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

[Chugger]

So if that massive amounts of cremains existed then why didn't they do further investigation, why did they call it off at core samples? That's not science that's propaganda.

They weren't trying to prove the Holocaust to a bunch of disbelieving quacks, they were trying to identify the grave locations, sizes, and properties for research purposes.

You said you accept the mainstream holocaust narrative as your central thesis, all of these things come as a part of it. So either support them or deny them. Which is it?

Show me where historians assert the existence of eg masturbation machines

 

[John.Doe]

I've presented lots of evidence, which you don't accept for some reason, eg archeological reports of mass amounts of cremains under the surface at the Reinhard camps.

Why won't you accept my evidence? I've got a page from Goebbels's diary, satellite images, and eye witness testimony.

Pictures from the Soviet Moon probes...


And eyewitness 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 "Lonely"

Its a trove that you've never even acknowledged.

they were trying to identify the grave locations, sizes, and properties

Yet they didn't actually do any of those things, weird, huh?

 

[Bonesjones]

They weren't trying to prove the Holocaust to a bunch of disbelieving quacks, they were trying to identify the grave locations, sizes, and properties for research purposes.

Again, why did they stop with a preliminary investigation instead of doing a full one? What were they afraid of discovering?

Also quacks are people who push fake medicine, unless you are calling us ducks.

Show me where historians assert the existence of eg masturbation machines

Show me where they explicitly denounced the testimony as ridiculous. They clearly didn't do their work in verifying nor filtering it at any level. So why would we take their efforts as anything but amateur and lackluster?

 

[Chugger]

Again, why did they stop with a preliminary investigation instead of doing a full one? What were they afraid of discovering?

Nothing, your problem is you're not taking the perspective of someone who believes the Holocaust happened when thinking about their motives.

Show me where they explicitly denounced the testimony as ridiculous. They clearly didn't do their work in verifying nor filtering it at any level. So why would we take their efforts as anything but amateur and lackluster?

It's a historical standard not to take something as fact if it's not sufficiently evidenced.

If you want to compare the evidence of masturbation machines to gassings, go ahead. It might be an interesting exercise for you. I'd say in terms of evidence gas chambers are many many orders of magnitude better evidenced. There's only one mention of masturbation machines in the entire historical record. That's not enough. I'm not even taking into account the author was proven to be lying about his post-war activities, identity, and wasn't even Jewish.

 

[Bonesjones]

Nothing, your problem is you're not taking the perspective of someone who believes the Holocaust happened when thinking about their motives.

No I take the perspective of someone who knows a lot about core drilling and what it means. The only reason you do core drilling and stop is because you do not like what you find and have no interest in investigating further. So again, if they found these mass graves, then why did they stop?

If you want to compare the evidence of masturbation machines to gassings, go ahead. It might be an interesting exercise for you.

I already did, there's no physical evidence for either because they are both ridiculous ideas.

I'd say in terms of evidence gas chambers are many many orders of magnitude better evidenced.

No one cares what you say, only what you can prove. So start proving.

There's only one mention of masturbation machines in the entire historical record. That's not enough.

So how many is enough then? When does a lie get repeated enough for it to be the truth for you?

I'm not even taking into account the author was proven to be lying about his post-war activities, identity, and wasn't even Jewish.

Simon Weisenthal was proven to be lying and he wasn't stricken from the record, nor Elie Weisal, nor Anne Frank's dad. Huh all these people lying about the holocaust and getting caught. Yet no one dares to say maybe eyewitness testimony about the holocaust is useless.

 

[Chugger]

Why won't you accept my evidence? I've got a page from Goebbels's diary, satellite images, and eye witness testimony.
View attachment 6332150
Pictures from the Soviet Moon probes...
View attachment 6332151

And eyewitness testimony


Its a trove that you've never even acknowledged.



Yet they didn't actually do any of those things, weird, huh?

It's pretty easy for me to debunk this evidence my man. Like the "satellite image" is literally a still from a movie.

If you're introducing brand new evidence like previously unknown journals and diary pages (80 years after the fact), you should post at least post scans. You are a verified fraudster based on you trying to parrot the "satellite image" as real, so now you're going to have to do a lot to win back trust.

Simon Weisenthal was proven to be lying and he wasn't stricken from the record, nor Elie Weisal, nor Anne Frank's dad.

Their testimony isn't utilized.

 

[Bonesjones]

Their testimony isn't utilized.

Look at how much stuff you skipped to say that, why do you run from questions? Why are you a lying coward?

