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

[Chugger]

You like it so much you can't help but make up your own head-history and defend it without end! Or skill, or wit, or knowledge. But gosh darn it, you've got gumption!

You mean like I believe an event occurred involving millions of people for which there isn't a shred of evidence? No witness statements, no documents, no physical evidence either.

 

[Throng of Titans]

You mean like I believe an event occurred involving millions of people for which there isn't a shred of evidence? No witness statements, no documents, no physical evidence either.

Actually this raises a good point.

A very common revisionist claim is that there is not enough evidence (paperwork in particular) that the Holocaust happened. Yet many revisionists will also claim that a mass relocation happened instead, despite there being even less evidence for such a thing happening.

To avoid sounding like a faggot or Redditor, I'll put it this way. It seems a little hypocritical to try and say that the Holocaust was a fabrication due to lack of evidence, then say a mass relocation must have happened, and it's proven by the lack of evidence.

 

[John.Doe]

Actually this raises a good point.

No, its a simple attempt to reverse the burden of proof. If you want to claim that 6 million Jews were put on death coasters, killed with trained bears/eagles, gas chambers, etc, and then all cremated, then you need to present proof of these facts. This kind of 'point' is just you creating a strawman position and then tasking people to then try and defend whatever ridiculous thing you've made up, a clear attempt in bad faith to dodge arguments and try reversing the burden of proof. Whether there exists any evidence of Moon Resettlement or not has no relationship whatsoever to the consistent and repeated inability or unwillingness to demonstrate the Holocaust.

If you read through the thread, you'll see this play out multiple times where Chugger and other Holocaust advocates hold the position that their lack of evidence makes their positions stronger, while demanding incredible standards from anyone else. In fact, Chugger brings the same flawed perspective you just stated, except with more smug retardation.

Chugger plays these smug word games while trying to reverse the burden of proof like "account for the movement of every Jew in Europe, oh you can't? Guess I win" or conjuring up tinfoil conspiratard logic to try and explain how some Hauptmann's receipt for blotter paper combines with some photocopied Soviet interrogation notes to prove the existence of a Voltron style Holocaust mecha.
"All the paperwork that might have proved a billion Jews were cremated at the Reinhard camps was completely destroyed, therefore proving me correct forever and ever, you cannot possibly attack my theory that a billion Jews were Holocoastered!"
"Meanwhile, your stupid resettlement theory has no evidence for it, therefore it must be false! Man, you deniers are so stupid, you can't even defend the strawmen I assign to you!"

The bottom line is that it doesn't matter what kind of theories other people have about WWII, or what level of proof they have. What matters is the proof presented to support the Holocaust narrative, and telling me that some other theory is bullshit doesn't prove your theory correct. Proof of burden matters.

 

[Chugger]

No, its a simple attempt to reverse the burden of proof. If you want to claim that 6 million Jews were put on death coasters, killed with trained bears/eagles, gas chambers, etc, and then all cremated, then you need to present proof of these facts. This kind of 'point' is just you creating a strawman position and then tasking people to then try and defend whatever ridiculous thing you've made up, a clear attempt in bad faith to dodge arguments and try reversing the burden of proof. Whether there exists any evidence of Moon Resettlement or not has no relationship whatsoever to the consistent and repeated inability or unwillingness to demonstrate the Holocaust.

No. If the Holocaust wasn't sufficiently evidenced by historical standards I wouldn't believe in it. Given no reasonable hypotheses about what happened to the Jews I would be completely agnostic about their fate.

It's you guys who are saying that because the Holocaust story doesn't make sense to you, relocation of the Jews must have happened. The purpose of me bringing up resettlement, is not to prove the Holocaust happened by reverse induction, but rather to show that you guys are the ones doing that, and this reflects poorly on your competency and historical approach. Mass events in history are always directly evidenced to some degree.

Death coasters, trained bears/eagles, are not sufficiently evidenced btw, that's why I don't believe in that. Putting people in an enclosed space and gassing them is evidenced, same with mass body destruction (through witness statements, documents, and physical evidence).

 

[John.Doe]

It's you guys who are saying that because the Holocaust story doesn't make sense to you, relocation of the Jews must have happened.

I've never said that, first. Second, even if any kind of theory about Jew resettlement wasn't well supported, that doesn't mean that some other theory (like the Holocaust) is true. This isn't a zero sum game where attacking someone else's theory supports your own.

