It seems to me that Mr. Adamski offers concrete proofs
and examples in support of his assertions and therefore
evokes from the reader, at least this one, greater
confidence in the truth of his statements. Mr. Szybalski
fails in the debate since he has not shown that Mr.
Adamski's claims are wrong by using concrete examples
that would contradict Adamski's claims. Nor has he shown
that under certain assumptions that we can accept, it
would not be logical to conclude that such deportations
took place in that period of time.
He has merely resorted to questioning the meaning of the
word "deportation". Often as Socrates has pointed out
confusion over the meaning of words is important in
clarifying and furthering a discussion. In this case, I
however do not see that Mr. Adamski's usage departs from
the accepted meaning which we give to that word.