Why do revisionists evade the physical evidence question?

[Keen]

You also lie about and misrepresent the evidence and what historians have done.

Like you lied and misrepresented here nesserto:

The Nazis were not trying to magically disappear the corpses and the graves.

All the mass graves dug by the Nazis, and the corpses they cremated, are still at the AR camps.

Mass graves are proven. By all normal standards of evidencing, they are proven.

I can point to them in the ground.

These "huge mass graves" that you allege you can point to in the ground; are they magically disappearing graves filled with magically disappearing jews, or actual physical entities that can be seen and touched?

Nesserto:

The holocaust has been proven by solid tangible evidence.

Nesserto, can you tell us how these magically disappearing jews are both tangible and invisible?

[Hektor]

....

The Holocaust has been investigated in the same way every historical event has. Evidence has been gathered, to establish what claims made can be corroborated and verified and establish a chronology of events.
....

That simply is not true. No other subject is as negatively sanctioned as the Holocaust-theme is. If your conclusion rejects the hypothesis, you will face repercussions in one way or the other. What makes the Holocaust-Narrative unique is that in many countries folks who 'deny it' have to face legally sanctioned violence like imprisonment.

[Nessie]

....

The Holocaust has been investigated in the same way every historical event has. Evidence has been gathered, to establish what claims made can be corroborated and verified and establish a chronology of events.
....

That simply is not true. No other subject is as negatively sanctioned as the Holocaust-theme is. If your conclusion rejects the hypothesis, you will face repercussions in one way or the other. What makes the Holocaust-Narrative unique is that in many countries folks who 'deny it' have to face legally sanctioned violence like imprisonment.

Denying historical events took place, invites sanction in many instances. Those sanctions can be legal and result in arrests, for example, discussing Tianaman Square in a way that the Chinese authorities do not approve of. Or they can result in academic ostracism, or social media pile-ons. People have been driven into exile, for promoting histories that are not officially approved of. Criticising the Soviet government for the Holodomor would have meant arrest and time in the gulags.
It is overly Western-centric to believe that the Holocaust is the historical subject that is the most negatively sanctioned.

The Holocaust narrative has been determined by exactly the same forms of evidence that are used to construct any historical narrative. Eyewitnesses, documents, physical evidence, imagery, archaeology, forensics and circumstances are used to build the chronology of what took place to the Jews during WWII. Since much of what took place was also a crime, motive, ability, opportunity and conduct after the crime have also been evidenced.

Holocaust deniers claim they can revise the history, but they all fail to do so. They invite sanction, because their claims are inherently anti-Semitic, as they resort to tropes about Jewish power, influence, greed and dishonesty. They produce a pseudo non-history, that is based on illogical arguments and lies about the state and extent of the evidence.

As proven by my repeated quarantining, challenging so-called revisionist methodology and exposing its flaws, is the most effective way to attack Holocaust denial/revisionism.

[Keen]

The Holocaust narrative has been determined by exactly the same forms of evidence that are used to construct any historical narrative... physical evidence, imagery, archaeology, forensics... Since much of what took place was also a crime... As proven by my repeated quarantining, challenging so-called revisionist methodology and exposing its flaws, is the most effective way to attack Holocaust denial/revisionism.

BELZEC, CHELMNO, PONARY, SOBIBOR and TREBLINKA II

Are the remains of 2.145 million Jews really buried in the 100 alleged “scientifically proven” mass graves?

(The labeling of asking this legitimate adjudicable question as “hate / antisemitic” is your first clue that they do not want you to know what the answer is.)

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, unsubstantiated allegations to the contrary, the truth is, the largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the 100 graves 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 SIX PEOPLE.

Note: Using the information presented on this website and applying legal standards used in U.S. courts, the above opening / fundamental statement of fact, which is written as, and can be defined as - a rebuttable presumption - can be - LEGALLY - ACCEPTED - AS - TRUE - in a U.S. court.

Foundational legal question: Is it reasonable to doubt that the remains of 2.145 million Jews are currently buried in the 100 specifically identified locations in question - Yes. - or - No. - ??

Foundational legal principles that easily expose this transparent archaeological hoax: BURDEN OF PRODUCTION, BURDEN OF PERSUASION & BURDEN OF PROOF.

...

A - $100.00 reward - is being offered for each one of the 100 alleged graves / cremation pits in question that is proven - with the same standard of proof applied in U. S. civil courts - to actually exist and to currently contain the remains of - at least 2 people. (That is less than one tenth of one one thousandth of one percent of the alleged mass murder.)

http://thisisaboutscience.com/

What are you waiting for roberta?

What are you so afraid of?