Creationism and the Holocaust

I like how athiests say that if you make an extraordinary claim (like that God exists) you have to have extraordinary claims to back it up. They say that books and writing isn't enough to prove this claim, because anybody could have just forged the Bible and just *claiming* to be an authority on the matter.

In 50 years from now, or a few hundred years from now, people believing that the holocaust happened, will face the same problem. They say that there's "mountains of evidence" to support this highly extraordinary claim, but with time, this mountain will be eroded into an amount of evidence no bigger than the Bible. Then people will point and laugh at the jews and their "fabled" extinction, going "Well, you're still *here*, aren't you? How do you explain *that*? I don't believe in your religious texts - I'm an atheist.".

>>1

I can explain that you are stupid and your mind must be grew full of weeds, dude!

>>2
Go for it. Explain away, "dude".
Oh, that's right: I'm on 4chan, where the *stupid* are, so I'm just going to get "JEWS" spam.

Why bring the Bible into this? Or any religious books or writings for that matter. It's totally extraneous to whether matter was brought forth by God or whether or not the Holocaust happened.

>>3

Holocaust happen because an alien disguise itself as an human called Hitler and the reason it start WWII so that their species in an human body bag can be easily mixed into the real human race are killed in the holocaust. And to make sure that their covered is not revealed, they even invented the bible and God for *stupid* humans like you so that they species rule.

And these aliens always like to disguise an bishop or church leader so that more of them can become human. So now you know the reason why war always happen. dude! ALIEN RULES!!!

I am No.5 and I need to correct this sentence : ...the reason it start WWII so that their species in an human body bag can be easily mixed into the real human while the real human race are killed in the holocaust.

>>5

So your saying that aliens *reptiles from what i about that stupid rumor** also heard of as evolved dinosaurs are taking over this world and creating WW3 and creating a new species to live on this land and no humanity left? Sorry i just can't believe that bullshit.

What the fuck are you people even saying in this thread

>>8
I'm saying that the "extraordinary claim" theory, works both ways. It's just a matter or time before holocaust deniers become the new sensible atheists.

5-7 are just drunken ramblings.

>>9

No, >>5 are far more imagination than your crap question. In fact he can be an movie scriptwriter judging from his idea. And do you even know who is Nostradamus if you are trying to prove thing like prophecies ? What do Bible had to do with your holocaust crap theory since it just an collection of christian's stories and quotes etc.

>>4
Why bring the Bible into this?
Maybe because religions (here: the bible) and might-as-well-be religions (like the holocaust) are at times required belief structures;
– There was a time when disbelieving the bible could get you declared a heretic, tortured to death, and then burned (in varying order).
– In the case of Islam (especially in areas of friction with Christianity), failing to Believe as you're told, can be just as unhealthy as, say, five aces at a poker table in the Wild West.
– Nowadays, there's a similar story with the holocaust; if you want to be branded as a hopeless Neo-Nazi, there are two main ways of getting it done; 1) dress up in full Gestapo regalia and howl “Sieg heil” copiously in public at every opportunity, or 2) mention once, in public (once is usually enough), that you think maybe the 6 million figure just might be a little bit on the high side. The latter is more cost-effective, in that you don't need swastika tattoos or anything.

Actually, the fact that holocaust denial is the ONLY JAILABLE THOUGHT-CRIME IN ALL OF EUROPE, should speak volumes.
Or would have, had we not been too brainwashed to see it.

>>10
As you are clearly old enough, post nudes on /b/.

Let's compare the two:

-Holocaust (70+ years ago): Some assholes rounded up some people of another race and sent them to gas chambers and concentration camps.

-Christianity (2,000+ years ago): A half-man, half-god/his own father born of a virgin vicariously took on the misdeeds of the human race that he created in the first place, and died and came back to life, subsequently ascending into an ethereal realm where he resides to this day with his dad/himself.


Certain semantics of the holocaust are certainly up for debate, but the gist of it is there. I mean, there's still people around who were kept in the camps.

>>13
- Holocaust: A civilized nation suddenly decides to exterminate all jews, and manages to build 40 000 facilities, where they kill 5.9 *MILLION* jews. (That's 5.9 jews for every nazi in the nazy army, so if the entire army was dedicated to this so called holocaust, they would be severely outnumbered.)
- Christianity: A creator created the universe (which then results in lots of other miraculous shit).

Christianity:
- People in the Roman Empire were being put up on crosses all the time, it was a standard way to execute people (who weren't full citizens of the Empire). Especially troublemakers, like, say, stray prophets. (Notice the Bible providing zero details on the crucifixion process; the intended audience were all too familiar with those anyway, thank you very much.)
- At the time of Jesus, some half of Judea's population went around calling themselves «son of God»; the other half being women.
- A certain mr Saul was a social climber with a handicap; he had Roman citizenship. And for all that the Jewish church might cooperate with the Roman occupiers, they didn't have to like Romans. Which created a glass ceiling for Saul. Change his name to Paul, start a new religion, and hey presto: problem solved, as the new religion ditched stuff like ethnic purity demands &shit.


