Examples of the argument from incredulity.

[Archie]

You cannot say, "historically, there were 800,000 Jews buried at exactly X location" while simultaneously not be saying, "there are scientifically-verifiable traces of the scale upwards of 800,000 Jews buried at exactly X location." This holds true unless you can explain within reason how these traces (e.g., vast volumes of stratified ash/bone equivalent to city populations, fuel logistics at unprecedented scales) may have disappeared. Either way, you are well-within the realm of science; not just historiography.

Callafangers thinks that because he does not find the archaeological evidence that there were c800,000 Jews buried and/or cremated at TII convincing, that is evidence to prove no such number were buried and/or cremated there.

This is so dumb.

If 800,000 were buried there, there would be abundant physical remains.

The remains are not there. (Or have not yet been shown).

Therefore 800,000 were not buried there.

That is logically consistent. You can counter this by either 1) showing the the remains are in fact there (challenge to premise 2), or, 2) conceding the remains are not there but explaining why (challenge to premise 1).

You are dismissing arguments without making any substantive counterpoints.

[Archie]

Borjastick,

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=21817#p21817

Here's another fun question or two which proves the holocaust could not have happened.

Why is it that in the camps which are supposed to have been death camps no mass graves or bodies or evidence of mass murder exists yet in the mainly German based camps such as Belsen the bodies were left in their thousands for all to see. How is it possible that in a 'death camp' all evidence was magically disappeared and yet in a normal camp it wasn't? If it was possible to cremate all these millions of bodies in Auschwitz, Majdanek, Sobibor, Treblinka in a very short period of time in ovens that could not have handled such volumes, and then dispose of the thousands of tons of cremains such that they were never seen again, why not in the other camps on Western soil was this planning and facility nowhere to be seen or implemeted.

He cannot get his head round certain questions he poses, and argues the means no mass murder happened. The question he raises, about there being no evidence of mass murder, is false. The suggestion that the evidence of mass graves at the AR camps "magically disappeared" is also false. Those false claims are used to support his incredulity about mass murder, and he uses that incredulity to support his disbelief.

Nonsense.

In which of the following camps has a greater quantity of human remains been demonstrated?

Bergen-Belsen or Treblinka?

B is highlighting the dearth of physical evidence that has been provided for the millions supposedly killed at these camps. That is a good point. That you incorrectly call it a fallacy merely reveals your irrationality.

[Nessie]

You cannot say, "historically, there were 800,000 Jews buried at exactly X location" while simultaneously not be saying, "there are scientifically-verifiable traces of the scale upwards of 800,000 Jews buried at exactly X location." This holds true unless you can explain within reason how these traces (e.g., vast volumes of stratified ash/bone equivalent to city populations, fuel logistics at unprecedented scales) may have disappeared. Either way, you are well-within the realm of science; not just historiography.

Callafangers thinks that because he does not find the archaeological evidence that there were c800,000 Jews buried and/or cremated at TII convincing, that is evidence to prove no such number were buried and/or cremated there.

This is so dumb.

If 800,000 were buried there, there would be abundant physical remains.

Correct.

The remains are not there. (Or have not yet been shown).

In your opinion, where you dispute the evidence that there are mass graves and a huge amount of cremated remains. You have not produced any evidence, such as GPR showing undisturbed ground, or eyewitnesses who state there never were any mass graves, or transport records of hundreds of thousands leaving the camp, to prove there cannot be c800,000 buried there.

Therefore 800,000 were not buried there.

Your conclusion is based on your disbelief of the evidence that there are c800,000 buried there, rather than evidence to prove there cannot be so many buried there. You rely on arguing there cannot be so many people buried there, as you cannot produce any of the types or forms of evidence that would prove no mass graves of c800,000.

That is logically consistent. You can counter this by either 1) showing the the remains are in fact there (challenge to premise 2), or, 2) conceding the remains are not there but explaining why (challenge to premise 1).

You are dismissing arguments without making any substantive counterpoints.

