First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Double standards regarding evidence
Posted 12/19/16 , edited 12/19/16

SHACLUB wrote:

jesus fucking christ i have no words for you that wouldn't get me banned, Lala.

I'd just recommend reading this
http://archive.adl.org/holocaust/response.html
and just reading through the entirety of this
https://www.ushmm.org/
https://www.hdot.org/
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial1.html

But besides that point, just because people are skeptical of your conspiracy theory (read: bullshit) doesn't mean that you get to peddle antisemitic talking points (read: BULLSHIT) , Lala.


The blog post on your first link addreses 5 points:


Responses to common Holocaust-denial claims

The following are summaries of five (5) major claims frequently made by Holocaust-denial propagandists. Click on each to read a brief factual response. The footnoted sources are listed at the bottom of the page.

1) The Holocaust Did Not Occur Because There Is No Single "Master Plan" for Jewish Annihilation
2) There Were No Gas Chambers Used for Mass Murder at Auschwitz and Other Camps
3) Holocaust Scholars Rely on the Testimony of Survivors Because There Is No Objective Documentation Proving the Nazi Genocide
4) There Was No Net Loss of Jewish Lives Between 1941 and 1945
5) The Nuremberg Trials Were a "Farce of Justice" Staged for the Benefit of the Jews


Lala has crossed out the points that don't relate to direct evidence, i.e. evidence that is about as strong as the evidence for Pizzagate. For some reason, the blog post completely ignored the two major points that the cremations were mathematically impossible to reach the digits of the original claims, or that the ashes or corpses have yet to be discovered, but Lala will let that slip for now.

#2 rejects the argument that there were no gas chambers by saying that the gas chambers were disguised as shower rooms. That's the same as arguing that the child-trafficking business is disguised as a pizza shop, and the pizza ovens are actually cremation ovens for babies. It's not a substantiated claim, and there certainly is no evidence to prove it.

#4... is a straw man fallacy.

The blog doesn't address the other problems either. How much manpower would this have required? Where did the corpses go? Why did they choose this method? Your source addresses none of the important questions, despite being a "debunk article". It appears to be a “debunk article” for the wrong audience, much like how Snopes writes garbage under the pretense of being objective. The blog is aimed at people like you, who want to believe that the Holocaust is real, and only want to read from sources that agree with them. Lala thinks you should look at more unbiased sources, considering the About Us page makes it more than clear that this is a biased blog.

Your second link.... it is a link to the Holocaust Museum. Lala can't think of a more biased source than that, considering the entity exists under the very assumption that this thread is questioning. Lala can only respond to you by giving you this link.

Your third link has a lot of circumstantial evidence. Lala asks you in return: where is the direct evidence on this website?

Your fourth link. Did you even read the pages you linked? It is titled, "How to Refute Holocaust Denial". It's telling you how to refute it, so why aren't you following its instructions and refuting Lala's claims?

Lala thinks that you really should reconsider your sources. All four links are clearly biased from the beginning, and they don't even hide it. The names "Jewish Virtual Library" and Holocaust Museum" make their purpose quite clear, and the other two links write on their "About Us" page that their sole purpose is to prove the Holocaust. It's dangerous to place all your faith on such biased sources. Sometimes it's important to take the Devil's Advocate, in order to understand why some people think differently to yourself.
Posted 12/19/16

runec wrote:


choppin_broccoli wrote:
Hah, that aspiring actor? (Yes, fact.)

Lol no legitimate discussion to be had here. The populace should collectively tar and feather every last one of them involved in this, its some of the most heinous crap ever, it was already swept under the rug when discovered back in the 80s with the franklin case...

I really dont know why people like you put yourself in the position of defending pedophiles.


I don't know why people like you put yourself in the position of defending delusions. =p


So richly ironic having this come from someone who believes the 911 commission report
10938 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 12/19/16 , edited 12/19/16

choppin_broccoli wrote:


runec wrote:


octorockandroll wrote:
Gonna have to second that. I mean at least she isn't namedropping politicians and businesses who could be ruined though innocent if enough people believe her shit, but that doesn't change the fact that this whole thing is fucked.


Fucked and legitimately dangerous given there's been one gunman already as a result of this bullshit. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever this should be on the forums. There's no legitimate discussion to be had here. So why the hell is it being allowed yet again? Are we just officially /pol/ now or what?



Hah, that aspiring actor? (Yes, fact.)

Lol no legitimate discussion to be had here. The populace should collectively tar and feather every last one of them involved in this, its some of the most heinous crap ever, it was already swept under the rug when discovered back in the 80s with the franklin case...

