Playing Devil's Advocate; I'm a believer in Holocaust but not exactly sure if it occurred as claimed?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Damian77
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2022 11:23 pm

Playing Devil's Advocate; I'm a believer in Holocaust but not exactly sure if it occurred as claimed?

Postby Damian77 » 4 months 4 weeks ago (Mon Jan 09, 2023 2:15 pm)

Why would the Germans use something as inefficient as bug spray when they, for example, had 12,500 TONS (enough to kill 70 million people) of human killing Tabun nerve gas just sitting around unused? Or, you know, bullets, etc.?

Answer


They did use bullets to execute many people, but it was too slow and inefficient and they were needed for the war. (Well duh.) Also too many of the soldiers refused to murder civilians and POWs. Remarkably, not one of the 135 known cases of troops who refused to perform illegal executions were killed for their acts of resistance, although they were often punished severely.


Even the Nazis recognised that the average German soldier would not be up to the mass murder of tens of millions of prisoners and civilians, which is why they looked for more efficient, industrial methods of murder that didn't require large numbers of riflemen.


Tabun expensive and difficult to make which is why they only managed to make 12,500 tons. They had severe problems with it degrading during storage. The army wanted to keep it as a deterrent in case the Allies attacked with poison gas. It can be slow acting: even a fatal dose can take 1-2 hours to kill a person.


Cyanide-based Zyklon-B was much cheaper, could be purchased from civilian manufacturers as a ready-to-use product, was much easier to handle, and more certain in its effects: it killed in under 20 minutes. It was anything but inefficient. It was easy to handle, could be used with a minimum of training, it was much safer to dispose of the corpses (the Sonderkommandos typically only needed to wear gas masks to handle the dead).


Not all the dead, Jews and non-Jews, foudn their way into a crematoria?

Answer


Not all of the murdered Jews were cremated. Not even a majority. According to the German records themselves, the five crematoria at Auschwitz-Birkenau were capable of processing approximately 2-3000 bodies a day. (They had been designed to handle around 12,000 bodies per day, but simply failed to cope with that many.) They operated for about 18 months or so, so that gives around 1.3 million cremated bodies, not 6 million. More accurate estimates suggest that only 900,000 bodies were cremated.


The 30kg of coal (coke) to burn a body is incorrect. That's a number that David Irving invented, from thin air. It has no basis in science or fact. He just made it up. According to the crematoria manufacturers Topf & Sons themselves, the crematoria were designed for continuous use, saving about 1/3rd of the fuel that would otherwise be needed.


Henryk Tauber, one of the crematoria operators, testified that not only did they keep the crematoria running continuously for long periods, but they supplemented the fuel with wood and straw. Most of the heat came from the burning body fat of the bodies themselves, with the coke and other fuels just needed to start the process going.


Due to the failure of the crematoria to keep up with the volume of bodies, most of the dead at Auschwitz were disposed of in open-air burning pits, using alcohol, oil and human fat as fuel. None of these fuels leave any ash behind.


There are ZERO mentions of any cermulators at any of the camps in the whole of holocaust literature.

Answer:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonderkom ... n_camp.jpg


Holocaust denialists: "The Nazis couldn't have run death camps because they were fighting a war!"


Holocaust denialists: "Even though the Nazis were fighting a war, it would have been easy for them to pull hundreds of thousands of SS troops from the front to murder Jews and Slavs by hand, one at a time."


Answer


When you are killing that many people at that sort of scale, there are only two alternatives: you either have hundreds of thousands of cold blooded killers shooting them, or you find some way to kill in industrial quantities using a much smaller number of people. Which is what they did.

Even then, the sheer volume of victims needing transport was a huge drain on Germany's ability to fight war.

It really isn't that easy to find killers willing to murder people in cold blood. In the heat of action, yes, in the middle of mob violence, yes, but to line up time and again, day after day, for months at a time, and cold-bloodedly shoot women and children and babies, over and over again, no.

Burn-pits are efficient enough that they are still used today to dispose of trash if you don't care about the health of the people around them, which the Nazis didn't. (Apparently neither does the US government and army.) The efficiency also comes from the fact that most people, if they haven't been starved almost to death, have more than enough body fat on them to not just burn themselves but also another body, provided you collect it and don't just allow it to run off and be lost. The additional fuel is only needed to get the initial combustion going. We have photos of the burn pits in action.

