Holocaust Revisionism vs. Flat-Earth Theory

[Stubble]

I'm going to post this again, because I don't think the points raised here can be stressed enough.

Concerning the holocaust mythos specifically, from around minute 52ish one should be able to get a basic read of the problems.



Of course, still unaddressed is the problem of 'where'd they go', so I will ask, since the 'victims' are not in holes in the dirt where I'm told they should be, 'where'd they go'? Where are they? They aren't in mass graves on the Bug River.

I will also pose a question, relating to Rumbula, the Bug River camps etc. What is easier to find after 80+ years? A body in a hole in the ground? Or a footprint?

[Nessie]

I'm going to post this again, because I don't think the points raised here can be stressed enough.

Concerning the holocaust mythos specifically, from around minute 52ish one should be able to get a basic read of the problems.

Doubting the evidence is not revisionism. Revisionism is presenting evidence to prove what actually happened. Rudolf cannot do that. His is a denier non-history.

Of course, still unaddressed is the problem of 'where'd they go', so I will ask, since the 'victims' are not in holes in the dirt where I'm told they should be, 'where'd they go'? Where are they? They aren't in mass graves on the Bug River.

I will also pose a question, relating to Rumbula, the Bug River camps etc. What is easier to find after 80+ years? A body in a hole in the ground? Or a footprint?

If millions of Jews survived WWII, it would be easy to find Nazi eyewitnesses and documentation recording the huge logistical task of keeping them alive in the camps and ghettos 1939-45, as more and more were arrested. There would also be a ton of evidence of mass liberations and the logistical problems that would have caused the Allies.

[bombsaway]

Of course, still unaddressed is the problem of 'where'd they go', so I will ask, since the 'victims' are not in holes in the dirt where I'm told they should be, 'where'd they go'? Where are they? They aren't in mass graves on the Bug River.

For you this entire debate seems to come down to the impossibility of them being buried in the AR camps and Chelmno in sufficient quantity, which I wouldn't even say about resettlement. There's no good evidence of it, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen, as so many revisionists state.

Anyway, if you can concede it is possible for them to have been buried there, that's a losing position, so I I understand why you cling so strongly to impossibility thesis.

[Stubble]

Of course, still unaddressed is the problem of 'where'd they go', so I will ask, since the 'victims' are not in holes in the dirt where I'm told they should be, 'where'd they go'? Where are they? They aren't in mass graves on the Bug River.

For you this entire debate seems to come down to the impossibility of them being buried in the AR camps and Chelmno in sufficient quantity, which I wouldn't even say about resettlement. There's no good evidence of it, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen, as so many revisionists state.

Anyway, if you can concede it is possible for them to have been buried there, that's a losing position, so I I understand why you cling so strongly to impossibility thesis.

The reality of it is that the grave space as defined by various studies is suitable for 10% of the claimed tally. This isn't hyperbole, look at the studies.

You, in the past, have claimed grave space is outside the perimeter of the defined 'extermination area's'. I find this quite dubious.

As I continue to do with the Hungarian Cohort, I will find these missing persons Bombsaway. I will find them and I will disposition them in as tight a resolution as possible, not as some nebulous group of persons but dispositioned as tightly as possible into the various cohorts. I will 'name' these jews.

This is something the orthodoxy is extremely disinterested in, and has been disinterested in, for roughly 5 generations (depending on how one defines generations). To me, that simple fact is very telling.

When you take into account the evolution of the historiography of the Aktion Reinhardt camps, the picture, the mask, is starts to fade, to slip. You see how the narrative was crafted.

These missing persons went somewhere, and it wasn't into the dirt along the Bug River.

Some food for thought;



Some further food for thought;

https://odysee.com/@unveilingshadowsech ... survivor:f

[bombsaway]

The reality of it is that the grave space as defined by various studies is suitable for 10% of the claimed tally. This isn't hyperbole, look at the studies.

So at Belzec there's less than 2000 cubic meters, not the 20,000 claimed? How do you figure this?

[Stubble]

You wildly misframe or completely misunderstand.

The grave space is sufficient for 10% of the claimed tally of dead. Not 10% of the grave space claimed by the study.

I don't intend to drag this thread off course on this particular however, and recommend your rebuttal go into an appropriate thread. I will edit this post to add a link to such.

https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=107

Link added.

[bombsaway]

You wildly misframe or completely misunderstand.

