The Holocaust Thread - The Great Debate Between Affirmers, Revisionists and Deniers

[Chugger]

I also want to bring up the issue of moisture. I think we all know dry wood burns more easily than wet, right? And photographs of liberated camps contain these terrible images of bodies stacked up everywhere waiting to be cremated. I would conclude that a body which has been air-drying for a few days will have lost enough liquid that it would probably require less energy to burn. And some of these people weighed 90lbs alive; which is also going to reduce burn time and fuel needs for bodies.

for every factor that favors the deniers position, something goes the other way

eg that 1/3rd of victims were children, or that the majority of bodies destroyed (at Reinhard camps / Chelmno / by 1005 group) had been in the ground for many months or years so in an advanced state of decomposition

This corpse cremation burn rate math makes me feel like a Nazi myself.

the deniers do not have an argument here but rather observations that they hold to be self evident as such

they don't think about what these observations really mean. likely destroying these bodies took less than 1/1000th of Germany's annual fuel production (wood + coal + oil) so the real question they should be addressing is whether Germany would have spent these resources covering up probably the single greatest crime in human history and depriving their opponents of an earth shattering propagandistic victory (equal to 100 katyns just if they counted the bodies at Treblinka)

I think we can agree that the Nazis probably wouldn't have destroyed the bodies if the fuel cost was 100x higher , ie 10% of their production , but it is impossible to argue it was this high

they will never answer this question, or any other pertinent ones, like the total lack of positive evidence for their hypothesis

 

[Bonesjones]

for every factor that favors the deniers position, something goes the other way

eg that 1/3rd of victims were children, or that the majority of bodies destroyed (at Reinhard camps / Chelmno / by 1005 group) had been in the ground for many months or years so in an advanced state of decomposition

You can't prove who or what or when or why, you can only speculate. Also the only difference between human and animal crematory is size. Since they both work exactly the same way and serve the same purpose. Bet you've never seen one of those in person have you? Probably don't even know they exist.

the deniers do not have an argument here but rather observations that they hold to be self evident as such

You don't have anything but war propaganda you refuse to support.

they don't think about what these observations really mean. likely destroying these bodies took less than 1/1000th of Germany's annual fuel production (wood + coal + oil)

Nice projecting you retard. You act like they spent a dollar out of 1000 on a candy bar, when it's talking vast quantities of resources that support city wide infrastructure that leaves mountains of evidence behind even when removed entirely. You know since you have to deforest miles upon miles of country side to produce that much wood, not to mention the requirements of moving that much fuel around, which is trains and trains. So I guess you don't live near anywhere forestry occurs because it's very noticeable.

so the real question they should be addressing is whether Germany would have spent these resources covering up probably the single greatest crime in human history and depriving their opponents of an earth shattering propagandistic victory (equal to 100 katyns just if they counted the bodies at Treblinka)

You can't cover something up if you don't have the ability. It doesn't matter how much wood it takes to chuck jews into ovens, if you fail to produce even a fragment of its requirements. Or is Hitler Jesus and could turn a few lumps of coal and a dozen sticks into enough resources go burn millions of jews? Man if so, this Hitler guy is sounding better and better when you think about it.

I think we can agree that the Nazis probably wouldn't have destroyed the bodies if the fuel cost was 100x higher , ie 10% of their production , but it is impossible to argue it was this high

So you can set an upper bound of resources that sounds too high, but doing basic math to set a lower bound according to science is just too much? Lmao.

they will never answer this question, or any other pertinent ones, like the total lack of positive evidence for their hypothesis

I've point by point refuted everything you say, you just ignore it, and restart the same arguements again and again. So keep up the pilpul.

 

[Chugger]

So you can set an upper bound of resources that sounds too high, but doing basic math to set a lower bound according to science is just too much?

I'll bite.

Bones, do you think destroying 3.5 million bodies (1 million at Auschwitz + 2 million at other camps + .5 million by group 1005) would have consumed more than 1/1000th of annual production? Is that your hold up here?

and btw your insults don't bother me so you should save your breath, they just make me think you are a bit unhinged

 

[Bonesjones]

I'll bite.

