Plain Facts



A Response to Jean-Claude Pressac

With Contribution by Prof. Dr. Robert Faurisson,
Manfred Köhler, Carlo Mattogno, Serge Thion
and a preface by Ernst Gauss


Table of Contents

Ernst Gauss, Preface

Manfred Köhler, Pressac and the German Public

Serge Thion, On Pressac: History by Night or in Fog?

Robert Faurisson, Answer to Jean-Claude Pressac. On the Problem of the Gas chambers

Carlo Mattogno, Auschwitz: The End of a Legend

Robert Faurisson, Two Further Comments on my Answer to Jean-Claude Pressac

Original German version:
ISBN: 90-73111-16-1
Wettelijk depot: D/5727/1995/3
1. Edition 1995
Editor: Herbert Verbeke

© The copyright to each contribution is held by the authors.

The contribution by C. Mattogno (Italian) was translated by Anne Sharp, the contribution by R. Faurisson (French), Ernst Gauss and Manfred Köhler (German) by Michael Humphrey, the Contribution by Serge Thion by (???).

Set  in Times New Roman.

»"Feedom of Science" also means that in principle every research goal can be chosen. Any "index of prohibited knowledge",  a "catalogue of research goals put under taboo", or a research moratorium, are incompatible with the self-understanding and dignity of science, because we have to instist tenaciously that under any circumstances, cognition is better than ignorance.«

Prof. Dr. Hans Mohr, Natur und Moral
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1987, p. 41

"The Natural sciences [like other scholary disciplines] are extremely conservative and dogmatic. Any corroboration of a paradigm is welcome, whereas any innovation or revision will long meet with resistance; the instinct for preservation (including self-preservation!) is stronger than the search for truth. Therefore, new findings usually gain acceptance only when sufficient numbers of researchers vouch for them: then the dogmatic status quo topples, a ‘scientific revolution’ occurs,
a new paradigm replaces the old

The bottom line is that no student, no researcher and no layman should believe any facts to be ‘conclusively proven’, even if the textbooks present them as such […]"

Professor Walter Nagl, Ph.D., Gentechnologie und Grenzen der Biologie,
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1987, pp. 126f.

»The Basic Law [German Constitutional Law] protects scientific research and basically wants the impartiality of this research. This is especially true for history, which is, after all, not about defining a central thread and making it binding, but about making offers for the discussion. In a pluralistic society, this must be manifold and controversial.«

Prof. Dr. Peter Steinbach, ARD-Tagesthemen, 10. June 1994, 22:30

»But otherwise one can in my view say that what we historians work out in accordance with the rules is not dangerous. I do not think that truth, if it is the truth, is dangerous.«

Prof. Dr. Christian Meier, in: Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (ed.), Verantwortung und Ethik,
Berichte und Mitteilungen der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
, vol. 3/84, Munich  1984, p. 231

Back to Table of Contents