The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Stubble wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 1:04 am

What I think happed to the jews under the authority of 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔗𝔥𝔦𝔯𝔡 ℜ𝔢𝔦𝔠𝔥 said to have been murdered before the Russian counter offensive is that they were transported to the Bug River camps, partisans were winnowed out and shot (around 10% of the suggested dead), and the rest were busted up into groups of 20-2,000 and sent to work in Ostland, Ukraine and The Occupied Soviet Territories. Some under TN, some under OT, some under WSRA, some under various local firms. Building infrastructure, armaments, cooking food, doing laundry etc.

Why 10%, why not 20%? The families too, children went to these work camps? They weren't sent to camps of their own?

When you get into these details, I think you'll see how ridiculous it is to have near certainty (my definition of belief) any of this happened exactly this way.

Grave space.

Wrong thread for this though. Just didn't want to let that strawman (intentional or not) stand there.

Further clarification, this is a hypothetical, not a theoretical, what's less established fact.

So, thread's done.

You 'don't know'. Got it.

Want to kick in on my proposal and get 300 pig carcasses and build a pyre for a test?

Or na?

Stubble wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 1:45 am Grave space.

Grave space tells you the specifics of how Resettled Jews were handled by NS Germany?

No I won't be kicking in. If I thought there was even a 1% chance you were right I might do it, but I think your movement is driven by delusions and not reasonable in any way, I don't feel like spending my precious money this way, you think I'm dishonest, yadda yadda

bombsaway wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 1:53 am

Stubble wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 1:45 am Grave space.

Grave space tells you the specifics of how Resettled Jews were handled by NS Germany?

No I won't be kicking in. If I thought there was even a 1% chance you were right I might do it, but I think your movement is driven by delusions and not reasonable in any way, I don't feel like spending my precious money this way, you think I'm dishonest, yadda yadda

This is a Dresden Pyres Thread Sir.

I will humor this just a titch more and say that grave space gives me a good idea of the number of persons who could have been killed at the Bug River Camps.

If you want to ruminate of the various 'Huge Mass Graves', take it to one of the various threads. We can beat on that dead horse some more. I won't be derailing this thread for it however.

Unfortunately for you, ultimately, the 'Huge Mass Graves' are alleged and have never been proved up.

Personal note: While tomorrow may belong to me, revisionism does not. The truth is something you can hold, but, it doesn't ever belong to you. It belongs to everyone.

Addendum: If defending a position you don't even believe isn't patently dishonest, I'm not sure what is.

Stubble wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 1:59 am

Addendum: If defending a position you don't even believe isn't patently dishonest, I'm not sure what is.

Correction, you think arguing for the possibility of a certain position being true is dishonest. Gotcha.

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sun Oct 19, 2025 11:03 pm

Archie wrote: ↑Sun Oct 19, 2025 9:55 pm So what's the summary of all of this so far? I'll give my version.

Bombsaway believes in his own novel theory that the bodies at the AR camps were burned primarily with gasoline rather than wood. This is contrary to the procedure described by all Holocaust authorities in standard reference works.

It was pointed out to him that liquid fuels are primarily used as an accelerant and are not a suitable replacement for wood as they flare up and burn off too rapidly. Moreover, gasoline in particular would be an especially volatile and dangerous choice. BA is stubbornly unable to grasp these points and continues to talk as if gasoline can be easily substituted for wood.

BA's only support for his theory is Dresden which he cites as a supposed "proof of concept" for liquid fuel-only cremations. Except upon investigation, it turns out 1) other sources of fuel like straw, wood, and clothing were present, and 2) it is unclear what degree of cremation was achieved. As the precise conditions and outcome cannot be determined, this has limited experimental value and it certainly is not enough to override all prior understanding of thermodynamics.

I would urge caution in attempting to draw scientific conclusions based on vague general history accounts as BA has attempted to do ("but Irving says X!"). Unless you have competent technical documentation of the events in question, it just isn't controlled or precise enough to draw any lessons about fuel consumption, etc.

Arad's foundational study quotes use of liquid fuel. Laughable.

If you are going to be so smug and condescending, you gotta be able to back it up. Being smug and condescending while being sloppy and getting stuff wrong is not a good combination.