Bones, do you think destroying 3.5 million bodies (1 million at Auschwitz + 2 million at other camps + .5 million by group 1005) would have consumed more than 1/1000th of annual production? Is that your hold up here?

and btw your insults don't bother me so you should save your breath, they just make me think you are a bit unhinged

I dont care what you think since you've proven to be a complete and utter retard.

Even in this moment, you think you are clever by suggesting that 1/1000th of a war time gdp is a small amount to be unnoticeable. You suggest they would literally burn money in the middle of the war because they are so evil. That they would devote all that infrastructure to genocide ontop of the other camp activities of slave labor and medical experiments and whatever other bullshit you conjure up. You lack any vision of what that scale of activity is.

I bet you don't even know that the majority of the German forces were still using horses.

 

[Chugger]

Even in this moment, you think you are clever by suggesting that 1/1000th of a war time gdp is a small amount to be unnoticeable. You suggest they would literally burn money in the middle of the war because they are so evil. That they would devote all that infrastructure to genocide ontop of the other camp activities of slave labor and medical experiments and whatever other bullshit you conjure up. You lack any vision of what that scale of activity is.

I bet you don't even know that the majority of the German forces were still using horses.

Of course I know this. The Germans prioritized resources to the extent that they euthanized their elderly, sick, and mentally ill countrymen against the general will of the population.

Now I argue they would still destroy the bodies, because if these were photographed and leaflets were dropped on German cities that might compromise the entire war effort and turn the populace against them.

But anyway what were the resource costs of hosting millions of non-working Jews in Russia or wherever?

You also asked me to establish the lower bound

I'll run the math using animal cremation figures, which you say works the same way : https://www.incinr8.com/

. Also the only difference between human and animal crematory is size. Since they both work exactly the same way and serve the same purpose. Bet you've never seen one of those in person have you? Probably don't even know they exist.

3.5 million bodies were destroyed over roughly 3 years

this machine can process 150 pounds per hour, consuming 2.5 gallons per hour at optimal settings

so 1.5 bodies per 2.5 gallons

therefore destroying 3.5 million would consume 5.8 million

Nazi germany annual production was 3,500 million gallons according to this

so total costs would be less than 1/500th of annual production. Over 3 years we can say 1/1500th. But oil was just part of Nazi fuel production, they also had large coal supplies and almost unlimited wood supply (occupied territories like Poland were indeed deforested significantly during the war) so probably we can bring that number down to 1/4000th . On top of that, many of the corpses destroyed were in advanced decomposition bringing fuel requirements down further, to maybe 1/6000th . transport costs might bring that a little higher, to 1/5000th of their annual wood oil and coal production

so this is where you're at when you start talking about fuel efficiency, compared to something like this

 

[mrolonzo]

yeah he blows up his misunderstanding of the maurer document into evidence that the Germans had trouble finding employment for their Jewish labor force, so had to inflate the numbers

https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/17-aoai.pdf pg 90


Idk, have you read the book? in terms of documents it's a lot of pilpul and asking questions around the Germans' obvious use of coded language. he finds no positive evidence -- ie documents showing the "dummy" shower heads were connected to pipes, or some policy or explanation about the ~70% of Jews that went unregistered

View attachment 3560495

This thread on the stokers is instructive;

https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=333&p=2138&hilit=900+krema+workers#p2138

Basically holocaust peddling authors and posters will make accusations of criminal activity based on interpretations of both small and big details of camp activity. Then when these are debunked they complain that the revisionist is going too deep into the details, or as seen here, is conducting "pilpul" - a Jewish term denoting;

" critical analysis and hairsplitting : casuistic argumentation especially among Jewish scholars on talmudic subjects : rabbinical dialectic"

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pilpul

Or

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12153-pilpul

"Description of Method.
The essential characteristic of pilpul is that it leads to a clear comprehension of the subject under discussion by penetrating into its essence and by adopting clear distinctions and a strict differentiation of the concepts. By this method a sentence or maxim is carefully studied, the various concepts which it includes are exactly determined, and all the possible consequences to be deduced from it are carefully investigated"

Take your pick.

So basically, holocaust peddlers do not want you to investigate too closely into the accusations they make and, here at least in this case will even use a Jewish term used often against Jews, while generally decrying nazis for anti semitism.

