MovieChat Forums > Denial (2016) Discussion > The Million Dollar Point

The Million Dollar Point

posted 8 years ago by pauliewalnuts-48096
50 replies | jump to latest

In court, van Pelt "proved" one only required 3.5 kg of coke to cremate a body by referring to an incinerator that was never actually built. Van Pelt attempted to pass off text from Klaus and Christel Kunz's 1985 report on the 1942 Topf patent application as being text from the application itself.

So van Pelt proved you need just 3.5 kg of coke to burn a body.... by referring to an oven that was never even built.

This "oven" was never built.
Van Pelt purposely and dishonestly distorted figures to support his argument.

When you need to tell such disgusting lies to win an argument, truth is certainly not on your side.

Anyone care to differ?

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

NOPE. Not a chance. Coming from your side of the argument... You absolutely don't get to play the "truth is not on your side" card. Not even close. The term hypocrite wouldn't even come close to doing you justice.

And how again does this ridiculously unrelated issue have anything to do with disproving the Holocaust? Because some guy 40 years after the Holocaust happened, lied about 1 thing... and THAT proves in any way the Holocaust didn't happen? Wow...

Just more smoke and mirrors to further your hilariously flawed attempt at disproving a historical fact. You would do yourself a huge favor in giving up this argument, because you can't win LOL. Which is what makes all this so painfully funny to read.

[–] ZortMcFleen 8 years ago

Got Paulie on ignore. But if he's still shouting the same thing he was shouting months ago when I put him on ignore -- because he seems that kind of obsessive, doesn't he -- then it's Paulie, not van Pelt, who's lying. Not a big surprise.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

Haha I know Zort. I just find it funny and entertaining to make them pout and cry and pound their fists on the table because nobody with half a brain takes any of their absolute BS claims, as anything other than bigoted nonsense.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

some guy 40 years after the Holocaust happened, lied about 1 thing... and THAT proves in any way the Holocaust didn't happen?

Thank you, Mikey, for admitting van Pelt lied. The living (so-called) number one authority on Auschwitz is a liar - someone who lied and cheated in court, under oath. Someone who committed perjury. Truth was certainly not on his side, and that is quite significant.

What's more significant - why did he have to lie about the cremation facilities and rates to "prove" the Germans could cremate X amount of bodies in X amount of time? Van Pelt had to lie because he has never been able to prove the Germans had the means to cremate the alleged number of bodies. No one has ever proven that. And that is hugely significant. Hugely significant.

The Germans could not have burned all those bodies in so little time. No one has been able to prove otherwise. Therefore, the "holocaust" did not happen as alleged. The story is not logistically possible. If they could not burn all those bodies, then where are the remains of the alleged dead?

Now answer me this, Mikey: how is it a "historical fact" if it was not possible to cremate all those bodies in so little time? And as they were not able to cremate all those bodies, the remains of those allegedly murdered people must be out there somewhere. So where are these bodies, Mikey?

You need to learn the meaning of "historical fact."

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

Admitted to nothing... Not only does the concept of satire or sarcasm completely elude you. But now you have no clue what playing the devil's advocate means.

And a big hilarious no.... YOU need to learn the meaning of historical fact. When every single historian in the world knows that he Holocaust happened, and would laugh at someone like you... Then there's no other explanation other than it being a historical fact.

You're either extremely gullible, extremely hateful, or EXTREMELY stupid if you actually believe the nonsense you spew. And I;m not even going to answer your painfully pathetic question about where the bodies are. You know exactly where they are.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

That's your basis of a historical fact - a group of historians saying something happened even though they don't have the evidence to support it? You have a very low criteria for "facts."

It was once a "fact" Jews were gassed at Dachau and Buchenwald.
It was once a "fact" Jews were steamed to death.
It was once a "fact" Jews were turned into lampshades and bars of soap.
It was once a "fact" Jews were mass-electrocuted.

The people who argued against the above were once labelled "holocaust deniers" and "anti-Semites" too. But they were right in the end. The same way I and all the others who see through this gas chamber nonsense will be proven correct in the end.

Van Pelt lied under oath. Fact.
You admitted he lied. Fact.
It was logistically impossible for the Germans to cremate so many bodies in so little time with the cremation facilities at hand. Fact.
The entire holocaust narrative is therefore logistically impossible. Even if people were gassed (they weren't), the Germans could not have cremated them all. The Soviets would have found the remains of people who died in these alleged homicidal gas chambers. But they didn't. No one has because no one was gassed.