Arad describes the roasters and use of wood. He does mention at one point that the "wood was doused with petrol," but to assume from this that gasoline was the primary fuel is utterly absurd. That description suggests perfectly typical use of liquid fuel as an accelerant. Look up what that is on Google.

An accelerant is a substance that is used to start or spread a fire more quickly, making it a key element in both arson and some firefighting techniques. Common accelerants include flammable liquids like gasoline, gases like propane, and solids like paper or black powder.

Say I have a batch of 6,000 bodies I need to cremate. I've got my 1,000+ tons of woods on hand. If I douse the wood with liquid fuel, how much will this reduce my wood requirement? Barely at all. Liquid fuels are not necessary. They are sometimes used as a shortcut to get the fire started.

Interestingly, upon revisiting the chapter, I see that Arad quotes a Polish report that mentions use of liquid fuels, but, sure enough, the source specifically contradicts you.

The Germans then started to erase systematically the trails of their crimes. They started to remove from the graves, with special cranes, the corpses of the murdered, pour over them some highly flammable material, and cremate them in large heaps.

But before you get too excited ...

Later the procedure of burning the corpses was improved, and a roaster of railway tracks was built. The corpses were laid layers, alternated with a layer of wood. The ashes of the burned corpses were put through a screening machine so that the valuables that might have remained with the corpses could be separated and removed.(Arad 2018 edition, pg. 214)

Hmm, so it says that in the beginning they briefly attempted to burn bodies with your retarded method but soon switched over to wood. You know, since that would actually work.

I never stated this was a stone cold belief, rather a speculation. Show me where I was said anything else.

Rather my belief is that liquid fuels were used, in accordance with what you see in Arad's book + most other sources. The ratio, I have said, is unknown.

There's a difference between speculation and belief in something, a distinction you clearly don't get.

This such a bunch of mealy-mouthed crap. This sort of thing is exactly why you have such a poor reputation.

TlsMS93 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 19, 2025 8:14 pm

Nessie wrote: ↑Sun Oct 19, 2025 1:33 pm
Corroborating eyewitness descriptions are enough for courts, historians and journalists, and are only not enough for you, when it is what you do not want to believe.

So if a woman accuses you of abusing her, will that be true in court? Aren't there any need for security cameras, forensic examinations, and DNA testing of genetic material?

I said corroboration is needed. You accept corroborating evidence that pyres were used at Dresden, but not at the AR camps.

Callafangers wrote: ↑Sun Oct 19, 2025 8:59 pm

Nessie wrote: ↑Sun Oct 19, 2025 1:33 pm Corroborating eyewitness descriptions are enough for courts, historians and journalists, and are only not enough for you, when it is what you do not want to believe.

Nessie, why are you lying (or just playing dumb)?

If one-thousand witnesses say that a man jumped over the Eiffel Tower, do the courts agree it happened? If something is not physically possible, it's a dead-end.

If this debate has truly devolved into you simple dismissing hard data on biomass as fuels, then this forum truly has become a haven for idiotic conspiracy theorists, and you're just now more overtly wrong about which side of that you're on.

Embarrassing.

I have explained this before, but people prone to falling for hoaxes, do not understand. You have used yet another logical fallacy, of false analogy. It is proven that someone cannot jump the Eiffel Tower. It is not proven that Germans could not get mass pyres to work. Your logically flawed argument from incredulity, that since you cannot work out how the pyres were possible, they did not exist, is yet another example of how you fall for fallacies.

There is no evidence that it is possible to leap over the Eiffel Tower. There is evidence that mass cremations of thousands of exhumed corpses was possible.

Wetzelrad wrote: ↑Sun Oct 19, 2025 1:55 pm

Leif F. wrote: ↑Sun Oct 19, 2025 2:33 am If starting with the main documents cited (by Bombsaway/Muehlenkamp/Taylor/Acht) claiming 6865 bodies cremated on the Dresden Altmarkt in 2 weeks to 8-10 m3 ash:

