Best and worst / least successful arguments

[Lamprecht]

I have been reading Stefan Molyneux's "The Art of the Argument" (found here: https://id.b-ok.org/book/3484469/cab11a or https://archive.is/Dbl0b) and it gave me an idea for this thread.

From your experience debating the "Holocaust" -- what are some of the strategies/topics you find the most convincing, and the ones you find least? I will give my opinions on some topics I have had better success focusing on, and others that are less successful. This is just from my experiences and I'd suspect many of you may have had better luck with some of these arguments I did not.

If you are given the opportunity to provide someone 5 reasons why they should doubt the "Holocaust" and 2 or 3 of them aren't very strong, they will focus mainly on those weaker arguments. People don't want to believe they have been fooled.
I also like to take an aggressive stance in the debate; I will go into more detail below what I mean about this



Good/successful arguments (these are in no particular order)

- Universal agreement by Nazi documents that "Final Solution" meant resettlement/deportation. Many people think "Holocaust deniers" deny everything about what happened to Jews. I think it is good to pre-emptively mention that the "Final Solution" was documented by the nazis and was, in fact, a real policy and revisionists recognize it as such. Before they can ask "What about all the documents though?" you can show that there is universal agreement on what that policy was, and then reverse the question onto them. I give examples of documents here: viewtopic.php?t=12296

- Lack of huge mass graves at the AR camps, despite multiple excavations - There really is no excuse for not being able to show photographs of enormous mass graves at these camps where allegedly hundreds of thousands of people died. I pointed this out in the recent thread on the mass grave found at Belarus, we have seen more photos of skulls at this site where allegedly just over 1,000 people have been unearthed (not proven to be Jew victims of nazis) than at excavated sites where it is illegal to deny that 100s of thousands of jews were killed and buried: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12313#p92089

- Unsuitability of Zyclon-B and Auschwitz alleged homicidal gas chambers for mass murder, as well as the 1,000 times lower concentration of ferrocyanide reside. The "Cyanide chemistry" sticky goes into detail here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4111

- Eyewitness testimony of gassings at regular concentration camps (Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald, Dachau, etc) which historians claim had no gassings, showing that Jews did in fact lie about gas chambers. Therefore, even a believer must admit some Jews did, in fact, lie about homicidal gas chambers, their position is actually "only SOME of gas chamber testimonies were lies"

- Open air pyres at the AR camps. It is literally claimed that hundreds of thousands of Jews were burned in open air pyres at the AR camps. This would leave an enormous quantity of remains, and also be a monumental task. If they truly insisted on killing as many people as possible, why roast the victims in an enormous barbecue?

- Nazis did not destroy all of the alleged "extermination facilities" -- it is claimed that they dynamited all the incriminating evidence, but they actually did not. See: viewtopic.php?t=12617

- Jews admit the "5 million" gentiles number is a lie. This proves they are totally willing to invent millions of deaths to gain sympathy for their hoax. Read more: viewtopic.php?t=12403



Mediocre arguments

- Crematory capacities at Auschwitz. Although I do not think the nazis had the cremation abilities at Auschwitz to kill 1+ million people and cremate them all, I think focusing on the AR camps, where jews were allegedly burned out in the open in massive pyres made with railroad rails.

- Illegal to deny in many countries. It is always good to mention this fact, but only in passing, I think, not as an argument. Most places in the world do not have free speech, and so people will excuse it. This does serve as a good explanation as to why there seems to be a "consensus" among historians ... anyone that publicly denounces the artificial "consensus" is imprisoned in most of Europe.

- All "Death camps" with gas chambers were liberated by the USSR. You can use this argument, but it can simply be passed off as a coincidence. If you mention this, it should also be in combination with the fact that there are testimonies of homicidal gassings at the camps liberated by the western allies, which had autopsies done to prove nobody was gassed.

- Nazis who denied the Holocaust. Believers will just say those people are liars and only wanted to save their own asses, and point to the "confessions" that confirm it. I don't usually focus on this too much, unless someone is indignant on claiming "no nazi ever denied" which is refuted here: viewtopic.php?t=12287



Bad/unsuccessful/weak arguments

- All those compilations of "6,000,000 Jews" articles from the 1800s up until the 1930s. The number 6 may in fact have religious significance for Jews, but it's not a very convincing or meaningful point for believers. They'll just say "Well, that's just a population count" or something like that

- Auschwitz numbers changing from 4 to 1 million. Believers will just say "that is REAL revisionism" or whatever