I really dont know why people like you put yourself in the position of defending pedophiles.


I really don't know why people like you accuse others of serious crimes despite never trying to do jack shit that would bring them legal recourse and help the supposed victims.

Well, okay, I do know why, it's because you don't actually believe it yourself and just want to attack politicians you don't like, but that doesn't really fit into my mocking your idiotic "I really don't know why" bullshit.


Feel free to prove me wrong and actually do something about it though.
Posted 12/19/16 , edited 12/19/16

octorockandroll wrote:

I really don't know why people like you accuse others of serious crimes despite never trying to do jack shit that would bring them legal recourse and help the supposed victims.

Well, okay, I do know why, it's because you don't actually believe it yourself and just want to attack politicians you don't like, but that doesn't really fit into my mocking your idiotic "I really don't know why" bullshit.

Feel free to prove me wrong and actually do something about it though.


Yeah, because spreading awareness amongst the public, pointing out the crimes of the elites, that's not really doing anything. *facepalm*

Especially when the corporate owned msm is doing what it can to keep this under wraps just like they did with the franklin case....although this time its different, because how many of us that were around back then even heard of the franklin case? And it was before the age of information, before the internet existed, it wasnt so easy to get information that had a tight lid on it.

This is not to simply attack politicians I dont like. This is to call out sick, disgusting people that commit atrocious acts upon innocent kids.

This is to call out people that instigate civil wars in nations that dont do what they're told. This is to call out murder, rape, lies, coverups, all the way to their root sources.

This is bigger than the Clintons, have you understood that yet? They are but a pair of morally vacuous lackeys that have gotten away with unbelievable amounts of crimes, because they work for and are in the pockets of the biggest crime on the planet.

That is why this is bigger than politicians. But the lynching needs to start somewhere, and I think the pedo network is a great place to start, then we can move right on to the counterfeiting houses. *cough* I mean, central banks.
4940 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / The Cat Empire
Offline
Posted 12/19/16
I and possibly other people on here are curious on whether or not you do believe in the existence of lizard people

A simple 'yes or no' would suffice

Posted 12/19/16 , edited 12/19/16

official-shinsengumi wrote:

I and possibly other people on here are curious on whether or not you do believe in the existence of lizard people

A simple 'yes or no' would suffice



The OP's obvious evasion tactics, deployed whenever Lizard people are brought up, makes me suspicious as to whether or not the OP may be a Lizard person, or somehow related to, or connected to the Lizard people.
4940 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / The Cat Empire
Offline
Posted 12/19/16
LalaSatalin

THE WORLD WANTS TO KNOW
1541 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 12/19/16

LalaSatalin wrote:


Xxanthar wrote:

Your evidence consists of a bunch of random file names and a password protected section of on a business website? Those files could be backups of the server for all you know.


Lala would like to emphasise, that the following paraphrase is not an attempt to mock you. Lala thinks that you're the only one who offered a valid argument so far in this thread, so Lala respects you more than anyone else:

Your video evidence consists of a bunch of random dead bodies being pushed into a pit? Those bodies could be the corpses of people who died of typhus for all you know.

This is Lala's point. It's only circumstantial evidence, open to interpretation. It's not direct evidence.


ran76 wrote:

by your logic, nothing can be used as evidence... for reasons


That's not true. The people on this website agree that a positive claim needs to be proven by the people making the claim, not the other way around. This is because it's impossible to prove a negative, and this person made the same point in the Pizzagate thread. However, absence of evidence can be used to show that a claim is likely false.


But you're the one claiming the Holocaust didn't happen. And you're the one making excuses why the mountains of evidence that support that the holocaust happened isn't valid. You're just using a bullshit double standard because actual evidence doesn't support your conspiracy theory. FYI, non-existent evidence does not, in any way, prove anything. Do you know why? Because there's no evidence. simple logic
Posted 12/19/16

ran76 wrote:

But you're the one claiming the Holocaust didn't happen. And you're the one making excuses why the mountains of evidence that support that the holocaust happened isn't valid. You're just using a bullshit double standard because actual evidence doesn't support your conspiracy theory. FYI, non-existent evidence does not, in any way, prove anything. Do you know why? Because there's no evidence. simple logic


Just calling out the misrepresentation of what was said. This is inaccurate and you know it, or perhaps being intellectually dishonest is ok so long as it agrees with the status quo?

