The Birkenau crematoria: what real 'convergence of evidence' looks like

[TlsMS93]

And he's doubling down. He is seriously claiming that Himmler is "irrelevant" as a witness because he didn't personally work in the Kremas. Hilarious.

Nessie, a basic principle of source criticism is, "The reliability of a given source is relative to the questions put to it." The question raised here in this thread is about when and why the Kremas were constructed. Himmler was a direct participant, indeed the key decision maker in this. Someone who worked in the Kremas would not have been involved in these decisions at all.

Let's summarize some of the key points so far,
-Nessie's claim that there are ZERO witnesses who have supported the revisionist interpretation of the Kremas is a deliberate falsehood.
-Himmler himself gave a revisionist interpretation for the Kremas.
-Himmler's claim is supported by abundant, contemporary documentation
-The timeline for the Krema construction supports the revisionist view but does not fit the orthodox timeline at all
-The evidence is so strong that even Pressac was forced to present a radically revised thesis about gas chambers being incorporated later during construction
-The Pressac proposal contradicts numerous classic sources such as Hoess and is at odds with what everyone believed for many decades

The problem is that exterminationists claim that Himmler was the first Holocaust denier.

[Nessie]

And he's doubling down. He is seriously claiming that Himmler is "irrelevant" as a witness because he didn't personally work in the Kremas. Hilarious.

Himmler could have only given hearsay evidence about the day to day operation of Kremas and hearsay is not normally allowed in courts.

Nessie, a basic principle of source criticism is, "The reliability of a given source is relative to the questions put to it." The question raised here in this thread is about when and why the Kremas were constructed. Himmler was a direct participant, indeed the key decision maker in this. Someone who worked in the Kremas would not have been involved in these decisions at all.

He could have given eyewitness evidence about the function of the Kremas, as he would have been in a position to know, but he may have not even got involved in the management, to preserve his plausible deniability.

All of this is moot, since he killed himself. That you suggest him as a witness, evidences my point that you have zero witnesses.

Let's summarize some of the key points so far,
-Nessie's claim that there are ZERO witnesses who have supported the revisionist interpretation of the Kremas is a deliberate falsehood.

You have ZERO witnesses who worked there. You then suggest Himmler, who killed himself before being questioned and Vrba who supports the use of the Kremas for gassings.

As for the revisionist interpretation, there are five interpretations, mass showers, delousing, corpse store, bomb shelter and normally functioning crematorium. You cannot produce a single witness who speaks to being inside the Kremas for any of those functions.

-Himmler himself gave a revisionist interpretation for the Kremas.

He made references that support the plausible deniability interpretation. He then killed himself.

-Himmler's claim is supported by abundant, contemporary documentation

Only if you cherry-pick the camp documentation and ignore 4 revisionist interpretations.

-The timeline for the Krema construction supports the revisionist view but does not fit the orthodox timeline at all

The timeline fits the temporary usage of the Kremas as gas chambers.

-The evidence is so strong that even Pressac was forced to present a radically revised thesis about gas chambers being incorporated later during construction

There has always been a debate as to when it was decided to use the Kremas for gassings. What is clear is that they used original plans that were for normally functioning Kremas, which would have been their long term use.

-The Pressac proposal contradicts numerous classic sources such as Hoess and is at odds with what everyone believed for many decades

You exaggerate. Pressac accepts the evidence, from Hoess and other sources, that the Kremas were used for mass gassings. He is part of the debate about planning and where the Kremas fit in.

You have dodged that it is revisionists who have contradictory claims about the functioning of the Kremas. Why are you correct and all the other revisionists are wrong?

[Nessie]

...

The problem is that exterminationists claim that Himmler was the first Holocaust denier.

Except, he wasn't. Despite knowing they were being accused of mass murder in death camps, Himmler did nothing to produce evidence that was not true and of millions of Jews still alive in camps and ghettos in 1944-5, evidence of which would have ended the mass murder claims instantly.

