Page 9 of 9
Re: Kula Columns
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2025 11:02 am
by HansHill
Nessie wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2025 10:57 am
Definitions of the fallacy;
"The fallacy of appeal to personal incredulity is committed when the arguer presumes that whatever is true must be easy to understand or to imagine."
Because Stubble finds so much about the evidence that is odd, he cannot believe it is true. That is the very definition of the argument from incredulity.
This is not what Mr Stubble is doing. He is not
personally invoking disbelief that the holes are not extant. He is
showing you that they aren't.
Re: Kula Columns
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2025 11:12 am
by Stubble
Nessie, you argue from ignorance, I don't argue from incredulity.
Basically everyone (exterminationists and revisionists) agree, those holes you pointed out aren't the mythical zyklon insertion holes.
Pro tip, when casting concrete, you have the opportunity to lay something called a form to create a regular hole. You know, like the holes in the floor of the furnace room.
That is what a German hole in concrete would look like. Precise, free of obstruction and like it was done on purpose.
So far as the manipulation of the aerial reconnaissance photographs, those 1.4 meter (roughly) stacks on the roof of corpse cellar 1 aren't the only things on the roof.
The folks that touched up the reconnaissance photographs went ahead and placed blocks of people on some of the barracks roofs...
Either that, or the Germans got the detainees to form up on the roof and the ground in blocks...
Food for thought, if the zyklon insertion holes were 1.4 meters tall, would the ss man need to clamber up a ladder to pour the pellets in? And what is the point? Like, how do you take the cover on and off?
Surely you can admit that these comical insertion chimneys are only good for looking at on a photo.
I apologize for the thread diversion, but I literally spit out my coffee laughing.
Re: Kula Columns
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2025 11:51 am
by Nessie
HansHill wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2025 11:02 am
Nessie wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2025 10:57 am
Definitions of the fallacy;
"The fallacy of appeal to personal incredulity is committed when the arguer presumes that whatever is true must be easy to understand or to imagine."
Because Stubble finds so much about the evidence that is odd, he cannot believe it is true. That is the very definition of the argument from incredulity.
This is not what Mr Stubble is doing. He is not
personally invoking disbelief that the holes are not extant. He is
showing you that they aren't.
I show him photographic and physical evidence of the holes and he disputes that evidence as "odd". That is the fallacy of personal incredulity. He thinks the evidence is strange, peculiar, weird and he tells me why that is and that somehow, that proves the evidence is somehow false.
Re: Kula Columns
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2025 11:52 am
by Nessie
Stubble wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2025 11:12 am
Nessie, you argue from ignorance, I don't argue from incredulity.
Basically everyone (exterminationists and revisionists) agree, those holes you pointed out aren't the mythical zyklon insertion holes.
Pro tip, when casting concrete, you have the opportunity to lay something called a form to create a regular hole. You know, like the holes in the floor of the furnace room.
That is what a German hole in concrete would look like. Precise, free of obstruction and like it was done on purpose.
So far as the manipulation of the aerial reconnaissance photographs, those 1.4 meter (roughly) stacks on the roof of corpse cellar 1 aren't the only things on the roof.
The folks that touched up the reconnaissance photographs went ahead and placed blocks of people on some of the barracks roofs...
Either that, or the Germans got the detainees to form up on the roof and the ground in blocks...
Food for thought, if the zyklon insertion holes were 1.4 meters tall, would the ss man need to clamber up a ladder to pour the pellets in? And what is the point? Like, how do you take the cover on and off?
Surely you can admit that these comical insertion chimneys are only good for looking at on a photo.
I apologize for the thread diversion, but I literally spit out my coffee laughing.
You are incredulous about the evidence of holes in the Krema roof. It is not how Germans would have made holes! It is all very "odd". Therefore it is not true. That is your argument from incredulity.
Re: Kula Columns
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2025 12:07 pm
by HansHill
Nessie wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2025 11:51 am
I show him photographic and physical evidence of the holes and he disputes that evidence as "odd". That is the fallacy of personal incredulity. He thinks the evidence is strange, peculiar, weird and he tells me why that is and that somehow, that proves the evidence is somehow false.
If you were engaging in good faith, you would address his point and demonstrate why his position is incorrect or misleading, rather than cry fallacy. His position rests on: the holes not being present in at least one aerial photo, and sound engineering and construction reasoning as to their post-war creation.
Not a fallacy.
Re: Kula Columns
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2025 12:18 pm
by Nessie
HansHill wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2025 12:07 pm
Nessie wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2025 11:51 am
I show him photographic and physical evidence of the holes and he disputes that evidence as "odd". That is the fallacy of personal incredulity. He thinks the evidence is strange, peculiar, weird and he tells me why that is and that somehow, that proves the evidence is somehow false.