- International Red Cross records of 300 thousand deaths. Believers will just say those are the recorded deaths from other causes, and the exterminated jews were not recorded there. Also they will say something like it is based on self-reported deaths, and that the ICRC has responded to its use by revisionists. There is one good reason to mention that the Nazis recorded deaths (the "death books"): to show the nazis did in fact track 100s of thousands of deaths in the camps so you can show them you do not deny that people actually died in the camps, just that none of those were from an "extermination" policy (rather, from disease/starvation mainly at the end of the war)

- Richard Krege's GPR scan of Treblinka. He never published, and Sturdy-Colls did, and failed to show us any "huge mass graves" which would necessarily exist. I think it's more prudent to focus on Sturdy-Colls' failed excavation than Krege's unpublished report, where all we have is a mere screenshot.

- Swimming pools and soccer teams. This one is not very convincing at all, they will just say the guards were the ones that used them, or that laborers did while other jews were being gassed.


These are just my experiences. You may have other experiences. What do you think are some bad topics to focus on when debating the Holocaust?

[David M]

I take the position that all scholars are revisionist and it is only a matter of degree.
I cite the Auschwitz State Museum website regarding the Majdanek death toll.
http://auschwitz.org/en/museum/news/maj ... ks,44.html

If the ASM is asking for changes in history textbooks (1,400,000 becomes 78,000) why get angry with me?

I also mention that the International Tribunal at Nuremberg was totally wrong with its Intentionalist conspiracy theories.
See. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functiona ... ntionalism

[David M]

One simple but powerful argument regarding the Diesel Death Chambers of Treblinka is the
impossibility of an unloaded diesel killing people. Simply put, one could breath exhaust from an unloaded diesel all day.
See http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v05/v05p-15_Berg.html Since Fritz came out with the evidence, Believers have "Revised" the diesel story
and NOW claim the Treblinka "gas chambers" were based on gasoline engines. Gasoline engines do produce lethal levels of CO.

A second obvious problem with the Treblinka, Belzec and Sobibor CO death chambers is that no witness accurately described the
appearance of bodies killed by CO poisoning. They are NOT purple or blue or black (as described) but cherry red.
It is a striking and unexpected effect: which is why the "witnesses" got it wrong.
See http://www.nazigassings.com/

[Lamprecht]

Another point I think is useful is, from the outset, to place the blame largely on the allies in general. Often times, believers will accuse you of blaming only Jews. But we know that the USSR, USA and British all were heavily involved in this war propaganda. I went into more detail about this here in JLAD's thread: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12419#p92076

One simple but powerful argument regarding the Diesel Death Chambers of Treblinka...
Believers have "Revised" the diesel story and NOW claim the Treblinka "gas chambers" were based on gasoline engines

Yes, I was intending to put the whole diesel exhaust issue there in the "Mediocre" category, I must have forgotten it. Not because it isn't absurd for murder, it is, but because the believers have switched from diesel to gasoline (for obvious reasons) and thus rebut that the "diesel gas chambers" is a strawman. When it comes to Treblinka, I try to focus on the lack of enormous mass graves (which would necessarily be there if hundreds of thousands were killed) despite an excavation, and the total ridiculousness of the "open air pyres" of hundreds of thousands of jews roasted in huge barbecues.

see this holocaust believer site:
Why the "diesel issue" is irrelevant
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... evant.html

[TimeTraveler]

The main best argument you listed that i use is the "Eyewitness testimony of gassings at regular concentration camps (Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald, Dachau, etc)" I also like to throw in that all the pictures that they've seen of piles of dead bodies came from those camps and not any of the alleged "death camps".

On the Treblinka thing I've never used the diesel argument. Or even the no mass grave one I use the steam chamber one it's a really early myth and it shows the development process of the gas chamber/ diesel and or gasoline story that they later came up with.

With anything else you hit the nail on the head.

[ginger]

I would say the best are - the changing of 4 million dead at Auschwitz to a number of around 1 million; the cremation capacity at Auschwitz; the Red Cross record of deaths at Auschwitz. I present my arguments in comments on mainstream news stories and am addressing the general news reader, who, I expect, have heard a lot about Auschwitz. The death toll changed from 4 million to about 1 million - that is an accepted fact - and may cause people to challenge the rest of the official narrative. (The grimm deposition of Heryk Tauber states that 4 million died at Auschwitz - the new number of 1 million may suggests that he didn't testify from his knowledge but was repeating official stories made up by the Soviets.) The cremation capacity Auschwitz has been ignored for too long. The general public hears about fantastic death tolls - like over 300,000 Hungarian Jews were killed at Auschwitz in 60 days in the summer of 1944. The 40 or so cremation ovens at the camp could not handle the load. And information from the Red Cross - a trusted organization - was from the agency being there at the time the war was going on. They reported that as few as 75,000 may have died at Auschwitz. The Red Cross has credibility with the general public.