[TlsMS93]

Except, he wasn't. Despite knowing they were being accused of mass murder in death camps, Himmler did nothing to produce evidence that was not true and of millions of Jews still alive in camps and ghettos in 1944-5, evidence of which would have ended the mass murder claims instantly.

The Nazis determined that these millions would be deported to the East, to the occupied Eastern territories. In other words, there is no point in asking where the millions in western ghettos and camps were in 1944, because the USSR recovered the territory where these millions were supposedly taken. This explains the lack of ash corresponding to the millions in Reinhardt camps. If the final destination of these millions from the General Government was these camps, as stated in the report, it should correspond to the amount of ash found, and this does not happen. There is no point in appealing to disturbed soil, because it is not a contiguous soil perfectly excavated like a rectangle, as would be expected.

And the kremas prove more that the Holocaust did not happen in AB than the opposite. This explains the increasingly smaller number of deaths maintained by exterminationists like Pressac and Fritjof Meyer. Not even they can sustain the absurdity of the 1.1 to 1.5 million. They only did not decide that no Holocaust happened because socially it is a paradigm that destroys reputations and careers if it is challenged.

[Nessie]

Except, he wasn't. Despite knowing they were being accused of mass murder in death camps, Himmler did nothing to produce evidence that was not true and of millions of Jews still alive in camps and ghettos in 1944-5, evidence of which would have ended the mass murder claims instantly.

The Nazis determined that these millions would be deported to the East, to the occupied Eastern territories. In other words, there is no point in asking where the millions in western ghettos and camps were in 1944, because the USSR recovered the territory where these millions were supposedly taken.

There is no evidence to support that claim. The Nazis did not claim to have left millions of Jews to be liberated by the Soviets and the Soviets did not claim they liberated millions of Jews.

This explains the lack of ash corresponding to the millions in Reinhardt camps.

You have never quantified, with evidence, how much ash there is at the camps and how that does not correspond to no mass pyres.

If the final destination of these millions from the General Government was these camps, as stated in the report, it should correspond to the amount of ash found, and this does not happen. There is no point in appealing to disturbed soil, because it is not a contiguous soil perfectly excavated like a rectangle, as would be expected.

I would expect mass graves that had been dug into to exhume the corpses, to not be perfectly rectangular. Chelmno was found to have a series of rectilinear pits. TII also had such identified during the geophysical survey. Belzec and Sobibor were more irregular again, indicating more digging.

And the kremas prove more that the Holocaust did not happen in AB than the opposite.

So-called revisionists have come up with 5 competing hypothesis as to what the Kremas were used for 1943-4. They cannot claim to have proved no gassings, when they cannot even agree on what did happen.

This explains the increasingly smaller number of deaths maintained by exterminationists like Pressac and Fritjof Meyer. Not even they can sustain the absurdity of the 1.1 to 1.5 million. They only did not decide that no Holocaust happened because socially it is a paradigm that destroys reputations and careers if it is challenged.

The main reason for the reduction in the death toll, was when the Polish authorities changed from using the Soviet total, to the western one. Other than that, variations are explained by historians revising previous research with more evidence.

[Stubble]

Nessie, how do you bury the population of liverpool, here?

Caroline Coll's GPR results are such an own goal. Courtesy of Blake from SSF- the covered-up areas of Treblinka are only about 1.6 hectares. Given that Colls found no significant mass graves of a corresponding size or shape to those alleged outside the covered areas, they rely on an absurd hope that 100% of the covered area covers the real mass graves. But the actual possible areas those mass graves could be theoretically is no more than 2 hectares for the burial of 700,000-800,000 people, with 1.6 hectares of that being covered areas which most certainly is not all grave space.



AFAIK the memorial stones weren't even placed in those areas based on any rigorous scientific study. The Treblinka Story is so incredibly weak it's absurd.

They, don't, fit, in, the, hole....

