4 ms·

"I find the [it] mildly disturbing [...] in that it proposes to be the absolute truth that admits no questioning." I have a suggestion for you: Head over to G

by lucifer 17y ago

"I find the [it] mildly disturbing [...] in that it proposes to be the absolute truth that admits no questioning." I have a suggestion for you: Head over to Germany and question the "absolute truth" of holocaust: numbers, methods, facts, etc. Lets see how long your "freedom of speech" is respected. (Will post your arrest and incarceration news here on HN!)

rglovejoy 17y ago
The difference is that the Holocaust is something that really happened, with eyewitnesses and documents to prove it. The stuff in the Bible or the Koran is a matter of faith, and can't be proven by the scientific method. Personally, I think that the Bible and the Koran are a bunch of fairy tales written a long time ago to frighten people into doing things that will keep them from going to hell.
- jimbokun 17y ago
  In my opinion, people unwilling to live in a society with true freedom of speech are cowards. Here in the U.S., we allowed Ahmadinejad to come here and spout his Holocaust denial nonsense. Then we mock him mercilessly, and are glad that he shows us so clearly the kind of person we are dealing with. Don't be afraid of speech. Use better, more persuasive speech to win over those who disagree with you. Anything else is a form of coercion.
- unexpected 17y ago
  I agree with you completely, but Muslims believe that the Koran is literal and that everything in it is 100% true. They believe that the Koran is the result of a scientific method, and that every character in a story is a 100% true eyewitness account, and that the Koran is as 100% accurate as a well researched book on World War II would be today. I've noticed that people of other faiths (Christians, Hindus, Jews) tend to take their holy books a little bit more allegorically. Personally, I believe that this unyielding approach to the Koran is a major cause in Islam's adoption into a modern day society.
  - rglovejoy 17y ago
    I really can't see how Muslims can think that the Koran is the result of a scientific method. This is a book whose contents were supposedly dictated to Muhammed by the angel Gabriel. This is a supernatural claim, not the natural. If people want to believe that the word of God was transmitted to human ears by an angel, that's fine, but please don't drag science into it.
yummyfajitas 17y ago
Germany violates the human right to free speech. So do Cuba, Zimbabwe, China and Canada (not an exclusive list). What's your point?
philk 17y ago
I'm not trying to be nasty here but really equating denial of the holocaust (an event that actually happened and we have extensive proof and documentation of) with religious beliefs (which have no evidence and need to be taken on faith) is somewhat offensive.
- lucifer 17y ago
  My intent was not to offend you or other readers. Further I do not find the notion of mass extermination of humans acceptable. However the comment I replied to posited the (imo false) notion that only religious beliefs are uniquely putting forward "absolute truths" and that the adherents of these beliefs are unique in resisting fact based analysis of their beliefs. I am not aware of rigorous studies that address the scientific and engineering aspects of the taboo subject of holocaust. Rough back of napkin calculations of the numbers involved suggest a very substantial killing machine; killing factories, in fact. And as with any other matter that is hammered into my head from every corner, I personally like to gain a certain level of comfort regarding its veracity. Since you seem to be aware of the "extensive proof and documentation" regarding this subject, I would be very grateful to see citations in literature so I can study them. (This is quite helpful since I can not raise this "scientific" topic in polite society without suffering adverse social and possibly economic consequences) The subjects that perplex me the most are: 1 - logistics: A handful of sites were used to kill people and dispose of bodies. (4 years of 12 hour days non-stop seems to indicate something around 30 people per hour non-stop.) How long does it take to reduce a human body to ashes? How much fuel does it take to do this? What sort of maintenance do these machines require? (I suppose the local crematorium can provide some factual numbers in this regard.) 2 - methodology: What chemicals were used to kill. How fast acting are these chemicals? How can these chemicals be delivered? How dangerous are they to the operators of the killing factory? What effects do they have on the factory infrastructure (corrosion, discoloration, etc.)? 3 - disposal: Assuming .2 cubic feet of ash per human body (rough guess), there should be somewhere near 1,000,000 cubic feet of human ashes around the slaughterhouses. Have they been found? From what I understand, every critical scientific effort to date to investigate the above has had serious consequences for their investigators, including incarceration for some. (No doubt I will get my virtual share of the same as well.) In contrast, I am certain that beyond ridicule, the consequences of questioning the existence of Electron, and DNA are fairly minimal.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]

by lucifer 17y ago

rglovejoy 17y ago

The difference is that the Holocaust is something that really happened, with eyewitnesses and documents to prove it. The stuff in the Bible or the Koran is a matter of faith, and can't be proven by the scientific method. Personally, I think that the Bible and the Koran are a bunch of fairy tales written a long time ago to frighten people into doing things that will keep them from going to hell.

