Germar Rudolf, Resistance Is Obligatory (2012; PDF-Datei

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORY
characteristics of a chemical compound. With his typical sharp wit,
the late Prof. von Schnering then remarked:
“Man, you mustn’t believe that at all. Everyone around here has
his own shithouse slogan!”
When we move into the field of historiography, statements by witnesses
do not become any more reliable. In fact, on account of greater
human and political emotions, they become even worse than
Schnering’s shithouse slogans.
In the field of historiography, even documentary evidence is often
circular, since every bureaucracy occasionally creates paperwork
that is designed not to document truth but rather to justify its own
political activities. 103 And in addition, historical events cannot be
replicated.
From what I have just explained, it necessarily follows that historical
theories in principle have low levels of reliability compared with theories
in natural sciences or even in the social sciences. This makes it
even more absurd that historical theses of all theses are declared to be
self-evident and even prescribed by penal law.
On the topic of the subjective convincedness of a witness, K. R.
Popper very accurately remarked: 104
“No matter how intense a feeling of conviction it may be, it can
never justify a statement. Thus I may be utterly convinced of the
truth of a statement; certain of the evidence of my perceptions;
overwhelmed by the intensity of my experience: every doubt may
seem to me absurd. But does this afford the slightest reason for science
to accept the statement? Can any statement be justified by the
fact that K.R.P. is utterly convinced of the truth? The answer is,
‘No’; and any other answer would be incompatible with the idea of
scientific objectivity. […] But from the epistemological point of
view, it is quite irrelevant whether my feeling of conviction was
strong or weak; whether it came from a strong or even irresistible
impression of indubitable certainty (or ‘self-evidence’), or merely
from a doubtful surmise. None of this has any bearing on the question
of how scientific statements can be justified.”
In other words: no matter how convinced “Holocaust” witnesses
may be of the authenticity of their experiences, and no matter the extent
103 Karl Popper, The Open…, op. cit. (note 70), vol. 2, pp. 265f.
104 Karl Popper, Logic, op. cit. (note 78), p. 46.
79