No. If the Holocaust wasn't sufficiently evidenced by historical standards I wouldn't believe in it.
Death coasters, trained bears/eagles, are not sufficiently evidenced btw, that's why I don't believe in that. Putting people in an enclosed space and gassing them is evidenced, same with mass body destruction (through witness statements, documents, and physical evidence).

You don't believe in death coasters and trained bears/eagles, but you do believe in never seen before or since magic Jew-fat powered cremation machines because you are working backwards from your preferred conclusion (the Holocaust happened) instead of using actual historical standards. You look at the killing fields in Cambodia or other genocides supposedly much smaller than the Holocaust and evidence is mountainous. Meanwhile for the Holocaust here you have insane conspiracy theories made from second and third hand accounts, given under torture or by motivated parties, combined with misleading (or fabricated) photos of nothing, or even things that contradict your own narrative.

In this case the conclusion is the starting point (a Holocaust of gassing and incineration) and every scrap of evidence or logical question is forced to bend and twist back to that; a memo about some Hauptmann's boot polish purchases is held up as proof there was Jew-ash everywhere, a photo of two men holding a woman is a 'prisoner being thrown into a crematorium' despite there being nothing else but trees and a fence in the photo, a note from 1985 based on sketched copies of a purported patent which concludes 'there is no way to know if this was ever built or worked' is touted as proof positive that magic super crematoriums existed - all of this is twisted around because the people presenting it as such do not want to go where the evidence leads, only adapt or twist everything to fit their already decided conclusion.

I know you remember the whole cremation debacle. A simple question about 'where did they get the fuel needed to cremate the millions of corpses?' turned into a three ring circus where the cadavers were emaciated and starved - except for the fat ones the Nazis rendered down to use as fuel, which were all then incinerated in their super-crematoriums that ran on jew fat - except for the ones burned in the open pits shown in their photos, and you won't ever see a picture of the super crematorium because photos were banned - but also we have all these pictures of everything but the crematoriums, with continual bad faith and constant attempts to flip the burden of proof and demanding other people defend positions they never claimed. The basic neutral position where full faith and credit is given cannot be sustained in the face of such duplicity, and the only ones to blame are the people that refuse to engage in even a modicum of good faith.

You're a liar and a fraud, my dude.

 

[Chugger]

I've never said that, first

That's fine. You're aware that basically every high profile revisionist (eg Mattogno/Graf/Dalton/Rudolph) believes in mass relocation? What do you make of that?

Second, even if any kind of theory about Jew resettlement wasn't well supported, that doesn't mean that some other theory (like the Holocaust) is true. This isn't a zero sum game where attacking someone else's theory supports your own.

I agree and don't think I've said this. It's just a way of me showing that the historical approach taken by your side is deeply flawed and hypocritical.

You don't believe in death coasters and trained bears/eagles, but you do believe in never seen before or since magic Jew-fat powered cremation machines because you are working backwards from your preferred conclusion (the Holocaust happened) instead of using actual historical standards.

I don't think any Jew-fat powered crema were ever used so I don't believe this, but I do believe in mass body destruction and gassing. Death coasters, as far as I'm aware, were never attested to in any direct testimony (eg a person who says they personally saw them), whereas there are many hundreds of direct testimonies about body destruction and gassing. That's a clear difference right there as difficult as it may be for your mind to grasp that.

You look at the killing fields in Cambodia or other genocides supposedly much smaller than the Holocaust and evidence is mountainous.

It's not. I haven't looked at Cambodia, but I did look at the Armenian genocide and the Holocaust case is much stronger.

 

[Krokodil Overdose]

I don't think any Jew-fat powered crema were ever used so I don't believe this, but I do believe in mass body destruction and gassing.

Okay, so where did they get the fuel? Remember that the death machine went into overdrive just as the war was turning decisively against them, with energy shortages across the board.

For reference, the German plan for the Battle of thr Bulge involved seizing Allied fuel depots because they couldn't pull together enough gas to get their last panzer package to Antwerp, that's how starved they were for fuel in late '44/ early '45.

 

[CowPox]

Anyone grab a copy of this?

 

[TJT]

Actually this raises a good point.

A very common revisionist claim is that there is not enough evidence (paperwork in particular) that the Holocaust happened. Yet many revisionists will also claim that a mass relocation happened instead, despite there being even less evidence for such a thing happening.