All of it is and was used. They all help form the foundational myth of the Holocaust. You again offer nothing and prove how weak you are morally, ethically, intellectually.

 

[Chugger]

Look at how much stuff you skipped to say that, why do you run from questions? Why are you a lying coward?

All of it is and was used. They all help form the foundational myth of the Holocaust. You again offer nothing and prove how weak you are morally, ethically, intellectually.

Show me where historians utilize the testimony of Weisenthal or Weisel,

In fact they've demonstrated that he wasn't telling the truth, this is good historical practice:

A number of Wiesenthal's books contain conflicting stories and tales, many of which were invented.[1][2] Several authors, including Segev[1] and British author Guy Walters,[2] feel that Wiesenthal's autobiographies are not reliable sources of information about his life and activities. For example, Wiesenthal would describe two people fighting over one of the lists he had prepared of survivors of the Holocaust; the two look up and recognise each other and have a tearful reunion. In one account it is a husband and wife,[128] and in another telling it is two brothers.[129] Wiesenthal's memoirs variously claim he had spent time in as many as eleven concentration camps; the actual number was five.[130] A drawing he made in 1945 that he claimed was a scene he witnessed in Mauthausen had actually been sketched from photos that appeared in Life magazine that June.

When people lie, you can often find evidence of deceit, like I did with John Doe above (the satellite photo). When they're telling the truth, you won't be able to find compelling evidence of deceit.

This is not an interrogation BonesJones, I don't have to respond to all your bullshit.

Tell me more about why you believe the Soviets genocided the resettled Jews when there is no evidence of this.

 

[John.Doe]

When people lie, you can often find evidence of deceit, like I did with John Doe above (the satellite photo).

What you actually did was make a baseless assertion without presenting any evidence, like you frequently do. It doesn't hold any weight or value. Pretty bad faith and disingenuous of you, the kind of behavior I'd expect from a liar,

 

[Chugger]

What you actually did was make a baseless assertion without presenting any evidence, like you frequently do. It doesn't hold any weight or value. Pretty bad faith and disingenuous of you, the kind of behavior I'd expect from a liar,

Sure I'll present the evidence.

25 seconds into the trailer is the image you present as being a photo of a real Nazi moon base. You are a proven fraudster.

https://europeanfilmawards.eu/en_EN/film/iron-sky.5764

 

[Bonesjones]

Show me where historians utilize the testimony of Weisenthal or Weisel,

In fact they've demonstrated that he wasn't telling the truth, this is good historical practice:

Considering the holocaust didn't exist until invented later using the works of Anne Frank's diary and Elie Weisal's nights to put them in the publics eye, that's how they were utilized.

When people lie, you can often find evidence of deceit, like I did with John Doe above (the satellite photo). When they're telling the truth, you won't be able to find compelling evidence of deceit

If only you held yourself and the holocaust to the same standard. I've shown you the biggest names in the holocaust and it's dishonesty and yet you won't shift your view, why is that? Remember when you quote your favorite blog and when exposed for it being a fraud, you didn't change your view. When you pretend a source says something due to selective quoting, you don't change your view. Why are you just constantly dishonest instead of shutting up instead?

This is not an interoogation BonesJones, I don't have to respond to all your bullshit.

You don't have to do anything, you choose to be a dishonest, weak, coward though.

Tell me more about why you believe the Soviets genocided the resettled Jews when there is no evidence of this.

Tell me why the Soviets massacred people at Katyn forest and blamed it on the Nazis. If they had already done it once, why wouldn't they do it again? Do I think there is proof it happened? No. Do I think it's infinitely more likely than the Nazis deciding to medically treat jews dying of Typhus just so they could force them into gas chambers so they could kill them? Absolutely.

 

[Chugger]

Considering the holocaust didn't exist until invented later using the works of Anne Frank's diary and Elie Weisal's nights to put them in the publics eye, that's how they were utilized.

You didn't answer my question. I said I respect the work of historians, not anything which may come into the public eye.

Remember when you quote your favorite blog and when exposed for it being a fraud, you didn't change your view.

It didn't change my view, because there is no evidence of them ever doing fraudulent activity. You have to take an evidence based approach. You can see how I did that above when I showed John Doe was lying.

So, as I did with John Doe, show them inserting "evidence", then show why that evidence is fraudulent.

Tell me why the Soviets massacred people at Katyn forest and blamed it on the Nazis. If they had already done it once, why wouldn't they do it again?

