to look at both sides, see which side has evidence to support it, and make my own conclusion of which side is the most likely to be true.
For example:
Holocaust:A lot of evidence that it did happen.No credible argument that it didn't, except for denial of said evidence.
Evolution:A lot of evidence that it's true;Creationsim:No evidence at all, except for denial of evidence for evolution.
Spherical earth:A lot of evidence that it's true.Flat earth:Nothing but literal interpretation of "holy" books.
etc...

 

Off-topic: Sure I'll post ^_^

At any rate, Hitler was a great leader, and he was a genius for trying to bring his country to power. Although he failed.. I may think he's pretty smart, but that doesn't agree with anything he did, or may have done.

There's always different ways to look at things, perspective is like a cube. You can see a single side when you look directly on which most people do, or you can look at the cube through someone elses eyes and see their side of the cube.

When you say something is either one or the other, that's like saying that it's either yes or no.. Life is not a binomial problem. That's taking away perspective and simplifying everything. While doing so you're denying my view and perhaps anyone elses view..

Views can be similar, or they can have minute differences, or they can be a completely different side of the scale.. I don't think that life is that simple to say that it's either one or the other when in some cases we're not blessed with the privilege to say it is this or that.

 

Your analogy is wrong.
The cube is a single truth.
It is one concept, and no matter which side you are looking at, you are looking at a cube.
In the case of the holocaust, you are dealing with two opposing realities, where if one is true, the other one must necessarily be false.
There are only two choices here.Either the holocaust happened or it didn't.
I can look at the other side, and what i see is nothing but denial of evidence.
There is no middle ground here.You can't say the holocaust happened, but at the same time it didn't.

That's exactly what i am saying.

No one is talking about life here.
We are discussing a very specific subject which can only have two conclusions.
Either it happened or it didn't.

I'm not denying your view.
I can't force you to believe the evidence.
I'm simply stating my view that denial of evidence is a sign of willful ignorance.

Again, we are not talking about life.
In this discussion, the issue is pretty simple.
The evidence is there, you can either look at it and accept it, or you can deny it and pretend it doesn't exist.
It is that simple.
How many sides are there to the proposition that 1+1=2?
You either accept the result, based on the evidence that if you put one finger up, and then another, you get two fingers, or you can dismiss that evidence and keep saying that it could equal 2 but it is equally probable that it could equal anything else.

 

According to forum rules this is getting out of hand.

I never said you were wrong.
I never said I was right.

But I ask, what gives you the ability to tell me that I am wrong, or that my analogy is wrong?

 

Why?
Am i being offensive?
I hope not.If i am, then sorry.

I understand.
You say that both positions are equally valid.
Which is what i am discussing.
I disagree.
I believe the position that has the evidence is more valid.

The ability to say that you are wrong, is given to me by all the evidence i have supporting my position.
You have said that the evidence might be false, but you must present an argument as to WHY the evidence is false in order for your claim to have any credibility.
As for the cube, i thought i did explain, but let me try again.
In your analogy we are looking at the cube from different perspectives.One sees one side of the cube, the other sees more.
It would be a better analogy if we were both looking at the cube, but one said the cube was there and the other said that no, it wasn't.
If the cube is the Holocaust, that is what is happening.
One says the cube is there (the Holocaust happened) the other says it's not (it didn't).
Is that more understandable?
And in case you think i am angry, or trying to pick a fight, i'm not.
I have nothing against you and i'm not trying to be offensive.
I like debating, and i actually have nothing better to do, so this is pretty entertaining.

 

No no, we're off topic slightly, that's all

But because there is evidence, it doesn't mean it is neccessarily true though.

Well I never said that the evidence was false, so I didn't see any reason to state why it was false.

That's true enough in itself, I mean to use the cube in the analogy of, while it is still a cube (The holocaust being the cube in this scenario). Everyone is looking at it from a different side, while it is ultimately the same topic, not everyone see's it the same way as other people. The basis is that a cube has six sides, not the basis of the fact that it exists or not.

I don't think you're angry at all ^_^
I understand exactly what you mean and I can see your side of the debate, and to be honest I am having a great deal of entertainment too.