[TlsMS93]

In the same way that exterminationists cling to the Nazi conspiracy to destroy evidence without any evidence of it, anyone can argue that the Allies, already with their minds made up about the genocide of Jews in the middle of the war, before any in-depth forensic investigation, ordered the confiscation and destruction of evidence that could shed light on the reality, especially behind the Iron Curtain where the bulk or all of the Holocaust supposedly took place.

Stalin would be the first to deny the existence of Jewish minorities in his power with this aim in mind, in the same way that he exaggerated the number of Germans killed in Barbarossa. Your problem is ignoring the elephant in the room or thinking that the Warsaw Pact was made up of fair countries committed to historical truth or that the USSR and these countries had nothing to do with each other.

[Archie]

Except, he wasn't. Despite knowing they were being accused of mass murder in death camps, Himmler did nothing to produce evidence that was not true and of millions of Jews still alive in camps and ghettos in 1944-5, evidence of which would have ended the mass murder claims instantly.

The Nazis determined that these millions would be deported to the East, to the occupied Eastern territories. In other words, there is no point in asking where the millions in western ghettos and camps were in 1944, because the USSR recovered the territory where these millions were supposedly taken.

There is no evidence to support that claim. The Nazis did not claim to have left millions of Jews to be liberated by the Soviets and the Soviets did not claim they liberated millions of Jews.

This explains the lack of ash corresponding to the millions in Reinhardt camps.

You have never quantified, with evidence, how much ash there is at the camps and how that does not correspond to no mass pyres.

If the final destination of these millions from the General Government was these camps, as stated in the report, it should correspond to the amount of ash found, and this does not happen. There is no point in appealing to disturbed soil, because it is not a contiguous soil perfectly excavated like a rectangle, as would be expected.

I would expect mass graves that had been dug into to exhume the corpses, to not be perfectly rectangular. Chelmno was found to have a series of rectilinear pits. TII also had such identified during the geophysical survey. Belzec and Sobibor were more irregular again, indicating more digging.

And the kremas prove more that the Holocaust did not happen in AB than the opposite.

So-called revisionists have come up with 5 competing hypothesis as to what the Kremas were used for 1943-4. They cannot claim to have proved no gassings, when they cannot even agree on what did happen.

This explains the increasingly smaller number of deaths maintained by exterminationists like Pressac and Fritjof Meyer. Not even they can sustain the absurdity of the 1.1 to 1.5 million. They only did not decide that no Holocaust happened because socially it is a paradigm that destroys reputations and careers if it is challenged.

The main reason for the reduction in the death toll, was when the Polish authorities changed from using the Soviet total, to the western one. Other than that, variations are explained by historians revising previous research with more evidence.

This is a derail. Let’s settle the question of why the Kremas were constructed and whether the evidence better fits the revisionist thesis that this is explained by the “normal” deaths or the extermination program thesis that these were built as mass execution facilities. You have not addressed any of the points made in the OP.

[Archie]

“So-called revisionists have come up with 5 competing hypothesis”

This is nonsense. Revisionists agree with the fundamental purpose as described by Himmler.

Where there has been some disagreement is over the interpretations of very specific construction documents where there is insufficient contextual documentation to draw a definitive conclusion.

Moreover these interpretations are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and none of them conflict with the primary crematorium with morgues interpretation.

Meanwhile you have failed to address the contradictions in your side’s theories.

[Nessie]

....
This is a derail. Let’s settle the question of why the Kremas were constructed and whether the evidence better fits the revisionist thesis that this is explained by the “normal” deaths or the extermination program thesis that these were built as mass execution facilities. You have not addressed any of the points made in the OP.

Why is your "thesis", the revisionist "thesis"? What about the other revisionist "theses"?

[Nessie]

“So-called revisionists have come up with 5 competing hypothesis”

This is nonsense. Revisionists agree with the fundamental purpose as described by Himmler.

Where does Himmler describe mass showering, use as an air raid shelter, delousing chambers or corpse stores?

Where there has been some disagreement is over the interpretations of very specific construction documents where there is insufficient contextual documentation to draw a definitive conclusion.