I am dismissing your argument, by showing how it follows the form of the argument from incredulity. You are disbelieving in, incredulous of, the evidence produced by historians and archaeologists of mass graves and buried cremains and claim that is proof there are no such mass graves or so many buried there.

What you are doing, is the equivalent of me arguing Dresden was not firebombed by the British in 1945, because I do not believe the evidence it was, I cannot believe it was possible for the British to do such a thing.

[Nessie]

Borjastick,

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=21817#p21817

Here's another fun question or two which proves the holocaust could not have happened.

Why is it that in the camps which are supposed to have been death camps no mass graves or bodies or evidence of mass murder exists yet in the mainly German based camps such as Belsen the bodies were left in their thousands for all to see. How is it possible that in a 'death camp' all evidence was magically disappeared and yet in a normal camp it wasn't? If it was possible to cremate all these millions of bodies in Auschwitz, Majdanek, Sobibor, Treblinka in a very short period of time in ovens that could not have handled such volumes, and then dispose of the thousands of tons of cremains such that they were never seen again, why not in the other camps on Western soil was this planning and facility nowhere to be seen or implemeted.

He cannot get his head round certain questions he poses, and argues the means no mass murder happened. The question he raises, about there being no evidence of mass murder, is false. The suggestion that the evidence of mass graves at the AR camps "magically disappeared" is also false. Those false claims are used to support his incredulity about mass murder, and he uses that incredulity to support his disbelief.

Nonsense.

In which of the following camps has a greater quantity of human remains been demonstrated?

Bergen-Belsen or Treblinka?

B is highlighting the dearth of physical evidence that has been provided for the millions supposedly killed at these camps. That is a good point.

It is an inaccurate point, that fails to take into account the Nazi destruction of evidence at TII, that did not happen at B-B. It is merely his opinion that there is a lack of evidence for mass murder at TII. There is corroborating evidence from multiple eyewitnesses, documents, archaeology etc to prove it was a death camp. His assertion that is not the case, has no evidential value. It is like me asserting there is a dearth of evidence that the British firebombed Dresden in 1945 and suggesting that means it did not happen.

That you incorrectly call it a fallacy merely reveals your irrationality.

I have not called his claim that there is a dearth of evidence a fallacy. You just made that up. I call that claim a lie, a misrepresentation, a delusion on his part, or at best it is evidence of his ignorance of the evidence.

[Archie]

Potpie,

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=21839#p21839

There are more holes in the gassing narrative than a block of Swiss cheese, but to touch on a couple of them, yes the Soviets built a chimney that connects to nothing. Why would they do that if gassings really happened? As far as NSDAP records go, the records of arrivals and departures from Auschwitz-Birkenau are missing and in their place, we have things such as Communist Jewish-authored Auschwitz Kalendarium by Marxist camp resistance member Danuta Czech and her collaborators which has been a gold standard source for "holocaust history" books

He cannot figure out why a chimney at Krema I was built after the war, erroneously thinking it was built by the Soviets. His ignorance is used to fuel his disbelief. It is easier to believe that the Soviets would try to hoax the world, than the Poles, who in fact built the chimney. He concludes it is all a hoax.

Many records of arrivals and departures are not missing, so again, his ignorance is fuelling his disbelief.

There is a counterpoint here but you have bungled it, focusing on "incredulity" and whether the botched reconstruction was done by Communist Russians or Communist Poles. The point about the detached chimney is an older argument. From what I can tell it was popularized by David Cole in the early 90s and was probably made by revisionists in the 80s. The detached chimney IS a reconstruction and many people thought it was nonsensical. As it turns out, there are some chimney designs that are connected underground, so it can work. The old Cole argument was based on an erroneous factual assumption. Happens all the time in all contexts. When new information becomes available, update your conclusions. Lots of arguments end up being wrong. Doesn't make them "fallacies." It's just people working from limited information and making mistakes. The scholarly literature of all fields is filled with arguments that have turned out to be wrong.

The museum falsely claimed for decades that the "gas chamber" was original even though it isn't. There is much to criticize about the "reconstruction" besides the chimney.