"The document StAD, Marstall- und Bestattungsamt, Nachtrag I - Schreiben, 4.3.1945, referred to in Matthias Neutzner, Martha Heinrich Acht, pp. 91, 93 and 221, partially quoted in the excerpt from Martha Heinrich Acht transcribed and translated here (emphasis added): For two weeks the old market place in the city center became a crematorium. On 5 March the corpses collected in the streets had been retrieved, the pyres gone out. »By my estimate, 8 - 10 cubic meters of ash lay on the Altmarkt«, was reported to the city administration the day before. »The Brigadeführer wished that this ash be loaded into recipients (boxes or sacks) and transported to the Heidefriedhof, where it is to be sunk into the earth at the place marked in lead on the map. It is not necessary to leave the boxes or sacks in the soil"

Personally I find it naive to think that human ash was left there to pile up for two weeks. This operation appears to have been fairly well staffed and organized, and they wouldn't have sat on their laurels for two weeks. I would expect that the wagons carrying in loads of bodies and fuel would also have carried out loads of ashes, after they had suitably cooled, whether or not it was documented.

That aside, here is another look at the math. Irving tells us the Heidefriedhof burial involved "several small horse drawn carts and ten large trucks with trailers", which dumped the ashes into "a pit twenty-five feet long and sixteen feet wide". If that pit was 6 feet deep, then it had a volume of ~68 cubic meters. The estimated 8-10 cubic meters of ash would take up only 12-15% of this space.

If we are comparing this example from Dresden to the purported mass graves of Jewish ashes, would they too be only 12-15% ash by volume? This would have devastating consequences.

"That aside, here is another look at the math. Irving tells us the Heidefriedhof burial involved "several small horse drawn carts and ten large trucks with trailers", which dumped the ashes into "a pit twenty-five feet long and sixteen feet wide". If that pit was 6 feet deep, then it had a volume of ~68 cubic meters"

Thanks for the original Irving quote, found it after some searching:

Irving , The destruction of Dresden, unfortunately cannot read the pagenumber (do you have it?) nor source-links in this copy online, emphasis added mine:

https://epdf.pub/apocalypse-1945-the-de ... esden.html

"In the late hours of the evening the grill was re-erected over a different part of the square. Nazi Party of⁵cials saw to it that the ashes and charred bones were collected and taken to the cemeteries to be buried too. In spite of their attempts to keep secret the fate of the victims who had been swallowed up by the ruined emptiness of the inner city, the story did leak out. Some citizens, probably risking their lives, made their way to the Altmarkt to check on the rumours. One man, Walter Hahn, a veteran photographer who had spent his life capturing this ‘Florence of the Elbe’ and the surrounding countryside on film, obtained an of⁵cial pass signed by the gauleiter on February , and took a score of photographs of the infernal scene in black and white and colour – photographs which helped belay the allegations that the ‘mass funeral pyres’ were a product of Dr Goebbels’ propaganda. It took several small horse drawn carts and ten large trucks with trailers to carry the ashes to the Heidefriedhof cemetery. Here the ashes of several thousand of the victims who had thus been publicly cremated were buried in a pit twenty-⁵ve feet long and sixteen feet wide. In Colonel Thierig’s report signed in mid March is this paragraph confirming the numbers cremated by that date: Because of the rapid decomposition of the bodies and the exceptional difficulties encountered in recovering them as well as the lack of suitable transport to convey them to the cemeteries, the approval of the Gauleiter [Martin Mutschmann] and the city authority was obtained to cremate altogether , bodies on the Altmarkt. The ashes of the victims were transported to a cemetery."

1) The exact measurements of the pit at the Heidefriedhof, where exactly did Irving get those from, could you please cite the exact source if you have/he gives it?

Unfortunately of course again the essential parameter of depth is entirely missing, i.e. all extrapolations are pure hypothetical speculations, nonetheless, just wondering could you explain short your 68 m3, how high/deep a covering layer of soil on top of the ash did you assume, one foot ?