Here however, we can see the problem in this debate;

The starting position is, no criminal activity. The camp is not advertised as a death camp but as a work camp. No senior nazi boasts of Auschwitz as the world's premier jew killing site.

A negative postulate is introduced, such advertising was a lie, there was extensive criminal activity, as per testimony and later trials.

Revisionists ask, where is the hard evidence?

World holocaust activism states - how dare you?! We know it happened because it is known already that it happened!!

Some years later..

Pressac, asserts, screw you revisionist fools! We have no hard evidence as such, but we have clues or traces of this criminal activity.

Van pelt then re iterated this in his report too. It is namely the use of words in documents. This is not hair splitting our peddlers tell us, this is real evidence.


Specifically here, the use of special cellar as trace of criminal activity. As a "code word".

Seeking to examine this claim however, because it is just true etc etc is 'pilpul' or hair splitting.

In this case, Chugger posts page 75 of the book I recommend but doesn't mention the page in his own post. This is merely to demonstrate he has it and has read it presumably. As in, hey guys ive got it. Here's a random page from it!!

He then proceeds to blather that the book does too much pilpul and asking to many questions about code words which is stupid because all the code words are obvious.. Obvious because? Because…they just are ok?!!!



The claim from Pressac et al/ peddlers, is that a documentary use of the term special cellar, was a 'slip up', revealing the true criminal intent of the rooms being built in crematorium 2. The nazis had been trying to avoid any terms that would give the real game away, but in this case the plan faltered.

The term "special" or "sonder" was used, and this must have meant special treatment of humans with zyklon b in order to end their lives.

Apparently this is not hair splitting either...

------

Mattogno explains this is not a code word. The memo used by Pressac uses special in plural for two rooms in krema 2, rather than for krema 2 and 3 as krema 3 was still getting the floors created at the time. And the memo mentions de ariation equipment of which two were planned for Krema 2.

These two rooms out of six in the half basement did indeed have a special character it was from the ventilation equipment installed. Nothing to do with murder. See attached for the full section on this accusation that Chugger didn't want you to read.

But all this is not acceptable to our peddlers, because despite referring to at minimum six different documents of the time, one photo and one personal measurement across these few pages, the author does not pull out a new document saying that 'Dear fellow SS men, this word was definitely not a murder word.' Nor does this book deal with the unregistered inmates of Auschwitz. In this sense, Chugger can concede no point on code words until everything else is explained to his satisfaction.

By the way Stan, aren't you a Christian?

What's this tizitzit stuff, is that a Christian practice?

 

[Chugger]

https://www.okd.cz/en/coal-mining/the-history-of-coal-mining/second-world-war

we find the Germans were producing 20 mil tons of coal per year in 1943

the equivalent of 26,700 mil pounds of oil in terms of energy value

in gallons this would be 26,700 / 7.5 or 3560 million gallons equivalent, which is around the annual oil production stated previously , 3,500 million gallons , in terms of energy value

@mrolonzo I'm not going to do pilpul on (or even carefully read) your response, so why don't you cut to the chase and show us some convincing positive evidence. Is that the document saying they put ventilation in the undressing rooms?

 

[Stan]

Bet you've never seen one of those in person have you? Probably don't even know they exist.

Are you in 4th grade? Who else talks like this?

 

[Stan]

@Bonesjones Germany was and always has been a very coal rich country. Coal was plentiful in Nazi Germany, but oil was not. Burning the bodies of Holocaust victims wasnt limited by the amount of fuel but the number of bodies and delta t to burn them. Hitler was happy to throw resources at the Holocaust at an economic loss because of his political and personal vendetta against the Jews.

 

[Stan]

By the way Stan, aren't you a Christian?

What's this tizitzit stuff, is that a Christian practice?

@mrolonzo it is my practice of counting my blessings and enjoying Creation. It is also my way of winding you up about Jews.

 

[Stan]

@mrolonzo do you just ctrl+f CODOH threads to get the answers you need to keep the dream alive? How lazy.

It’s also quite lazy of Mattogno to simply decide that “sonder” wasn’t a code word when it was often used as one. It’s intentionally poor translation bent to making the Nazis look as non-murderous as possible, hoping we find it credible.

 

[Chugger]

Hitler was happy to throw resources at the Holocaust at an economic loss because of his political and personal vendetta against the Jews.

Actually I think the resource loss was the decision to separate the Jews out from the main population. This created a large amount of non-working people that were dependent on Nazi resources for survival. You remember the HC blog book's examples about the difficulty German administrators were having here. The logic behind the decision to eliminate this subset was in part the same as with the T4 program (no more spending on "useless mouths")

btw the 300k victims of T4 were mostly cremated

 

[mr.moon1488]

Are you in 4th grade? Who else talks like this?

@Bonesjones Germany was and always has been a very coal rich country. Coal was plentiful in Nazi Germany, but oil was not. Burning the bodies of Holocaust victims wasnt limited by the amount of fuel but the number of bodies and delta t to burn them. Hitler was happy to throw resources at the Holocaust at an economic loss because of his political and personal vendetta against the Jews.

@mrolonzo it is my practice of counting my blessings and enjoying Creation. It is also my way of winding you up about Jews.

@mrolonzo do you just ctrl+f CODOH threads to get the answers you need to keep the dream alive? How lazy.

It’s also quite lazy of Mattogno to simply decide that “sonder” wasn’t a code word when it was often used as one. It’s intentionally poor translation bent to making the Nazis look as non-murderous as possible, hoping we find it credible.

I am almost always correct. And though I can come off as arrogant - I do it with finesse and style. You, though, appear kinda wet behind the ears, are pretty much an empty suit, and are scarcely fit to address me as you are so clearly my inferior. If we ever have a real debate about anything of substance (which seems unlikely as you are heavily on the trolling and shit stirring side of things) you will lose and lose badly. And I'll do it with half my brain tied behind my back.

 

[Bonesjones]

Of course I know this. The Germans prioritized resources to the extent that they euthanized their elderly, sick, and mentally ill countrymen against the general will of the population.

So they prioritize efficiency and progress except to when it really counts? Makes sense to a total fucking idiot.

Now I think it might be arguable that they would still destroy bodies, because if these were photographed and leaflets were dropped on German cities that might compromise the entire war effort and turn the populace against them.

I thought the Nazis and by association was so evil that they wanted all Jews genocided? So now the Germans think killing Jews is a bad thing?

But anyway what were the resource costs of hosting millions of non-working Jews in Russia or wherever?

Who cares? You have to prove they killed them first.

3.5 million bodies were destroyed over roughly 3 years

this machine can process 150 pounds per hour, consuming 2.5 gallons per hour at optimal settings

so 1.5 bodies per 2.5 gallons

therefore destroying 3.5 million would consume 5.8 million

Nazi germany annual production was 3,500 million gallons according to this

If we convert it to dark matter they only needed a few grams, imagine the efficiency! Stick to the facts.

so total costs would be less than 1/500th of annual production. Over 3 years we can say 1/1500th. But oil was just part of Nazi fuel production, they also had large coal supplies and almost unlimited wood supply (occupied territories like Poland were indeed deforested significantly during the war) so probably we can bring that number down to 1/5000th . On top of that, many of the corpses destroyed were in advanced decomposition bringing fuel requirements down further, to maybe 1/7000th . transport costs might bring that a little higher, to 1/6000th of their annual wood oil and coal production

I just looked at all the aerial photos of Auschwitz and see no wood nor coal piles next to the crematory. Also, the train tracks don't come even close. So did they wheel barrel all this heavy shit back and forth? On a starvation level diet. These jews sure are a tough industrious people.

Are you in 4th grade? Who else talks like this?

Address my points or fuck off.

Germany was and always has been a very coal rich country. Coal was plentiful in Nazi Germany, but oil was not. Burning the bodies of Holocaust victims wasnt limited by the amount of fuel but the number of bodies and delta t to burn them. Hitler was happy to throw resources at the Holocaust at an economic loss because of his political and personal vendetta against the Jews.

Yes burning bodies isn't limited by the stuff you use to burn other stuff but blah blah blah fuck off retard.

Actually I think the resource loss was the decision to separate the Jews out from the main population. This created a large amount of non-working people that were dependent on Nazi resources for survival. You remember the HC blog book's examples about the difficulty German administrators were having here. The logic behind the decision to eliminate this subset was in part the same as with the T4 program (no more spending on "useless mouths")

btw the 300k victims of T4 were mostly cremated

How are they an economic loss if they are in slave labor camps? We know most jews left Germany prewar, not that they were contributing much since they ruined the economy and all. I guess taking money to stuff wombs in men who immediately die added a lot to humanity as a whole.

Also funny how the numbers jump from 70k to 300k. Also weird how Hitler ordered the euthanasia stopped directly. He just loved killing cripples so much he told them to stop.

 

[Green Man]

What's the term for when two idiots treat the thread like an open DM to ignore, derail, and present coordinated agreement as if it has a factual basis or logical consistency? I want to say a circle jerk, but that doesn't have the bad-faith implication I really need.

They're using this thread as a DM thread, meanwhile Stan sends me a DM to tell me how NOT MAD he is about negrates...which kind of defeats the point of sending the message.



He really doesn't care, but cared enough to send me a DM about it, and also cared enough to close the DM to further replies.

They're just stickers, chief.

 

[mrolonzo]

https://www.okd.cz/en/coal-mining/the-history-of-coal-mining/second-world-war

we find the Germans were producing 20 mil tons of coal per year in 1943

the equivalent of 26,700 mil pounds of oil in terms of energy value

View attachment 3563956

in gallons this would be 26,700 / 7.5 or 3560 million gallons equivalent, which is around the annual oil production stated previously , 3,500 million gallons , in terms of energy value

@mrolonzo I'm not going to do pilpul on (or even carefully read) your response, so why don't you cut to the chase and show us some convincing positive evidence. Is that the document saying they put ventilation in the undressing rooms?

Of course you're not going to read it!!

Not even the pages that you yourself post!!

Anyway yes, refuting the code words meme is positive evidence of no murderous activity.

@mrolonzo it is my practice of counting my blessings and enjoying Creation. It is also my way of winding you up about Jews.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tzitzit

Lol

@mrolonzo do you just ctrl+f CODOH threads to get the answers you need to keep the dream alive? How lazy.

It’s also quite lazy of Mattogno to simply decide that “sonder” wasn’t a code word when it was often used as one. It’s intentionally poor translation bent to making the Nazis look as non-murderous as possible, hoping we find it credible.

Yes. No it's not lazy.

No Mattogno is not lazy here, he's disproving the code word accusation for sonder and about 39 other criminal traces. Which is about the best evidence of a holocaust that you have.

 

[mrolonzo]

Actually I think the resource loss was the decision to separate the Jews out from the main population. This created a large amount of non-working people that were dependent on Nazi resources for survival. You remember the HC blog book's examples about the difficulty German administrators were having here. The logic behind the decision to eliminate this subset was in part the same as with the T4 program (no more spending on "useless mouths")

btw the 300k victims of T4 were mostly cremated

I assume here that you're not actually talking to Stan here but are advertising your filthy views here for my benefit.

The terminally ill and mentally deranged were euthanized then put on barbecue grills? Or was it the normal cremation process that all camps and civilian institutions carried out?

Anyway you're telling us that euthanasia was not legal ?

 

[mrolonzo]

Anyway, Ventilation;

 

[JohnDoe]

they will never answer this question, or any other pertinent ones, like the total lack of positive evidence for their hypothesis

Another point of evidence that you're an NPC with a badly written and looped script, as we come back to this tired canard where you try to shift the burden of proof:
"There is no confirming evidence that positively demonstrates every detail of a position I assigned to you, therefore you are wrong and I am right."
"Uh, that's cool and all, but then where is your positive evidence proving your thesis?"
"There is no evidence, therefore you can't disprove my thesis."
"You just said a second ago that a lack of positive, detailed evidence demonstrates probable falsity, so how can you-"
"SHUT UP IDIOT, THERE WAS NEVER A MOON RESETTLEMENT AND YOU'LL NEVER PROVE YOUR CONSPIRACY THEORY, RETARD!"

 

[Stabmaster Arson]

I've often heard the Nazis were into the occult. Has no one looked into if they opened a portal to hell and put the bodies there?