Comments on other threads.

[Nessie]

Don't try to convince the rest of the world to accept the scale of the murders without presenting the total number of bodies or ashes allegedly recovered from cremations. I care little about the multitude of your witnesses or what transport documents say.

That is what the archaeological surveys have done. You just chose to not believe that evidence.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence; this is terrifying in the context of the Holocaust. It would be the same as a court convicting a man for abusing a woman even if the genetic material found is not his, or even if such material did not exist.

Why do you fail to produce evidence for your extraordinary claim that the mass murder of millions of Jews is a hoax?

[Stubble]

He isn't making a positive claim dumb shit. The burden of proof falls on you, you are making the claim, he is disputing it.

[Archie]

That is what the archaeological surveys have done. You just chose to not believe that evidence.

You have faith that those bodies were there, despite the lack of proof. Most of us do not have such faith.

[TlsMS93]

We are not making any claims, unlike you, who want to impose a narrative without sufficiently clear elements to corroborate it.

You wouldn't even need the amount of ashes from 800,000 bodies; if you presented something on the scale of 100,000 in ashes, it would already be strong evidence of your case, as it would be doubtful that something of that magnitude would occur in an isolated camp with only deportees in very poor health, deprived of water, or starving. But not even that is presented.

If you found burnt remains, that's enough; if you found remains of bodies without signs of violence, it can only have been gassed; there is no other explanation.

[Nessie]

That is what the archaeological surveys have done. You just chose to not believe that evidence.

You have faith that those bodies were there, despite the lack of proof. Most of us do not have such faith.

That is merely your opinion. The evidence is there to prove mass graves.

You have faith that the AR camps were used for a purpose that revisionists cannot agree on and that millions of Jews somehow survived WWII, without any evidence of the millions of Jews the Nazis and their Allies arrested, still alive in 1944-5. You also have faith in a conspiracy that you have no evidence of. Your claims that I lack evidence and have faith, are to deflect from your actual lack of evidence and reliance on faith.

[Nessie]

We are not making any claims, unlike you, who want to impose a narrative without sufficiently clear elements to corroborate it.

You are variously claiming that there is insufficient evidence to prove c800,000 corpses at TII and therefore it was not a death camp. You pretend that you are making no claims, as you know that you cannot evidence your claims.

You wouldn't even need the amount of ashes from 800,000 bodies; if you presented something on the scale of 100,000 in ashes, it would already be strong evidence of your case, as it would be doubtful that something of that magnitude would occur in an isolated camp with only deportees in very poor health, deprived of water, or starving. But not even that is presented.

I disagree. In 1945 the Poles identified and surveyed and area of 2 hectares, where they found the ground littered with decomposing human remains and ash, which stank. The ground had been disturbed by grave robbers, some of whom used explosives. They excavated one of the craters and found cremains up to 7m deep. In 2011 part of the same area was subject to a geophysical survey that found 5 pits in a row. That evidence corroborates the witness descriptions of the main mass grave area. You chose not to believe that evidence. You present no evidence to the contrary, from eyewitnesses, geophysics, or any other source.

If you found burnt remains, that's enough; if you found remains of bodies without signs of violence, it can only have been gassed; there is no other explanation.

What has been found at the TII camp site, corroborates the witness narratives of the operation of the camp. Until you can produce a revised chronological evidenced narrative, you have nothing.

[Nessie]

He isn't making a positive claim dumb shit. The burden of proof falls on you, you are making the claim, he is disputing it.

Disputing a claim requires evidence, otherwise it is just unsupported opinion. If someone disputes that they were at the scene of a crime, they need to show evidence they were elsewhere, or else the court will go with the evidence they were there. If a historian disputes a claim that 100,000 died at Dresden, it is up to them to evidence what the actual death toll is, or else the claim remains that 100,000 died.

It is bizarre that you think all you need to do is dispute a claim and then you can leave it at that, job done. If you tried that at university, or during a criminal investigation, you would be the subject of at least ridicule, if not dismissal from your role.
You either don't know how to dispute the claim of mass graves at TII, or you know that you lack the evidence, hence your suggesting you have no burden of proof. If I disputed a claim that you made, that you had evidence for, and then announced you had failed in your claim and I did not need to prove anything, would you accept my claim? No you would not!

For you to prove that there are no mass graves of c800,000 at TII you need evidence from;

- eyewitnesses who worked at the camp, who describe no mass graves and mass transports back out.
- eyewitnesses from the transports who describe what happened inside the camp, that did not involve gassing.
- archaeological and geophysical surveys of areas alleged to have mass graves, that show undisturbed ground.
- documents that prove hundreds of thousands of those sent to TII, were still alive elsewhere afterwards, such as transport records.

You have a lot of potential sources of evidence and from that, you can produce nothing. Hence, your pathetic attempt to excuse yourself from the burden of proof.