How does "the numbers are inaccurate" equate to "that never even happened" - aside from the intellectual dishonesty of those who have to extrapolate others' arguments in order to make them sound worse than they really are.
21543 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/19/16
There is the fact that you are still alive (I hope?). If you are just a crazy internet conspiracist, then it doesn't matter if what you say is true or not. Too many crazy people in the world. But if somehow you were able to get yourself taken seriously... ... Then you will be suicided, or involved in a traffic accident, or die of a sudden illness, or have your water meter checked.

Ever heard of Sasha Avonna Bell? Matthew McFarland? Darren Seals? These are just some recent cases that we know about. What about Karen Gay Silkwood? David Kelley? What about the ones we have never heard of? What do they know that we don't know? We will never know. Because there really are some very powerful people out there who will do anything to safeguard their interests.
Posted 12/19/16

official-shinsengumi wrote:

I and possibly other people on here are curious on whether or not you do believe in the existence of lizard people

A simple 'yes or no' would suffice



lol....instead of pre-loading the charge on that question...

how's about this one: do you believe there is other intelligent life in the universe aside from humans on earth?
14720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 12/19/16
I tend to rely on a variety of "razors" when dealing with conspiracy theories. Here are some of my favorites:
-Occam's Razor - The more assumptions you have to make, the less likely your assertion is
-Hanlon's Razor - Do not attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
-Popper's falsifiability principle - For something to be considered scientific, it must be falsifiable
-Alder's Razor - If something cannot be settled by experiment or observation, it is not worthy of debate

I find most of what would commonly be called "conspiracy theories" are often convoluted explanations for easily explainable phenomena and most often, if they go any further, they reach a point where it becomes impossible to falsify them. Either this is because they get so big that refuting pieces has no effect or they stand on a platform of denial of evidence.

When a theory reaches the point where discussion and falsifiable are impossible, it is no longer worth the debate.
4940 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / The Cat Empire
Offline
Posted 12/19/16
Probably! The universe is just so vast that there has to be things somewhere.


But I and others want to know if Lala also believes in aliens, and if she believes that lizard people exist here on Earth

30158 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/19/16 , edited 12/19/16
Too many people are reading the post and getting caught in the weeds of the details. If you try and debate the small points you'll miss what the topic actually is.

There is actually quite an interesting thing going on in this thread besides just the main topic, and that's how some people are quick to dismiss Pizzagate and defend the Holocaust without themselves actually knowing the evidence (not everyone mind you).

Here's an important question for most of you including myself, why do you believe the Holocaust is true? Because unless you have either experienced it yourself or have studied it in depth yourself then the only way you even know about it is that you heard it from somewhere else thus when someone presents a claim that the Holocaust didn't happen are you being hypocritical to so quickly deny the claim because it contradicts what you understand yet ultimately you are just choosing to elevate what you have heard from one person over someone else since you don't know the material yourself and what's even worse is that while you know who is making the claim that the Holocaust didn't happen do you even know who you heard the claim from that it did happen? For many people they are actually in a sense acting illogically when presented with a claim that the holocaust didn't happen because they have been presented with and know more evidence that it didn't happen than if it did because their only support that it did happen is their reliance on someone else of what they said.

Here's a good exercise. A commonly repeated idea being circled around recently is that "Russia hacked our election." Wikileaks themselves are claiming that they did not receive their material from Russia (http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/2200412-julian-assange-of-wikileaks-says-russian-government-wasnt-his-source/). Where did this rumor come from. Yes, supposedly the CIA, but where did you hear that the CIA said this since the CIA didn't tell you directly themselves, and where did the source that you heard it from get their information?

Can you prove that Wikileaks or someone else is lying, telling the truth, or is there some nuance in between?
One Punch Mod
97866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Boston-ish
Offline
Posted 12/19/16 , edited 12/19/16
Temporary, possibly permanent lock. I need to read the whole thread and consider what the best action is as a few things have been reported, including the entire thread.

I think the general discussion about how we decide what to believe; how we decide what information is valid and what is not; how we draw conclusions based on what is always incomplete information; how we determine what conclusions drawn by others to trust; and so forth has a lot of merit. But when the examples initially presented for comparison are especially sensitive topics and the discussion starts revolving around them specifically, and when people start getting snarky toward each other, a continuing respectful conversation becomes more difficult. So for now, a bit of a time out.

UPDATE:

I was not the one who gave Lala permission to start this thread. However, having deleted just a few posts I am going to be unlocking it to see if the overarching discussion can continue in some reasonable way, since most of the responses here have been fine. Please be respectful of one another. Please don't make this thread about "Pizzagate" or about Holocaust denial. Those were presented merely as examples in a question that really boils down to: Why should we not believe Thing 1 that seems too horrible to believe and yet believe Thing 2 which is also exceedingly horrible. What kinds of evidence lead to believing in one event, yet not another?

