Dr. E. Michael Jones on the Holocaust and AI

[jarno]

Here is an interesting article that was just posted by Dr. Jones on how artificial intelligence is inadvertently weakening the Holocaust:
https://www.unz.com/ejones/why-its-easi ... -to-a-jew/

[HistorySpeaks]

This is image-board tier denial. I doubt that the cleverer deniers (Mattogno, hell I'll throw my debate nemesis Dalton in here) would embrace such patent nonsense.

The problem with the AI bot's "calculation" is that the premise it was fed (by some rando denier) is a lie: there were not "four ovens" but 15 ovens with a total of 52 muffles. (The latter is the important factor, as muffles are the receptacles where one actually puts the bodies)

Other relevant factors at Auschwitz that the AI bot would not have taken into account:

High percentage of emaciated bodies
High percentage of child bodies
Cremas running continuously throughout the day (more time cremating, and built up heat to make cremation faster
etc

[hermod]

The problem with the AI bot's "calculation" is that the premise it was fed (by some rando denier) is a lie: there were not "four ovens" but 15 ovens with a total of 52 muffles. (The latter is the important factor, as muffles are the receptacles where one actually puts the bodies)

A widespread misconception. Many people falsely believe that 4 crematories mean 4 crematory ovens. I've seen it numerous times on the internet.

That being said, Auschwitz-Birkenau was not as well equipped in crematory ovens as mere concentration camps such as Buchenwald and Dachau were when mortality is taken into account.

https://postimg.cc/sB39Z6BP

[PrudentRegret]

This is image-board tier denial. I doubt that the cleverer deniers (Mattogno, hell I'll throw my debate nemesis Dalton in here) would embrace such patent nonsense.

The problem with the AI bot's "calculation" is that the premise it was fed (by some rando denier) is a lie: there were not "four ovens" but 15 ovens with a total of 52 muffles. (The latter is the important factor, as muffles are the receptacles where one actually puts the bodies)

Other relevant factors at Auschwitz that the AI bot would not have taken into account:

High percentage of emaciated bodies
High percentage of child bodies
Cremas running continuously throughout the day (more time cremating, and built up heat to make cremation faster
etc

You should try asking it about fuel requirements for cremating bodies, even without including any context about the Holocaust or the like. Simply ask for how easy/difficult it is to cremate a body outdoors and how much fuel it would take to cremate a body as well as many bodies simultaneously outdoors. You can even follow-up with asking it things like "what if bodies were stacked together, would that save fuel?"

The one thing I've noticed is that it gives the Revisionist interpretation of fuel requirements for cremation, and not the magic fuel requirements proposed by you and the Holocaust Controversies bloggers.

[Hektor]

This is i.....

High percentage of emaciated bodies
High percentage of child bodies
Cremas running continuously throughout the day (more time cremating, and built up heat to make cremation faster
etc

You should try asking it about fuel requirements for cremating bodies, even without including any context about the Holocaust or the like. Simply ask for how easy/difficult it is to cremate a body outdoors and how much fuel it would take to cremate a body as well as many bodies simultaneously outdoors. You can even follow-up with asking it things like "what if bodies were stacked together, would that save fuel?"

The one thing I've noticed is that it gives the Revisionist interpretation of fuel requirements for cremation, and not the magic fuel requirements proposed by you and the Holocaust Controversies bloggers.

Well HS got a point there. With AI you still can go an make up presuppositions and input data and then make the story work. That's already standard procedure on the Holocaust believer side. If it can't work based on reasonable assumptions, make it work based on irrational ones. Just make sure you slide it carefully and distribute it a little so the audience doesn't notice this immediately.

By that technique they can also avoid the question of actual physical evidence for their assertion.
Seems that was the whole motivation for their activism, avoid the question of actual evidence by debating, naming and claiming it over and over again.

[curioussoul]

This is image-board tier denial.

Ironic, coming from a self-styled image-board poster.

The problem with the AI bot's "calculation" is that the premise it was fed (by some rando denier) is a lie: there were not "four ovens" but 15 ovens with a total of 52 muffles. (The latter is the important factor, as muffles are the receptacles where one actually puts the bodies)

False. There were 46 muffles across 12 ovens - 5 triple-muffle furnaces in Crematoria II and III and one 8-muffle furnace in Crematoria IV and V. The crematorium in the Main Camp was not active during the time the Birkenau crematoria went into operation, so claiming there were 52 muffles in total is nonsensical if you want to calculate the overall cremation capacity for Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Even so, the number of muffles has practically no bearing on the answer spewed out by the chat bot. Its claim was that a cremation takes approximately 2-3 hours, which is correct for modern non-continuous cremations (about 1 hour for larger crematoria with higher cremation volumes and scheduled cremation sessions). Even if we increased the number of ovens from 4 to 46, which would be incorrect given that "oven" refers to the entire machine including all muffles, it would still be insufficient to cremate 1.1 million corpses.

