Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

[Keen]

Not seeing an elephant in ones basement is self evident proof that there is no elephant in ones basement, and one can be 100% certain that there is no elephant in ones basement if one cannot be seen.

CJ, I am 100% sure, base on the fact that it's a self evident truth derived from the Ipso facto / convergence of the lack of physical evidence method, that the following is true:

It is alleged in orthodox historiography that, during WW II, hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of corpses were buried in numerous “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II. However, despite all the deceptive allegations to the contrary, the truth is, the largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the one hundred graves / cremation pits that are fraudulently alleged to have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at these sites, in which verified human remains have been tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology, contained the remains of - ONLY FIVE PEOPLE.

You are 100% emotionally "sure" but that's not the same thing as actually being sure. Your epistemics, the understanding of how to determine what is true, are deeply flawed.

Without good epistemics, you can't think clearly or articulate yourself clearly.

I don't see a huge mass grave with the remains of more than 5 people in it. If there were a huge mass grave with the remains of more than 5 people in it, the jews would be rubbing my nose in it and collecting the reward money for doing so.

http://thisisaboutscience.com/

Therefore, I am 100% certain that there are no huge mass graves with the remains of more than 5 people in them.

It's a self evident truth / Ipso facto / convergence of the lack of physical evidence method thing CJ, which you apparently don't have the mental capacity to understand.

CJ, if the remains of 2,145,000 people are buried in 100 "huge mass graves," and 4 of the 100 "huge mass graves" contain the remains of a total of 8 people, on average; the remains of how many people are buried in each of the remaining 96 graves?

[ConfusedJew]

2nd dodge noted CJ.

Do you lack the basic intelligence to answer this question that you are unwilling to answer:

V - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; If 100 graves contained the bones and teeth of 2.1 million people - then each grave would contain, on average, the remains of 21,000 people - ??

Or are you afraid to?

I didn't dodge, I answered your question in an honest and accurate way. This is a debate or discussion and not a legal trial so there is no official burden of proof. If you make a specific claim, then it is on you to show evidence for it. Since the debate is on whether or not the Holocaust is real, the burden of proof is for you to convince me or for me to convince you. Only on specific claims is there a burden of proof.

Assuming that you have bones and teeth of 2.1 million people, whatever that means, spread across only 100 graves, then sure they would have 21,000 people in them on average. That's a mathematical tautology. 2.1m / 100 = 21,000.

But now you have to explain the relevance of that to me because that alone isn't an interesting question. And as I've mentioned I don't want to talk about forensic evidence so you keep pulling me away. I'm setting a boundary again. If you keep pulling me away from the topic on hand, which is why you think the Holocaust is fake at a high level, then I will stop responding again.

[ConfusedJew]

Here's an updated math question for you CJ:

If the remains of 2,145,000 people are buried in 100 "huge mass graves," and 4 of the 100 "huge mass graves" contain the remains of a total of 8 people, on average; the remains of how many people are buried in each of the remaining 96 graves?

It is much more direct and easy for everybody if you just make the argument mathematically using real numbers and then provide evidence for your assumptions and explain your method.

These hypothetical math questions are set up to be some kind of gotcha questions but I am happy to just audit your logic and numbers directly.

[Stubble]

I'll rephrase the math question posed by user Keen for you as you seem to have missed it CJ.

If Cookie Monster is trying to sell you 2,145,000 cookies in 100 cookie jars, and you open a couple of the cookie jars and only find 8 cookies, are you going to be skeptical about buying the rest of the cookie jars from him?

[Keen]

While it is true that much physical evidence doesn't exist, many would argue that it was because the Nazis destroyed the evidence to conceal their crimes, there is still significant physical evidence that has been recovered and studied extensively by historians, forensic experts, and archaeologists.

If you make a specific claim, then it is on you to show evidence for it.

CJ, is there still significant physical evidence at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II that has been recovered and studied by forensic experts and archaeologists that proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a mass grave exists at one or more of those sites that contains the remains of more than 5 people - Yes. - or - No. - ??

To help you answer that simple question, let me remind you what Chat gpt answered to this question: "How many mass graves have been proven to exist at Treblinka II that contain the remains of more than 5 people?"

... the existence of numerous mass graves at Treblinka II is well-documented and proven... each of these mass graves contains hundreds to thousands of individuals.

And about that "evidence" that was "concealed" by the Germans:

IV - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; Covering millions upon millions of pounds of bones and teeth with “a thick layer of sand” makes them magically disappear - ??

[ConfusedJew]

I think I have gotten a pretty good high level understanding of the overall pushback on this thread. I can consider it mostly completed and now I'll break down the controversy into smaller subsections.

I said I wasn't interested in discussing the forensics of physical evidence and you keep distracting the overall discussion so I will bring that up later.

[ConfusedJew]

I'll rephrase the math question posed by user Keen for you as you seem to have missed it CJ.

If Cookie Monster is trying to sell you 2,145,000 cookies in 100 cookie jars, and you open a couple of the cookie jars and only find 8 cookies, are you going to be skeptical about buying the rest of the cookie jars from him?

The analogy doesn't hold. Bodies are very different from "cookies" especially when they are burned. I'll start more specific threads to keep things on track.

[Nessie]

I'll rephrase the math question posed by user Keen for you as you seem to have missed it CJ.

If Cookie Monster is trying to sell you 2,145,000 cookies in 100 cookie jars, and you open a couple of the cookie jars and only find 8 cookies, are you going to be skeptical about buying the rest of the cookie jars from him?

The analogy doesn't hold. Bodies are very different from "cookies" especially when they are burned. I'll start more specific threads to keep things on track.