Now how about you bring some evidence that supports your argument for once instead of resorting to childish names?

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

I admitted Van Pelt lied? Not even close to a "fact". Try looking up SATIRE... Would do you some good.

Logistically impossible? Based on evidence supplied by who exactly? Yeah, thought so...

The whole narrative is therefor logistically impossible? Based on evidence supplied by who exactly? Yeah, thought so...

And again, all the evidence and research has already been done for me. I don't need to prove anything to you because it already has been. It's not my fault your a conspiracy believing, tinfoil hat wearing, nutjob. And I resort to childish names, because that's even more than the likes of you deserve.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

So you're saying van Pelt didn't lie?

It is logistically impossible because the evidence used to "prove" it could be done referred to an incinerator that was never built. Do you not grasp the significance of that? This super oven that could burn all those bodies in so little time with so little fuel was never built, Mikey. Therefore, it was not possible to burn that many bodies in that time frame with the facilities and fuel supply at Auschwitz. No one has ever been able to prove it could be done. But if you think someone has then present their evidence...

You're very naive, Mikey. You can't win the cremation argument. You really haven't studied this enough to even begin to counter my argument. You're way out of your depth.

Ask yourself why Zort is staying away from this topic? He's dodging it like the plague because he knows he can't explain how so many bodies were cremated using the Auschwitz facilities in so little time and with so little fuel. No one has ever been able to prove it. And that is one huge hole in the holocaust narrative.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

LMAO omg.... ummm, do you need help reading? I've never even entertained your "cremation argument" in the first place LOL... Never said anything about cremation, because you're right... I'd be way out of my depth. But you are clearly even further out of your depth when it comes to arguing.

And Zort is not entertaining your blatant nonsense and fake facts, because he's smarter and less patient than I am LOL. You're having this argument on an IMDB board because no one in real life would ever take you seriously LMAO. And there's probably nothing more true than that.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

Never said anything about cremation, because you're right... I'd be way out of my depth.

You're so out of your depth it's painful to watch. Zort must cringe watching you make mistake after mistake. He's probably praying you keep away from the cremation argument because no one can prove the alleged cremation rates were possible. And if the cremation rates were impossible, where are the alleged victims' bodies?

We have established:

Van Pelt lied under oath - that is not up for debate;
He knowingly used a non-existent incinerator (a machine that was never even built) in order to "prove" the Germans could cremate the alleged number in victims in so little time with so little fuel;
He deliberately acted deceptively and dishonestly;
He was reduced to doing so because he knows the cremation rates were not logistically possible;
If the cremation rates were possible, van Pelt would not have had to lie the way he did.

As the Germans could not have cremated all the alleged victims, where are the bodies, Mikey?
Where are the bodies of these people who allegedly died in homicidal gas chambers?

The story doesn't add up. And you know it...

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

I never engaged in the conversation so how am I being "out of my depth" when not even talking about it. You're whole way of thinking is pathetic at best.

WE'VE established nothing. You're pretending to establish points that no one is engaging in a conversation with.

My point was you're proving absolutely nothing. You go from eh, maybe there wasn't enough supplies or time to kill EVERYONE... which in turn means no one was killed. Pathetic logic.

Here comes the retarded "name one" argument. Which also proves nothing. It isn't even original and is copied form the movie. What's next, "no holes, no Holocaust!"...?

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

So...
Because you aren't "engaging" on an IMDB board, factual happenings aren't true? That's a very strange logic, Mikey.

I'll state the facts again:

1) Van Pelt lied under oath - that is not up for debate;
2) He knowingly used a non-existent incinerator (a machine that was never even built) in order to "prove" the Germans could cremate the alleged number in victims in so little time with so little fuel;
3) He deliberately acted deceptively and dishonestly;
4) He was reduced to doing so because he knows the cremation rates were not logistically possible;
5) If the cremation rates were possible, van Pelt would not have had to lie the way he did.

I dare you to disprove any one of the above five facts. If you can, I will never post on this board again.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

Again, your proving absolutely nothing.

So because they didn't specifically cremate them all... that means they didn't kill them all.

Retard logic.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

So because they didn't specifically cremate them all... that means they didn't kill them all.

