Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
hannef
Member
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2023 5:46 am

Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Postby hannef » 3 months 1 day ago (Thu Mar 09, 2023 3:31 pm)

Hello all.

So I've made this flowchart draft as a pilot to a larger plan I have of using logical arguments in flowcharts and similar diagrams to illustrate how 'Holocaust denial' is simply critical thought that could be done by a machine.

This is a logical flowchart. It does not concern itself with what is real or not or what is believable or not. The chart shows logical steps drawn from a question, branching out and referencing other nodes until every route stops at the same conclusion.

The chart should be challenged by pointing out a logical error, not by pointing out that there is something wrong with the referenced facts.

e.g. "they didn't find hair" is an invalid argument here because it is not concerning the relationships between the nodes. if "they didn't find hair" was true, I would revise the entire chart.

A valid logical argument would be "You have three nodes branching from this node, but I can think of a fourth reasonable possibility" because I have not considered all logical routes of reasoning.

The starting node in yellow refers to the hair mentioned here https://newyorker.com/magazine/1993/11/15/evidence-of-evil
In May, 1945, just days after the German capitulation, Polish officials dispatched ten pounds of human hair found at Auschwitz to the Institute of Forensic Medicine in Cracow. Following a series of chemical tests, Jan Robel, the head of the institute, confirmed, in his final report, “the presence of traces of cyanide, particularly the poisonous compound bearing the name Zyklon.” Such findings served as evidence in trials against Nazi war criminals, including Rudolf Hess, the former commandant at Auschwitz, who was sentenced to death on April 2, 1947, and was hanged fourteen days later beside the former crematorium of the Stammlager, the main Auschwitz camp.


Some bales of hair here https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa5592

I would like it if you could follow the chart and try to find an error in my logic. I believe there is one, maybe two, but I won't reveal where they are.

My intent with this particular chart is to demonstrate how weak, presumptory evidence presented at Nuremberg not only fails to prove something but actually helps to disprove the findings drawn from other evidence or a body of evidence as a whole.

Interested to hear your thoughts.

Image

if you can't see the pic, right-click and open/save image, or use this link https://i.postimg.cc/kG91B66k/chm.png

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2919
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Postby hermod » 3 months 12 hours ago (Fri Mar 10, 2023 11:10 am)

The long hair of female inmates collected in concentration camps were indeed used by the Germans for manufacturing clothes during WWII and the hair shipped from concentration camps to textile factories of course needed to be deloused ("disinfected," i.e. fumigated with Zyklon B) before leaving those typhus-infested places. Not doing that would have been a dangerous sanitary nonsense.



The long hair of women were also collected in France and used in textile industry at that time. Nothing was allowed to be wasted under such circumstances. In fact, a law passed in March 1942 even prohibited the destruction of the human hair collected at hairdressers' shops in all the French cities with more than 10,000 inhabitants. The French press reported in May 1942 that 200 tons of human hair (30 tons in the Paris district and 170 tons in the other districts throughout France) were being collected and woven each month in France. (Compare that amount of human hair with the 7.7 tons of human hair found by the Soviets at Auschwitz in 1945.) Some French newspapers also published long illustrated articles about that industry and the textile products manufactured in those factories.





"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed.
"

Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 5168
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Postby Hektor » 2 months 4 weeks ago (Sat Mar 11, 2023 4:48 am)

What would "Cyanide on Human hair" proof?

Tell you what it doesn't prove: That someone was treated with Zyklon B, killed, then got his/her hair shorn off. But that is what was tried to suggest. And apparently it works. Power of suggestion does work on people. And suggestion is what the Holocaust is build upon to get a reinterpretation of real history.

hannef
Member
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2023 5:46 am

Re: Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Postby hannef » 2 months 4 weeks ago (Sat Mar 11, 2023 9:02 am)

The chart should be challenged by pointing out a logical error, not by pointing out that there is something correct/incorrect with the referenced facts.

I've posted this on some normie forums too but people gravitate to the emotional response and sometimes they challenge the evidence but I need a logical challenge only

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 5168
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Postby Hektor » 2 months 4 weeks ago (Sun Mar 12, 2023 2:25 am)

A conclusion needs to follow out of the premises. E.g. one finds ashes at a place, conclusion: Something burned there. That sounds logical, but one needs to consider the possibility of alternative explanations as well. E.g. the ashes have been transported from another place there.