High percentage of emaciated bodies

Contrary to your implication, a high percentage of emaciated corpses would not be helpful for the cremation process, because of the low amount of body fat compared to heavier corpses. It's a well-documented fact that the fat contents in heavier corpses contribute to the fuel requirements, whereas lean/emaciated corpses would burn less efficiently and require more fuel.

The emaciated corpses fallacy is a common trope amongst Holocaust affirmers, which is rarely called out. Witness testimony in this regard also differs wildly, some witnesses falsely claiming (as you do) that the emaciated corpses were somehow faster to cremate, while others correctly stated that fatter corpses burned more efficiently.

High percentage of child bodies

The presence of child corpses would only impact the cremation capacity by a factor of approximately 1.2.

Cremas running continuously throughout the day (more time cremating, and built up heat to make cremation faster
etc

What makes you think a regular cremation session in a modern crematorium does not run continuously, thus accounting for the loss of heat by shutting down the oven between cremations? When calculating the efficiency of a cremation oven, one naturally accounts for the fact that the cremation oven is started up in the morning and then runs for at least 12 hours in a continuous session.

There is evidence that the crematoria in Auschwitz-Birkenau ran in 12 hour shifts, but even if we assume that they ran in 20 hour shifts, which is perfectly plausible for certain periods (24/7 shifts would not be possible because of the cleaning requirements for the muffles), this was clearly the normal mode of operation for cremation ovens. German cremation experiments from the 20's and 30's accounted for continuous cremation sessions, not individual cremations with cooling-off periods in between.

The list of cremations for the Gusen crematorium clearly proves that the fuel requirements and the cremation time did not dwindle to extreme lows just because the ovens ran continuously for about 2 weeks. In fact, the 50-60 minute average cremation time was only achieveable in such optimal conditions.

[bombsaway]

You should try asking it about fuel requirements for cremating bodies, even without including any context about the Holocaust or the like. Simply ask for how easy/difficult it is to cremate a body outdoors and how much fuel it would take to cremate a body as well as many bodies simultaneously outdoors. You can even follow-up with asking it things like "what if bodies were stacked together, would that save fuel?"

The one thing I've noticed is that it gives the Revisionist interpretation of fuel requirements for cremation, and not the magic fuel requirements proposed by you and the Holocaust Controversies bloggers.

(bold mine) I don't understand this. Clearly burning stacked bodies would save some amount of fuel (how much I couldn't say). The area around a fire and especially above it also gets hot, am I crazy here?

[Hektor]

They will still have a capacity issue even if they minimize required capacity unreasonably as the do. They have no evidence that even the existing capacity being used remotely, though. So they have to read it into the evidence at hand. It always goes back to "We have testimony". But even if one uses their cherry picked testimony it becomes clear that this isn't to be trusted. Commonalities on absurd statements are actually a sign of coaching and not for 'corroborating' testimony. So they have to wiggle all the time with it. As a distraction from not having remotely sufficient physical evidence for what they claim. It turns into beating around the bush with the inference that "You guys can't disprove what we claim". Well, I can't disprove big foot sighting and Alien abductions neither... But can reject it based on 'no evidence', but 'testimony' that sounds absurd (albeit less absurd than the bulk of "Holocaust Testimony").

[curioussoul]

(bold mine) I don't understand this. Clearly burning stacked bodies would save some amount of fuel (how much I couldn't say). The area around a fire and especially above it also gets hot, am I crazy here?

That clearly depends. Normally, you would encounter thermal inadequacy during water evaporation if you added more corpses. Witness testimony to the effect that 4-5 corpses were stuffed into a single muffle are physically impossible. Even two corpses would not necessarily be more efficient or even possible, since the ovens were engineered and constructed for the cremation of a single corpse per muffle. That's probably why Kurt Pruefer, who designed some of the Topf ovens, testified that he witnessed an attempt at cremating two corpses simultaneously, which failed.

[HistorySpeaks]

Hey Curious,

First, I'm proud of you for addressing me for the first time without making unfounded personal attacks. That wasn't too hard, was it?

Second, you are incorrect to say that the "crematorium in the main camp was not active during the time the Birkenau crematoria went into operation." As Mattogno correctly points out (see below link), Krema 1 in Auschwitz I ran through 17 July 1943; whereas Krema II, for example, began running in March 1943.

So there is a considerable period of overlap that must be taken into account when calculating Auschwitz's cremation capacity.

https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/24-tcfoa.pdf (see page 228).

[bombsaway]

(bold mine) I don't understand this. Clearly burning stacked bodies would save some amount of fuel (how much I couldn't say). The area around a fire and especially above it also gets hot, am I crazy here?

That clearly depends. Normally, you would encounter thermal inadequacy during water evaporation if you added more corpses. Witness testimony to the effect that 4-5 corpses were stuffed into a single muffle are physically impossible. Even two corpses would not necessarily be more efficient or even possible, since the ovens were engineered and constructed for the cremation of a single corpse per muffle. That's probably why Kurt Pruefer, who designed some of the Topf ovens, testified that he witnessed an attempt at cremating two corpses simultaneously, which failed.