[Lamprecht]

I would say the best are - the changing of 4 million dead at Auschwitz to a number of around 1 million; the cremation capacity at Auschwitz; the Red Cross record of deaths at Auschwitz. I present my arguments in comments on mainstream news stories and am addressing the general news reader, who, I expect, have heard a lot about Auschwitz. The death toll changed from 4 million to about 1 million - that is an accepted fact - and may cause people to challenge the rest of the official narrative. (The grimm deposition of Heryk Tauber states that 4 million died at Auschwitz - the new number of 1 million may suggests that he didn't testify from his knowledge but was repeating official stories made up by the Soviets.) The cremation capacity Auschwitz has been ignored for too long. The general public hears about fantastic death tolls - like over 300,000 Hungarian Jews were killed at Auschwitz in 60 days in the summer of 1944. The 40 or so cremation ovens at the camp could not handle the load. And information from the Red Cross - a trusted organization - was from the agency being there at the time the war was going on. They reported that as few as 75,000 may have died at Auschwitz. The Red Cross has credibility with the general public.

The issue is that all of these have canned, ready-to-go refutations. They think it's a settled matter, you bring it up, and they throw the "refutations" and, the fact that the issue has been addressed already (whether the 'debunking' is legitimate), and you still use it, makes you seem less credible.

Further, the 6 million number itself, to many believers is not so important. Convince them that the 6 million number is impossible and they will say something like "OK, well, so if Hitler only killed 3 million ... that's still bad!" - It really isn't so important. What is important is a systematic policy of extermination; 3 million jews killed by nazis is almost just as bad as 6 million.

Remember: even if you're correct you can argue in a way that is unconvincing. If someone says "Prove ____ is a male!" and the only evidence you offer is: the individual is 6 foot tall, has short hair, and plays sports... it is not on its own very convincing.

Red cross issue: https://imgur.com/gallery/F9nYZg3
More "refutations": https://imgur.com/gallery/JQKQI
And a recent thread: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12399

Cremation capacity is important, but at the AR camps, like I said, there were not even ovens despite 100s of thousands of jews allegedly being killed there.

If you have used these arguments to convince people, that is good. From my experience though, those sorts of arguments are weaker than others.

[Hegwood]

During discussions about the holocaust, the true cause of the horrible conditions found in some of the labor camps in western Germany by the Western Allies at the end of WWII can be effectively used to deny the holocaust. Even such holocaust promoters as the USHMM now acknowledge that, except for some disciplinary executions, no one was intentionally killed in these camps. The vast majority of inmate deaths occurred in the last few months of the war when Allied destruction of German infrastructure made it impossible to adequately supply the camps with food, sanitary, and medical supplies. They all died of disease and malnutrition. This is in no way the Jewish genocide claimed by the holocaust story.

Although it is not logically consistent to argue that the conditions found in these camps are not a part of the holocaust story and at the same time say they destroy its validity, it has been my experience that believers in the holocaust will invariably try to claim they are proof of the holocaust. All I've had to do was ask how these events have any bearing on the basic holocaust story. The propaganda film clips made by the U.S. Army of these camps are a huge part of the reason for their belief and are easily refuted.

Besides the lack of any intentional killing of camp inmates there is also the matter of time and place. According to the current holocaust story all death camps were located in Poland and were either closed or overrun by the Soviet Army months before the Western Allies entered Germany. The U.S. and British Armies were at least four months to late and never got within five hundred miles of a so called death camp. They could not have witnessed anything relevant to the "holocaust".

[Bonesy]

- Richard Krege's GPR scan of Treblinka. He never published, and Sturdy-Colls did, and failed to show us any "huge mass graves" which would necessarily exist. I think it's more prudent to focus on Sturdy-Colls' failed excavation than Krege's unpublished report, where all we have is a mere screenshot.

I was of the impression that Richard Krege and the technicians who carried out the ground penetrating radar tests on the grounds at Treblinka really didn't know what they were doing anyway.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNvwe1Smz0I

[Hannover]

- Richard Krege's GPR scan of Treblinka. He never published, and Sturdy-Colls did, and failed to show us any "huge mass graves" which would necessarily exist. I think it's more prudent to focus on Sturdy-Colls' failed excavation than Krege's unpublished report, where all we have is a mere screenshot.

