Historians v revisionists, methodology.

A containment zone for disruptive posters
K
Keen
Posts: 1361
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2025 1:27 pm

Re: Historians v revisionists, methodology.

Post by Keen »

roberto wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2026 6:33 pm The Holocaust has been investigated in the same way all historical events and crimes have been investigated.
And what have the "crime scene investigations" uncovered?
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.

Image

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 scientific question: Can archaeologists prove, with 100% certainty, that millions of pounds of bones and teeth are actually buried in an alleged mass grave - Yes. - or - No. - ??

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.

http://thisisaboutscience.com/
If the physical evidence for a claim that - HAS TO EXIST - in order for the claim to be true - DOES NOT EXIST - then that claim is false.
K
Keen
Posts: 1361
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2025 1:27 pm

Re: Historians v revisionists, methodology.

Post by Keen »

Nessie wrote: Wed Apr 15, 2026 6:33 pm I do not think you know how to go about evidencing there were no gas chambers.
If the physical evidence for an alleged crime that - HAS TO EXIST - for the crime to have

actually happened - DOES NOT EXIST - then the alleged crime obviously - DID NOT HAPPEN.

Ergo: The orthodox “pure extermination center” story is - A PROVEN, NONSENSICAL BIG-LIE.
If the physical evidence for a claim that - HAS TO EXIST - in order for the claim to be true - DOES NOT EXIST - then that claim is false.
Post Reply