Then where were all the alleged cyanide-laced bodies, Mikey? If they didn't cremate the alleged victims then what did they do with them? Why didn't the Soviets find any "gassed" people? Did the Germans invent a new way of corpse disposal that made human remains completely vanish into thin air? Of course they didn't. So where are all the bodies?

To call your logic retarded is an insult to the retarded.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

To say you use logic, is an insult to the word itself.

I never claimed they weren't all cremated, you did. Nice try at another worthless post.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

I never claimed they weren't all cremated, you did. Nice try at another worthless post.

The narrative states: all the bodies were cremated, hence no cyanide-laced bodies were ever found.

If the alleged victims weren't all cremated then where are they, Mikey?

[–] walterlawson-99568 8 years ago

Notice how not one of these holohoaxers actually debunks your point. Just childish ad hominems and phony incredulity.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

As you make a hypocritical and childish post yourself.

Again, WE don't have to prove anything. You do. The fact is the Holocaust happened. This whole "van pelt" discussion is as worthless as you and your opinion of the Holocaust. You're not disproving that the Holocaust happened, in any way, shape or form.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

Exactly. To be fair to the jerk, Zort has studied the hoax material from the boys in Tel Aviv. The uninformed probably find his nonsense convincing, but the proof is in his disappearance act - every time a tough question comes up he vanishes.

But this Mikey Buckets character is a complete retard. He doesn't even have a grasp of the basic narrative. Zort must be throwing his kippah across the room in frustration watching Mikey crash and burn with every silly post he writes. People like Mikey are a gift for revisionists.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

"The uninformed" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, yup 99.9999% of the population is uninformed. Laughable.

The definition of insanity.......

You fail to realize I'm giving you the respect you deserve. Zero.

You keep ignoring the point that you can't prove the existence of someone whose existence was erased.

And you ignore every book ever written on the subject.

There's only 1 retard in this scenario. I'll give you 1 hint. It's you.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

You keep ignoring the point that you can't prove the existence of someone whose existence was erased.

You keep ignoring the point that historians can't have possibly come up with an accurate total figure if they can't prove these alleged victims ever existed.

How do you count people you can't prove ever existed? How do you come up with millions and millions of alleged victims if you can't prove they even existed in the first place?

This should be hilarious. I'm all ears Mikey-boy...

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

When did I say there was an "accurate number". Lol just making up nonsense again.

There isn't an accurate exact number, you're right... and I WONDER WHY THAT MIGHT BE??? Is it because none of it happened? Or because it's impossible to get an exact number in a pile of ash?

Anyone that made it out of kindergarten could answer that question correctly... though I'll just assume you'll evade answering that.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

When did I say there was an "accurate number".

Too easy. Thank you for admitting the six million number is not accurate. That is the first step to revisionism. Zort will be calling you a Nazi before you know it.

Now, tell me where the magical six million number came from if they can't prove any of the alleged victims actually existed.

How do you tally up "erased" people?

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

Lmao keep evading the actual point I made. If you really thought 6 million was the exact number on the dot... well then you're even more retarded than I'm making you out to be, which is pretty retarded. Every book and historian out there will tell you the numbers are a rough estimate. (Though I understand by YOUR logic that the term rough estimate = never happened, just like how satire = lie.)

It's actually more than double 6 million, as the ROUGH ESTIMATE of 6 million only referred to the Jews.

Keep acting like you've proven anything other than you needing to be in a mental institution.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

If you really thought 6 million was the exact number on the dot

No one - not denier/revisionist or holocaust historian - has ever said it was exactly six million on the button. What a stupid point.

the numbers are a rough estimate

How do you tally up a rough estimate of erased people? How do you count up people you can't say ever existed? What data are they using to come up with numbers if there is no proof of existence?

You're going to have to explain that one, Mikey.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

Hahahahahahahahaha omg PRICELESS...

"No one - not denier/revisionist or Holocaust historian - has ever said it was exactly six million on the button. What a stupid point."

YES, THANK YOU. That was EXACTLY MY POINT, after you had said...

"Too easy. Thank you for admitting the six million number is not accurate."

So what was YOUR point by saying that? I could regurgitate the first quote right back to you.

If anyone actually needed evidence of you being a hypocritical POS nutjob.... there it is.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

Oh, and up until that last post... I hadn't yet "admitted the 6 million number wasn't an exact number" proving yet again that it's obviously you who is the liar.

