Challenge to Believer 'Pon' on so called "Eyewitnesses"

[Pon]

The points are all introduced already in this thread and are related to the witnesses credibility (and as such, this thread). The points being, that more than one person could be incinerated at the same time (in one muffle) and that they used techniques that would incinerate people more quickly.

If you didn't mean those points, which points should I start threads on (that are unrelated to this thread)?

[Lamprecht]

more than one person could be incinerated at the same time (in one muffle)

According to SS Kurt Prüfer who built the furnaces, they could not.
You brought up that Prüfer "Confessed" to homicidal gas chambers, that was already elaborated on why it was beneficial for him to say that. However, it actually works against your position because if he truly "Believed the Holocaust" as you claim, why would he argue that only one person could be incinerated at one time in the ovens? It makes no sense.

and that they used techniques that would incinerate people more quickly.

Incorrect, they could have but did not.
See:
Auschwitz cremation ovens and the "four-story continuous operation corpse incineration oven" never built
viewtopic.php?t=12778


Actually the technology used for Auschwitz cremations was very crude, inferior to civilian crematoria.

If you didn't mean those points, which points should I start threads on (that are unrelated to this thread)?

Auschwitz cremation capacity is a separate topic as this one is mostly about "gas chamber" witnesses [especially those who claimed introduction columns]. There is that thread above I have just linked to on Auschwitz cremations, or you can make another one.

[Hannover]

Pon and the profitable "holocaust industry" puts faith in so called "eyewitnesses", as if they are proof of whatever they claim.

It's also said that doubting what these alleged "eyewitnesses" claim is insulting and is an "anti-semitic hate crime" ... regardless of the fact that they claim what is scientifically impossible, contradict each other, and contradict the 'holocaust' narrative itself.

So then, to reject the claims of witchcraft "eyewitnesses" is therefore 'insulting, disrespectful & hateful' to witchcraft "eyewitnesses".

So here we go, proof of witchcraft:
Witchcraft Documents, Testimony, Eyewitnesses:
http://salem.lib.virginia.edu/home.html

It's no wonder that free speech on "holocaust eyewitnesses" and the narrative in general is banned in Europe, and there's a move afoot to have similar bans on free speech in the US. Only lies require censorship.

I see that Pon still evades my challenges:

I challenge you to tell this forum about so called "eyewitnesses" that you find convincing.
It's a simple request.

- Give us their names.
- Tell us what they claim in their own words.
- Tell us where they were when they supposedly 'witnessed' events which allegedly support the "holocaust" narrative.
- Tell us when they supposedly did this alleged witnessing.
- Tell us what trials they testified in.

and:

Again, I challenge you start threads on just THREE, or more if you like, of your favorite "eyewitnesses" and tell us:
- Their names.
- What they said in their own words.
- Where they supposedly "witnessed" the 'holocaust'.
- When?
- What trials did they testify in?
- Show us the verbatim text of their testimony, and show us the cross examination text.
- And why you believe them.
It's time for you to back up what you claim.

- Hannover

Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the laughable 'holocaust' storyline is the message.

[borjastick]

Hannover, I think you'll find Pon is 'too busy'.

[Lamprecht]

I think it's important to have the dates for these eyewitnesses as well. Pon tries to argue that these eyewitnesses independently claimed to have witnessed the exact same thing and could not have copied one another. But if they testified at different times, they had ample time to read other testimonies and make their own. This seems to be the case with Filip Mueller, a testimony that Pon brought up, which I discuss here: viewtopic.php?p=94147#p94147

It should be reiterated again that if an individual's statements were not subjected to careful cross examination by the defense counsel of the accused, it may not be proper [in the legal sense] to refer to these statements as "eyewitness testimony". I explain that here: viewtopic.php?t=12783
Naturally we can not go back in time and talk to these claimed eyewitnesses as most of them are dead. This is why physical evidence is so important.

Hannover, I think you'll find Pon is 'too busy'.

Nothing wrong with that. People have stuff to do.

[borjastick]

I think it's important to have the dates for these eyewitnesses as well. Pon tries to argue that these eyewitnesses independently claimed to have witnessed the exact same thing and could not have copied one another. But if they testified at different times, they had ample time to read other testimonies and make their own. This seems to be the case with Filip Mueller, a testimony that Pon brought up, which I discuss here: viewtopic.php?p=94147#p94147

It should be reiterated again that if an individual's statements were not subjected to careful cross examination by the defense counsel of the accused, it may not be proper [in the legal sense] to refer to these statements as "eyewitness testimony". I explain that here: viewtopic.php?t=12783
Naturally we can not go back in time and talk to these claimed eyewitnesses as most of them are dead. This is why physical evidence is so important.