When the cookie jars are the largest in history and they are full of crumbs and broken down cookies, then I would not be so sceptical about what the Cookie Monster is selling.

[ConfusedJew]

When the cookie jars are the largest in history and they are full of crumbs and broken down cookies, then I would not be so sceptical about what the Cookie Monster is selling.

There's a very strong forensic archaeological evidence that they dismiss without a justifiable reason. I'm not a forensic archaeologist, but I do actually have an archaeologist friend that can help me figure this out if necessary although she would probably be mortified if I asked her to look into this. With AI, you can figure these kinds of things out in a matter of minutes.

[Callafangers]

When the cookie jars are the largest in history and they are full of crumbs and broken down cookies, then I would not be so sceptical about what the Cookie Monster is selling.

There's a very strong forensic archaeological evidence that they dismiss without a justifiable reason. I'm not a forensic archaeologist, but I do actually have an archaeologist friend that can help me figure this out if necessary although she would probably be mortified if I asked her to look into this. With AI, you can figure these kinds of things out in a matter of minutes.

Ooh boy, who wants to tell him?

[ConfusedJew]

Ooh boy, who wants to tell him?

If you actually had something of substance to say, to my logical argument, you would have just come out eye it.

Somebody mentioned that the existing forensic archaeological evidence was worthless but when I asked why, nobody answered, and when I did a search for it, nothing came up. So in this case, the burden of proof is on you guys.

[Nessie]

When the cookie jars are the largest in history and they are full of crumbs and broken down cookies, then I would not be so sceptical about what the Cookie Monster is selling.

There's a very strong forensic archaeological evidence that they dismiss without a justifiable reason. I'm not a forensic archaeologist, but I do actually have an archaeologist friend that can help me figure this out if necessary although she would probably be mortified if I asked her to look into this. With AI, you can figure these kinds of things out in a matter of minutes.

Ooh boy, who wants to tell him?

There is a ton of archaeological evidence to prove huge areas of disturbed ground containing cremated remains at the AR camps and Chelmno. Links here;

https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic. ... acbdbc0fb7

The areas found are larger than any other mass deaths in history. No mass grave site, from battles to plagues, are on the scale of what was found at those camp sites.

Holocaust revisionists play down and minimise the scale of the finds, asserting they are not enough. None produce any archaeological evidence to back up their assertions. Instead, they make back of the envelope calculations based on guess work, as to how many corpses fit in a space, ignoring that corpses were naked and decomposed under pressure in the graves, leaving what Kola called a waxy fat transition. The corpses that were not exhumed, had congealed together into one mass, leaving no space.

Ignorant, agenda driven opinion, from people with no relevant training, is more or less worthless.

[Stubble]

The most thorough examination I'm aware of is the Kola study. There is a thread on it here. They found actual evidence of human remains. Not in the quantity used to calculate the 6,000,000, but human remains none the less.

In my opinion, the Kola study thoroughly undermines the thesis of 'aktion 1005' which has always been used to justify the distinct lack of human remains.

So far as the burden of proof goes, the burden of proof always falls to positive claims as you can not prove a negative.

[Nessie]

The most thorough examination I'm aware of is the Kola study. There is a thread on it here. They found actual evidence of human remains. Not in the quantity used to calculate the 6,000,000, but human remains none the less.

In my opinion, the Kola study thoroughly undermines the thesis of 'aktion 1005' which has always been used to justify the distinct lack of human remains.

So far as the burden of proof goes, the burden of proof always falls to positive claims as you can not prove a negative.

I know what is needed, to prove there were no gas chambers inside the A-B Kremas. I know how to prove a negative claim. It is the same evidence gathering process that is used to prove a positive claim, such as, that there were gas chambers inside the Kremas. If evidence is gathered from Krema workers, documents, circumstances, physical items, and that evidence proves the Kremas were used for a purpose other than gassings, then gassings is proven not to have happened.

The problem so-called revisionists have, is that there is no evidence to prove what did happen inside the Kremas, that was not gassings. By proving what did happen, the negative has been proven. Those revisionists do try to revise the history of the Kremas, to they were used as delousing chambers, showers, corpse stores or bomb shelters. But, they cannot find sufficient evidence to prove their claims, which is why they cannot reach any agreement and they contradict each other.

I can prove the D-Day landings were not on the beaches of Belgium. I can do that by interviewing Belgian residents and German soldiers based there, would report that on D-Day, no Allied soldiers landed on the beaches. I would find no film or photos of landings there, no Allied plans, nothing. I have now proved a negative.

So-called revisionists, with their ignorance about investigations, think that it is not possible to prove a negative, when in fact it is quite simple to do so.

[borjastick]

When the cookie jars are the largest in history and they are full of crumbs and broken down cookies, then I would not be so sceptical about what the Cookie Monster is selling.

There's a very strong forensic archaeological evidence that they dismiss without a justifiable reason. I'm not a forensic archaeologist, but I do actually have an archaeologist friend that can help me figure this out if necessary although she would probably be mortified if I asked her to look into this. With AI, you can figure these kinds of things out in a matter of minutes.

Ooh boy, who wants to tell him?

They don't seem to get it or maybe they do and are using the AI argument because it gives them the answer they want to hear. AI only scans the internet and gets its answer from what is concluded and published on it. It doesn't think or apply rationale questioning. It is a repeating music box.

This was proven some months ago by Tony Heller who is a famous Youtube climate crisis challenger. He asked a certain question about data and temperatures and got an answer than was easily disproved once he had gone inside the published data and applied logic etc.