And it doesn't even make sense that would help your argument. So now, the numbers are rough estimates = the number is 0? Wtf are you on man?

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

Nope, you're not dodging it that easily. I'll ask again.

How does one tally up a rough estimate of erased people? How does one count up people one can't say ever existed? What data can one use to come up with numbers if there is no proof of existence?

You're going to have to explain that one, Mikey.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

Hahahahaha omg STILL PRICELESS LOL... As you dodge my entire point, you tell me not to dodge your point? Hahahahahahahaha it's so entertaining to watch you try and slither your way out of every pathetic argument when you've been proven your logic doesn't work.

Was it me who brought up the "stupid point"? Or you who tried to act like you won the argument because of same said "stupid point"?

Nope. Won't even remotely entertain your question until you admit your hypocrisy.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

As I have already said. No one - not denier/revisionist or holocaust historian - has ever said it was exactly six million on the button.

I'll ask you again:

How does one tally up a rough estimate of erased people? How does one count up people one can't say ever existed? What data can one use to come up with numbers if there is no proof of existence?

You're going to have to explain that one, Mikey, or you're going to look even more foolish.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

Too easy. Thanks for admitting the 6 million number is not accurate.

Explain that comment without admitting complete hypocrisy and I might actually entertain your pointless argument.

You can't do it. You're so blind in your hypocritical hatred, that you can't notice it when it's right in front of your face.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

Too easy. Thanks for admitting the 6 million number is not accurate. Explain that comment without admitting complete hypocrisy and I might actually entertain your pointless argument.

You admitted the holy, sacred untouchable six million is a "rough estimate." I tongue-in-cheek said that was the first step towards revisionism. Holocaust scholars never back away from or undermine the six million figure - they constantly say they have sources to back up such a high number (they don't) and that it is anything but a "rough estimate." It was allegedly calculated via scientific means. Of course no one on either side has ever claimed it to be exactly 6,000,000 on the button - that goes without saying, you idiot.

Saying it wasn't exactly 6,000,000 on the button is not the issue; admitting the six million number is a "rough estimate" certainly is.

So we've established historians made a "rough estimate" by tallying up "erased people." The historical accuracy is amazing, LOL!

I'll ask you for the THIRD time:

How does one tally up a rough estimate of erased people? How does one count up people one can't say ever existed? What data can one use to come up with numbers if there is no proof of existence?

The more you dodge the question, the more foolish you look.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

To dare to explain the hypocritical bull in every one of those statements would take me forever.

You did absolutely nothing to explain your hypocritical comment.

You did absolutely nothing to prove your retardedly false claim that Holocaust scholars didn't have enough evidence to prove an estimated number of victims.

For the millionth time to your question that I've answered every time, I don't need to prove a single thing to you. Every single scholar already did the work for me, and have all concluded the same result. What you continue to pathetically "dodge" as you call it is the fact that you're the one who has to disprove the facts. Not the other way around.

You continue to prove how moronic and hypocritical you are.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

More name calling, no answers. A typical Mikey Buckets response.

I'll ask you for the FOURTH time:

How does one tally up a rough estimate of erased people? How does one count up people one can't say ever existed? What data can one use to come up with numbers if there is no proof of existence?

The more you dodge the question, the more foolish you look.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

Still no answer.

I'll ask you for the FIFTH time, Mikey Buckets:

How does one tally up a rough estimate of erased people? How does one count up people one can't say ever existed? What data can one use to come up with numbers if there is no proof of existence?

Answer the question or admit you can't.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

I DON'T NEED TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION OR PROVE ANYTHING TO YOU. ALREADY BEEN DONE. "It couldn't be any simpler"

Why would I show you the respect that you so do not deserve. I'm showing you the same respect you're giving me, and I am "proving" the exact same number of things you are.... ZERO. The difference between our view points, is that not a single scholar or historian has ever been on your side of the argument.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

Once again you try to avoid the question.

I'll ask you for the SIXTH time, Mikey Buckets:

How does one tally up a rough estimate of erased people? How does one count up people one can't say ever existed? What data can one use to come up with numbers if there is no proof of existence?

Answer the question or admit you can't.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

YAWN again... as you continue to bore me with your pathetic logic. You continue to pretend that you AREN'T the only one who needs to prove themselves. Which couldn't be further from the truth.

I don't have the patience to teach this subject to you, as you clearly have absolutely ZERO clue what happened. Just research every BOOK (you know, credible sources?) ever written and you might actually learn something, instead of watching nutjob YooToob videos (you know, NOT credible sources?) and letting those people do the thinking for you.

For the SIXTH time, do the tiniest bit of research, as I won't do the easy work for you that you refuse to do.

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

Trying to logically understand you, isn't possible because you don't use logic. It's just a merry go round of delusional thoughts and nonsense.

When I said the numbers weren't "exactly accurate", you puffed out your chest like you won the super bowl and declared "too easy. Thank you for admitting the number isn't accurate."

But go to next post, and when I dumbed down the explanation for you as to WHY the number could never be accurate... you said "duh, what a stupid point."

If you don't see the extremely major logic flaw there, there is absolutely no helping you.

[–] pauliewalnuts-48096 8 years ago

If I'm such an idiot then counter my point. If you are unable to then you must be a real idiot...

[–] tkidcharlemagne 8 years ago

Paulie old bean. It has been noted by numerous jewish experts that jewish fat and blood have some deified extraordinary combustibility only ascribed to our chosenite friends.

So stop it with your racist crap. Jews burn at an extraordinarily rapid rate. Must be all the gefilte fish.

The Goyim know

Shut it down

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

If Zort apparently "cringes" when he sees my posts... I can only imaging what you do every time you read quotes from vile humans such as these. I mean, these are the only people you can get to follow your pathetic beliefs, racist ignorant trolls. That should seriously concern you about your position on the subject.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tkidcharlemagne 8 years ago

If the event didn't happen jokes are perfectly acceptable you know.

Personally I don't find the soviet gulags funny. Remind me the big bosses of the soviet gulag system where at least 36 million white Christian Russians did die.

Jew to a man. Solts, Yagoda, rappaport, frenkel, berman etc etc...

In fact:

Solzhenitsyn affirms that Jews created and administered the organized Soviet concentration-camp system in which tens of millions died. Pictured on page 79 of the Gulag Archipelago II are the leading administrators of the greatest killing machine in the history of the world.1 They are Aron Solts, Yakov Rappoport, Lazar Kogan, Matvei Berman, Genrikh Yagoda, and Naftaly Frenkel. All six are Jews.

You don't like to talk about that do you pal.

Why dooesn't heimywood make films about the soviet gulag.

Why??

I find that rather vile you know.

The goyim know

Shut it down

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

Absolutely hateful and incomprehensible nonsense. You're doing your kind proud though.

[–] tkidcharlemagne 8 years ago

Is this like that jewish fingernail quote some jew said somewhere. Along the lines of a million palestinian lives isn't worth a single jewish fingernail.

I'm assuming you go along with that or. 36 million Christian Russian deaths at the behest of the six jewish administrators of the soviet gulags isn't worth a single jewish lampshade.

That what you're saying dude????

If the event didn't happen jokes are perfectly acceptable you know.

Personally I don't find the soviet gulags funny. Remind me the big bosses of the soviet gulag system where at least 36 million white Christian Russians did die.

Jew to a man. Solts, Yagoda, rappaport, frenkel, berman etc etc...

In fact:

Solzhenitsyn affirms that Jews created and administered the organized Soviet concentration-camp system in which tens of millions died. Pictured on page 79 of the Gulag Archipelago II are the leading administrators of the greatest killing machine in the history of the world.1 They are Aron Solts, Yakov Rappoport, Lazar Kogan, Matvei Berman, Genrikh Yagoda, and Naftaly Frenkel. All six are Jews.

You don't like to talk about that do you pal.

Why dooesn't heimywood make films about the soviet gulag.

Why??

I find that rather vile you know.

The goyim know

Shut it down

[–] Mikey-Buckets 8 years ago

"That what you're saying dude????"

Ummm, that would be an emphatic no. Not even in the same world to what I said. You just took paraphrasing to a whole new level of delusion.

All I said was that your nonsense was hateful and incomprehensible. And, well... the more you talk, the more you prove my point.

[–] ZortMcFleen 8 years ago

I said that people like Kid Jewishsong were going to get more and more unhinged as the clock ticked down. So now we're at under a week, and I'll bet he's probably straight out of "The Shining" by now.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]