Your top reasons

[Mkk]

Holland was for five years under German occupation - which was no great fun - but it was War and there were no, absolutely NO extremities and NO abuses to normal civilians. In my opinion, there never was an occupation army after WW 2, which behaved so correctly and disciplined as German soldiers in Holland. Even the Jews sent to Westerbork, were relatively treated well; only resistance deeds and -fighters got no mercy).

...As is legal under international law.

Check out this excellent collection of videos on the Netherlands in WW2, looks like hell.

http://www.youtube.com/user/RTVNederland

[Creox]

As has been said in the thread, choosing one top reason doesn't quite work. This is because the Holocaust, and its related claims, is a very complex subject. The principal claims of gas chambers and six million dead are easy claims to swallow if you want to, they are part of a very large web of so called anti jewish German persecution. Therefore to define my opposition to the holocaust in one juicy tidbit is impossible.

I was talking to one one my oldest friends yesterday. He knows that I have studied this issue for years but we have never actually talked about my feelings and opinions on the holocaust. I told him outright that it didn't happen. At that point he was so shocked that further intelligent conversation was not possible. So we carried on drinking a rather fine wine from Bergerac - Cantus Terra. Later on he asked if we could have a deeper conversation about the holocaust when we next get together.

Whenever I get into a discussion about the holocaust I try to challenge with a short sharp statement. 'It didn't happen and if you think it did, do your research and then show me the six million bodies and the gas chambers.'

You have to create an impact that will make the recipient stop and reconsider their position.

This is exactly what happened with my friend. He was shocked at my thoughts on the subject but he really didn't have many retorts to many of my declarations. As I said, I think that the sheer number of questions one can raise about the conventional story is huge and will make most but the most fundamentalist believer think twice.

[Hegwood]

The top reason for not believing in the holocaust is the totally insane story of burning bodies at Treblinka. Eyewitnesses claim that thousands of bodies are piled on a grate, a fire is kindled with a few dry branches and womens bodies, and the whole pile erupts into flame as if it were a pile of wood. Actually I doubt that rain soaked wet wood would burn this well.

The purveyors of the holocaust then deliver a gift to holocaust denial by using this insanely impossible story, completely intact, to describe operations at Belzec and Sobibor.

They also claim that the mass graves of the victims of Einsatzgruppen shootings were exhumed and the bodies burned in a similar manner.

This modified version is then used to describe the burning of bodies at Auschwitz when it is pointed out that the crematoria were totally inadequate for the burning of the number of claimed victims.

Thanks to the originators of the holocaust story themselves, the whole story becomes infected with this obvious lie.

Hegwood

[Creox]

The top reason for not believing in the holocaust is the totally insane story of burning bodies at Treblinka. Eyewitnesses claim that thousands of bodies are piled on a grate, a fire is kindled with a few dry branches and womens bodies, and the whole pile erupts into flame as if it were a pile of wood. Actually I doubt that rain soaked wet wood would burn this well.

The purveyors of the holocaust then deliver a gift to holocaust denial by using this insanely impossible story, completely intact, to describe operations at Belzec and Sobibor.

They also claim that the mass graves of the victims of Einsatzgruppen shootings were exhumed and the bodies burned in a similar manner.

This modified version is then used to describe the burning of bodies at Auschwitz when it is pointed out that the crematoria were totally inadequate for the burning of the number of claimed victims.

Thanks to the originators of the holocaust story themselves, the whole story becomes infected with this obvious lie.

Hegwood

That is why I find it fascinating that people don't take a few minutes of reasoned analysis (nothing complex mind you) to see exactly what you just posted. It is frustrating and depressing to see how well indoctrination can work when there is so much evidence to discount it. My friend is an intelligent and logical man but he found it very difficult to parse the stories from "eyewitnesses" and history books with what is impossible scenarios depicted in them and by them. I guess when you are only subjected to one side of a story while the other side is suppressed that is what you will think....

[Dresden]

It seems like different people are convinced by different things, but here are my "Top Three":

1. "Thought Crime" Laws.

The fact that it is illegal to doubt the "Holocaust" in many countries of Europe, and Canada, is conclusive proof that it is a Hoax!
I agree with French Jewish Professor, Dr. Roger Dommergue Polacco de Menasce in his letter to Steven Spielberg:

"These laws are, accordingly, the absolute proof of the fake before we study its arithmetical and technical ineptitude"

The Professor didn't say they were proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but that they were "ABSOLUTE" proof, and I agree.

2. Producer Gas.

The fact that there were about a half million Producer Gas Vehicles all over Germany and other parts of Europe, and the utter simplicity of the design of a Producer Gas Generator renders the use of Diesel exhaust, or Zyclon B as idiotic as trying to start a fire by rubbing two sticks together.....IN A MATCH FACTORY!!!