The grave space is sufficient for 10% of the claimed tally of dead. Not 10% of the grave space claimed by the study.

I don't intend to drag this case off course on this particular however, and recommend your rebuttal go into an appropriate thread. I will edit this post to add a link to such.

Yes, respond in that thread and justify why 20,000 cubic meters is only enough grave space to contain 10% of the claimed 430k bodies.

A 35 kg body is around 30 or 40 liters btw. Your math is insane.

[Stubble]

You wildly misframe or completely misunderstand.

The grave space is sufficient for 10% of the claimed tally of dead. Not 10% of the grave space claimed by the study.

I don't intend to drag this case off course on this particular however, and recommend your rebuttal go into an appropriate thread. I will edit this post to add a link to such.

Yes, respond in that thread and justify why 20,000 cubic meters is only enough grave space to contain 10% of the claimed 430k bodies.

A 35 kg body is around 30 or 40 liters btw. Your math is insane.

It's already addressed in the first post in the thread linked.

I'm simply being less forgiving than Mattogno with grave density assuming 2or3/m^3. If you want to call that 'downplaying the grave capacity' as SanityCheck (Dr Nick) has done, so be it. Even if you take that point of view, you can't justify the claim given the space. It's not physically possible for the bodies to have been buried in the holes such as they were/are.

The 'Aktion 1005' at my homework excuse for the lack of physical evidence isn't going to cut it anymore Bombsaway, as you yourself have stated, you can't erase the grave space. It is extant.

[ConfusedJew]

Doubting the evidence is not revisionism. Revisionism is presenting evidence to prove what actually happened. Rudolf cannot do that. His is a denier non-history.

Doubting evidence is skepticism, not revisionism. Skepticism, in the right amounts can be societally valuable, too much skepticism turns you into a round earth denier.

[Nessie]

Doubting the evidence is not revisionism. Revisionism is presenting evidence to prove what actually happened. Rudolf cannot do that. His is a denier non-history.

Doubting evidence is skepticism, not revisionism. Skepticism, in the right amounts can be societally valuable, too much skepticism turns you into a round earth denier.

Scepticism should be about the accurate checking of claims, to establish if they are correct or not. The so-called revisionists here, are not able to accurately check the evidence.

[Keen]

Scepticism should be about the accurate checking of claims, to establish if they are correct or not.

Right, like when I ask you questions like these:

Nessie,

#1 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The USHMM alleges that 600,000 jews were killed in Belzec - ??

#2 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; It is alleged in orthodox histriography that the remains of the jews who were killed in Belzec currently lie in 33 mass graves within the boundary of the camp - ??

#3 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the 33 alleged mass graves in question, contains the remains of less than 5 people - ??

But you cravenly refuse to answer them, because they expose your lies and severe lack of intelligence.

So you craveny dodge questsions whenever someone asks you about your unsubstantiated allegations.

[Keen]

Yes, respond in that thread and justify why 20,000 cubic meters is only enough grave space to contain 10% of the claimed 430k bodies.

bombsaway,

#1 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The USHMM alleges that 600,000 jews were killed in Belzec - ??

[ConfusedJew]

Scepticism should be about the accurate checking of claims, to establish if they are correct or not. The so-called revisionists here, are not able to accurately check the evidence.

100%

Sometimes they point out weaknesses or tiny flaws in the existing and accepted evidence base but they almost never fully debunk any source despite claiming that they did

[Keen]

Scepticism should be about the accurate checking of claims, to establish if they are correct or not. The so-called revisionists here, are not able to accurately check the evidence.

100%

Sometimes they point out weaknesses or tiny flaws in the existing and accepted evidence

This is a "tiny flaw"?

OPENING / FUNDAMENTAL STATEMENT OF FACT: It is alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, the bodies and burnt remains of hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of jews were buried in numerous “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II. However, despite all the deceptive allegations to the contrary, the truth is, the largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the one hundred graves / cremation pits in question that are fraudulently alleged to have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at these five sites, in which verified human remains have been uncovered / tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology, contained the remains of - ONLY FIVE PEOPLE.

https://thisisaboutscience.com/

[Nessie]

Scepticism should be about the accurate checking of claims, to establish if they are correct or not. The so-called revisionists here, are not able to accurately check the evidence.

100%

Sometimes they point out weaknesses or tiny flaws in the existing and accepted evidence base but they almost never fully debunk any source despite claiming that they did

A good example of that is about the supposed use of diesel engines.