Posted: Oct 20, 2011 6:07 pm
jamest wrote:virphen wrote:No, moronic gullibility would be a better name for your thread.
I have already stated that I don't believe the premise of the book. How could I, if I haven't even read the book?
What I have actually stated is that I have good reason to doubt the FACT that Hitler died in Berlin in 1945, since evidence for that fact amounts to hearsay. What I am in fact saying, is that I am open minded regards this issue.
My objection in this thread, then, pertains to the arrogant mocking and disdain of perspectives/works in general, when nothing is known of those perspectives/works - combined with the fact that there is insufficient reason to close one's mind to the issue in question, anyway.
I have clearly demonstrated, then, that it is not I who is gullibe - but the likes of yourself - who evidently and unquestionably will believe anything that 'consensus' throws at you. Not only that, but that you will stubbornly and rudely defend those beliefs to the hilt, regardless of the irrationality inherent within such an endeavour. That is, your mind appears to be unjustifiably closed on this issue.
Unless I state that I believe the premise of the book in question (which I haven't) - and unless you have read the book in question (which you haven't) - then you don't have any reason to call me gullible. Not unless you conflate gullibility with open-mindedness where evidence is lacking, that is.
Errr, see this is well, one of many places you fall down. I did not dismiss the work out of hand - I spent 20 minutes seeking out the reviews, reading the ones on Amazon and in other places. It became very clear that this book fell in the huge category of books not written with a serious and genuine historical hypothesis, but with tabloid trash "make-a-headline" pseudohistorical cash mining as the objective. One doesn't have to read every member of this genre to clearly identify one, no more than I can't easily dismiss the books that claim Aliens destroyed Atlantis and built the pyramids without being "unjustifiably close-minded". There is also the number of objections I raised that a book such as this would have to address. It's comparable to the fake moon-landing hypothesis in that it requires us to give credence to a ridiculously extensive conspiracy of silence, including (as one of the reviewers on that threat comments) the significant number of Germans held by the tender hands of the NKVD. These points you apparently wish to just hand-wave away in the most casual manner, but you simply just can't get away with doing that.
And my references to gullibility were to the ridiculous 5 star reviews on the Amazon link provided, by all these ridiculous people absolutely CONVINCED by a book that provides ZERO EVIDENCE (according to those knowledgeable in the field who have reviewed it). Perhaps you neglected to read those as well?
Put sure, I am gullible, close-minded, all the other personal attacks you decided to launch at me.
This book, this hypothesis has nothing to recommend it, no evidence to support it and is simply untenable.
And when the alternative situations require a situation of such miraculous implausibility, historians or anyone else are quite justified in coming to the conclusion that the witness testimonies (your definition of hearsay seems ... well rather wacky, again) are accurate and the position that Hitler and Braun did commit suicide and were burned outside the bunker entrance is the true one.