2) Interesting and perhaps helpful to understand the conflicting numbers of Altmarkt and Heidefriedhof (?)I found the just preceding (-page) quote by Irving:

"Several weeks earlier the police authorities had already decided to adopt a measure more dreadful than had been employed at any other stage of the British area bombing offensive. The remaining victims, and there were still thousands being dug out each day, would no longer be carried to the pine forests and mass burial sites any longer. The danger of spreading epidemics by these long caravans of decaying bodies loaded onto carts was too great. The whole of the city centre around the Altmarkt had already been cordoned off. relatives who stumbled across the still-impassable streets of the inner city were waved away by police and Party officials. Wagon loads of corpses were now being driven to the frontiers of this cordoned area by SHD and forced labourers, and there handed over to army drivers and officers. The wagons were driven on to the centre of the Altmarkt, and there their terrible loads were tipped onto the cobbled paving"

and most importantly the very curious fact that even the previously cited official Final commission of historians`s report on Dresden (https://www.dresden.de/media/pdf/stadta ... 1_V1_0.pdf) states that the numbers on the Heidefriedhof with the alleged 6885 from Altmarkt do not match up at all, over 6000 are recorded buried there but cannot be accounted for:

"(translated)After March 5, the ashes of 6,865 people arrived at the Heidefriedhof cemetery, who had been cremated in the days before at Dresden's Altmarkt. On February 22, 1945, the local cemeteries were instructed to regularly report the number of buried people to the city administration. Several of these reports have survived in their original form.(72)
Analysis of the individual records in the database revealed more than 3,700 people buried at the Johannisfriedhof cemetery, who were most likely killed by the February air raids. This number agrees with the figures reported in the aforementioned documents, with only minimal deviations.73 The situation is different for the Heidefriedhof cemetery: The last report from the Heidefriedhof dates from April 30, 1945. It lists 10,430 people buried – not including those cremated at the Altmarkt. From the individual records in the database, only about 3,700 of these cases can be confirmed with certainty so far; almost two-thirds of the burials at the Heidefriedhof Cemetery are therefore currently undocumented.[/i]"

This report (based on original reports as stated) states explicitly that the Altmarkt cremains are NOT included, yet astonishingly the number reported as buried there, but unaccounted for is almost exactly the same as those claimed to have been cremated (6730 versus 6865).

So, I wonder, for as said, I am mostly interested in determining exactly what is scientifically proven and where mere speculation starts, do we all agree that:

A) There are great scientific/historiographical problems with the cited figures:

A1)The famous frequently cited 6865 bodies "eingeäschert"/cremated is hugely problematic and in the end scientifically unreliable, not only for the documented chaos at the receiving end (Heidefriedhof cemetery) but also because we have no exact objective report/data at all to what degree those bodies were indeed really reduced to (at least 90%) ash or if they were mostly just charred/carbonized- as the main objective stated by above Irving quote mentions for epidemic preventing purposes-, with only a fraction really to ash, the larger remains being transported separately to cemeteries, creating chaos in final counts/reports.

A2) The 8-10 m3 of ash is equally scientifically entirely unsound, because we have no exact objective data at all about how much of that was actually human and to what wood/cotton/brick/scrap-residue and how that ash even looked like. On mentioned Hahn`s photos from the 25th of febr 1945 some 3-4 m3 heaps of what looks like scrap/ash/paper/brick blend are visible, but again sadly we have no way of determining if those really are the heaps referred to and the resolution isn´t good enough to clearly see what their content exactly is.

What can be stated with 100% certainty is that if that was indeed the total amount and the witness`estimation somewhat correct, this is physically entirely impossible to have come from more than max 2000 bodies and the entire 6000+ claimed cremated on Altmarkt does not match.

BUT we have no way of checking whether it was all or if the witness was correct, so in the end it is pure speculation, not evidence at all.

A3) The same regarding the Heidefriedhof burial pits, in the end sadly Irving`s 25 foot x 16 foot claim is scientifically useless since
- we have no data regarding the 3rd spacial parameter, depth, at all and even if he had given it:
- we have no way of knowing: a) if his witness`estimation was correct and most importantly b) to what degree/level that pit actually was filled with the mentioned crematory ashes and/or what else may have been dumped in there with it in those times of scarcity of time/available burial space.

A4) Scientifically sound data regarding the exact amount of total both liquid and solid fuel used for cremation on the Altmarkt pyres is entirely non-existent, unknown and at this point probably unknowable, as is how often either was or was not (re-)added to during the burning period. ALL else is purely theoretical speculation.

B) Because of A1)-A4) ALL extrapolation based on any of those numbers is pure unproven(and unprovable) hypothetics and scientifically useless/irresponsible until further exact evidence has remedied their unreliability.