With present fact conclusion to past events there is always the problem that there can be several plausible explanation for what is observed in the present.


With the Holocaust people (believing it) point to several present day measurables:
* Pictures of dead and emaciated people in concentration camps.
* Documents relating to deportation of Jews
* Testimonies meaning statements of people that were inmates or staff at those camps.

They throw it into the cauldron and then taste what they got, stating: "There was a Holocaust". To assert they claim they appeal to "academic" consensus: "All serious historians agree, the Holocaust happened."

They ignore any other evidences that could be in conflict with their thesis. When that gets pointed out, they tend to react emotionally. And it is emotion that has clouded their judgement to begin with.

Ironically in witchcraft trials similar lines of argument were used.
* Evidence from a sick persons (supposedly victims of witch craft)
* Brooms, herbs, cat's tails and other supposedly magic items were shown.
* Testimonies were given by those that observed the accused. Or those making accusations.
* Plenty of confessions were given.

With the confessions people tend to chip in claiming "Yeah, everybody knows they were tortured".
Well, that may the case in many cases. But there is also the thing that people confessed without any visible coercion neither. Witchcrafts just happened to be a sensational subject at the time. And it got a lot of attention by the public.

There were also educated people, theologians at the time arguing against the witchcraft trials and the modes of proof being used. But not too much avail. It was only later that those trials diminished, since alternative explanations for e.g. diseases or misfortunes of people were given. The risk for those struck by those misfortunes also became longer, since diseases could be treated and those struck by e.g. crop failures could find other sources of income.

With the Holocaust the matter might be slightly different. While it is used in scapegoating, it's also a substitute for religion even ardent atheists can embrace. In fact it seems to be the decline of traditional religions and classic philosophies that did seem to strongly contribute to people embracing the Holocaust. Hitler seems to have replaced Jesus and Satan at the same time. They made him the epitome of evil and his followers demon-like figures. But nevertheless they give his name quite some 'moral authority'. In the name of Hitler anything he supported is condemned and anything he opposed is exalted. And then there is the issue of 'new Hitlers' ('resurrections') after all his grave isn't even empty, there is none. So his ghost may still be spooking around as well and possess people. People try to 'distance themselves from Hitler' in an rather irrational fashion as well. "Of course I'm not a Nazi". "I condemn Nazism" etc. They also love to denounce others as "Nazis". The problem with this (and also an indicator) is that "NAZIS" wasn't the name of the organization or movement. It was the NSDAP and National Socialism. Nationalsozialismus. Which has of course the letters NA-ZI in it. It still isn't a German word. Not even a loan word. There is of course Hebrew words this can be an abbreviation of Nazir/Nazarenes and I guess it's worthwhile to look down that trail a little. The whole affair is surrounded by a mystical aura. Which is a bit detrimental to empirical, historical, rational and logical analysis of the matter.

But as long as the Holocaust Hex works, only a niche of people interested in Middle 20th century history will realize that what we're told isn't exactly the accurate truth. The debates tend to be intellectually dishonest. And only one thesis is 'acceptable' a priori, which puts the whole affair outside anything that could be considered remotely scientific.

Fred zz
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2021 11:37 pm

Re: Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Postby Fred zz » 2 months 4 weeks ago (Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:49 am)

I thought they shaved heads before going into the gas chamber? I sight Denierbod's video on Treblinka.
The J story at the Majdanek camp is they were shaved before gas chamber
History is never a one-sided story.

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2919
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Postby hermod » 2 months 4 weeks ago (Sun Mar 12, 2023 7:35 am)

Hektor wrote:A conclusion needs to follow out of the premises. E.g. one finds ashes at a place, conclusion: Something burned there. That sounds logical, but one needs to consider the possibility of alternative explanations as well. E.g. the ashes have been transported from another place there.

With present fact conclusion to past events there is always the problem that there can be several plausible explanation for what is observed in the present.

With the Holocaust people (believing it) point to several present day measurables:
* Pictures of dead and emaciated people in concentration camps.
* Documents relating to deportation of Jews
* Testimonies meaning statements of people that were inmates or staff at those camps.

They throw it into the cauldron and then taste what they got, stating: "There was a Holocaust". To assert they claim they appeal to "academic" consensus: "All serious historians agree, the Holocaust happened."