To avoid sounding like a faggot or Redditor, I'll put it this way. It seems a little hypocritical to try and say that the Holocaust was a fabrication due to lack of evidence, then say a mass relocation must have happened, and it's proven by the lack of evidence.

What are you talking about?

The Wansee conference notes are the primary paper evidence that the lolcaust was ordered. Not a single time does this document mention killing anyone. You have to believe the Jew narrative that it was all euphemisms conveniently for killing people. Indicating that even among themselves the Germans were too polite to speak frankly. Despite already waging war and killing hundreds of thousands by this point.

The Lolcaust is lol because its exaggerated to the point of lunacy. The Jews suffered no more than anyone else did in the war. Which claimed the lives of millions upon millions of people. Nothing about them also dying in the war makes them special or worthy of more attention. Nothing. If you think that any kind of anti-Jew sentiment is solely the result of irrational antisemitism you're just a retard.

 

[TJT]

You think I'm here to defend something but really I just like debating history and justifiably mocking people for being really bad at it.

There's no debate really. Revisionism doesn't meet the barest threshold for being a legit historical hypothesis (the no evidence thing).

No you don't. You literally run the gamut of bullshit old Addy states.

1. Come in with smug superiority on the topic. - Check.
2. Get challenged and call the person asking you an idiot - Check.
3. Get pressed on something you don't understand but can't find a way to disregard. So you act like an idiot instead. - Check
4. Pretend you don't understand and change the context- Check.
5. Pretend something hasn't been already discussed then claim it doesn't exist unless produce in front of you right now even though its sitting on the shelf next to you - Check.
6. Instead pretend that you were just joking and you are just here for the shitposting.

 

[Chugger]

Okay, so where did they get the fuel? Remember that the death machine went into overdrive just as the war was turning decisively against them, with energy shortages across the board.

For reference, the German plan for the Battle of thr Bulge involved seizing Allied fuel depots because they couldn't pull together enough gas to get their last panzer package to Antwerp, that's how starved they were for fuel in late '44/ early '45.

I did this math here, using figures provided to me by a denier https://kiwifarms.st/threads/poll-w...olocaust-happened.103122/page-4#post-10266387

TLDR: energy costs come out to a few days of fuel production, assuming they only used gasoline, which they didn't. More available resources like wood and coal were also used.

I also did math showing that keeping Jews alive (the converse of killing them) would be far more costly in terms of energy expenditure.

They diverted some of the fuel used to power their war machine to covering up one of the greatest crimes in history (criminal in the way that it would be perceived, obvs not from their perspective).

The Wansee conference notes are the primary paper evidence that the lolcaust was ordered.

No it's not. It's one of hundreds of documents. And if you go through it in detail you can see that it supports extermination claims more than contradicts them.

No you don't. You literally run the gamut of bullshit old Addy states.

1. Come in with smug superiority on the topic. - Check.
2. Get challenged and call the person asking you an idiot - Check.
3. Get pressed on something you don't understand but can't find a way to disregard. So you act like an idiot instead. - Check
4. Pretend you don't understand and change the context- Check.
5. Pretend something hasn't been already discussed then claim it doesn't exist unless produce in front of you right now even though its sitting on the shelf next to you - Check.
6. Instead pretend that you were just joking and you are just here for the shitposting.

You actually can't get into specifics about any of this (eg me changing the context). I think you tried to this and then I showed you where Bonesjones claimed that the Dachau museum said the gas chamber was fake, after which you were silent. I'll give you credit for this actually, you probably aren't as dumb as Bones but your memory isn't so good.

 

[John.Doe]

I did this math here, using figures provided to me by a denier https://kiwifarms.st/threads/poll-w...olocaust-happened.103122/page-4#post-10266387

TLDR: energy costs come out to a few days of fuel production, assuming they only used gasoline, which they didn't. More available resources like wood and coal were also used.

Except that those numbers were, at best, for incinerating chickens, not cremating human remains and also, you declared that most of the bodies were destroyed in open-air pits.

The indoor cremation issue is moot because most of the bodies were destroyed outdoors

An open air pit-style burning is less efficient than any kind of crematorium, so any kinds of numbers from a closed-crematorium setting would need to be multiplied an order of magnitude, at least. So now that you've cranked up the fuel requirements to an insane degree, you try to cover by mentioning coal and wood off hand.

Wood and coal are a lot less energy dense than petrol, so you'd need even more raw material by volume, but I'm sure a scholar like you has the evidence on hand showing the tons of wood/coal harvested and transported for use in highly inefficient outdoor pit cremation.