Human tissue -- all that fat and protein -- contains more energy than is needed to evaporate the water in the body. You just need a sufficient high temperature to dry off the water and ignite the corpse, and you can use human corpses for fuel:

https://www.salon.com/2014/05/18/will_t ... ad_bodies/

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna45526347

The trick is that a single body takes a lot of heat to dry out and ignite, but once that ignites, that can be used as fuel for the second body, and the second for the third, and so on. The more bodies you have, the more efficient it is. It is like burning green wood: it is very, very hard to ignite green wood, but if you get it started, you can keep throwing green wood onto a fierce fire and the process is self-sustaining.

The Nazis experimented with this and found that the most efficient method was to stack the bodies in layers: fat corpses followed by emaciated corpses, in alternating layers, would provide an even heat that needed only a relatively small amount of fuel to get started. Especially since they prepared the pits with channels so that melted fat could be collected and dropped back onto the pile. Waste not, want not.

So much ash was dumped in the rivers, marshes, and fields around Birkenau that to this day, the soil in the area is a different colour and texture to the surrounding land. Anyone says that the ash has just mysteriously disappeared is lying. Its right there, in the ground.

You can put your hands into the soil and see and feel the ashes. This is the direct proof you wanted. You wanted to know where the ash went, it is right there, in the soil, where you can see and feel it. You don't need "chemical testing" to recognise that the topsoil there is full of ash and is very different from the surrounding area. You just need to open your eyes and look.

Denialists ask were all the ash went. It went right there, into the ground, where to this day you can feel it and see it and sometimes even smell it. And your response is to call it "grasping at straws". Only one of us is grasping at straws, and it isn't me.

Ground radar conclusively shows that the ground around Treblinka has many large pits. The soil contains recognisable fragments of bone in such large quantities that they can only have come from a mass murder site.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-16657363

Rudolf's arguments are untrustworthy. Rudolf is often self-contradictory, for example he claims that chemistry is not an exact science and cannot be used to rigorously prove or disprove the Holocaust, while also claiming that throw chemistry he has rigorously disproved the Holocaust. The man is confused about his own ideas.

https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-his ... chemistry/

Rudolf frequently makes unsupported, evidence-free claims with nothing backing them up, such has his assertion that it would take "2 hours" to ventilate the gas chambers before it was safe enough for the Sonderkommandos to enter. There is nothing backing up that number, and the real figure is more like 20 minutes even under conservative assumptions.

He often misrepresents his sources. For instance, he references Pressac, who states that it takes about 15 minutes for the air extraction systems at Auschwitz to reduce the concentration of cyanide to a level safe to enter, but misrepresents him as saying that it takes 15 minutes for one single air exchange. Since Pressac is very clear about his calculation, we must conclude that Rudolf is deliberately misrepresenting him.

Regarding the presence of Prussian Blue, Rudolf himself acknowledges that Prussian Blue is unlikely to form. It formed in the delousing chambers, where the conditions were very different from the execution chambers. In particular, the delousing chambers were exposed to cyanide for many hours at a time, compared to only a few minutes for the execution chambers. (Insects are much more resistant to cyanide than people.) And the execution chambers were frequently washed down with water, which inhibits the formation of Prussian Blue. The delousing chambers were not. So it is hardly surprising that no Prussian Blue formed.

But why look only at Prussian Blue? That is only one of many cyanide compounds, and you don't need sophisticated chemical analysis to spot it, it is obvious to the naked eye due to its vivid blue colour.) The Institute for Forensic Research in Cracow tested for other cyanide compounds, and found that the execution chambers do contain cyanide. Leuchter and Rudolf are simply mistaken. Case closed.

https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-his ... e-science/


30k Eisnatzgruppen that allegedly shot 1.3 Million Jews.

Answer


The Einsatzgruppen operated for six years. they frequently complained about battle fatigue and mental anguish caused by shooting large numbers of women and children. The majority of them weren't monsters or psychopaths they still had human feelings. Even the most enthusiastic soldiers can suffer from mental distress from killing, especially when they are murdering helpless people in cold blood, and even more so when they are women and children.

A significant minority of SS troops refused to take part in the killings at all. In August 1941, Himmler witnessed an Einsatzgruppen mass execution and concluded that shooting Jews was too stressful for his men. By November he made arrangements that all SS men suffering ill health from having participated in the executions were to be provided with rest and mental health care, and ordered to a transition to gassing, especially the women and children. He also ordered the SS to recruit expendable auxiliaries who could assist with the murders. But even the gas vans didn't help -- SS-Gruppenführer Otto Ohlendorf complained to Himmler that his men found cleaning out the gas vans horrible, and besides they were far too inefficient, only killing about a dozen people at a time.