Why are you only using one form of evidence to determine what happened? How does a heated undressing room, gas chambers and barracks to store property fit with the normal function of a crematorium?

What about the circumstantial evidence of mass arrivals, selections and those not selected for work going to the Kremas and then disappearing from the documentary trail?

Moreover these interpretations are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and none of them conflict with the primary crematorium with morgues interpretation.

Mass showers and delousing chambers certainly conflict with the morgue interpretation. I supposed people could shelter inside the Leichenkeller during a raid, if it had a normal mortuary function. The corpse storage hypothesis fits OK with your, it was a normal mortuary hypothesis.

Meanwhile you have failed to address the contradictions in your side’s theories.

What contradictions? 100% of the Krema workers describe undressing, gas chambers and cremations. Documents record undressing rooms, gas chambers and cremations. The circumstantial evidence fits that process.

[borjastick]

He and they keep going with the 'millions of jews' claim when anyone sensible knows there were never millions of jews under German control let alone banged up in the camps. It is just isn't true and so when you look at the numbers who were in the camp system, less those who died of natural causes and those who survived (many many many) you can quickly realise that the 6m figure and millions of jews killed routine is simply laughable.

Tilting at windmills is fun if you're an idiot. Don Quixote loved doing it and so does someone who has to tilt at every churning windmill he can for fear of missing one line of argument and defending his position, and we all know who that is.

[Nessie]

He and they keep going with the 'millions of jews' claim when anyone sensible knows there were never millions of jews under German control let alone banged up in the camps. It is just isn't true and so when you look at the numbers who were in the camp system, less those who died of natural causes and those who survived (many many many) you can quickly realise that the 6m figure and millions of jews killed routine is simply laughable.

Tilting at windmills is fun if you're an idiot. Don Quixote loved doing it and so does someone who has to tilt at every churning windmill he can for fear of missing one line of argument and defending his position, and we all know who that is.

The Wannsee Conference minutes, Korherr Report and Einstazgruppen OSRs alone, evidence millions of Jews being identified and arrested. The countries the Nazis occupied or were aligned to also kept records. Transport records, such as the Hofle Telegram, evidence mass movement of millions of Jews.

[Archie]

Mass showers and delousing chambers certainly conflict with the morgue interpretation. I supposed people could shelter inside the Leichenkeller during a raid, if it had a normal mortuary function. The corpse storage hypothesis fits OK with your, it was a normal mortuary hypothesis.

Why couldn't you have showers in a crematorium building? This actually makes sense because the heat can be used for hot water.

There were proposals in 1943 (this is documented) to install ~100 hot showers in I think it was Krema III. This never happened.

One of the inventory sheets mentioned 14 showers. Pressac claims these were fake. Revisionists say they were real. Why would it be impossible to have 14 showers somewhere in that big building? Are you seriously suggesting there was insufficient space to for this?

Regarding delousing, there are documents discussing plans to use hot air disinfestation devices in the Kremas. This would not likely conflict with the corpse storage functions.

Mattogno has suggested possible Zyklon delousing was intended but this never actually happened. This physical evidence strongly suggests Zyklon was never used (at least not intensively in those buildings.

Much of these debates are about plans for things that never actually happened. You are acting like interpreting the minutiae of construction documents decades after the fact with incomplete context is easy. It isn't. It's "easy" for you because you are a dogmatic retard who is working from a fixed conclusion.

Meanwhile you have failed to address the contradictions in your side’s theories.

What contradictions? 100% of the Krema workers describe undressing, gas chambers and cremations. Documents record undressing rooms, gas chambers and cremations. The circumstantial evidence fits that process.

The contradictions that you have been dodging this entire thread.

When did Hitler give the order for the Final Solution? And when was this order given to Hoess?

Traditionally this was said to have been spring/summer of 1941. Now it seems most of you say Dec 1941. Browning says around Sep 1941. All of this is guessing since they don't have any hard documentation for it.