Holocaust:
- The main evidence for the whole thing, seems to be the existence of KZ camps. Which is a bit like saying «This is the house where the (alleged) murder took place; there really is a house here, ergo the murder really did take place and the defendant really is guilty».

Fun Fact: The KZ camps went up to deal with thought-criminals, like Communists, Social Democrats and the like. Followed closely by gays, mentally handicapped, Jehovah's Witnesses(!) and whoever else the Party had decided, in its infinite wisdom, to not like. Only then did someone think to add Jews to the list; until then, they'd largely been kept in the ghettos inherited from centuries past.

Fun Fact: KZ camps were not invented by the Nazis, nor were ghettos (or, for that matter, eugenics). The Nazis just saw others doing it, and liked what they saw and copied it. All they really did was turn it up to eleven.

Fun Fact: Have a Sadistic Empire (like the 3rd Reich) put a large crowd into an internment camp, especially people that the Sadistic Empire really hates, and stuff like medical care is going to be half-hearted at best. Cue random infectious disease, watch said undesirables die by the truckload.

Fun Fact: Said infectious diseases include typhus and cholera. Who's been hardest at work belittling the pain and suffering involved in dying from those, Revisionists or anti-Revisionists? («Most died from these diseases» being deliberately misinterpreted as «KZ camps were really five-star luxury hotels» &shit? Srsly?)

Fun Fact: Even after actually hearing out some of the Revisionists, I've yet to hear anyone describe KZ camps as anything other than (to the effect of) «sadistic hellholes, by design».
Obviously, cue random actual Neo-Nazi claiming the Jews simply had it coming, and/or lamenting that the Nazis didn't get them all, or some shit like that. Even including those, count the voices claiming the KZ camps didn't actually exist (or shit like that). Anyone?
(cricket, cricket)


- «There are still people around who survived the KZ camps!»
Well no shit, Sherlock! With so many people rounded up like the rats which the Nazis thought them to be, anything short of actual death camps dedicated to systematic mass extermination, is bound to leave survivors. And again: the existence of KZ camps only really proves the existence of KZ camps.

This whole premise is a bit like saying «brutal murderer = eats babies»: In reality, murdering someone (even brutally) is not the same as wanting to eat them. And intentionally mixing up the two, is a piss-poor excuse for criminology.

But replace «brutal murderer» with «wears swastikas», and «eats babies» with «massacres Jews by the million», and watch what happens to simple logic…

Oh, and let's not forget Creationism, mentioned in the thread title;
- «Earth is 6,000 years old», says Creationist. «The evidence is right here in the Bible»
- «Erm, howsabout all these wear-marks in the mountains?» says Darwinist. «Or the fossil records? Zircon crystals? DNA?»
- «Oh don't you know? Satan put it all there to confuse us!»
- (facepalm)
- «Oh, and btw, how did life begin?»
- «We're researching that.»
- «So, science doesn't know. Therefore, God did it.»
- (facepalm)
- «You see? Science doesn't have an answer! I win!»
- (facepalm)

What really baffles me, though, is how the Creationists keep missing the elephant in the room. Just think about it;
- Alternative One: The Universe had no real plan with us, we just happened to develop over millions of years, as an afterthought to a footnote, completely by chance. No plan, no design, just an exercise in the evolution and survival of the fittest. Floating in the vastness of space; a microscopic speck of dust, wearing an even more microscopic pinprick labeled «You are here».
– Alternative Two: Some 6,000 years ago, an Invisible Sky Wizard went and created the whole Universe, including Planet Earth (complete with copious (false) evidence of billions of years of history), for the sole, explicit purpose of giving us humans a place to not only live, but conquer and subdue. And own.

Creationists actually prefer Alternative Two, in the name of a god that preached humility. Because Alternative Two isn't arrogant at all, not even a little bit.

And somehow, these people manage to get themselves a stranglehold on how fast America's school system is allowed to move into the Twentieth Century (to say nothing of the Twentyfirst).
Ahh yes, America FTW. Riiiiiight.

>>15
Dude, there's a little more than just buildings to prove what was going on:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/qar/qar26.html


My argument isn't that the holocaust didn't happen, or that a god exists. My argument is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" isn't such a good argument, when extraordinary things that happened enough years ago, won't have any evidence to show for it.

>>17
My standpoint is actually similar: The more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinarily the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim. If you claim the world is flat, then it's up to you to prove it.

Thing with the holocaust, is that the evidence if favor, tend to be to the effect that «believe as you're told, or else», which is hardly an improvement from the “glory” days of the 3rd Reich. And the “or else” part is invariably a Nazism framejob.

Not only does it sink us down to the level of the actual Nazis, but it hinges on the notion that the Nazis somehow need the holocaust to be evil. The inevitable consequence of this, would be that the holocaust was somehow “the only evil thing the Nazis ever did”, i.e. “remove the holocaust, and the Nazis were suddenly good guys after all”.

It shouldn't take a genius to grok the logical extreme of this fallacy; suddenly the Crystal Night was “not evil”, suddenly it's OK to burn books you don't like, suddenly it's OK to have KZ camps with “undesirables” in them (as long as they're not Death Camps), etc

And the true horror of this, is obviously that there are in reality a fuckton of reasons the Nazis were bad; but the over-focus on this one particular crime actually belittles the others. Makes them somehow harmless.