Thus I wonder (and I am not asking rhetorically! But really am interested in getting to know whether this is the case or not): DO you (all) both sides agree with those basic statements or to what degree partly or not at all? Is there a base of scientific rules that both sides could be made to agree upon for constructive dialogue/research over the opinion/interpretation-divide?

Sorry reply got long....

Leif F. wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 6:04 pm ....

Thus I wonder (and I am not asking rhetorically! But really am interested in getting to know whether this is the case or not): DO you (all) both sides agree with those basic statements or to what degree partly or not at all? Is there a base of scientific rules that both sides could be made to agree upon for constructive dialogue/research over the opinion/interpretation-divide?

Sorry reply got long....

There is limited data, and much of that is eyewitness estimations, about how many corpses were cremated on pyres, how long it took, to what extent the corpses were cremated and how much ash was produced. So-called Holocaust revisionists take that data and use it to construct arguments from incredulity, whereby they argue that cremations were not physically possible, therefore they did not happen. That form of argument is logically flawed, because just because someone cannot work out how something was possible, does not therefore mean that it cannot have happened.

The so-called revisionists do not deny the pyres at Dresden, because they are so well evidenced, in particular the photos, and because they are prepared to accept the evidence that the British bombed the city, causing a firestorm.

They then deny the pyres at the AR camps, Birkenau and Chelmno, which are also well evidenced, because they are not prepared to accept that the Nazis had gassed and then cremated hundreds of thousands of Jews.

Not being able to work out how the Nazis got the pyres to work, is not evidence to prove that there were no pyres. But the pyres at Dresden and Ohrdruf, prove that they were possible. It is just that at the AR camps, Birkenau and Chelmno, they were far larger.

Stubble wrote: ↑Sun Oct 19, 2025 1:52 pm A proposal,

We fund an experiment with 300 pig carcasses. We build a pyre, we feed wood through one side and collect ash/cremains from the other.

We see what it takes, and what it leaves.

Not want to be the smartass (though I of course like it a lot to be..!):

You/all are familiar that exactly what you propose was done with all bells and whistles by the School of Civil Engineering, University of Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia and published in 1918 (isn`t this the one cited by Germar and Carlo in several of their works as well?)?
Just in off-chance case not:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 1218300766

Highlights

•
The characteristics of a wood pyre that can fully consume a body were studied.
•
Systematically constructed pyres and pig carcasses, as human surrogate, were used.
•
Ideally, a ratio dry wood/body of 5 is necessary to achieve complete destruction.
•
In practice, a ratio higher than 9 is necessary to achieve complete destruction.

Abstract
The results of a systematic study of open pyre cremation of bodies is reported here with the aim of providing quantitative information on the mechanisms controlling the cremation process and the relationship between the characteristics of a fire and the level of consumption of a body. Systematically constructed timber pyres and recently euthanized pig carcasses (as surrogates for human bodies) were used to establish the importance of fuel quantity, methodology of fuel application, body size and body arrangement. The results indicate that a fuel/body mass ratio greater than 9 is necessary to overcome the endothermic effect of the body on the pyre. Even with a fuel/body mass ratio of 9 and ideal burning conditions full destruction of all organic matter could not be attained.

And -sorry for stealing your thread/post a bit- I have to admit that it is this I have always wanted to ask Mr Muehlenkamp and promoters of the "liquid/minimal fuel" hypothesis (including those in this thread like bombsaway&Co) that contradict the above fully scientifically rigorous results:

Could you guys please -if you have it- share a link to ANY equally fully documented all parameters-controlled scientific reports as the above that prove your claims?

Not meant rhetorically, I would indeed be very interested to read them if they exist!

(BUT please if I may, note that I explicitly said equally fully documented all parameters-controlled scientific reports, which reports like the 120 year old Lothe -report, so often found referred to by Muehlenkamp/HC, sadly not even remotely adhere to, entirely missing the most basic control and exact documentation of standard parameters like actual quantity of ash (!) and achieved level/quantity of corpse-degradation/consumption (!) and ratio of fuel-adding/ amount of manual human labor input prior and during cremations (Lothe`s animals were not only skinned and disembowled, i.e. drained of fluids prior, but also with the opened belly artificially turned downwards and the entrails neatly spread out on the grid and manually only by and by added to the flames, as was the solid fuel) and most astonishingly no standard comparable repetition (/replicated) experiments under exact same parameters were documented at all by Lothe.) (!)