Hannover, I think you'll find Pon is 'too busy'.

Nothing wrong with that. People have stuff to do.

Yep we all have sh-t to take care of. I'm 61 and semi retired and seem to be busier now than when I was at work. But what I don't do is set stuff up, bait everyone around me and then find I am 'too busy' to follow it through. If I have something to do I do it. Simples. Pon is mucking around by claiming all manner of nonsense and being deliberately difficult and obtuse and then when challenged runs off like a twelve year old in the playground. Basically he needs to put up or shut up.

[Pon]

more than one person could be incinerated at the same time (in one muffle)

According to SS Kurt Prüfer who built the furnaces, they could not.
You brought up that Prüfer "Confessed" to homicidal gas chambers, that was already elaborated on why it was beneficial for him to say that. However, it actually works against your position because if he truly "Believed the Holocaust" as you claim, why would he argue that only one person could be incinerated at one time in the ovens? It makes no sense.

He didn't, he was talking about the load of bodies in the camp, it is a mistranslation that is at fault here.

The text should rather be read:
"I told Sander that I was present at a test run of the ovens in the crematorium in Auschwitz concentration camp; that I came to a conclusion that the crematoria [sic] do not cope with such an amount of corpses that were there for incineration, because the crematoria ovens were of low capacity.

With this I gave Sander an example - that in Auschwitz, in my presence, two-three corpses were being pushed into crematoria openings /muffles/ instead of one per opening, and even then the crematorium's ovens did not cope with that load, because there were too many corpses for incineration."
Taken from: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/03/carlo-mattogno-and-interrogations-of.html

and that they used techniques that would incinerate people more quickly.

Incorrect, they could have but did not.
See:
Auschwitz cremation ovens and the "four-story continuous operation corpse incineration oven" never built
viewtopic.php?t=12778


Actually the technology used for Auschwitz cremations was very crude, inferior to civilian crematoria.

There are other techniques than building new ovens. This page deals with such techniques: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2017/09/short-debunking-of-steven-andersons.html#cremationexplained

From that page:
" The Topf engineer Fritz Sander wrote about the experiences in the concentration camps on 14.09.1942 that in the camps one tries to overcome the deficiency of the muffle system by "fully stuffing individual muffles with several corpses". He noted that "it is a hard and unpleasant work to introduce the corpses lengthwise into the muffle, namely when always several corpses must be packed simultaneously into the muffle". "

If you didn't mean those points, which points should I start threads on (that are unrelated to this thread)?

Auschwitz cremation capacity is a separate topic as this one is mostly about "gas chamber" witnesses [especially those who claimed introduction columns]. There is that thread above I have just linked to on Auschwitz cremations, or you can make another one.

To discern if a witness is credible we have to explore what you believe they lied about. I think it's fair to discuss issues related to the witnesses credibility in a thread that deals with witness credibility.


borjastick: I do have a lot to do, and I didn't start these threads but have been challenged to answer them (although I did mention the subjects in other threads), obviously the discussion could go on for decades no matter how often I post and it's not like you have to sit there idle waiting for me. I also want to post good quality arguments and not knee-jerk responses which means that I have to spend a lot of time finding information that is relevant, which in turn means that I have to set aside a lot of time to be able to, and that is something I am seldom able to do.

I think a good rule is "one step at a time". Eventually everything will be answered.

[Hannover]

SS Kurt Prufer, told the officers of SMERSCH (according to documents found in the Moscow archives) that only one body at a time could be cremated per muffle and that the cremation time took 60 minutes, and that they tried to cremate 2 bodies at a time; but the temperature inside the muffle went so high that it damaged the oven.
and:
- There was a total 52 muffles of Auschwitz, never used simultaneously.

- 38 is the most that were ever online simultaneously

- The 6 at Auschwitz I were taken out of action as soon as the new ones at Birkenau came online. These were in turn liable to long periods of breakdowns and even idleness.

- If there was a program of mass extermination, the desperate need for cremation capacity is obvious. Why then put six muffles out of action?

Yet Pon continues to dodge my challenges while he faithfully believes in 'gas chambers' which were in fact scientifically impossible as alleged.

Instead he is essentially arguing the illogical & absurd 'How many angels can dance on the head of pin? ...' when in fact there are no angels.

