In his post of Thu Sep 04, 2008 4:29 pm on the CODOH thread Gerdes pledges to pay Kola's Sobibor bill, the most lamentable Gerdes – whose lies, as readers of my discussions with him on VNN and Topix know, I have long lost count of - tried to get the attention of his fellow believers by accusing me of lying:
Well, RM has been caught in yet another lie.
But don't worry, he's just told another lie to cover up his old lie:
Not yet, my friend. The supposed contradiction between the information I provided and Yoram Haimi's e-mail is easy to explain.
As I learned from Yoram Haimi during a conversation this week, he heard about Prof. Kola’s funding problems not from Prof. Kola himself (I misunderstood him in this respect during our first conversation), but from a third source. Yoram Haimi, as I gathered during our recent conversation, is skeptical of whether the information given to him by this third source, about Prof. Kola having refused publication of a report due to funding problems, is accurate information. As a professional archaeologist, he has some problem believing that money is the problem, or the only problem, that Prof. Kola has with the Polish government. Hence his careful statement that he doesn’t know what Prof. Kola’s problem is. That’s all.
That's funny - I think everyone here knows "what his problem is!" LOL!!!
Of course the fellow has nothing to support his empty accusation with and thus makes a fool of himself – as in all his previous attempts in this direction.
Apparently concerned that the CODOH folks might not be impressed, Gerdes followed up with another hysterical gambit:
I have an idea. If any one of the holocaust controversies freaks can prove that Belzecs grave #10, the largest of all the alleged "huge mass graves" allegedly found at Belzec by Kola himself, contains the remains - of just 600 jews - (Yes, that hundred, not thousand), I will pledge $5,000.00 myself to The Sobibor Archaeology Project in said freaks name.
They have till the end of this month and the "proof" has to be posted here or on VNN.
Now how hard should that be?
Remember, grave #10 contains 10% of all the volume of the alleged "huge mass graves" allegedly found at Belzec, so according to Kola's "findings," it should contain the remains of at least 60,000 jews.
Isn't it funny how Kolas own alleged "evidence" for the alleged "huge mass graves" of Belzec is so fraudulent, that it can't even be used to help raise $5,000.00 for The Sobibor Archaeology Project?"
OH THE IRONY!
Ha ha ha!!!
26 days left boys - get crackin!
It seems that Gerdes didn't read my original article (although I gave him the link, as usual), where I provided reasonable estimates, based on Prof. Kola’s description of Belzec mass grave # 10, about the number of human beings that the crematory remains inside that grave can be assumed to correspond to. Following these estimates I explained why Gerdes would be demanding something very difficult if not impossible to accomplish if, instead of accepting a reasonable estimate as proof, he were to call for a precise physical quantification of the human remains inside grave # 10. I then asked him the following questions, which – unsurprisingly for who knows Gerdes – remain unanswered (even though I expressly requested an answer to these and other questions in VNN post # 1069 and repeated my request in post # 1076):
So which of them is it, Mr. Gerdes?
Will you accept a reasonable, evidence-backed estimate, like those presented above, as proof that Belzec grave # 10 contains the remains of at least 6,000 dead people?
If so, better go get your money.
Or will you require a precise physical quantification that, for the reasons described above, is very difficult if not impossible to accomplish?
If so, thanks a lot for once more exposing your utter fraudulence..
I'll post these questions and what’s behind them on VNN, and I already predict that the reaction will be the staple "what part of proof do you not understand" – rhetoric that the coward hides behind whenever confronted with the question what he would accept as proof and whether his demands make any sense. Then I will ask him if this "what part of proof do you not understand" – crap means that he submits to reasonable standards of proof such as applied in criminal investigation and historical research, whereupon I expect him to change the subject.
Having received no feedback to his CODOH post of Thu Sep 04, 2008 4:29 pm more than four hours later, Gerdes tried to get his fellow believers' attention with a classic "Revisionist" fuss about eyewitness testimonies, quoting Mattogno's rant about oh-so-outrageously exaggerated figures in the testimonies of Rudolf Reder and Kurt Gerstein.
What is one supposed to conclude from these exaggerations, other than that Reder and Gerstein were not too good at figures and maybe prone to exaggerate, and that therefore the information they provided should be used only insofar as corroborated by other evidence independent of them? Nothing, I would say.
One thing that neither Gerdes nor the more intelligent Mattogno seem to have realized or given any importance to is the fact that Reder and Gerstein provided their testimonies independently of each other, at different times and before different entities that did not communicate. So however obviously wrong certain details in the testimonies of these two eyewitnesses may be, they corroborate each other regarding the essential facts of mass murder at Belzec extermination camp that become apparent from the narrative of both.
The inability – or unwillingness – to grasp this simple logic is, like many other fallacies of "Revisionist" argumentation, due to the fact that "Revisionists" can’t help being themselves.