Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

[borjastick]

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.

Fish Fryer

There is plenty of evidence dear and you've been presented with it many many times but you can't deal with it so, like a stuck record, you just repeat the same old shit hoping we'll go away or your personal brilliance will attract newbies to your cause. It won't.

Now get back in the kitchen.

[Nessie]

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.

Fish Fryer

There is plenty of evidence dear and you've been presented with it many many times but you can't deal with it so, like a stuck record, you just repeat the same old shit hoping we'll go away or your personal brilliance will attract newbies to your cause. It won't.

Now get back in the kitchen.

Plenty of evidence of what? Delousing chambers, showers, normal crematorium use, corpse stores or bomb shelters? Or something else? That so-called revisionists cannot agree, proves how scant the evidence is, for each competing, contradictory claim. You cannot even find a single eyewitness who worked in a Krema, who speaks to any of the suggested, alternative functions.

[Stubble]

If mass gassings occured at Auschwitz Birkenau in Kremas II and III specifically (also IV and V), then there should be physical evidence of that.

That there isn't is a glaring problem with the orthodox thesis.

If you are going to say they were cremated in the crematoria (which would make sense), then you need to come up with supply of fuel and records of refractory replacement.

If you are going to say they were burned in outdoor open air cremations, you are going to have to evidence where the pyres were and where the remains are.

If you are going to say they were directly buried, you are going to have to show where.

No trace of hydrogen cyanide gas in the walls of the LK's referred to as 1 above background levels is not a strong point for your case. A lack of any remains is not a strong point for your case. A lack of evidence of mass outdoor open air cremations is not a strong point for your case.

You can't hand wave all of that away because some revisionists disagree on one specific point or another. That doesn't make your case.

If you are going to claim mass executions, you are going to have to show mass human remains.

[Keen]

With AI, you can figure these kinds of things out in a matter of minutes.

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.

Oh, and here is a reminder of what CJ said:

there is still significant physical evidence that has been recovered and studied extensively by historians, forensic experts, and archaeologists

So if mass graves have been "proven" like AI says, and what CJ says about his confidence in AI and the extant physical evidence that has been recovered and studied extensively by historians, forensic experts, and archaeologists actually does exist, then CJ shouln't have any reason for his continued dodging.

But continue to dodge he does.

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. - ??

[Keen]

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

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.

The corpses that were not exhumed, had congealed together into one mass, leaving no space.

Nessie, concerning the alleged "tons of archaeological evidence" at these areas alleged to be "larger than any other in history;" 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. - ??

[Keen]

in this case, the burden of proof is on you guys.

No it's not CJ, it's on you:

CJ:

there is still significant physical evidence that has been recovered and studied extensively by historians, forensic experts, and archaeologists

[Keen]

There is a ton of archaeological evidence to prove huge...

Let's be clear here:

When you say "a ton of archaeological evidence" do you mean a ton of physical evidence?

A simple yes or no would suffice Nessie.

(Place your bets on whether or not Nessie is going to dodge this simple clarifying question. I bet he lacks the courage, integrity and character to answer.)

[Keen]

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.

Nessie, regarding the sophistic exterminationsist allegation that one cannot prove that no mass graves exist at at B, C, P, S & T II; do you deny that the ipso facto / convergence of the lack of physical evidence / self evident proof method proves that no "huge mass graves" exist at those sites?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

[ConfusedJew]

Let's be clear here:

When you say "a ton of archaeological evidence" do you mean a ton of physical evidence?

A simple yes or no would suffice Nessie.

(Place your bets on whether or not Nessie is going to dodge this simple clarifying question. I bet he lacks the courage, integrity and character to answer.)

Is this a rhetorical question? Of course archaeological evidence is one type of physical evidence.

[Keen]

Let's be clear here:

When you say "a ton of archaeological evidence" do you mean a ton of physical evidence?

A simple yes or no would suffice Nessie.

(Place your bets on whether or not Nessie is going to dodge this simple clarifying question. I bet he lacks the courage, integrity and character to answer.)

Is this a rhetorical question? Of course archaeological evidence is one type of physical evidence.

First off, the question wasn't directed at you.

Second, I didn't ask if archaeological evidence is one type of physical evidence.

Your lack of intelligence is really evident here.