Archie wrote: ↑Sun Jul 05, 2026 3:58 pm
Evidence is any relevant data that would inform a conclusion. This includes material directly related to the point in question (like testimonies) but also contextual data which is necessary to evaluate the plausibility of the claims. A major difference between revisionists and Nessie is that Nessie believes that if there are multiple witnesses that the witnesses corroborate
each other and that whatever they say is proven.
That is wrong and I have said that on numerous occasions. Multiple witnesses claimed women were witches and the same for alien abductions. They are all wrong, therefore, multiple witnesses on their own are not enough to corroborate and prove the truthfulness of the event they allege. Archie knows this, so I can safely say that he is lying by misrepresenting me.
I have said that when an accused and witnesses agree with each other and corroborate, that is strong corroboration. There is not a court in the world, that does not attach credibility to a crime, where the accused admits the crime and speaks to the same events as those who witnessed what took place. But, there still needs to be other evidence, independent of the witnesses, to prove the crime could and did happen.
Revisionists in contrast do not regard multiple similar testimonies as proof and revisionists use science and technical considerations to evaluate the claims.
If that was the case, so-called revisionists would not repeatedly use witches and alien abductions as false analogies, comparing such to Germans building and operating gas chambers.
Mass graves with over 20 bodies per cubic meter, cremating a body with only 15 kg of wood, burning four bodies per hour in a single muffle, etc.
They are hypotheticals, based on incomplete evidence and estimations. A genuine scientific enquiry would accept that much of the data about how many people were buried in the mass graves, is missing and we do not know exactly how many were buried, in what size of graves and even what happens when naked corpses are dumped on top of each other, for months on end, where corrosive material may have also been used.
These claims don't hold up no matter how many supposed "eyewitnesses" you trot out.
Just because you cannot work out, to your satisfaction, how the gassings, graves and cremations worked, is not evidence to prove those events did not happen. You are biased and your opinion is clouded.
According to Nessie, looking at the relevant contextual data is not allowed. We just have to believe the witnesses.
That is a lie. I have spent many posts discussing the other, corroborating evidence, such as documents that record the construction of gas chambers inside the Kremas, and archaeological surveys of the AR camps that have found large areas of disturbed ground containing buried, cremated remains.
And then even on witnesses and documents Nessie is extremely selective. Nessie claims there's "no evidence" that LKs were morgues. If we point out that the blueprints call them morgues, he says they were converted later on (he can't explain why they didn't design them as gas chambers from the beginning which is the traditional story).
What is evidenced to have happened, is that the Kremas were originally designed with corpse stores, that Topf & Sons then converted for temporary use as gas chambers, which would have been converted back to corpse stores, once gassing operations had been completed. But, that did not happen. Krema I was instead converted to use as air raid shelter and the other Kremas were blown up, as the Soviets advanced and the Nazis knew it was likely A-B would need to be abandoned.
There is no traditional story as historians have disagreed on how much initial planning there was and how much did the original designers of the Kremas know about their intended use?
When we point him to documents describing the rooms being used as morgues, Nessie simply dodges this and speculates that there was a "policy of keeping the usage of the Kremas as obscured and secret as possible."
viewtopic.php?t=134
There are no documents describing the Leichenkellers as being used as morgues. Instead, there are documents that describe the transporting of corpses from around the camp to the Kremas. You assume they were stored before being cremated, but evidence of 24 hour cremation operations, negates the need for storage and the corpses likely went straight to the ovens.
When it is pointed out that Himmler, the man who ordered the construction of the crematoria, stated that they were built for hygienic purposes, Nessie (absurdly) claims Himmler is not a relevant witness.
https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=315
Himmler did not work at the Kremas. The buildings were evidenced to have been converted for a temporary gassing operation in 1943-4, after the AR camps had closed down. The long term plan, along with the expansion of Birkenau with the addition of the "Mexico" camp, was to use the buildings as crematoriums. There are also documents that refer to "special" actions, treatment and evidence the gas chambers were made to look like showers, hence any reference to hygiene, eas code for gassing.
Sanity Check - "Thus, currently revisionists can console themselves by affirming their incredulity..."
