LC>> Any resources I can lend to such an effort (my Web site, my
LC>> services as advocate or organizer) are hereby offered.
LB> Ok. I propose a science court debate about the proposition
LB> "There were gas chambers at Auschwitz and Birkenau."
LB> The prosecution says there were, the defense says the prosecution's
LB> arguments prove nothing. I will argue for the defense.
That's two different propositions. I, and any rational thinker, will
concede the latter. Debating the former might be more interesting,
except that (1) it bears little relationship to anything extropian,
and (2) it's been done to death already.
The utter lack of valid reasoning on the part of even the most eloquent
revisionists is very easy to spot if one is reasonably well-armed in the
art of bullshit detection. The fact that they have swayed so many is a
good data point on the importance of proper epistemology, and the
persuasive power of one-sided rhetoric. Any time this question has been
put forth in an open adversarial process, revisionists were trounced
soundly, as one would expect. Since this has been done, I would rather
do something new and more interesting, but if, say, you and Mr. Shermer
would like to submit yourselves to the process I describe, I will be
happy to detail it for you.