Where are the Goalposts?

[bombsaway]

If you are talking again about 'a conspiracy to hide missing jews', can you uh, tell me who is missing? Don't just point at some revised census data either. Who, who is missing?

No I'm talking about the conspiracy you would allege (or deem very possible) if revisionists were allowed to investigate the sites and claimed evidence of hundreds of thousands dead. In light of your constant proclamation, "well I know they're not in the ground there", such a conspiracy would be almost certain. Revisionism is unfalsifiable.

[Stubble]

If you are talking again about 'a conspiracy to hide missing jews', can you uh, tell me who is missing? Don't just point at some revised census data either. Who, who is missing?

No I'm talking about the conspiracy you would allege (or deem very possible) if revisionists were allowed to investigate the sites and claimed evidence of hundreds of thousands dead. In light of your constant proclamation, "well I know they're not in the ground there", such a conspiracy would be almost certain. Revisionism is unfalsifiable.

Dude, if revisionists, or anybody, literally anybody, went and documented a thorough archeological excavation of the site, complete and documented, and found support for the claim, I would say 'mother of god, how were the 13 Apostles of Treblinka so wrong! Here, here is where the population of Seattle was buried before being dug up and cremated with, I don't know, they self immolated or something, but, they were there, at some point, in the dirt, there, along the Bug river. How could the Soviet have missed this?'.

Unfortunately, such a scenario will never occur. Best that can be done is to dig up a sharks tooth and some tile and say 'we totally found it, there is some grass that indicates disturbed soil over here where the mock train station was said to be'.

[bombsaway]

Dude, if revisionists, or anybody, literally anybody, went and documented a thorough archeological excavation of the site, complete and documented, and found support for the claim, I would say 'mother of god, how were the 13 Apostles of Treblinka so wrong! Here, here is where the population of Seattle was buried before being dug up and cremated with, I don't know, they self immolated or something, but, they were there, at some point, in the dirt, there, along the Bug river. How could the Soviet have missed this?'.

Would you really think that? As opposed to thinking, well maybe I made some faulty assumptions that gave me so much certainty about what happened there (and at Belzec, and at Sobibor, Chelmno). Let's say they went to all those camps and found evidence that strongly supported the orthodox story. At Treblinka they found large amounts of bone buried near the surface confirming the Soviet examiner's quote "the surface is covered for about 2 hectares by a mixture of ashes and sand. "

Or would you think, hmm, something is funny about this.

[Stubble]

Bombsaway, if you find a gas van I will cut ut up with a right angle grinder and eat it. If the grave space ever turns up, you can bury me in it alive.

I don't know what the hell you think is going on here, but, even with my admitted bias, developed over time, I do not 'deny' reality. If the shit's real, show me, till then, fuck off with this pedantic flailing of 'but but you, you are a flat earther, and, muh evidence'. Bring evidence, put up or shut up. For God's sake though, do it in an appropriate thread.

[bombsaway]

Bombsaway, if you find a gas van I will cut ut up with a right angle grinder and eat it. If the grave space ever turns up, you can bury me in it alive.

I take it from this that you don't really want to engage with my hypothetical.

If you are saying, that based on what you know so far, not only is there no evidence for the mass graves or burial areas described by examiners, the evidence is that it's impossible for that many bodies to have been buried there or for those remains to be present there, it would be very logical for you to assume a conspiracy among the revisionists brought into examine. On this basis you assume mass resettlement in the USSR occurred despite 0 evidence of that, it's basically the same thing.

[Stubble]

I did indeed directly 'engage your hypothetical'. FFS. Now, let's both, let's both stop derailing this thread and acting like this is some chat app.

My how far this thread has meandered from the OP.

[bombsaway]

When comparing these two possible conspiracies

1 - orthodoxy finds some revisionists and threatens them / pays them off so they can give false testimony about the sites, which they do

2 - orthodoxy suppresses all evidence related to millions of non-working Jews being maintained in USSR

I would say 1 would be trivial compared to 2. You already believe that hundreds of German "perpetrators" did exactly this, were forced into giving false testimony.

If you believe in 2, you should also believe in 1, based on the results at the sites, which seemingly prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the orthodox story is impossible.

[Stubble]

Bombsaway, this isn't a conspiracy thread. Move this to one of your conspiracy threads you abandoned.

Stop trying to discredit and deal with argument. This smear, eventually in virtually every thread, it's becoming a bit of a calling card of yours. Stop man.

[bombsaway]

Bombsaway, this isn't a conspiracy thread. Move this to one of your conspiracy threads you abandoned.

Stop trying to discredit and deal with argument. This smear, eventually in virtually every thread, it's becoming a bit of a calling card of yours. Stop man.

I'm not discrediting. The conspiracy angle is key to my claim that it is revisionism that resists falsification.

If you don't believe (within your current frame) there were conspiracies to fabricate testimony (like all of the Germans who you believe falsely testified that it happened) and suppress counter evidence, I think this is more discrediting to the revisionist position. You need strong forces to be able to pull something like this off.