Pon cannot show us the contents of the alleged enormous mass graves for millions claimed to be in known locations, in which his impossible 'gas chambers' are supposedly the murder weapons which allegedly put most of the alleged millions into the non-existent "mass graves".

Surreal. No, ridiculous.

- Hannover

Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the laughable 'holocaust' storyline is the message.

[Lamprecht]

Pon's points on cremation have been responded to here: viewtopic.php?p=94849#p94849

To discern if a witness is credible we have to explore what you believe they lied about. I think it's fair to discuss issues related to the witnesses credibility in a thread that deals with witness credibility.

I believe any witness who claimed "Homicidal gas chambers" lied. This thread deals with witness credibility.

[Pon]

SS Kurt Prufer, told the officers of SMERSCH (according to documents found in the Moscow archives) that only one body at a time could be cremated per muffle and that the cremation time took 60 minutes, and that they tried to cremate 2 bodies at a time; but the temperature inside the muffle went so high that it damaged the oven.

The origin of which is a mistranslation, as I pointed out above. It never states that it was because the temperature was so high either, in fact, the most damaging is temperature change, the longer they could have the oven burning at a constant rate the better, even at a high temperature.

and:
- There was a total 52 muffles of Auschwitz, never used simultaneously.

- 38 is the most that were ever online simultaneously

- The 6 at Auschwitz I were taken out of action as soon as the new ones at Birkenau came online. These were in turn liable to long periods of breakdowns and even idleness.

- If there was a program of mass extermination, the desperate need for cremation capacity is obvious. Why then put six muffles out of action?

The need for cremation capacity was desperate at times even without mass extermination (with the typhus outbreaks) why was six muffles out of action then? The same answer applies to your case as with mine. Any idleness was of course because there wasn't a constant flow of victims. Air photos shows open air incinerations, why didn't they use all the muffles instead? Same answer applies to your case as with mine.

Yet Pon continues to dodge my challenges while he faithfully believes in 'gas chambers' which were in fact scientifically impossible as alleged.

Your challenge requires a lot of research since it needs to be that detailed. Because of that it will also take time before I can answer it. No dodging is taking place.

Instead he is essentially arguing the illogical & absurd 'How many angels can dance on the head of pin? ...' when in fact there are no angels.

Only because it was stated that it was impossible and that this was used to discredit the witness. Obviously showing that it was indeed possible is then a valid argument to show that the witness could have been truthful (as opposed to couldn't have been truthful).

Pon cannot show us the contents of the alleged enormous mass graves for millions claimed to be in known locations, in which his impossible 'gas chambers' are supposedly the murder weapons which allegedly put most of the alleged millions into the non-existent "mass graves".

Surreal. No, ridiculous.

- Hannover

Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the laughable 'holocaust' storyline is the message.

Aren't there many photos of the mass graves? Maybe not particularly of the gassed victimes as they were cremated but I've seen a lot of mass graves photos and there's even a video out there. I have yet to investigate current excavation projects, if that's what you mean. Again, because I just don't have much time to devote to this, I do know that there have been excavations where they have indeed found bodies at the places where they should be.

Here's one youtube clip (4 minutes) of the excavation of a mass grave, what more would you need? It's certainly not possible to dig out all of them.

Shoah Par Balles (Subtítulos en español) Versión 4 min.

I will continue to answer also in the cremation thread.

[borjastick]

Aren't there many photos of the mass graves? Maybe not particularly of the gassed victimes as they were cremated but I've seen a lot of mass graves photos and there's even a video out there. I have yet to investigate current excavation projects, if that's what you mean. Again, because I just don't have much time to devote to this, I do know that there have been excavations where they have indeed found bodies at the places where they should be.

Pon

Let's just take Auschwitz and Treblinka here. At Auschwitz we have all seen the famous picture supposedly taken secretly of a burning pit with many tangled bodies and several men working there, especially the one with the overly long chimpanzee arms. They claim this burning pit location is easily identified. Why then has it never been found, opened and excavated to show all the cremains?

Treblinka was a very small area and yet, so they claim 900,000, people were gassed, buried, dug up and then cremated on open pyres. Why was it then covered up with concrete abstract monstrosities and therefore protected from investigation? Why was it that when Richard Crege carried out GPR investigations he found nothing? Why was it when Caroline Sturdey-Colls did an official pro-holocaust excavation she found very little at all and what she did find was then laughably mis-labelled and attributed to all sorts?