They ignore any other evidences that could be in conflict with their thesis. When that gets pointed out, they tend to react emotionally. And it is emotion that has clouded their judgement to begin with.


During WWI, the big atrocity story of German corpse factories was portrayed as an established fact only 10 days after it had been disseminated by the London Times for the first time. Newspapers reported in April 1917 that: "The case seems completely established by American, Belgian, Dutch and finally by German testimony. The London and Paris newspapers all accept the story as true after careful investigation and print editorials on it."



And it took 8 more years before the British government publicly admitted that the story was untrue for damage control purposes but refused to concede that it was an intentional lie.

"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed.
"

Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2919
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Postby hermod » 2 months 4 weeks ago (Sun Mar 12, 2023 7:47 am)

Fred zz wrote:I thought they shaved heads before going into the gas chamber? I sight Denierbod's video on Treblinka.
The J story at the Majdanek camp is they were shaved before gas chamber


According to the notorious Holohoax illustrator David Olère, their heads were shaved after they had been gassed to death.

Image
"Our Hair, Our Teeth, Our Ashes" (1946), by David Olère


That was of course a big lie...








... but lies don't matter in a world where even the hair and mustache of shrunken heads can grow!!




A dehumanizing process?

Image
https://postimg.cc/GH3MrxBV
Some German anti-typhus delousing stations during WWI
(Note the big piles of hair next to the soldiers whose heads were being shaved.)
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed.
"

Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 5168
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Postby Hektor » 2 months 4 weeks ago (Mon Mar 13, 2023 2:17 am)

hermod wrote:
Hektor wrote:A conclusion ......The London and Paris newspapers all accept the story as true after careful investigation and print editorials on it.[/i]"



And it took 8 more years before the British government publicly admitted that the story was untrue for damage control purposes but refused to concede that it was an intentional lie.



Those stories were still to juicy and no evidence was ever presented, not remotely.

I think that is what had many in mind, when confronted with WW2 atrocity propaganda.
But the propagandists did of course also realize this is what happened. So psychological warfare divisions prepared a show in the form of footage from concentration camps that were in bad conditions due to the very mode of warfare of the Allies.

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2919
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Postby hermod » 2 months 3 weeks ago (Mon Mar 13, 2023 10:33 am)

Hektor wrote:Those stories were still to juicy and no evidence was ever presented, not remotely.

I think that is what had many in mind, when confronted with WW2 atrocity propaganda.


Evidence is not needed during and shortly after big wars. The very fact that they are/were at war with us (of course the good guys) is enough proof that they are evil bastards. And appalling atrocities of hair-raising perversity are just what evil bastards do. No evidence is needed to prove that. That's a "fact of common knowledge " (Nuremberg jargon). That's just self-evident (offenkundig in German). The German rulers and believers always repeat that "der Holocaust ist offenkundig" as soon as some skeptics mention or imply a possible lack of evidence for Israel's dear founding myth.

Hektor wrote:I think that is what had many in mind, when confronted with WW2 atrocity propaganda.


They had good reasons for having that in mind because that atrocity story was rehashed during WWII. The Jewish soap story was a copy-and-paste recycling of the corpse-factory story. Ditto for the human fertilizer story. And sinister artifacts such as human-skin lampshades, human shrunken heads and human-bone furnitures looked like products from ghoulish corpse factories.

Image


When the leader of American Zionism launched the Holohoax (November 1942) and when the Soviets portrayed Majdanek as a death camp (August 1944), The Christian Century even said that the story sounded very much like the debunked corpse-factory story of WWI.







Hektor wrote:But the propagandists did of course also realize this is what happened. So psychological warfare divisions prepared a show in the form of footage from concentration camps that were in bad conditions due to the very mode of warfare of the Allies.


