"Revisionists cannot work out how the Holocaust happened"...

[HansHill]

.... is an implicit admission that the details as presented do not survive routine interrogation!

[Stubble]

[Cowboy]

I only joined this forum about a month ago, but I've been browsing it since the start of the year. This "argument from incredulity" point that I have seen repeatedly since I started lurking is an obvious cop-out, for lack of a better term.

This is basically how I see it:
1: "Hey man, I made 300 three pointers in a row today at the gym!"
2: "I don't think that's feasible. You aren't that great of a shooter, and you were playing on a double rim."
1: "Well, just because you can't work out how I made 300 shots in a row, doesn't mean I didn't do it."
2: "What? I mean, I guess that's fair to an extent, but I've never seen you make more than 7 in a row..."
1: "Yeah well it happened, and you just have to believe me because it's technically possible."

How are reasonable conversations supposed to be had with this attitude?

[HansHill]

Welcome Cowboy. Your post is a really good example of why I always aim to reply to these frauds: Because every thread is some newcomer's first impression of Codoh!

I am another example of it

[Archie]

No one on planet Earth can "work out how it happened."

Pretty much any attempt to debunk anything would fall under "not being able to work out how it could happen."

[bombsaway]

What I wonder, is the most glaring example of so called Holocaust mythos that "cannot be worked out"?

How does this contrast to oh say, working out how at least 2.5 million were evacuated into Russia without a shred of evidence surfacing of what happened to them there?

Or how they got hundreds of "perpetrators", over many decades, in different countries, and across the East/West divide to confess to crimes they didn't commit, without a single recantation?

The answer to these questions have not been given, no books or even articles have been written about them. Rather what you see is just a retreat to the impossibility of the mainstream story. The mainstream story being impossible, proves that these things must have happened. Witnesses saying "impossible things" is the proof they were coerced.

[Nessie]

.... is an implicit admission that the details as presented do not survive routine interrogation!

No, it is a logical request, that since so-called revisionists claim the very well evidenced Holocaust did not happen and millions of Jews were not murdered, then why can they not evidence what did happen, and millions of Jews still alive in camps and ghettos in 1944 and liberated in 1945?

[Nessie]

I only joined this forum about a month ago, but I've been browsing it since the start of the year. This "argument from incredulity" point that I have seen repeatedly since I started lurking is an obvious cop-out, for lack of a better term.

This is basically how I see it:
1: "Hey man, I made 300 three pointers in a row today at the gym!"
2: "I don't think that's feasible. You aren't that great of a shooter, and you were playing on a double rim."
1: "Well, just because you can't work out how I made 300 shots in a row, doesn't mean I didn't do it."
2: "What? I mean, I guess that's fair to an extent, but I've never seen you make more than 7 in a row..."
1: "Yeah well it happened, and you just have to believe me because it's technically possible."

How are reasonable conversations supposed to be had with this attitude?

False analogy. You are comparing something that is physically impossible, to something that is not. There is no doubt that in the 1940s, the Germans had the design and engineering skills to build gas chambers, dig mass graves and cremate corpses on pyres and in ovens.

Your analogy would be closer to reality if you changed 300 three pointers in a row, to 30. That is closer to the 7 you accept had happened. If anyone is going to work out how to expand gassing, grave and cremation capacity to kill millions, it was the Germans. For example, the Topf & Sons engineer descriptions of how they expanded cremation oven capacity, so that multiple naked corpses could be continuously cremated, in ovens developed from the more traditional single corpse in a coffin cremation. So-called revisionists just pour scorn on the engineers, rather than provide evidence as to how many corpses were cremated at the A-B Kremas. It is evidenced, not just from the engineers, but others who worked inside the Kremas, and documents, that cremation capacity was greatly expanded. That is corroborating evidence to prove mass cremations.

That is like the claim for 30 three pointers in a row, being corroborated by other people who saw it happen, and a scoresheet with the scores recorded on it. The additional evidence confirms the claim.

[Nessie]

No one on planet Earth can "work out how it happened."

Pretty much any attempt to debunk anything would fall under "not being able to work out how it could happen."

Historians can. I have just exampled how cremation capacity was expanded at A-B, to cope with multiple corpse continuous cremations, so that hundreds of thousands of corpses could be cremated. That you do not believe the claims, does not therefore mean A-B could not cremate hundreds of thousands of corpses.