Plus:

The SS soldiers were needed for the war.

Mobile killing squads were needed for the Soviet Union, where the Nazis had not taken control yet, but would be wasteful for the rest of Europe.

Why send mobile squads to search for victims, when you could use civilian police in the occupied territories to detain undesirables, and ship them to concentration camps for mass industrial murder?

Gassing victims fit right in with the world-view of the leading Nazis, especially Hitler and Himmler who considered Jews and Slavs "vermin".

Hitler himself had a special horror of gassing due to his experiences in WW1 and would have thought it especially apt to murder Jews and Slavs by a means too horrible to use against people.

Otium

Re: Playing Devil's Advocate; I'm a believer in Holocaust but not exactly sure if it occured as claimed?

Postby Otium » 4 months 4 weeks ago (Wed Jan 11, 2023 10:52 am)

I can only recommend that you actually read the various books and articles published by revisionists before you make such claims which have all been thoroughly discredited.

This statement conveys immense ignorance:

Damian77 wrote:But why look only at Prussian Blue? That is only one of many cyanide compounds, and you don't need sophisticated chemical analysis to spot it, it is obvious to the naked eye due to its vivid blue colour.) The Institute for Forensic Research in Cracow tested for other cyanide compounds, and found that the execution chambers do contain cyanide. Leuchter and Rudolf are simply mistaken. Case closed.


That you name and talk about revisionists whose work you have clearly never read for yourself is glaringly obvious. You're not even aware of the debates had between the revisionists and hacks like Richard Green: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=14833

You ignore the fact that the Cracow team also found comparable traces of cyanide in the barracks and other buildings, yet you wouldn't claim anyone was gassed in those places. In reality the cyanide the Cracow team found is not proof of a massive gassing operation, it merely shows - if anything - that these rooms were fumigated for diesease. The reason the Poles refused to explain why there was no Prussian Blue in the alleged homicidal 'gas chambers' is not because it couldn't be explained, but because if they did it would refute their analysis.

Can you explain why in other so-called 'death camps' prussian blue formed in the alleged purely 'homicidal gas chambers' but not the ones in Auschwitz? This is a glaring contradiction which must be explained.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make when you say that the prussian blue is obvious by looking at it.

Image
viewtopic.php?t=12736

Damian77 wrote:Rudolf frequently makes unsupported, evidence-free claims with nothing backing them up, such has his assertion that it would take "2 hours" to ventilate the gas chambers before it was safe enough for the Sonderkommandos to enter. There is nothing backing up that number, and the real figure is more like 20 minutes even under conservative assumptions.


20 minutes is ridiculous and impossible. The alleged gas chambers had no efficient ventilation system and actually had an inferior ventilation system than originally planned, this is a problem which concerns exterminationists, not revisionists. Rudolf points this out in section 7.3.2.2.3. of his book 'The Chemistry of Auschwitz' (2020, pp. 280 ff.) And of course Mattogno addresses the issue of ventilation repeatedly in his refutation of Van Pelt; see 'The Real Case for Auschwitz' section 1.8 (pp. 45-47). The fact that without the right equiptment to protect against the gas you couldn't enter the chamber for 2 hours is a scientific fact demonstrated by Rudolf and Mattogno in their various works.

Maybe you can explain to us why Krematorium I had such thin walls? Do you have an explanation for this and the numerous problems it invokes for the Holocaust narrative?

The point is that you should really have read a few of the Holocaust Handbooks before making this post. If you had you'd have found many of the people and events you mention have their own dedicated volume. For example, Carlo Mattogno has written the most thorough standard work on the subject of the Auschwitz crematoria:

Carlo Mattogno, Franco Deana: The Cremation Furnaces of Auschwitz—A Technical and Historical Study
https://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?page_id=24


Mattogno has also written 3 books dedicated to dealing with the witness statements of the Sonderkommando, you mention Henryk Tauber who has been dealt with in volume 2:

Carlo Mattogno: Sonderkommando Auschwitz II—The False Testimonies by Henryk Tauber and Szlama Dragon
https://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?page_id=45


Tauber has also been extensivly dealt with in part 3 of Mattogno's book 'The Real Case for Auschwitz':

Carlo Mattogno: The Real Case for Auschwitz—Robert van Pelt’s Evidence from the Irving Trial Critically Reviewed
https://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?page_id=22

EtienneSC
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 735
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Playing Devil's Advocate; I'm a believer in Holocaust but not exactly sure if it occured as claimed?