Maybe (in some conceivable universe) they may have, but only someone who practices cartoon history can turn possibility into a positive assertion about what really happened.

 

[Bonesjones]

You didn't answer my question. I said I respect the work of historians, not anything which may come into the public eye.

There are no historians about the holocaust because the holocaust was invented in the 60s. There is no holocaust before "Destruction of the European Jews"

It didn't change my view, because there is no evidence ever of them doing fraudulent activity.

http://www.deathcamps.org/editorial2013.html

Aww you lied yet again.

. You have to take an evidence based approach. You can see how I did that above when I showed John Doe was lying.

So post the evidence one jew was gassed to death. Post one order from Hitler for genocide. Your words are empty and hollow.

So, as I did with John Doe, show them inserting "evidence", then show why that evidence is fraudulent.

It's always funny watching you pretend to take a principled stand when you have no principles and stand for nothing.

Maybe (in some conceivable universe) they may have, but only someone who practices cartoon history can turn possibility into a positive assertion about what really happened.

So you have two choices, either the Soviets killed them and blamed the Nazis OR the jews just disappeared into nothing. Which is more likely? Those are your two choices.

 

[Imperial Citizen]

Tell me why the Soviets massacred people at Katyn forest and blamed it on the Nazis. If they had already done it once, why wouldn't they do it again?

The elimination of remnants of Polish leadership while blaming it the Nazis to mobilize Polish support for the Soviets?

While the Soviets could have done it again, partisan groups were already established by the time the Soviets were marching towards Berlin. The Soviets had their local allies.

 

[John.Doe]

Sure I'll present the evidence.

25 seconds into the trailer is the image you present as being a photo of a real Nazi moon base. You are a proven fraudster.

https://europeanfilmawards.eu/en_EN/film/iron-sky.5764

Okay, now that we established that you know how to present evidence, the fact that you fail to do so when presenting your assertions about the Holocaust indicates that you don't have any evidence to present.

Thanks.

 

[Chugger]

Okay, now that we established that you know how to present evidence, the fact that you fail to do so when presenting your assertions about the Holocaust indicates that you don't have any evidence to present.

Thanks.

Documents, archeological reports, witness statements are evidence, so . . . where does that leave us? If you think something I've presented is fake, then by all means make your argument

eg the Just Memo https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2015/10/contemporary-german-documents-on.html#_doc10

 

[Bonesjones]

Documents, archeological reports, witness statements are evidence, so . . . where does that leave us? If you think something I've presented is fake, then by all means make your argument

eg the Just Memo https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2015/10/contemporary-german-documents-on.html#_doc10

Good Lord! What is happening in there?
-Nazi Gas Vans
Nazi Gas Vans?!
At this time of year, at this time of day, in this part of the country localized entirely within your kitchen?
- Yes.
May I see it?
- No

 

[Chugger]

Good Lord! What is happening in there?
-Nazi Gas Vans
Nazi Gas Vans?!
At this time of year, at this time of day, in this part of the country localized entirely within your kitchen?
- Yes.
May I see it?
- No

View attachment 6334528

So if the Nazis had used gas vans (around 10 of them) and then modified or destroyed them after they had fulfilled their purpose, then automatically they get away with this crime. All the other evidence of their use means nothing and in fact must be fake. Got it

 

[Bonesjones]

So if the Nazis had used gas vans (around 10 of them) and then modified or destroyed them after they had fulfilled their purpose, then automatically they get away with this crime. All the other evidence of their use means nothing and in fact must be fake. Got it

So if 1000 people saw Bigfoot, recorded his foot prints and captured him on camera. You believe in him right? Sure no one ever found bits of fur or a skeleton or any other piece of physical evidence but that doesn't matter in the face of overwhelming documentation. So do you believe in Bigfoot now? Or will you continue to cope and seethe?

 

[Chugger]

So if 1000 people saw Bigfoot, recorded his foot prints and captured him on camera. You believe in him right? Sure no one ever found bits of fur or a skeleton or any other piece of physical evidence but that doesn't matter in the face of overwhelming documentation. So do you believe in Bigfoot now? Or will you continue to cope and seethe?

I think the Bigfoot story suffers because the witness evidence is very inconsistent, unlike with gas vans, and a lot of it has been clearly hoaxed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Dyer_(hoaxer)

There's also no mechanism to explain the lack of big foot remains, whereas there clearly is with gas vans. The Nazis modified or destroyed them after their purpose was fulfilled, which makes perfect sense.