Oh, and since these open pits are so inefficient and hard to manage there must be tons of forensic evidence left over, too, so I'm sure you can demonstrate the tons of ash, carbonized flesh and large bone hunks left behind from a haphazard, inefficient pit burning right?

No it's not. It's one of hundreds of documents. And if you go through it in detail you can see that it supports extermination claims more than contradicts them.

Oh boy, do I have some great proof for you, then, I have a translated passage from Gobbel's diary

a picture from the Soviet Moon Probes...

and some eye-witness testimony.

My sister, Chane, was taken from me and dragged to a rocket with the rest of the women and many of the children. I too, should have been placed with the other children, but the Hauptsturmführer grasped my arm and declared I was fit to labor with a young man's strength. I had to watch through tears as the rocket turned winter into summer, for the moments of its flight from the frozen ground into the sky. I was gripped with fear, thinking my sister would explode like a firework, taking her from me like the bombs took our parents. Instead, it vanished into the night on a tail of foul smelling smoke, lost among the stars like a seed on a sand bar. I begged the soldier to tell me where my sister had gone, and he laughed. To the moon she went, he said, to grow Moon Pears in honor of Hitler. As for me, my path went to a labor camp......
- Schmul Goldberg

These are just single examples of hundreds of thousands of documents that all prove that the Jews were relocated to the Moon, and if you go through these in detail you'll have to agree.

I wish I had more direct evidence, but sadly, sometime during the ensuing Space Race between Russia and the USA the Lunar Colonies were discovered and destroyed by anti-Semites to hide all evidence of the Jewish triumph over their Nazi guards and resettlement. Until Based Musk travels there on a private shuttle and does some archeological work I'm afraid we will never read the victorious story of Jankel Schapiro, written over his meal of Moon Pears.

Obviously anyone who denies the existence of the Jewish Moon Colony is an Anti-Semite, unwilling to admit that the Jews were able to turn the table on their captors and establish a thriving Moon Colony that would have been a boon for all mankind. You're not an anti-Semite Nazi-Lover, are you?

 

[Chugger]

An open air pit-style burning is less efficient than any kind of crematorium, so any kinds of numbers from a closed-crematorium setting would need to be multiplied an order of magnitude, at least.

Show this to be necessarily the case. Experiments at the beginning of the 1900s by Lothes & Profé show that aprox .5kg of wood was needed per kg of body weight when burning animal carcasses in open air pits. https://holocaustcontroversies.blog...os-cremation-encyclopedia-part-2_28.html#more

We know that wood has about 1/3 the nergy density of liquid fuel so you can make your calculations there. 40kg per body is quite generous given the emaciated state of most European Jews at the time and that a large part of those alleged to have been killed were children, babies.

These are just single examples of hundreds of thousands of documents that all prove that the Jews were relocated to the Moon, and if you go through these in detail you'll have to agree.

Yeah I remember these examples. You're making an argument about Holocaust evidence being faked, sure it's possible all the evidence was faked. But in history you actually have to make a compelling case for the evidence being faked. If you can't do it that, possibility isn't enough. You can start with some of the documents seen here https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2015/10/contemporary-german-documents-on.html The big ones are 4,5, 9, 10

 

[Bonesjones]

A very common revisionist claim is that there is not enough evidence (paperwork in particular) that the Holocaust happened. Yet many revisionists will also claim that a mass relocation happened instead, despite there being even less evidence for such a thing happening.

No we say there isn't any physical evidence backing up holocaust claims, and a lack of paperwork and logistics makes their assertions impossible. You have to show how this industrial machine of genocide was built and ran and the steps leading up to it, not how it was just magically there. If you say a million people died in an area it leaves long reaching environmental effects, if you say the bodies aren't there because it was destroyed. You have to prove they could even do that first before you can say it was done. There is more than adequate evidence that they were relocating people. The fact you can't trace the travel of everyone involved doesn't change any of that, considering it happened during total war with millions dead, and a post war period that was just as violent and tragic and would lead to the starvation of millions more. Funny how the holocaust only focuses on jews and none of the other millions of people killed by the Soviets both intentionally and not.

To avoid sounding like a faggot or Redditor, I'll put it this way. It seems a little hypocritical to try and say that the Holocaust was a fabrication due to lack of evidence, then say a mass relocation must have happened, and it's proven by the lack of evidence.