Postby EtienneSC » 4 months 4 weeks ago (Wed Jan 11, 2023 3:03 pm)

The OP is all over the place and in particular does not follow the forum rule to "Keep your threads / posts limited to one point":
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=358
Instead, it drifts from the non-use of nerve gas, to the nature of cyanide, to the supposed psychology of the camp staff, to arguments about cremation, to the Einsatzgruppen killings, all in one post. It is at least borderline on several of the other forum rules. There have been a few other such posts of late.

I appreciate that this is a new poster who is likely fairly new to revisionism and I'm generally against censoring or curtailing discussion here, but the author should read the rules and make an effort to follow them. The rules are reasonable and contribute to the high quality of discussion we sometimes attain here.

User avatar
hermod
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2919
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:52 am

Re: Playing Devil's Advocate; I'm a believer in Holocaust but not exactly sure if it occured as claimed?

Postby hermod » 4 months 3 weeks ago (Wed Jan 11, 2023 10:09 pm)

Damian77 seemingly believes that Holocaust revisionists (not "Holocaust denialists" or "Holocaust deniers," libellous names coined by Holocaust believers to discredit Holocaust revisionists and evade debate) disbelieve the Holocaust because it couldn't have happened as claimed. But Holocaust revisionists disbelieve the Holocaust mostly because the victors of WWII and court historians never bothered to provide a single solid proof of it.
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed.
"

Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925

User avatar
Webmaster
Administration
Administration
Posts: 466
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Playing Devil's Advocate; I'm a believer in Holocaust but not exactly sure if it occured as claimed?

Postby Webmaster » 4 months 3 weeks ago (Thu Jan 12, 2023 9:46 pm)

EtienneSC wrote:The OP is all over the place and in particular does not follow the forum rule to "Keep your threads / posts limited to one point":
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=358
Instead, it drifts from the non-use of nerve gas, to the nature of cyanide, to the supposed psychology of the camp staff, to arguments about cremation, to the Einsatzgruppen killings, all in one post. It is at least borderline on several of the other forum rules. There have been a few other such posts of late.

I appreciate that this is a new poster who is likely fairly new to revisionism and I'm generally against censoring or curtailing discussion here, but the author should read the rules and make an effort to follow them. The rules are reasonable and contribute to the high quality of discussion we sometimes attain here.

Correct.

Damian77: next time a thread with so many different topics will be rejected. Please try to stick to the rules. All of these topics have already been discussed in multiple threads that you can find with the search function.

Webmaster

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 5168
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Playing Devil's Advocate; I'm a believer in Holocaust but not exactly sure if it occured as claimed?

Postby Hektor » 4 months 3 weeks ago (Fri Jan 13, 2023 4:24 am)

hermod wrote:Damian77 seemingly believes that Holocaust revisionists (not "Holocaust denialists" or "Holocaust deniers," libellous names coined by Holocaust believers to discredit Holocaust revisionists and evade debate) disbelieve the Holocaust because it couldn't have happened as claimed. But Holocaust revisionists disbelieve the Holocaust mostly because the victors of WWII and court historians never bothered to provide a single solid proof of it.



Exactly, the proof provided is mostly innuendo and then assertion that this somehow proves a genocidal program using gas chambers to kill six million Jews. The innuendo is also cherry-picking that ignores other evidences.

So 'the Holocaust' does mostly base on hearsay. And pushed with all kinds of trickery and manipulative tactics.

This should make a reasonable person at least suspicious. But most people are not that interest in challenging it. And they become indignant, when somebody does it, since it is part of civic religion. And people also become indignant, if you point out the superstitious aspects of the affair. The West has rejected trad. Christianity as civic religion and got the Holocaust as a replacement. Don't think that was a good deal, though.

Damian77
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2022 11:23 pm

Re: Playing Devil's Advocate; I'm a believer in Holocaust but not exactly sure if it occured as claimed?

Postby Damian77 » 2 months 1 week ago (Thu Mar 30, 2023 8:31 am)

Thank you everyone. I will be purchasing some revisionist books to get a different perspective, hopefully one that is truthful.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bombsaway and 9 guests