So, if you have, please share, thanks.

If you don`t, may I ask if then at least Muehlenkamp/you ever have done and documented your own (down-scaled obviously, maybe same scope as Carlo has documented his in his book ) practical scientific experiments to corroborate you theory in principle?

If so, please share, thanks.

If not, may one ask why not?

You are most definitely on topic and I don't consider anything you have said in any way to be a thread jack Sir, so, by all means, keep on keeping on.

What makes my proposal unique is the use of a 3r style pyre. The study you quote is similar, but, pyre construction was different.

I'm also proposing a 'rolling' or 'rotating' fuel supply being fed through the stand off with the ground. Keeping a coal bed burning and timing the operation as well as keeping track of fuel use.

Nessie wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 7:22 am
I said corroboration is needed. You accept corroborating evidence that pyres were used at Dresden, but not at the AR camps.

Who said I deny that open-air cremations took place at the Reinhardt camps? The difference between you and me is the alleged scale. Since exterminationists can't and won't quantify the ash and corroborate how much it could have produced if the alleged death toll is sufficient, you're content with finding only ash and uncremated remains, claiming that everyone transported there was killed.

Therein lies your flaw and dishonesty. Even the ashes themselves would need to be analyzed to determine whether they are purely human or not and what proportion of the ashes contain the burned remains of the material used in the cremation. Kola's findings aren't sufficient; they haven't been corroborated by peers.

Nessie wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 6:36 pm

Leif F. wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 6:04 pm ....

Thus I wonder (and I am not asking rhetorically! But really am interested in getting to know whether this is the case or not): DO you (all) both sides agree with those basic statements or to what degree partly or not at all? Is there a base of scientific rules that both sides could be made to agree upon for constructive dialogue/research over the opinion/interpretation-divide?

Sorry reply got long....

There is limited data, and much of that is eyewitness estimations, about how many corpses were cremated on pyres, how long it took, to what extent the corpses were cremated and how much ash was produced. So-called Holocaust revisionists take that data and use it to construct arguments from incredulity, whereby they argue that cremations were not physically possible, therefore they did not happen. That form of argument is logically flawed, because just because someone cannot work out how something was possible, does not therefore mean that it cannot have happened.

The so-called revisionists do not deny the pyres at Dresden, because they are so well evidenced, in particular the photos, and because they are prepared to accept the evidence that the British bombed the city, causing a firestorm.

They then deny the pyres at the AR camps, Birkenau and Chelmno, which are also well evidenced, because they are not prepared to accept that the Nazis had gassed and then cremated hundreds of thousands of Jews.

Not being able to work out how the Nazis got the pyres to work, is not evidence to prove that there were no pyres. But the pyres at Dresden and Ohrdruf, prove that they were possible. It is just that at the AR camps, Birkenau and Chelmno, they were far larger.

Ok, thanks for feedback, I think I understand your point.

May I though drill a bit more into my core question if it might be possible to formulate and settle most basic rules of scientific objectivity and fairness that both sides agree upon?
Could it be possible to establish a somewhat double-blind fair investigation-situation or is this topic too emotionally loaded ?

How about you, can you think of any concrete rules of objectivity that you think both the other side and you yourself could agree to ? Not meant theoretically, but concretely, as example/starting point perhaps, you state specifically :

"There is limited data, and much of that is eyewitness estimations"

which seems to agree with the main point of my basic statements A1-A4 and B in former post and (please correct of course if wrong) basically what the other commentators stated in several places as well and thus this seems to be a fact/rule of objectivity that indeed all could/do agree to (?):

1. Fully objective scientific data is one category and witness testimony is another, the latter cannot be regarded reliable/scientific unless corroborated independently by enough amounts of the former.

(And in the case of this thread and the topic of the Dresden pyres and burials, as you state (if I summarize correctly) there isn`t even remotely enough of that, objective data, available for ANY definite conclusions (either/any which way) and what witnesses said cannot be taken as reliable proof because it is not corroborated.)

Do you agree and if so, would you agree/say it is fair to state that this rule of course applies to all sides equally, witness testimony of all sides needs to be corroborated by independent scientific data to have any value as evidence?