Hoess claimed he got his orders in summer of 1941. Hilberg accepted this timing (at least in his first edition) as did Dawidowicz. Reitlinger accepted an early timeline for the final solution but argued that Hoess must have meant 1942 since 1941 is not possible for various reasons. This 1942 fix seems to be pretty common. But it falls apart when you get into the specifics.

After settling on a date for the orders, we then can ask about when were the decisions made regarding the construction of the crematoria and what was the motivation for this decision. Pressac's theory is a radical departure from the traditional theories. Why are the theories contradictory?

Lol at you and your "everyone agrees on gas chambers" so there are no contradictions. Uh, "gas chambers" is a little vague. How about coming up with a coherent chain of events that doesn't completely fall apart.

[Nessie]

Mass showers and delousing chambers certainly conflict with the morgue interpretation. I supposed people could shelter inside the Leichenkeller during a raid, if it had a normal mortuary function. The corpse storage hypothesis fits OK with your, it was a normal mortuary hypothesis.

Why couldn't you have showers in a crematorium building? This actually makes sense because the heat can be used for hot water.

There were proposals in 1943 (this is documented) to install ~100 hot showers in I think it was Krema III. This never happened.

One of the inventory sheets mentioned 14 showers. Pressac claims these were fake. Revisionists say they were real. Why would it be impossible to have 14 showers somewhere in that big building? Are you seriously suggesting there was insufficient space to for this?

Regarding delousing, there are documents discussing plans to use hot air disinfestation devices in the Kremas. This would not likely conflict with the corpse storage functions.

Mattogno has suggested possible Zyklon delousing was intended but this never actually happened. This physical evidence strongly suggests Zyklon was never used (at least not intensively in those buildings.

Much of these debates are about plans for things that never actually happened. You are acting like interpreting the minutiae of construction documents decades after the fact with incomplete context is easy. It isn't.

The context of usage is evidenced. Only so-called revisionists would study what did not happen. You struggle, because you are trying to do something that is illogical and unevidenced.

The suggested bomb shelters, showers, delousing chambers etc do conflict and you cannot produce an evidenced timeline of usage of the Kremas, which is a basic task for any investigation.

It's "easy" for you because you are a dogmatic retard who is working from a fixed conclusion.

No, I am studying the Holocaust using exactly the same methodology I would study any historical event, by following the evidence to a corroborated, logical conclusion.

Meanwhile you have failed to address the contradictions in your side’s theories.

What contradictions? 100% of the Krema workers describe undressing, gas chambers and cremations. Documents record undressing rooms, gas chambers and cremations. The circumstantial evidence fits that process.

The contradictions that you have been dodging this entire thread.

When did Hitler give the order for the Final Solution? And when was this order given to Hoess?

Traditionally this was said to have been spring/summer of 1941. Now it seems most of you say Dec 1941. Browning says around Sep 1941. All of this is guessing since they don't have any hard documentation for it.

Hoess claimed he got his orders in summer of 1941. Hilberg accepted this timing (at least in his first edition) as did Dawidowicz. Reitlinger accepted an early timeline for the final solution but argued that Hoess must have meant 1942 since 1941 is not possible for various reasons. This 1942 fix seems to be pretty common. But it falls apart when you get into the specifics.

After settling on a date for the orders, we then can ask about when were the decisions made regarding the construction of the crematoria and what was the motivation for this decision. Pressac's theory is a radical departure from the traditional theories. Why are the theories contradictory?[/quote]

They do not contradict. They disagree as to what month in 1941 the orders for and how the management of the Holocaust developed and was run. That is due to the relative lack of evidence, such as Hitler order that specifically mentions the Final Solution.

Lol at you and your "everyone agrees on gas chambers" so there are no contradictions. Uh, "gas chambers" is a little vague. How about coming up with a coherent chain of events that doesn't completely fall apart.

How about you do that? As for A-B, from 1941, prisoners and arriving Jews not needed for work were gassed, and when the AR camps had closed, A-B took over as the main death camp, for the 1944 Hungarian action and the last of the ghettos.