Best case for the Holocaust, in short form.
Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2026 3:44 pm
Archie requests, "what I would really like to see is an attempt from either of them to put forth their best case for the Holocaust in long form".
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=20785#p20785
I take that to mean an evidenced, chronological history of what happened to the Jews in occupied Europe, 1939-45. That is quite the undertaking, which historians spend years, if not decades, gathering evidence and writing.
Bombsaway responded by saying,
"I think my outline would be to go through the strongest pieces of evidence
And then a general description of the documentary evidence, and why that would be difficult to fabricate
Then the same for witness evidence and physical evidence."
That is exactly what a genuine historical or criminal investigator would do, and it is exactly what so-called revisionists cannot do. He goes on to say.
"Then I would talk about the lack of a viable alternative hypothesis, would describe why the revisionist one is not viable."
Not only do so-called revisionist fail to provide a viable alternative history, that evidences instead of being murdered in gas chambers and by shooting, millions of Jews remained alive in the camps and ghettos till 1945, they also fail to provide any evidence of the mass conspiracy required to hide the evidence of those Jews still being alive 1945.
That is the short form of the best case for the Holocaust. The mass murders of millions of Jews is evidenced to have happened and no viable alternative has been evidenced. Archie will never argue against that, as he cannot. Instead, he wants to be presented with evidence from eyewitnesses, documents etc, that he already had his excuses for dismissing, claiming innocent explanations for documents and the witnesses lied.
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=20785#p20785
I take that to mean an evidenced, chronological history of what happened to the Jews in occupied Europe, 1939-45. That is quite the undertaking, which historians spend years, if not decades, gathering evidence and writing.
Bombsaway responded by saying,
"I think my outline would be to go through the strongest pieces of evidence
And then a general description of the documentary evidence, and why that would be difficult to fabricate
Then the same for witness evidence and physical evidence."
That is exactly what a genuine historical or criminal investigator would do, and it is exactly what so-called revisionists cannot do. He goes on to say.
"Then I would talk about the lack of a viable alternative hypothesis, would describe why the revisionist one is not viable."
Not only do so-called revisionist fail to provide a viable alternative history, that evidences instead of being murdered in gas chambers and by shooting, millions of Jews remained alive in the camps and ghettos till 1945, they also fail to provide any evidence of the mass conspiracy required to hide the evidence of those Jews still being alive 1945.
That is the short form of the best case for the Holocaust. The mass murders of millions of Jews is evidenced to have happened and no viable alternative has been evidenced. Archie will never argue against that, as he cannot. Instead, he wants to be presented with evidence from eyewitnesses, documents etc, that he already had his excuses for dismissing, claiming innocent explanations for documents and the witnesses lied.