[Nessie]

... Lots of arguments end up being wrong. Doesn't make them "fallacies." It's just people working from limited information and making mistakes. The scholarly literature of all fields is filled with arguments that have turned out to be wrong...

"AI Overview
Personal incredulity is not an argument – Rev. Brent L. White
The argument from incredulity (or personal incredulity) is a logical fallacy asserting that a claim must be false because it is difficult to imagine, understand, or believe. It replaces objective evidence with personal, subjective disbelief."

I am amazed at how many people find it difficult to do the most basic of fact checking research. Potpie has come across the Holocaust denier false claim that the Krema I chimney was built after the war, by the Soviets, and it is not even connected, so it is evidence of a hoax, and he just believes it. He does not bother with objective evidence, and check to see if the denier claim is correct.

Like so many, he is incredulous about the Nazis building gas chambers with wooden doors, supposedly no ventilation, that left no trace of the gas. He does not bother to think, is his incredulity fact based? You know, because you have done some more research, that yes wooden doors were used, but they were hermetically sealed, there was a ventilation system and there are traces of the use of gas.

But you then rely on the same form of argument, where you claim despite the doors, the vents and the traces, gassings were not possible, all the eyewitnesses lied, there were no mass gassings. Despite repeated requests, you have failed to show how that argument is logically and evidentially sound.

Why should I dismiss the evidence in favour of your argument it was not possible, it did not happen? What is so special about you, that your opinion has more value than all the evidence?

[Nessie]

Stubble;

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=22011#p22011

And to think, Auschwitz only had the one pool...

I think it bears remarking that no one wants to throw a single witness out of the Auschwitz pool, even if he does look like jaws when he back strokes, but, folks seem almost eager to absolutely drive a bus over the Treblinka witnesses without hesitation. Well, except for the part where they saw a homicidal gas chamber and a 30 foot flaming pit behind a fake hospital into which jews were thrown. Those we keep, we just lose the mass graves part, since, those don't exist. So, you know, people just died in transit and were buried where they died like in Oregon Trail, only, they didn't die of dysentery, they were suffocated in a chlorinated lime cattle car of death...

Why not 88% of the transports instead of just a measly 80%?

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/log ... ncredulity

"Argument from Incredulity
(also known as: argument from personal astonishment, argument from personal incredulity, personal incredulity)
Description: Concluding that because you can't or refuse to believe something, it must not be true, improbable, or the argument must be flawed."

Stubble lists reasons why he finds the narrative of mass killings at Auschwitz and Treblinka to be unbelievable and he concludes that means there were no such mass killings.

How can Auschwitz have a pool, when it was a death camp? Ridiculous! The witness descriptions of gassings and cremations at Treblinka are ridiculous! The mass graves, unbelievable! All that happened was some people died in transit, that is far more believable.

[Nessie]

Stubble again, expresses his incredulity;

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=21982#p21982

Have we come back to the start of the circle again already?

On the map of Treblinka II, show me where they buried the population of Seattle.

I'll wait.

I know he has been shown on maps of the camp, produced from eyewitnesses who were at the camp, where the main mass graves were located and how that tallies with the geophysical survey of the camp in 2011, that found large pits in those same areas. But he just cannot believe that is "where they buried the population of Seattle"! He cannot accept the evidence is sufficient to prove mass graves for hundreds of thousands of people.

https://almossawi.substack.com/p/the-ar ... ncredulity

"There’s a type of argument called the argument from incredulity, in which we determine that something couldn’t have happened either because we find it hard to believe or because we don’t want to come to terms with it being true."

[HansHill]

I am amazed at how many people find it difficult to do the most basic of fact checking research. Potpie has come across the Holocaust denier false claim that the Krema I chimney was built after the war, by the Soviets, and it is not even connected, so it is evidence of a hoax, and he just believes it. He does not bother with objective evidence, and check to see if the denier claim is correct.

??

What on earth are you blabbering on about now. The chimney being reconstructed and passed off as homicidal in its original condition is a hoax you clown.

[Keen]

If 800,000 were buried there, there would be abundant physical remains.

Correct.