I was of the impression that Richard Krege and the technicians who carried out the ground penetrating radar tests on the grounds at Treblinka really didn't know what they were doing anyway.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNvwe1Smz0I

Your video link is predictably "unavailable".

While maybe not a properly packaged presentation, Krege did in fact scan the area where it's claimed ca. 900,000 Jews are said to be buried and his scans showed no ground disturbances since the last ice age.

The 1999 Krege Report on the Treblinka Extermination Camp, by Richard Krege
https://codoh.com/library/document/6411/?lang=en

"Engineer Richard Krege at work with his ground-penetrating radar equipment on the territory of the former Treblinka camp"


"Computer Screen Display of one ground-penetrating radar result as taken by Richard Krege on the territory of the former Treblinka camp"
and:
Vernichtungslager« Treblinka - archäologisch betrachtet, Von Ing. Richard Krege:
http://vho.org/VffG/2000/1/Krege62-64.html


and:


Of course now the area is covered over to prevent further research:
Alleged location of Treblinka mass graves / remains of 900,000 Jews according to Treblinka officials, no alleged remains exist.

see more:
Sites Where Excavations Are Physically Obstructed, Blocked
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9171

- Hannover

[Hase]

Mah First post on Codoh!

Excellent thread. Reading through the posts above, I think the most convincing and succinct argument is to tell the believer that every nasty bit of holocaust footage they may have seen were taken from camps that everyone agrees, and which have been forensically proven to *not* be a death camp.

The argument I use is that the official record of the holocaust has changed dramatically over time; yet it is illegal to discuss the topic in 30 countries; and now even on American college campuses. I might also start with this starling image.

[Grimsithe]

I think the best arguments, are making people prove the extermination myth. Ask what evidence they have and then just smack it down. Or answer it with a question

"how does a pile of shoes prove anything about gas chambers?"

"you realize those pictures are from Dachau, a camp where they didn't gas anyone according to the official narrative"

[david2923]

Question i posed before
What would be the building design benefit or payoff of having a gas chamber in the basement and furnace area one level up. Now you must transfer all those dead bodies upward at Birkenau 2 and 3. What were the German Engineers thinking at the time? No sense of gravity working for them?
2 ideas...
Have a gas chamber on same level
or
Have gas chamber above the furnace area for free fall drop or chute transfer
No one has been able to be this argument
I emailed Germar about this, and he seemed on board with it in his response.

[Hannover]

Question i posed before
What would be the building design benefit or payoff of having a gas chamber in the basement and furnace area one level up. Now you must transfer all those dead bodies upward at Birkenau 2 and 3. What were the German Engineers thinking at the time? No sense of gravity working for them?
2 ideas...
Have a gas chamber on same level
or
Have gas chamber above the furnace area for free fall drop or chute transfer
No one has been able to be this argument
I emailed Germar about this, and he seemed on board with it in his response.

And as if putting intense heat generating crematorium just above the alleged highly volatile, explosion danger, cyanide / HCL 'gas chambers' would have worked. The claims are pure comedy.

Exploded house due to explosive dangers of cyanide that Rudolf presents here: http://vho.org/GB/Books/trr/1.html#1.2

The residents of a house in Los Angeles, California, had to learn this in a quite painful way shortly before Christmas 1947. They had hired the Guarantee Fumigation Company to destroy the termites which threatened to eat up the wooden structure. The pest controllers, however, were apparently not very competent, because when using a container of pressurized HCN to fill the house, which had been wrapped up like a Christmas present, they exceeded safe limits and pumped in too much gas. (Fig. 2).[15] Due to unknown reasons, the mixture of air and HCN, which can be highly explosive under certain circumstances, ignited during the fumigation. The resulting explosion destroyed the entire dwelling.[16]
[16] "How to get rid of termites", Life, Dec. 22, 1947, p. 31; see also Liberty Bell, 12/1994, pp. 36f.

More:

For a thorough demolition of the alleged Auschwitz gas chambers & alleged Auschwitz homicidal gassing process see analysis at: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11143&p=83723&hilit=model+asmarques#p83723

- Hannover

Science over religion & propaganda.

[forasanerworld]

The standard narrative has it that hundreds of thousands were gassed on arrival while others, evidently unable to work, were put on starvation level rations, photographs there of abound.

The human body can persist quite a long time with no food whatever.

If there really was an intent on mass murder why were those penned at e.g Birkenau simply denied water, Zyclon-B and critical rations saved and three to eight days later everyone would be dead.


Such tactics were of course employed by the US in the Rhine Meadow camps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinwiesenlager