|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Holocaust Denial
| quote: | Originally posted by Jake Benson
No I am still right.
Culture was used before documentations so that humans could learn vicariously instead of learning the hard way (in person). That's why language was developed, so mom could tell her son, "don't go into that forest because a lion will eat you." (as opposed to the son not knowing his mother has encountered lots of angry lions in the forest and he goes into the forest and gets his arm bit off). The same is true for documenting history, as you said. But that doesn't mean it's incorrect for culture. |
That's all well and good, but when it comes to the veracity of historical evidence, the anthropological transmission of culture is exceedingly irrelevant as the crux of the very topic at hand has everything to do with documentation and nothing to do with anecdote.
| quote: | | Sorry but the Bible doesn't count as literal historical documentation. |
Nice try.
| quote: | | So are you saying thousands of people testifying to witnessing or being in the holocaust was just a bunch of outlandish ideas that all correlate with one another? I suppose slavery was a hoax too. Why do black people believe in that fairy tale? |
Thousands of people? What people? Old people tend to tell stories and make shit up, it's just a part of getting old.
Tell you what, if you can find some actual historical documentation of events indicating there was some sort of mass murder of people of Jewish descent in the 1930s and 40s by a political party clearly aimed by economic idealism that is verifiable by recurrent evidence remiss of cultural interference, I might just believe you.
Until then, it's just geezers weaving yarns about how big a fish they almost caught.
I mean, really, why would this Hitler guy go through so much trouble? Where's the motive?
___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
|