I don't think you're being honest with yourself.

[Stubble]

Then you accept jewish ritual murder as established historiography? That the cases were real and rightly prosecuted?

Your double standards are showing.

(To be very clear, the denial of a defense to the defense is established, outlined and in black and white in other threads, and that this happened should not be contested. This jab by Bombsaway, this poke and run, it is simply more smearing without speaking to the actual content of the thread. I should work on not engaging in such diversions and thread jacks)

[bombsaway]

Then you accept jewish ritual murder as established historiography? That the cases were real and rightly prosecuted?

Your double standards are showing.

(To be very clear, the denial of a defense to the defense is established, outlined and in black and white in other threads, and that this happened should not be contested. This jab by Bombsaway, this poke and run, it is simply more smearing without speaking to the actual content of the thread. I should work on not engaging in such diversions and thread jacks)

I mean sure yeah if there's compelling evidence of this. Want to link me to it?

Conspiracy isn't a bad word to me. Holocaust was a conspiracy (harmful plan carried out with attempted secrecy).

[Stubble]

There is this,

https://odysee.com/@Stubble:4/Jewish-Ri ... treicher:1

And also 'My Irrelevant Defense' by Leese. There are others but these are some of the best.

[Callafangers]

Without doubt - just like you do with strong Holocaust evidence like Eichmann / Sassen or Gas Van documents - you can easily appeal to the power of the conspiracy here, as the FE community does. It's enough to find a few nitpicks or inconsistencies and you can justify this to yourself. This is actually a fundamental problem with your movement, not the mainstream one.

The Flat Earth model is not falsifiable because it isn't even a specific claim or prediction. There is no unified Flat Earth model. There are not even denominations within the Flat Earth movement to suggest any subdivision within which could be argued as the 'most authoritative'. The lack of any committed model means a lack of a testable claim/prediction. Thus, it is not falsifiable.

This lack of commitment looks much more like the 'Holocaust' conspiracy theory:

Q: "Where are the graves?"
A: "Oh, they're somewhere in there, I'm sure of it!"

FE really isn't a great example for your position.

[bombsaway]

Without doubt - just like you do with strong Holocaust evidence like Eichmann / Sassen or Gas Van documents - you can easily appeal to the power of the conspiracy here, as the FE community does. It's enough to find a few nitpicks or inconsistencies and you can justify this to yourself. This is actually a fundamental problem with your movement, not the mainstream one.

The Flat Earth model is not falsifiable because it isn't even a specific claim or prediction. There is no unified Flat Earth model. There are not even denominations within the Flat Earth movement to suggest any subdivision within which could be argued as the 'most authoritative'. The lack of any committed model means a lack of a testable claim/prediction. Thus, it is not falsifiable.

This lack of commitment looks much more like the 'Holocaust' conspiracy theory:

Q: "Where are the graves?"
A: "Oh, they're somewhere in there, I'm sure of it!"

FE really isn't a great example for your position.

The FE model states that the Earth is a flat, stationary disk rather than an oblate spheroid. This is testable in many ways, like taking video of the earth from space. FE believers think these videos are fake, not that in theory they wouldn't falsify the FE model.

Has the German-done Katyn theory been falsified? I would say definitely yes! Holocaust could falsified in a similar way, theoretically.

[Callafangers]

The FE model states that the Earth is a flat, stationary disk rather than an oblate spheroid. This is testable in many ways, like taking video of the earth from space. FE believers think these videos are fake, not that in theory they wouldn't falsify the FE model.

Correct, and the claim that "Earth is a flat, stationary disk" is a scientific (bold, empirical) claim. This is a perfect example of how Popper's principle works, and how it isn't meant to distinguish true versus false -- only what is scientific and what is not.

The claim that "Earth is a flat, stationary disk" has clear, testable predictions. The history of the debate on this topic clearly reflects this. One pertinent test at a time showed that the claim cannot be true, while simultaneously validating other models which were more consistent. What is left is the current heliocentric model with an oblate spheroid Earth.

FE has had it's original claim, which was scientific (hence, originally admitted and taken seriously by scientists in the past), however has never developed consistency as a model (for obvious reasons). Today, the debate is not reduced to claims but is one between the accepted globe model versus the FE 'model'. The latter is non-specific (not really a model at all), which makes it unfalsifiable (no conclusions can be made against an undefined, ever-shifting model).

Has the German-done Katyn theory been falsified? I would say definitely yes! Holocaust could falsified in a similar way, theoretically.

Don't mistake whether something "has been falsified" with Popper's principle of falsification. The latter is more an exercise leading to corroboration than it is meant to determine the status ('falsified' vs. not) of any particular claim.

That "the Germans killed the 17,000 corpses buried under the Katyn forest" is falsifiable is evident in the fact that we have, indeed, produced evidence to show it as false. This evidence was always conceivably possible, even before Soviet admissions in the 90s, which means it has always been a scientific/legitimate claim or prediction. However one could dispute whether it was falsifiable in practice decades prior, due to Soviet motives and control of information. It took a Soviet admission to show it false, after all.