cptgaio

"Never once can we have a serious conversation without unnecessary outbursts, never once can someone question themselves and say 'I don't know, let's try to listen to what the other says'... here everyone is a luminary and full of certainties... oh well...". This is not about Gödel's incompleteness theorem; this is about evidence. Evidence, do you understand? P.S. Truly, the only one who has had an outburst between you and me here is you. Even here, if you don't understand that, the problem is yours."

Pps2: "but to regard the sources that support one's own arguments as serious and credible is simply ridiculous" is an incorrect statement (one of the many in your response) for various reasons: the first is that these are not “my” sources but those derived from people who have investigated scientifically over decades of inquiries, acquisitions, etc. The second is that I do not consider them "serious and credible": they are serious and credible. Period. Which makes the whole discussion your problem (even if you don’t understand the comparison made by Cappio). All this with the utmost serenity possible. Bye.

@Alexander: happy you, happy all. Night. Ps: I don’t pee outside the pot: I catheterized myself years ago. You? :-D

subject of the promise, not the review :-D

The number of Jewish deaths during World War II was about 6 million, and this is not a random estimate but is supported by all credible and serious sources. I'm not going to list them out because, from experience, I know that the possible "interlocutors" wouldn't check anyway (and even if they did, they would dismiss them as untrustworthy a priori). The sources that speak of a lower number of victims come from completely unreliable backgrounds due to their political pasts (let's call them that), and again, I have no intention of delving into this discussion for the same reason I mentioned earlier: if it works for you, that's fine; if not, feel free to remain deniers: the problem is entirely yours. I appreciate Carlo's argument and I don't find Cappio's (September 11) comparison inappropriate, as these two issues have recently united all the "fans" of various conspiracy theories et similia: I remember a phrase from Attivissimo that stated, more or less, that it's important to deconstruct any theory that doesn't adhere to reality to prevent any resurgence of denialism even in matters of immense gravity like the Holocaust. The discussion becomes more complex (hypothetically since the figure is what I mentioned above) regarding whether there is a difference between 3 or 6 million victims: I have a very clear idea (which is similar to my friend Fusillo's, whom I greet) but I believe it is quite superfluous to delve into it here.
Ps. For the sake of precision, I had intended to fulfill a "statistical" promise made a few months ago and wanted to post some numbers (not here but in the review in question), but this discussion has definitely "fired me up" ;-) so we'll talk about numbers another time. Take care, everyone. Beautiful and ugly.

Listen, since this is, without naming names or we’ll never finish, a situation of "parties" where everyone knows who made many mistakes, who made some, who didn’t, who has grudges against whom, who against everyone, who against a few, etc. etc., but for various reasons these things will never come to light, I would say we should leave it here. I take full responsibility for what happened even if it was an innocuous joke: whether DeBaser has problems or not, I’ll leave it to others to decide (as it seemed clear to me at the beginning: these were my travel notes), whether it’s managed well or poorly is the same. In a few months, if what I think comes true, I’ll come to point it out to you (hoping for your greater attention); if not, I’ll come to make a public amends, as I have always done on the occasions when I made mistakes. For now, I’m fine this way since certain things have been clarified for me, more than anything, they’ve been confirmed. Take care.

I only see now the reference to "pulisciculi": @Nes I don't remember your intervention, sorry, and I don't feel like going to check that page (so I trust you), but I believe it wasn't about defending me in that case, and anyway if you did, thank you, (apart from the fact that I prefer the phrase "to be supportive" rather than "to defend": despite certain rumors concerning me, spread by someone, I have never asked to be defended by anyone. I think I can handle things quite well on my own) but simply being on the side of logic and reason, so I don't know if it's appropriate to "hold a grudge" about what happened. Also, if time was wasted, that's only your problem so I can’t do anything about it (as for being touchy, I could say "look who's talking" ;-D). I only see now Skele's comment (unfortunately I'm connected from a tiny-weeny screen ;-D): just know that if you don't behave, I'll pull out the statistics on how, when, and why you were banned ;-). Anyway, I don't want to end up with another 35 comments if possible, so if you have nothing else, I would say goodbye. Mo.

Ps: Kosmo, Girlanachronism was not a fake of mine but a secondary account of mine whose "owner" (that is, me) everyone knew, and the second time you deleted it, it had been sent as cptgaio: when we say things, let’s say them well (and correctly), please.

@Nes: just joking... Look at the emoticons, Diana, I parodied your comment... it doesn’t take much. @Kosmo: I must have learned from someone…

Nes, honestly, and without any offense, what you think is quite irrelevant. In fact, it's quite a compliment to hear that my posts are nonsense to you, knowing your level: no offense, huh :-D