"I killed a man" ok where's the body and the murder weapon? "I destroyed them both" ok what other evidence do you have "well they aren't here any more" so your only proof of it happening is that they aren't there? They probably just left.

No. If the Holocaust wasn't sufficiently evidenced by historical standards I wouldn't believe in it. Given no reasonable hypotheses about what happened to the Jews I would be completely agnostic about their fate.

You believe tons of things that have no evidence, we've proven it many times. Any time you try to think for yourself you only assert your own holocaust denial.

It's you guys who are saying that because the Holocaust story doesn't make sense to you, relocation of the Jews must have happened.

I guess all the evidence that the Nazis were trying to relocate jews to the Soviets or Madascar doesn't exist. Oh right it's all just code words. I thought you only believed in well evidenced stuff? Why is it always deja vu?

The purpose of me bringing up resettlement, is not to prove the Holocaust happened by reverse induction, but rather to show that you guys are the ones doing that, and this reflects poorly on your competency and historical approach. Mass events in history are always directly evidenced to some degree.

You didn't bring it up, it existed before the Holocaust did. Explicitly. You are diverting from your own lack of evidence yet again.

Death coasters, trained bears/eagles, are not sufficiently evidenced btw, that's why I don't believe in that. Putting people in an enclosed space and gassing them is evidenced, same with mass body destruction (through witness statements, documents, and physical evidence).

Yet you can't prove any of it, so you just fall back to pretending you did. Hey look its Hitler’s how jews argue again.

That's fine. You're aware that basically every high profile revisionist (eg Mattogno/Graf/Dalton/Rudolph) believes in mass relocation? What do you make of that?

Almost like the Wannsee conference was about expelling jews from German territory and they did that. Remember jews were allowed to leave prewar. Oh yeah we don't talk about prewar Germany because it directly refutes the holocaust.

I agree and don't think I've said this. It's just a way of me showing that the historical approach taken by your side is deeply flawed and hypocritical.

"Guys you keep proving me wrong, time to reframe everything yet again"

I don't think any Jew-fat powered crema were ever used so I don't believe this, but I do believe in mass body destruction and gassing. Death coasters, as far as I'm aware, were never attested to in any direct testimony (eg a person who says they personally saw them), whereas there are many hundreds of direct testimonies about body destruction and gassing. That's a clear difference right there as difficult as it may be for your mind to grasp that.

You've said it multiple times in this thread. Death Coaster's literally come from a book on eyewitness Jewish accounts. Yet another case of you undermining your own arguments by picking and choosing information. You are by definition a holocaust denier.

TLDR: energy costs come out to a few days of fuel production, assuming they only used gasoline, which they didn't. More available resources like wood and coal were also used.

So where are the wood and coal piles at? We have photos that directly disprove this. I literally posted them to prove you and everyone else wrong.

I also did math showing that keeping Jews alive (the converse of killing them) would be far more costly in terms of energy expenditure.

Yeah undermining your own argument yet again. If they wanted to kill them they would but they didn't so they had no intention of killing them. Hey look you just disproved the Nazis as genocidal maniacs, congrats you can't go to Germany or Poland any more.

They diverted some of the fuel used to power their war machine to covering up one of the greatest crimes in history (criminal in the way that it would be perceived, obvs not from their perspective).

Hey look the "Nazis are evil genocidal maniacs so they made Rube Goldberg machines to kill jews but also failed to kill the jews" argument again.

Show this to be necessarily the case. Experiments at the beginning of the 1900s by Lothes & Profé show that aprox .5kg of wood was needed per kg of body weight when burning animal carcasses in open air pits.

Oh look back to quoting a propaganda blog that got caught forging documents. You really are pathetic.

 

[Chugger]

Oh look back to quoting a propaganda blog that got caught forging documents. You really are pathetic

Didn't read the rest of your response, but what's the document they got caught forging? Let me guess, you're not gonna say.

 

[Bonesjones]

Didn't read the rest of your response, but what's the document they got caught forging? Let me guess, you're not gonna say.

I don't answer people who can't read. I'm not digging through the thread to find the link to Codoh whose forum doesn't exist that show the whole thing, so you can continue to forget conversations you've had or things you've read.

 

[John.Doe]

Show this to be necessarily the case.

You want me to prove to you that a closed vessel is more efficient at heating an object than one open to the air? Are you unable to understand the basic principles underlying oven technology, in seriousness? We're circling back to this gem from earlier in this thread where this discussion was beaten to death

If you just put a pizza in the oven. You can cook it, then turn the oven off and use the heat from that pizza to cook another pizza. This makes sense if you believe in the Holocaust.