You also mentioned the muffles which were out of action and why would they use outdoor incineration. Muffles were out of action due to repair and maintenance and the outdoor incineration was, from memory, the rubbish incinerators at the edge of the camp.

Pon, the holocaust isn't rocket science. It is a very simple event that is deliberately made complicated by those who wish to indoctrinate and obscure. It was about the claimed mass murder of a large group of people in very few locations in an industrial manner. The science, the forensics, the evidence and the architecture should all be incredibly easy to show, if it happened. That it cannot be shown says a massive amount about the scam that is the holocaust.

[Lamprecht]

Aren't there many photos of the mass graves?

In some cases there are photographs of graves, but these do not prove the Holocaust.

The graves that would prove "Deniers" wrong and the "holocaust" correct are nowhere to be seen. It seems vague, but I may make a challenge thread for you about this subject. But it has nothing to do with Auschwitz (where revisionists claim about 100,000 perished, none in gas chambers) which is what you have been focusing on this entire time. Soon, I think it will be useful to move on to another camp. (not to say "stop talking about Auschwitz" but to have threads focused on other camps also being posted in)

[Pon]

Aren't there many photos of the mass graves? Maybe not particularly of the gassed victimes as they were cremated but I've seen a lot of mass graves photos and there's even a video out there. I have yet to investigate current excavation projects, if that's what you mean. Again, because I just don't have much time to devote to this, I do know that there have been excavations where they have indeed found bodies at the places where they should be.

Pon

Let's just take Auschwitz and Treblinka here. At Auschwitz we have all seen the famous picture supposedly taken secretly of a burning pit with many tangled bodies and several men working there, especially the one with the overly long chimpanzee arms. They claim this burning pit location is easily identified. Why then has it never been found, opened and excavated to show all the cremains?

Treblinka was a very small area and yet, so they claim 900,000, people were gassed, buried, dug up and then cremated on open pyres. Why was it then covered up with concrete abstract monstrosities and therefore protected from investigation? Why was it that when Richard Crege carried out GPR investigations he found nothing? Why was it when Caroline Sturdey-Colls did an official pro-holocaust excavation she found very little at all and what she did find was then laughably mis-labelled and attributed to all sorts?

You also mentioned the muffles which were out of action and why would they use outdoor incineration. Muffles were out of action due to repair and maintenance and the outdoor incineration was, from memory, the rubbish incinerators at the edge of the camp.

Pon, the holocaust isn't rocket science. It is a very simple event that is deliberately made complicated by those who wish to indoctrinate and obscure. It was about the claimed mass murder of a large group of people in very few locations in an industrial manner. The science, the forensics, the evidence and the architecture should all be incredibly easy to show, if it happened. That it cannot be shown says a massive amount about the scam that is the holocaust.

I agree that we should only discuss Auschwitz here, it's unfortunate that the threads are named generally and the challanges as well. The location has been identified by looking at the forest line, I would guess that the evidence for the cremation pit was removed by the germans. How would you explain the photos?

It is not made complicated by them, it was made complicated by the nazis that destroyed or obfuscated the evidence and even in the process of extermination was causious not to leave evidence behind or to produce unnecessary documentary traces.

Corline Sturdey-Colls found some bricks that had what they thought was the star of David but was shown to be the company logo that made the bricks, it was a unfortunate mis-labelling but I don't think for a minute that it was intentionally misleading. You can see why they thought so though, since the nazis deliberately tried to make the facility look jew-friendly with a large star of David on the wall (according to witnesses).

The argument was to show the same discrepency no matter if you believe in the holocaust or not. It is not evidence of anything and the germans would have known the reason at the time. The answer also becomes the same no matter if you believe in the holocaust or not (if there was only a certain amount of ovens ever used in the same time (implying that a certain amount set idle the entire duration) then it makes no sense why they had to use open-air incinerations, as the argument was that they were simply idle, not faulty. If they were faulty then of course the same argument applies to pro-extermination).

[Moderator]

Pon:
Answer the challenges or leave the thread. Your avoidance of critical challenges to your claims is telling, does not make a good case for your arguments.
You agreed to the guidelines, abide by them like everyone else.
M1

[Hannover]

Pon posted a link to an alleged 'Nazi mass grave site', actually a Soviet NKVD execution site, which has been completely debunked here:

Focused Thread: The so-called UKRAINIAN "holocaust by bullets"
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12800

No wonder he dodges.

- Hannover