Talk:Noah Carl Controversy: FAQ (rebuttal)

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Side-by-side[edit]

@Tobias: Take a look at our RationalWiki:Side-by-side page. You might find this a better way to go for this page. Bongolian (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

That looks very useful, thanks. Tobias (talk) 20:40, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Will continue this tomorrow. So far from what I've read - Carl is a bad liar. Tobias (talk) 02:49, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Update, I've responded to half of the points. Will continue the rest later. Tobias (talk) 21:50, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

False, unsourced claim about me[edit]

As of 2019-09-04, this article contains the claim "At least one speaker, Dalibor Jurášek is a self-described Holocaust revisionist". It is intended as a proof that "some of the researchers who attended the LCI hold “far-right” views".

This claim is unsourced and I do not describe myself as a Holocaust revisionist. I thus ask that you remove this claim.

Moreover, Holocaust revisionism in itself does not imply “far-right” views as is shown by revisionists such as David Cole (a Jewish revisionist) or "the father of Holocaust denial" Paul Rassinier (a French pacifist and anti-fascist).

Dalibor.jurasek (talk) 07:29, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

It's not a false unsourced claim, you're a Holocaust denier according to your own postings on this wiki:

I am not a holocaust denier. My stance on the Holocaust is the following: I do not know whether the Holocaust happened. I studied the arguments of both sides and both have strong arguments, but also serious questions that need to be answered. There are almost no discussions on the subject and those that I found did not address the key points. To find out the truth, we need a free discussion and free academic research. This stance is not Holocaust denial.

Only Holocaust deniers make the arguments you do.Lantern (talk) 09:48, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
@Bongolian @David Gerard @DuceMoosolini you should revive this Holocaust deniers article. It was wrongly deleted, too few votes.Lantern (talk) 09:54, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Dalibor it's obvious you are a Holocaust revisionist (which does not inherently mean outright Holocaust denial) because questioning if the Holocaust happened is obviously revisionism. Lantern/you-know-who-yet-again, that article was a crappy stub, you are at liberty to try and write a better one anytime if you think it's relevant. — Dysk (contribs) 11:05, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your answers. I am afraid this already amounts to word play. As I wrote in the discussion before, I am not obliged to have a resolute opinion on every topic. That does not make me a "revisionist" on the topics I have not studied deep enough to make a clear opinion.
For example, I do not know for sure if Jesus existed. That does not make me a "Jesus revisionist", although Wikipedia claims "Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed." So there is a consensus I am not sure about.
I could go on and on with many topics. I would be a "revisionist" on dozens of them. I simply take time and depth to reach a conclusion because I try to think critically. That would also mean all philosophical sceptics are "Holocaust revisionists", "Jesus revisionists" and "everything revisionists".
If you want to be exact, you can write that I do not have a clear opinion on the Holocaust, as I do not have on many topics, and encourage free research regarding the topic, but I am not a "self-described" revisionist. In any case, even if I were a revisionist, that does not imply far-right views (which is in itself a politically charged label) so the mentioning of my person there is misplaced and should be removed. Dalibor.jurasek (talk) 07:25, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
The article had no supporters for keeping. It was deleted primarily because Jurášek had little notability and because the article was a stub. If someone can make a better article than existed (say in Draftspace), it might be reasonable to restore it. Bongolian (talk) 16:28, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
@D, I noted on Reddit I'm no longer creating articles. I do though have a sleeper account that monitors my page creation talks to see if there's any new discussions. This is irregular since very few have new editors leaving comments. Regardless, Holocaust denial & "revisionism" are the same thing. Similarly if someone said they were a climate change "revisionist" it's obvious they're a climate change denier and deny the consensus. I won't though waste any more time debating this. Lantern (talk) 19:53, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
dysk is indeffed in sysoprevoke without talk page access so now u drove them away ur free to do whatever u wantEK (talk) 10:53, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
Not so fast, I will ensure that policy is followed through, this user is banned, banned. Oxyaena Harass 20:19, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Very well done![edit]

Great FAQ article Tobias. Well researched, detailed and well presented! ShabiDOO 21:31, 22 October 2019 (UTC)