 

[Chugger]

You want me to prove to you that a closed vessel is more efficient at heating an object than one open to the air? Are you unable to understand the basic principles underlying oven technology, in seriousness? We're circling back to this gem from earlier in this thread where this discussion was beaten to death

My napkin math using open air cremation experiments, which I linked to in my response to you, shows that to destroy a 40 kg body in an open air pit requires 20 kg of wood, or 8 kg of liquid fuel. 8 kg of liquid fuel come to around 2 gallons of liquid fuel per person. Roughly 8 million gallons equivalent would be needed to destroy 4 million bodies, you can adjust it up if you think the average Jew killed here would have weighed more than 40kg. Germany was producing 10 million gallons per day.

 

[John.Doe]

My napkin math using open air cremation experiments, which I linked to in my response to you,

First off, I'm not giving traffic to your off-site whatever. Post it here if you want us to laugh at it.
Secondly, we already calculated the energy requirements with a number of concessions (like perfect efficiency), which are much higher. No physical process could possibly have lower energy requirements. Feel free to go back in the thread and critique as you like, I'd love to hear more about the magic crematoriums you're sure existed because some guy wrote a memo fifty years ago about his brother's roomate's cousin' former landlord's hairdresser seeing a patent.

Third, explain oven technology. I want you to prove that you understand a level of physics I'd expect from a 6th grader.

 

[Chugger]

First off, I'm not giving traffic to your off-site whatever. Post it here if you want us to laugh at it.

In their aforementioned article, Lothes & Profé rendered their total fuel requirements (minus accelerants whose quantities were considered negligible) in "evaporation units" (E.U.), an "evaporation unit" being the amount of energy required to evaporate 1 kg of water. They also provided information that allows for converting these evaporation units into wood weights, as I did on p. 465 of the critique, namely that 1 kg of wood can evaporate 9 kg of water. If 1 kg of wood can evaporate 9 kg of water, the mass in kg of wood or wood equivalent can be obtained dividing by nine the number of E.U. stated by Lothes & Profé regarding each of their experiments, which leads to the following wood weights per kg of carcass weight:

Experiment I: 4.5÷9 = 0.5 kg
Experiment II: 3.88÷9 = 0.43 kg
Experiment III: 6.75÷9 = 0.75 kg
Average I, II and III: 5.04÷9 = 0.56 kg
Experiment IV: 3.65÷9 = 0.41 kg
Experiment V: 4.76÷9 = 0.53 kg
Experiment VI: 4.5÷9 = 0.5 kg
Average IV, V and VI: 4.3÷9 = 0.43 kg

Modern methods of open air burning show similar numbers.

However, air Curtain incinerators are not noted for fuel efficiency, according to the TAHC’s aforementioned General Guidelines for the Disposal of Carcasses, whereby air curtain incineration is "fuel intensive" (p.9). These guidelines on the other hand mention fuel-to-carcass ratio much lower than MGK claim for the experiment they mention: "The materials required are wood (in a wood: carcass ratio of from 1:1 to 2:1), diesel fuel for both the fire and the air-curtain fan, and properly trained personnel. For incineration of 500 adult swine, the requirements are 30 cords of dry wood and 200 gallons of diesel fuel." (p. The mentioned ratios are in line with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)/TAHC report on an experiment of burning swine carcasses at Pilot Point, Texas, on 19-20 December 1994, available under http://www.airburners.com/DATA-FILES_Tech/ab_swine_report.pdf. They are also in line with a communication sent to the author by Mr. Norbert Fuhrmann, sales manager of Air Burners LLC in Florida, USA, which is quoted in Muehlenkamp, ‘Carlo Mattogno on Belzec Archaeological Research - Part 4 (2)’. According to Mr. Fuhrmann: "A good rule of thumb is that you need roughly in tons the same amount of wood waste as the weight of the carcasses for bovines, pigs, horses, sheep, etc. For 5 tons of carcasses you need 4-5 tons of wood waste." These equally reliable sources conveniently omitted by MGK show that carcasses can be burned at a much lower wood-weight-to-carcass-weight ratio than in the cases they mention.

I don't even need to get into oven technology because you said it's an order of magnitude more efficient. I'm happy using the numbers for less efficient open air cremation just to show how weak your overall case is.