Nessie,

Of the 15 alleged Treblinka II graves / cremation pits in question - the one that you can conclusively prove currently contains the most human remains is number: _?_.

Nessie's answer:

I don't know.

Nesserto:

Geophysics scientifically and conclusively proves that there are pits and that they exist. But it does not prove that those pits contain human remains.

[Keen]

Stubble;

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=21892#p21892

If you expect me to believe that the population of Seattle was buried in a 2 acre plot (the extermination area at Treblinka II), you are going to have to show me where. This applies equally with a quarter of a million at Sobibor etc. The physical evidence such as it is does not support the claim, neither does the Polish Commission report that turned up, what exactly? At Treblinka II? I believe the exact words from the 13 Apostles of Treblinka were 'no mass graves were found'. You can't hand wave that away with a piece of paper and some words. The history as given does not comport with reality.

Stubble also does not believe the physical finds at the AR camps are sufficient to prove mass graves and cremations and thinks that is enough to prove there were no such graves and cremations.

All he says here is, "you are going to have to show me where." He is demanding evidence for an extraordinary claim. That is not a fallacy. That is good thinking.

Good thinking indeed.

But Stubble isn't just asking for evidence, he's asking for clear, credible and convincing evidence that can actually prove something beyond a reasonable doubt in a U.S. court.

Wouldn't it be something if more revisionists did what Stubble is doing?

[Keen]

Nessie:

The Nazis were not trying to magically disappear the corpses and the graves.

All the mass graves dug by the Nazis, and the corpses they cremated, are still at the AR camps.

Mass graves are proven. By all normal standards of evidencing, they are proven.

I can point to them in the ground.

Stubble [to Nessie]:

If you expect me to believe that the population of Seattle was buried in a 2 acre plot (the extermination area at Treblinka II),
you are going to have to show me where.

What are you waiting for roberta?

What are you so afraid of?

[Keen]

BTW Stubble, according to the USHMM, a number equal to the population of the entire state of South Dakota is buried in those magically disappearing "huge mass graves" of Treblinka II.

https://learnertrip.com/demography/us-s ... opulation/

[Stubble]

Keen, it is fucking beyond ridiculous.

The grave space is a thimble and the dead wouldn't fit as a liquid even if you ground them into a slurry and poured them in.

That's ok though, because apparently, they were suffocated to death in 'chlorinated lime cattle cars of death' and buried where they fell like in Oregon Trail. Instead of dying of dysentery though, they died of asphyxiation from chlorine gas from a sanitation product.

See, I'm supposed to play 'whak a mole' for the next 6,000,000 years unless I can show where a statistically aberrant phantom population that probably never even existed went. Because 'we have pre war and post war census showing 6,000,000 people missing'.

Never mind that those figures were revised post war...

[Nessie]

In a thread exampling arguments from incredulity, arguments from incredulity are being made;

Keen, it is fucking beyond ridiculous.

The grave space is a thimble and the dead wouldn't fit as a liquid even if you ground them into a slurry and poured them in.

That's ok though, because apparently, they were suffocated to death in 'chlorinated lime cattle cars of death' and buried where they fell like in Oregon Trail. Instead of dying of dysentery though, they died of asphyxiation from chlorine gas from a sanitation product.

See, I'm supposed to play 'whak a mole' for the next 6,000,000 years unless I can show where a statistically aberrant phantom population that probably never even existed went. Because 'we have pre war and post war census showing 6,000,000 people missing'.

Never mind that those figures were revised post war...

https://thelogicofscience.com/2024/05/1 ... -im-wrong/

"The fallacy in question goes by many names including, argument from incredulity, personal incredulity, appeal to incredulity, appeal to personal incredulity, and argument from personal incredulity. I will simply refer to it as the incredulity fallacy.
“Incredulity” refers to an inability or unwillingness to consider the possibility of something, and the fallacy occurs when someone asserts that they are right about something because they cannot personally imagine that the alternative is true."

Both Stubble and Kean are unable, or unwilling to consider that they may be wrong about the evidence for mass graves and buried cremated remains and that because they cannot imagine how it was possible to bury so many people, in the space found, it cannot have happened.