That's true. The Christian Century mentioned above became a Holocaust believer only when falsely-captioned shocking pictures of epidemic devastation in the last operational concentration camps of the collapsing Third Reich were circulated (April 1945). The psyop was very successful.
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed.
"

Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 5168
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Logical reasoning [cyanide residues in human hair]

Postby Hektor » 2 months 3 weeks ago (Tue Mar 14, 2023 7:51 am)

Will have to look more closely into the "Christian Century"... Perhaps there is more worthwhile text in it as well.
The thing with Christian organizations and/or publication is that they are often used for virtue signaling and attracting readership and approval. Bear in mind that in the middle of the 20th century most people still had some firm attachment to their Church and Christianity (in the broad sense) as a religion. So you'd get a myriad of publications with millions of readers. But calling (yourself) a Christian is also a form of 'virtue signaling'.... It is a way of gaining credibility, you don't have on your own. In South Africa this was a big thing. Just by using a couple of bible version and using Christian terminology, people would easily start believing what a person or book says. And this got dragged into all terrains of life, not only the strictly faith related ones. It got dragged into business, politics even personal relations. And it appears that also individuals with ulterior motives discovered that presenting yourself as a 'good christian' had great advantages in social life. This didn't stay unnoticed, though. Nowadays people get anxious, when somebody tells them that he's a Christian.

But back to the middle of the 20th century. Perhaps initially those in such an organization/publication were 'well intentioned individuals'. That wanted to have a 'magazine for Christians', where the readers could 'learn the truth' on matters. Well-intentioned doesn't mean 'street-wise'. It doesn't mean that you are not gullible and skilled to discover, whether a story is a prank or not. In fact having grown up in a surrounding were most people are basically honest may predispose you to be tricked by those that aren't honest at all, but will push their agendas ruthlessly. And those folks know how to spot the gullible, they know how to manipulate others as well. Shock and awe tactics are one mark of deceivers and scamsters. Appeal to pity, shame and even 'manliness' are stuff they will engage in rather ruthlessly. So it's no surprise that skilled Propagandists will target such publishers to spread their poison.

The gullible will be shocked and think: "The poor Jews, that's something we must tell our readers!". Looking at 'the Christian Century" and its background. The publication was probably ideal for the purpose at hand. It's target audience was mainline Protestantism in the US. It claims to be 'undenominational", which is a bit misleading, since they still will have some creed, even if it is unstated. The advantage is that it's readership will be 'cross denominational', meaning Reformed, Lutheran, Presbyterian, etc. will be among its readership. The readers will probably be people of some social standing. Preachers, church staff and folks that are active in the Church. That means others will revert to them for guidance on matters outside their personal sphere of action and perception.

The "Christian Century" was considered advocates of 'liberal Christianity', but the matter seems to be far more complex, when scrutinizing it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Christian_Century
At appears that their Holocausting was preceded by some controversy on the matter. At first they did not believe it, which isn't really a surprise given that it sounded 'too good to be true' from a propagandistic point of view. They may also have observed other pranksters in the past. But even suspicious folks, crack down under pressure, especially when people on the board of editors are divided on a matter. And they probably will be. With some of the folks there being more gullible, while others are more skeptical. The issue is that you never can be really certain about a matter that is happening thousands of kilometers away. The atrocity propaganda was obviously self-serving as well. But when everybody starts repeating it, openly disagreeing may become a threat to your own interest. So rather go along with it. After all isn't the emaciated inmates not 'proof enough'. Stipulating that this is exactly what stands to be expected, when a country is blown to smithereens appears to be 'apologetic' and 'not compassionate with the victims'. And especially liberal christianity makes a big thing about 'being compassionate' (merciful, gracious, etc.). If you are into virtue signaling, of course you know that being critical will be seen as not being compassionate. So rather drop the ball or go along with it. The vast majority of initial skeptics seems to have done this. And it was the same with the COVID scam. People realized that it was fishy, so first they were critical, but under the flood of reports of "Covid Cases" many cracked and become 'Corona's Witnesses'. Those still skeptical were 'conspiracy theorists' and 'not trusting science', etc.

That said a compilation on initially skeptical articles and further development on the matter would be an interesting research project. It's exactly the analysis and exposure of propaganda campaigns that will let people see the 'relevance for today'. One frequent argument against "Holocaust Revisionism" is that "Revisionists" are 'captured in the past'. And lots of people hate to 'dwell in the past'. The matter isn't entertaining neither. In fact it seems that people have less time for matters 'unentertaining' more and more. But that is even another issue in which people's character is changing. My guess is that permanent exposure to 'new information', 'advertising' and 'sensationalism' does also take its toll there. Serious reading is also exhausting, good writing is for sure more difficult, but even reading isn't exactly most people's priority.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Otium and 12 guests