I've allowed some of the snarky "lizard people" posts to remain because I think they have a point and add some levity, but let's not get meaner than that even if we are completely baffled by what others choose to believe.

Some have asked why mods allowed this topic to stay open, and my answer is above. I believe that it was not, unlike some earlier threads, intended to propagate theories about either "Pizzagate" or the Holocaust specifically, but about concepts of evidence, information, belief, and how we can know or trust things that we don't experience personally. If future posts can focus on those bigger concepts then the thread can stay open. I've modified the thread title to emphasize this aspect of the discussion.
14720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 12/19/16

SupersunZeratul wrote:

Here's an important question for most of you including myself, why do you believe the Holocaust is true? Because unless you have either experienced it yourself or have studied it in depth yourself then the only way you even know about it is that you heard it from somewhere else thus when someone presents a claim that the Holocaust didn't happen are you being hypocritical to so quickly deny the claim because it contradicts what you understand yet ultimately you are just choosing to elevate what you have heard from one person over someone else since you don't know the material yourself and what's even worse is that while you know who is making the claim that the Holocaust didn't happen do you even know who you heard the claim from that it did happen? For many people they are actually in a sense acting illogically when presented with a claim that the holocaust didn't happen because they have been presented with and know more evidence that it didn't happen than if it did because their only support that it did happen is their reliance on someone else of what they said.?


Established bodies of knowledge are not worthless. If all I know about, say, global warming is that 99% of the scientific community believes that it is a real phenomena (numbers not meant to be accurate), that is worth something. This is why we have experts in the first place. If in order to make a conclusion about anything, the totality of evidence must be analyzed by every person on the planet, we would never get anywhere. Experts are the ones who hold the largest body of knowledge and can make the strongest conclusions. When presented with a singular piece of evidence, unless it is new evidence, there is a good chance it has been considered by experts in the fields and either changed their mind or didn't.

Basically, "knowledge of expert opinion" counts as evidence, so when presented with a piece of evidence that global warming isn't real, that is not weighed against nothing, it is weighed against the knowledge of expert opinion. This is not illogical.
30158 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/19/16 , edited 12/19/16

sundin13 wrote:


SupersunZeratul wrote:

Here's an important question for most of you including myself, why do you believe the Holocaust is true? Because unless you have either experienced it yourself or have studied it in depth yourself then the only way you even know about it is that you heard it from somewhere else thus when someone presents a claim that the Holocaust didn't happen are you being hypocritical to so quickly deny the claim because it contradicts what you understand yet ultimately you are just choosing to elevate what you have heard from one person over someone else since you don't know the material yourself and what's even worse is that while you know who is making the claim that the Holocaust didn't happen do you even know who you heard the claim from that it did happen? For many people they are actually in a sense acting illogically when presented with a claim that the holocaust didn't happen because they have been presented with and know more evidence that it didn't happen than if it did because their only support that it did happen is their reliance on someone else of what they said.?


Established bodies of knowledge are not worthless. If all I know about, say, global warming is that 99% of the scientific community believes that it is a real phenomena (numbers not meant to be accurate), that is worth something. This is why we have experts in the first place. If in order to make a conclusion about anything, the totality of evidence must be analyzed by every person on the planet, we would never get anywhere. Experts are the ones who hold the largest body of knowledge and can make the strongest conclusions. When presented with a singular piece of evidence, unless it is new evidence, there is a good chance it has been considered by experts in the fields and either changed their mind or didn't.

Basically, "knowledge of expert opinion" counts as evidence, so when presented with a piece of evidence that global warming isn't real, that is not weighed against nothing, it is weighed against the knowledge of expert opinion. This is not illogical.


Actually that's a logical fallacy. " argumentum ad verecundiam" or argument from authority.

Something isn't true because experts say it is, but rather because of the data that the experts have and if that's the case then you should present the data that the experts have rather than claim something is true because the experts say it is.

This is actually a great point because it strikes especially true for Global Warming. People don't know the evidence themselves, but instead rely on the claim of someone else when trying to refute someone claiming that Global Warming isn't true when instead to refute them you should present the evidence that the experts use to make their opinion, and then debate over that.

You can debate over evidence. It's really hard to debate against a non-present expert, and even if the expert was there he would defend his point with the data that he has studied and not just his word so defending the claim with an argument that "the majority of scientists believe it" isn't actually defending the claim at all since that isn't actually an argument.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.