If you were engaging in good faith, you would address his point and demonstrate why his position is incorrect or misleading, rather than cry fallacy.
His position is incorrect, because it is reliant on illogical reasoning.
His position rests on: the holes not being present in at least one aerial photo,
He shows a tiny rendition of one of the aerial photos and claims that because you cannot see outlines on the Krema roof, therefore there was never any hole. That is not a credible position to hold.
and sound engineering and construction reasoning as to their post-war creation.
His reasoning is not evidence to prove that the holes were a post-war creation, as it assumes the Nazis would always create a perfect hole, in a roof that they admit was never designed to have holes. His reasoning is also countered by evidence the holes existed in 1943-4.
Not a fallacy.
He has expressed reasons why he finds it difficult to believe that holes had been made in the roof in 1943 and then claims therefore no holes. He has presented no evidence that no hole was constructed in 1943, from a 1943 photo, or a witness who saw the Krema roof in 1943, or any other contemporaneous source. Instead, he relies solely on his opinion and beliefs, which is why it is a fallacy.
Re: Kula Columns
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2025 12:24 pm
by Stubble
What?
No, I pointed out that the roughly 2'x2'x5' chimneys didn't get scratched in to the krema corpse cellars on that entire set of photos from the 13th. Go check man...
I also pointed out that when you pour concrete, you don't bend rebar, you cut it.
I also pointed out almost nobody claims the holes you are pointing at are the insertion holes. The consensus is that it is 'strange' that nobody can find the insertion holes...
So far as the holes being a post war creation, if they weren't, then the forms from the building project picture you displayed with the locomotive in it, would have the forms used to cast the concrete...so, they would be cast forms...
See how that works? If you have pictures from the construction showing forms, that indicates forms, which indicates cast holes...
You argue from extreme ignorance.
Re: Kula Columns
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2025 12:32 pm
by Stubble
HansHill wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2025 12:07 pm
Nessie wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2025 11:51 am
I show him photographic and physical evidence of the holes and he disputes that evidence as "odd". That is the fallacy of personal incredulity. He thinks the evidence is strange, peculiar, weird and he tells me why that is and that somehow, that proves the evidence is somehow false.
If you were engaging in good faith, you would address his point and demonstrate why his position is incorrect or misleading, rather than cry fallacy. His position rests on: the holes not being present in at least one aerial photo, and sound engineering and construction reasoning as to their post-war creation.
Not a fallacy.
It's the whole set from the 13th. I'm guessing that folder was misplaced when the touch ups were done after Arthur Butz wrote his book and before they released the photos. I'm also guessing they were found later.
Here is another from that set.
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ca ... 306015.tif
Re: Kula Columns
Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2025 9:34 am
by Nessie
Stubble wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2025 12:24 pm
What?
No, I pointed out that the roughly 2'x2'x5' chimneys didn't get scratched in to the krema corpse cellars on that entire set of photos from the 13th. Go check man...
Most close up I can find here, it is not clear if marks can be seen on Krema II. Krema III does appear to have marks. That will be due to the light and angle of the image.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/i ... 738071.jpg
I also pointed out that when you pour concrete, you don't bend rebar, you cut it.
I also pointed out almost nobody claims the holes you are pointing at are the insertion holes. The consensus is that it is 'strange' that nobody can find the insertion holes...
So far as the holes being a post war creation, if they weren't, then the forms from the building project picture you displayed with the locomotive in it, would have the forms used to cast the concrete...so, they would be cast forms...
See how that works? If you have pictures from the construction showing forms, that indicates forms, which indicates cast holes...
How it works is that you would present to me evidence, such as a witness who worked at the Kremas 1943-4, or a close up photo dated from that time, who states or show that there were no holes in the roof. You cannot do that, so you try to argue there were no holes, because you are incredulous about the evidence for holes.
You argue from extreme ignorance.
The argument from ignorance is to claim that something happened because it has not been proven to have not happened, or vice versa. I don't use that, or indeed any argument. I use evidence to prove what happened. I use evidence of holes in the Krema roof and the presence of Kula columns inside, to prove that happened. You try to counter that with argument, rather than evidence.
Re: Kula Columns
Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2025 1:21 pm
by Stubble
Nessie, you can crop these photos yourself, you can also zoom in.
The photos that you cite are shot in the same resolution. They have simply been cropped...
Re: Kula Columns
Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2025 4:05 pm
by Nessie
Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2025 1:21 pm
Nessie, you can crop these photos yourself, you can also zoom in.
The photos that you cite are shot in the same resolution. They have simply been cropped...
To stay on topic, I am still waiting for your evidence that the Krema floors never had anything like a column attached to them.