Which stands to open the floodgates for more of the same.

>>18

If you are so analytical, could you use your Creationism theory to explain how an aeroplane can disappeared out of no where?

>>19
I would say something about strawman-free zones, or suggest leaving those goalposts alone, or somesuch…
…but then, this is 4chan; where logic, reason, integrity and intelligence, all go to die. As exemplified by your excellent little blurb there.

＼　　　　 :::::／
 　　　　　　　│　　　:::│
　　　　　　　│　　　:::│
　　　　　　　│　　　:::│
　　　　　　　│　　　:::│
　　/⌒ヽ__／／　∥＼＼__/⌒＼ 　　
 Mr.Obama let's visit Yasukuni shrine together.
 War criminals? No problem. Most of your predecessors are war criminals aren't they? 

  　 （　◯　／ ／）　　（＼＼　○　）
 　　＼ ／ .／● Ｉ　 Ｉ　●＼＼／　
 　　　/　　/／　│　│　＼_ゝヽ　
 　　 /　　　　 /│　 │ヽ　　　 :::ヽ　
 　　/　　　　ノ （_＿＿）:::ヽ　　　:::|　　　　
 　 │　　　　　I　　　　I　:::::: 　 ::::::|

>>1
The existence of a metaphysical being cannot be proved through any physical means, save for the supernatural. The average anti-atheist, or at least all that I've spoken to, dismiss any potential "miracles" right off the bat and still demand physical evidence, despite that any physical evidence would be "miraculous".

>>17
A better response to this line of thought is that religion or spirituality is the default position of mankind throughout its history, atheism is what's bucking the trend, or the "extraordinary claim".

>>22
or stupidity is the default position of mankind and atheism won't immunize the population from it

>>19

A plane can still be found if effective method are used :

How inmarsat plotted the route of plane

Even if the entire airplane's communications system stopped, inmarsat will manage to detect pings, which are transmitted hourly automatically from the plane's terminal.

   Engineers then looked at the "Doppler Effect", which is the change in frequency due to the movement of the satellite.

   From there, it will concluded how long the plane flew and it location.

What is the Doppler Effect?

The Doppler Effect describes how a wave changes frequency relative to the movement of an observer (satellite). Imagine a police siren getting louder as it comes towards you and getting more faint as it goes away from you.

Let me see if I get the question; Are you looking for fundamental differences between Holocaust and Creationism? Or similarities?

I'd say there are basic similarities; Both are belief structures that demand to be believed in, with "evidence" ranging from "I don't believe in your evidence" to "Believe as I tell you, or else!"…

—  Creationism states that a fuckton of archaeological evidence isn't really proof, since it fails to properly support the story of Intelligent(?) Design.
Evidence offered: Little. Rather, it refuses to accept the evidence provided by actual science. But it still demands to be listened to, even believed in.


—  Holocaust is the story of how a cultured nation suddenly became the Ultimate Eeeevil Empire™, and turned its existing concentration camps into dedicated death camps, basically for the Evulz.
Evidence offered: Non-believers are put in jail (in the name of Democracy™ and Freedom™) and framed as Nazis, effectively giving _actual_ Nazis some kind of monopoly on phrases like "Truth does not fear an investigation". And, in the process, a monopoly on _actually_ being interested in _actual_ truth.
And a fuckton of hullabaloo is presented to make this sound as if we were still living in a truth-loving democracy.

For this to stop being a belief structure and instead moving into evidence-backed history, we need to stop giving Nazis that idiotic monopoly on skepticism. Allow the stuff that isn't backed by evidence to be removed from the equation, and let's have an actual look at what remains.


Notes that are sadly important:
1) Simply asking "Where's the (_actual_) evidence?" is *_NOT_* an ill-willed "twisting of someone's words", or "siding with the culprit", or any of that shit; it's how stuff like criminal prosecution is supposed to work; Either prove – beyond reasonable doubt – the suspect to actually be Guilty for real, or find them Not Guilty and release them. Anything else makes for a rights-free society where anyone can get thrown in jail for reasons that have nothing to do with justice.

2) I really do _not_ support Nazis. There's actually a shitload of _real_ reasons the Nazis were bad, long before the Holocaust comes into play. So let's stop being retards already!

>>25
I'm afraid, today nobody cares about the truth, which is multifaceted and boring. The Holocaust became your usual name-calling game: label your political opponent Nazi, before he labels you.

Joseph Stalin has not been mentioned, although he made Hitler look like an amateur, having slaughtered many more millions of his own people, including Jews. And Mao Zedong was no slouch, having had millions of his own people slaughtered; plus, he successfully committed genocide against several non-Han Chinese, completely exterminating them.
 
A sure sign of mass indoctrination in America is always resorting to the Hitler card. So Juvenile and uninformed.

>>27
I tend to summarize the Eastern Front part of that war, as having two basic phases;
1) Hitler and Stalin racing to kill most Russians. Stalin won.
2) Hitler and Stalin racing to kill most Germans. Stalin won.