jimbokun 17y ago
In my opinion, people unwilling to live in a society with true freedom of speech are cowards. Here in the U.S., we allowed Ahmadinejad to come here and spout his Holocaust denial nonsense. Then we mock him mercilessly, and are glad that he shows us so clearly the kind of person we are dealing with. Don't be afraid of speech. Use better, more persuasive speech to win over those who disagree with you. Anything else is a form of coercion.
unexpected 17y ago
I agree with you completely, but Muslims believe that the Koran is literal and that everything in it is 100% true. They believe that the Koran is the result of a scientific method, and that every character in a story is a 100% true eyewitness account, and that the Koran is as 100% accurate as a well researched book on World War II would be today. I've noticed that people of other faiths (Christians, Hindus, Jews) tend to take their holy books a little bit more allegorically. Personally, I believe that this unyielding approach to the Koran is a major cause in Islam's adoption into a modern day society.
- rglovejoy 17y ago
  I really can't see how Muslims can think that the Koran is the result of a scientific method. This is a book whose contents were supposedly dictated to Muhammed by the angel Gabriel. This is a supernatural claim, not the natural. If people want to believe that the word of God was transmitted to human ears by an angel, that's fine, but please don't drag science into it.

yummyfajitas 17y ago

Germany violates the human right to free speech. So do Cuba, Zimbabwe, China and Canada (not an exclusive list). What's your point?

philk 17y ago

I'm not trying to be nasty here but really equating denial of the holocaust (an event that actually happened and we have extensive proof and documentation of) with religious beliefs (which have no evidence and need to be taken on faith) is somewhat offensive.

lucifer 17y ago
My intent was not to offend you or other readers. Further I do not find the notion of mass extermination of humans acceptable. However the comment I replied to posited the (imo false) notion that only religious beliefs are uniquely putting forward "absolute truths" and that the adherents of these beliefs are unique in resisting fact based analysis of their beliefs. I am not aware of rigorous studies that address the scientific and engineering aspects of the taboo subject of holocaust. Rough back of napkin calculations of the numbers involved suggest a very substantial killing machine; killing factories, in fact. And as with any other matter that is hammered into my head from every corner, I personally like to gain a certain level of comfort regarding its veracity. Since you seem to be aware of the "extensive proof and documentation" regarding this subject, I would be very grateful to see citations in literature so I can study them. (This is quite helpful since I can not raise this "scientific" topic in polite society without suffering adverse social and possibly economic consequences) The subjects that perplex me the most are: 1 - logistics: A handful of sites were used to kill people and dispose of bodies. (4 years of 12 hour days non-stop seems to indicate something around 30 people per hour non-stop.) How long does it take to reduce a human body to ashes? How much fuel does it take to do this? What sort of maintenance do these machines require? (I suppose the local crematorium can provide some factual numbers in this regard.) 2 - methodology: What chemicals were used to kill. How fast acting are these chemicals? How can these chemicals be delivered? How dangerous are they to the operators of the killing factory? What effects do they have on the factory infrastructure (corrosion, discoloration, etc.)? 3 - disposal: Assuming .2 cubic feet of ash per human body (rough guess), there should be somewhere near 1,000,000 cubic feet of human ashes around the slaughterhouses. Have they been found? From what I understand, every critical scientific effort to date to investigate the above has had serious consequences for their investigators, including incarceration for some. (No doubt I will get my virtual share of the same as well.) In contrast, I am certain that beyond ridicule, the consequences of questioning the existence of Electron, and DNA are fairly minimal.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]