3. The Color of "Gassed" Corpses.

The fact that not a single "eyewitness" got the color of the "gassed" corses right, is conclusive proof that they never saw the corpse of a person who died from Carbon Monoxide, or Hydrogen Cyanide.
The distinctive "Cherry Red" color of gassing victims would have been noticed and never forgotten by everyone who saw them.
A pile of gassed corpses would have looked like a pile of Lobsters, and most, if not ALL, of the eyewitnesses would have mentioned the eery sight!

There are many(and I really mean many) more reasons that I know the "Holocaust" is a Hoax, but these three are the most powerful, in my opinion.

[astro3]

Well said Steve F. about how every 'eye-witness' at Nuremberg got the colour of the gassed bodies wrong!

My top reason for not believing the whole shebang, is that the total number of Jews who have claimed and received compensation as 'Holocaust Survivors' from Germany, is slightly larger than the total number of Jews who lived in lands controlled by the Nazis during WW2.

[Hektor]

All in all I'd say the convergence of evidence gets pretty convincing after a while. See my post on Prof Essbach and listen to the podcasts.

[steeltoe14]

Had a "survivor" visit my middle school. It got me interested and after a little research I stumbled across David Coles video. Been a denier ever since.

[Dresden]

Welcome to the Forum, steeltoe!

[Moderator]

I second Steve. Welcome, steeltoe.
Be sure to check out our basic guidelines and avail yourself to the immense amount of research at the CODOH main site and this forum.
Cheers, M1

[Scotsman]

The body cremation process. They simply have no explanation for why the ovens at Auschwitz are able to cremate bodies (several at a time!) quicker and more efficiently than modern ones can. Same problem with the Reinhardt camps, but instead with 'large pits' and bodies that burn like cordwood. What you have there is that they have a number in their heads, and they needed a story to match it.

[Landulf]

The truth...

[hermod]

- For years the Allies 'failed' to report hundreds of thousands of Jews were disappearing in the Auschwitz crematories even if information was constantly leaking out of that camp ("Auschwitz and the Exile Government of Poland According to the 'Polish Fortnightly Review' 1940-1945" By Enrique Aynat: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v11/v11p282_Aynat.html).

- When the Allies captured Auschwitz, they first 'reported' all kinds of grotesque things like an "electric conveyor belt, on which hundreds of people were simultaneously electrocuted" and "special transportable apparatuses for killing children", and they were not even able to locate the alleged gas chambers of that camp ("The stationary gas chambers in the eastern part" - Birkenau lay to the North-West of the Auschwitz Stammlager and the crematoria were at the western extremity of that camp), even if they had just liberated about 8,000 eye witnesses able to show them those alleged fantastic death factories (http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Pravda020245.html).

- No credible introduction holes for Zyklon B can be seen on the aerial photographs of Birkenau (the farcical shadows of those alleged Zyklon chimneys are in the wrong directtion) and they are nowhere to be found today in the ruins of Krema II and III (even Van Pelt admitted that).

- The evolution of the alleged Nazis gassings was a sum of technical nonsenses, each gassing method being less efficient than the previous one (hermod @ Homer Simpson's gas chambers...).

- The Birkenau "undressing rooms" (morgues 2) had more powerful ventilation than the Birkenau "gas chambers" (morgues 1).


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5mLhoO5hNw

- Even the commandant of the Sobibor and Treblinka camps Franz Stangl was unable to say how gassed bodies were supposed to look like.

Stangl: "To tell the truth, one did become used to it...they were cargo. I think it started the day I first saw the Totenlager [extermination area] in Treblinka. I remember Wirth standing there, next to the pits full of black-blue corpses."



- The stupid ineffective cremation methods allegedly used in the Reinhardt camps.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ga1wBkMDDOc


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoCygmfPgb8

- Some Zionists had tried to sell their holocaust of 6 million Jews on very numerous occasions prior to WW2.

[Nap]

- Too much reliance on witnessing in the standard historiography. I do not care too much for witnesses when there are documents. And I do not care for witnesses when they are cleary lying or are talking just about stories they heard in the camps (electrolocution, steam-chambers etc.)

- The standard historiography utterly forgets the situation. It does not talk about typhus fever and other epidemics and tends to put the blame only on the "gassing". Even if the creation of crematoria is explained by the amount of corpses due to something, it prefers to transform this something in "gas chambers" instead of analyzing why people where dying in mass.

- The standard historiography believes in the Holocaust before prooving it ("it is real because it happened", the dumbest thing I ever heard). This is not scientific.

[gasto]

I think Chemistry is my top reason.
People can lie or tell the truth, but ultimately is Chemistry which will utterly demolish every single nonsense I have read about the so called holocaust. This testimonies cannot resist a serious forensic or chemical analysis, not now, not ever. Combine that with the fact that you can show anyone nowadays how Chemistry beats the holocaust tale in a youtube video, and the truth gets powerful and powerful each day.