In the post I quoted PrudentRegret was talking about outdoor cremation, where there would be a lot of heat dissipation.

[HistorySpeaks]

Should have further clarified that Krema II began running on 31 March 1943; that is still march but obviously the end of march.

Of course my general point still stands: There was considerable overlap between cremation at Auschwitz I and cremation at Birkenau, contrary to what curious suggested.

[curioussoul]

Hey Curious,

First, I'm proud of you for addressing me for the first time without making unfounded personal attacks. That wasn't too hard, was it?

Second, you are incorrect to say that the "crematorium in the main camp was not active during the time the Birkenau crematoria went into operation." As Mattogno correctly points out (see below link), Krema 1 in Auschwitz I ran through 17 July 1943; whereas Krema II, for example, began running in March 1943.

So there is a considerable period of overlap that must be taken into account when calculating Auschwitz's cremation capacity.

https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/24-tcfoa.pdf (see page 228).

"Considerable overlap" according to who? According to the official narrative, the crematorium in the Main Camp cremated a virtually inconsequential number of corpses in comparison to the Birkenau crematoria, for the period in question. Mattogno points out (Real Case for Auschwitz, page 267) that between March 14 1943 and October 30 1944, a mere 3050 corpses were cremated in Crematorium I of the Main Camp. So your "overlap" turns out to be utterly insignificant.

By the way, I find it absolutely hilarious that you keep referring to revisionist research as your main source, evidently because mainstream scholars do not broach these topics in any serious way and because revisionist research is simply better and of much higher quality than the pseudo-science produced by orthodox historians.

[HistorySpeaks]

"Considerable overlap" according to who? According to the official narrative, the crematorium in the Main Camp cremated a virtually inconsequential number of corpses in comparison to the Birkenau crematoria, for the period in question. Mattogno points out (Real Case for Auschwitz, page 267) that between March 14 1943 and October 30 1944, a mere 3050 corpses were cremated in Crematorium I of the Main Camp. So your "overlap" turns out to be utterly insignificant.

By the way, I find it absolutely hilarious that you keep referring to revisionist research as your main source, evidently because mainstream scholars do not broach these topics in any serious way and because revisionist research is simply better and of much higher quality than the pseudo-science produced by orthodox historians.

You are goal-post shifting now by saying at least 3,050 burned in Krema 1 in the relevant timespan (Mattogno is referring specifically to registered prisoners, who to be sure were the overwhelming majority burned in Krema 1) is insignificant. Before you categorically insisted that Krema 1 was not used after the Birkenau cremas were activated). You were simply wrong about that.

I quote Mattogno when I am conversing with deniers who deny even basic facts about Auschwitz that Mattogno recognizes. It is a strategic citation, not a citation made because I have deep regard for Mattogno.

[curioussoul]

You are goal-post shifting now by saying at least 3,050 burned in Krema 1 in the relevant timespan

You were the one claiming that the overlap in activity for Crematorium I was "significant", when in reality it was completely insignificant. While it is true that Crematorium I was formally open for a couple of months after Crematorium II opened, the number of corpses cremated in that crematorium is not only numerically irrelevant in the context of the claimed Holocaust deaths, but it is also irrelevant in the context of the official number of corpses cremated in Auschwitz up until the inauguration of Crematorium II. Keep in mind, until March 1943, pretty much every single corpse had to be cremated in Crematorium I. Functionally speaking, this crematorium was out of service after the Birkenau crematoria went into operation.

So, would you like to elaborate on how 3050 corpses is "significant" and how your false claim about the number of muffles somehow goes from a lie to a truth?

(Mattogno is referring specifically to registered prisoners, who to be sure were the overwhelming majority burned in Krema 1)

Are you seriously implying that "gassed Jews" were cremated in Crematorium I of the Main Camp after the Birkenau crematoria were opened?!

Before you categorically insisted that Krema 1 was not used after the Birkenau cremas were activated). You were simply wrong about that.

I didn't "categorically insist" on anything. I claimed that Crematorium I was not active after the Birkenau crematoria went into operation. As demonstrated, the number of corpses cremated in that crematorium after March of 1943 is completely insignificant and has no bearing on your lie about the number of muffles and the overall cremation capacity for Auschwitz-Birkenau. In your original post, you were dishonestly attempting to claim that the chat bot should have calculated its cremation capacity based on 52 muffles, when in reality only 46 muffles are relevant for those calculations.

I quote Mattogno when I am conversing with deniers who deny even basic facts about Auschwitz that Mattogno recognizes. It is a strategic citation, not a citation made because I have deep regard for Mattogno.

On the contrary, you have no orthodox Holocaust source for any of these facts, because these things are not broached by orthodox Holocaust historians. What "basic facts" are you pretending that "deniers" are denying but Mattogno recognizes? I am yet to see a single such claim on this forum.