And perhaps the follow-up question, might it be possible what exact objective scientific "data" is/stops and where subjective interpretation starts?
Best again probably in concrete example, I personally would say/agree that the 23 photographs taken by Walter Hahn on 25th feb 1945 showing the Altmarkt pyres (in many interesting details) are fully objective data and the datapoints (size of pyres/girders/wood/location)they show cannot be (and isn`t as far as I know) disputed by anyone.

But already when going to the official documents cited mentioning numbers and times/actions, a possibility -and infact as proven before in this case of Dresden a certainty (given that the records do not match up)- of subjective error/falsehood has come in, because they are written entirely by and through subjective humans. So already at the level of documents we cannot talk about fully scientifically reliable data anymore and preferably need independent corroboration.

Would you agree to that and if not why not If one may ask?

Leif F. wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 6:04 pm Irving , The destruction of Dresden, unfortunately cannot read the pagenumber (do you have it?) nor source-links in this copy online

Page 235 or around there. Here is a link to that page of the pdf:
https://archive.org/details/david-irvin ... 4/mode/2up

Leif F. wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 6:04 pm 1) The exact measurements of the pit at the Heidefriedhof, where exactly did Irving get those from, could you please cite the exact source if you have/he gives it?

Colonel Thierig's report is Irving's number one source, and he refers to it in the next sentence, so I assume that is where the description of the burial pit comes from. Here is the (first instance of this) citation:

HSSuPf Elbe in den Gauen Halle-Merseburg, Sachsen, und im Wehrkreis IV: Befehlshaber der Ordnungspolizei, ‘Schlußmeldung über die vier Luftangriffe auf den LS-Ort Dresden am 13., 14. und 15. Februar 1945,’ signed [Police colonel Wolfgang] Thierig, Eilenburg, den 15. März 1945 (Dresden city archives); first published by Walter Weidauer in Inferno Dresden (Dietz Verlag, East Berlin, 1966), 2nd edition, with an account of how a Frau Jurk of Dresden had found it in the spring of 1965 among the papers of her late father-in-law Max Jurk, whose initials (‘Ju.’) are on the document as author (pages 127f.).—Thierig, born Apr 2, 1890, went to Munich in 1949 after his release from communist custody (Author’s microfilm DI–35).

If not that, I would assume it's from one of many interviews Irving conducted.

Leif F. wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 6:04 pm Unfortunately of course again the essential parameter of depth is entirely missing, i.e. all extrapolations are pure hypothetical speculations, nonetheless, just wondering could you explain short your 68 m3, how high/deep a covering layer of soil on top of the ash did you assume, one foot ?

I think 6 ft is a reasonable estimate, with consideration for the location (a cemetery) and the other dimensions. There would be no reason to make it a shallow pit and plenty of reason to make it deeper.

If a 1 ft layer of soil was added, then the space left for ashes was ~57 cubic meters. If they also layered in as much sand as ashes, then the volume of ashes would still be ~28 cubic meters. Just estimates.

We can estimate it another way by counting the trucks. Grok gave me a load volume estimate of 3 cubic meters for a contemporary "large truck with trailer" and 0.4 cubic meters for a "small horse drawn cart". So perhaps in the area of ~32 cubic meters of ash.

Leif F. wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 6:04 pm [...] because we have no exact objective report/data at all to what degree those bodies were indeed really reduced to (at least 90%) ash or if they were mostly just charred/carbonized- as the main objective stated by above Irving quote mentions for epidemic preventing purposes-, with only a fraction really to ash, [...]

On this question, it seems plausible to me that the bodies at the Altmarkt were fully reduced. All of the photos show piles of ash and cremains that are not quite a fine powder but definitely reduced to small bone fragments. We can hypothesize that the piles' contents could be camouflaged by the finest wood ash, which would be the last thing swept up, but even so, we don't see anything like a scorched body or parts thereof.

From the perspective of someone assigned to that cremation detail, it should have been obvious that if any human material was left unburnt then it should be returned to the grill for the next cycle. On the other hand, it's possible they had explicit orders to conserve fuel or to only scorch the bodies. And if most or all of the photos come from a single hour of a single day then we have a pretty incomplete picture of events.

Your other questions are interesting but beyond my ability to speak on, so I will leave them for someone else.