No one to debate? [Rudolf vs Vann on Jake Shields]

[Keen]

You have an odd standard of proof... There is also evidence to prove outdoor cremations.

Says the low IQ dimwit who provides this photo:



as "proof" that 925,000 jews were cremated at Treblinka II!

No wonder Nessie wont debate me.

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=493

No wonder he cravenly refuses to debate Greg Gerdes.



What a coward!!!

[Keen]

True investigators are led by the evidence, not their opinion, or argument and it is clear from the words people use, only the historians amongst us follow the evidence.

And when one takes off their magic glasses and follows the evidence, it leads them here:

https://thisisaboutscience.com/

Where we learn that low IQ "historians" like Nick Terry cravenly refuse to answer the simplest of questions, like:

26 - Of the 100 alleged graves / cremation pits of Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II in question - the one that you can conclusively prove currently contains the most human remains is number: __?__.

[Keen]

The Holocaust as a hoax involves millions of people, across every single country in Europe, lying, falsifying documents, forensic and archaeological evidence and creating a fake circumstantial narrative...

If the forensic and archaeological "investigations" of Belze, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II are not fraudulent, then why are all the "investigators" of those camps so afraid of answering Greg Gerdes' questions?

Why do they run away from debate like you and the low IQ coward Nick Terry?

[Keen]

I teach and supervise across the entire NS-WWII era and into adjacent periods, as well as into the postwar era for trials and memory.... Research and study are meant to be open-ended processes not about teaching a particular dogma. But they are also meant to be teachable and representable in comprehensible forms... For revisionist arguments to be accepted, they need to be convertible and translatable... First and foremost, this means the arguments must be tested in a comparative framework... To nearly all outside observers, revisionism just looks like negationism. That's because there is an awful lot of denialism..."

SanityCheck, I would first like to say about your posts that I have not read such sophomoric drivel since Nick Terry was writing for holocaust controversies. (BTW, whatever happened to that low IQ tard?)

Anyway, SanityCheck, it seems to me that you think you know a thing or two about the holohoax and education. What do you teach your students about the nonsensical orthodox story about the magically disappearing "huge mass graves" at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II? More specifically, are you a reality denier who teaches them the same crap that the moron Nick Terry teaches his students - i.e. - that the "huge mass graves" have been proven to exist, or do you have some common sense and teach them the truth that the "huge mass graves" are a hoax?

Oh, one more question SanityCheck: Do you think that you can show the "deniers" that which you allege they deny?

[Keen]

From where I am standing, this persistent habit of hacking Treblinka out of context looks like wishful thinking to me... Simply repeating to yourself and others that something is a lie does not make it so.

So what exactly are your thoughts on Treblinka?

Do you agree with the liars Nessie and Nick Terry that this how 925,000 jews were made to "magically disappear" at Treblinka II? (But with virtually no wood!)?:



Do you see any physical evidence of human remains in that photo SanityCheck?

[Keen]

There is the big revisionist lie, the supposed lack of evidence. There is significantly more evidence for gassings, graves and cremations, than there is for mass resettlement.

There is virtually zero credible and convincing evidence for the existence of the alleged mass graves.

ZERO.

OPENING / FUNDAMENTAL STATEMENT OF FACT: It is alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, the bodies and burnt remains of hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of jews were buried in numerous “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II. However, despite all the deceptive allegations to the contrary, the truth is, the largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the one hundred graves / cremation pits that are fraudulently alleged to have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at these five sites, in which verified human remains have been uncovered / tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology, contained the remains of - ONLY FIVE PEOPLE.

https://thisisaboutscience.com/

Nessie:

100% of the archaeological evidence states that there are large areas of disturbed ground containing cremated remains. Revisionists have zero evidence the ground is undisturbed.

A - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; Non-nefarious diggings for such things as garbage pits, cellars, wells, latrines, etc. - were dug at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - ??

Now let's watch Nessie squirm and lie.

[Keen]

The Holocaust narrative is implausible, but it's the lack of evidence that should be there however isn't that affirms the falsity of the narrative/thesis.

Exactly.

However, the narative is not only implausible, but in many cases, it's physically impossible.

[Archie]

Looks like Shields is trying to arrange another one.

J. Otto Pohl has expressed some interest in arguing the pro-Holocaust side.



I have observed Pohl on X for a while now. He is a serious scholar but he's is woefully underemployed (works as a janitor IIRC). He's the author of this book from Columbia University Press.
https://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-years ... 838216300/

It's hard to get an exact read on him but he seems to be at least somewhat "based." I thought he might be a closet revisionist who was holding back somewhat in hopes of one day landing that elusive academic position. He apparently believes in the Holocaust in some form, but he doesn't seem 100% orthodox by any means. I would be very interested to hear him defend his position in detail, if he is willing to do so. It is so hard to find someone who is a) knowledgeable, b) willing to discuss the matter in detail, and c) not an activist/shill.

The last debate (Rudolf vs Vann) was of some interest but a little disappointing since Vann was so outgunned and decided to play dead. If you're going to have a debate, do a debate. None of this "let's just have a conversation" stuff. Some people do not get what a debate is for. It is a rhetoric exhibition. It gives both sides a chance to present their case to an audience. It is not for the debaters to convince each other (presumably they have heard all the arguments before), nor is it to settle the nitty gritty details of the topic (which cannot really be satisfactorily addressed in a live setting). It is to introduce a broader audience to the topic and get them up to speed on the matter.

[Archie]

Here are a few old posts of his where you can see he is a far cry from e.g., Lipstadt (who would probably consider him a Holocaust minimizer or some such).





And here is his review of Rudolf vs. Vann debate. He is fairly positive toward Rudolf.

[Stubble]

Interesting character.

His sub stack;

https://jottopohl.substack.com/archive

His takes actually seem balanced enough for me to be able to tolerate reading. Most stuff I have to take in doses because of the vitriol for Germans in it. His stuff seem to be free of that from what I can tell.

Seems like this would be a revisionist vs semi revisionist debate.

Looking over his take on the Einsatzgruppen, he doesn't appear to be too far from my understanding. There is also a tacit admission that it was antiterrorism. Of course, reprisals and decimations are regrettable. They were not and are not however, uncommon.

For the KZ system minus the Bug River camps, he gets 300,000 give or take.

I wonder where the parts of radical divergence are. Likely, along the Bug River.

[HansHill]

This will be interesting if it materializes. Is it confirmed that Rudolf will be the opponent again?

[Wahrheitssucher]

.
Here is a video put up today on Rumble of Ron Unz analyzing the Holocaust narrative with Germar Rudolf and Jorge Besada:

[Stubble]

Always glad to see 'The Iron Curtain Over America' get a positive review.

Excellent book. Highly recommend.

Good interview overall, although I must admit, I'm still not enamoured with Mr Unz.