The 6,000,000 number, a fable?

[bombsaway]

You are drawing conclusions without proper neutrality, explaining what is going on mechanistically.

What even is this argument

"p-p-please be neutral with my propaganda"

Nice try - if you haven't noticed, this entire conversation is about your nonsense being pulled apart, we don't owe you "neutrality", what we owe you is critical thinking and to reject it as we see fit. "Neutrality", wtf.

Like this:

The reason figures were often around 5-6 million in the pre-war period and during the war, when talking about Jewish suffering was that this was the approximate amount of Jews that fell under Nazi control, and before that, the amount of Jews in Eastern Europe + Poland where anti semitism was strongest

The geo-political calculus swinging across time, regions, political configurations and actors, and supposed hostile threat entities with polar divergent objectives, and muh 6 million is a constant across all those wildly fluctuating parameters.

I've seen no evidence of singular focus on the 6 million figure during the war period and prior to that (5 million seems to be just as common, if not more so). I'm not saying it's not the case, the evidence just isn't there, so to believe in a singular focus is silly.

If your assertion is Jews had a tendency of saying many millions of Jews were facing dire circumstances in the pre war period, sure I can agree with that.

As for propaganda, it's no more propaganda than the people who are saying white genocide is happening in South Africa. Or that white genocide is happening in America.

[Callafangers]

bombsaway wasn't aware that the "6 million" figure has more prominence than "5 million" or other adjacent 'millions'... sure.

Here ya' go, bombsaway:

6M-f.jpg (324.69 KiB) Viewed 627 times

The above charts are from Google's NGram Viewer. The values (percentages) shown in the charts represent the relative frequency of a word or phrase in a given year. The table shown compares the average annual frequency of the phrases "four million Jews", "five million Jews", "six million Jews", and "seven million Jews". Not only has the total uses of "six million Jews" far eclipsed the uses of these other 'millions' combined (by a factor of about five), but we can see by looking at the approximated mean (red lines) in each chart that the use of "six million Jews" has dramatically increased since war's end, whereas it has generally decreased for all other 'millions'.

Google's NGram viewer also mainly looks at books, so it potentially misses uses in movies and TV shows, uses by museums, or other uses like these:

"The Slaughter of Six Million Jews: A Holocaust or a Shoah?"
https://www.thetorah.com/article/the-sl ... or-a-shoah

"Six Million Against Gun Control: Lessons from History"
https://jewscanshoot.org/2016/09/11/six ... amendment/

"...in memory of 6,000,000 who were murdered..."
https://www.studentnewsdaily.com/daily- ... holocaust/

bombsaway is well-aware that the term "six million" is far more widespread than any casualty figure for any human population ever, but he's also aware that the emphasis on this term makes those who have been propagating it look like, well... propagandists. bombsaway is therefore determined to sweep this ol' doozy into the memory hole.

NGram Viewer for "six million Jews":
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?c ... tive=false

[Callafangers]

And see here, from Wikipedia of the early 2000s:

The commonly used figure for the number of Jewish victims is six million, so much so that the phrase "six million" is now almost universally interpreted as referring to the Jewish victims of the Holocaust, though mainstream estimates by historians of the exact number range from five million to seven million.

https://web.archive.org/web/20060203040 ... _Holocaust

[bombsaway]

bombsaway wasn't aware that the "6 million" figure has more prominence than "5 million" or other adjacent 'millions'... sure.

Here ya' go, bombsaway:


6M-f.jpg


The above charts are from Google's NGram Viewer. The values (percentages) shown in the charts represent the relative frequency of a word or phrase in a given year. The table shown compares the average annual frequency of the phrases "four million Jews", "five million Jews", "six million Jews", and "seven million Jews". Not only has the total uses of "six million Jews" far eclipsed the uses of these other 'millions' combined (by a factor of about five), but we can see by looking at the approximated mean (red lines) in each chart that the use of "six million Jews" has dramatically increased since war's end, whereas it has generally decreased for all other 'millions'.

Google's NGram viewer also mainly looks at books, so it potentially misses uses in movies and TV shows, uses by museums, or other uses like these:

"The Slaughter of Six Million Jews: A Holocaust or a Shoah?"
https://www.thetorah.com/article/the-sl ... or-a-shoah

"Six Million Against Gun Control: Lessons from History"
https://jewscanshoot.org/2016/09/11/six ... amendment/

"...in memory of 6,000,000 who were murdered..."
https://www.studentnewsdaily.com/daily- ... holocaust/

bombsaway is well-aware that the term "six million" is far more widespread than any casualty figure for any human population ever, but he's also aware that the emphasis on this term makes those who have been propagating it look like, well... propagandists. bombsaway is therefore determined to sweep this ol' doozy into the memory hole.

NGram Viewer for "six million Jews":
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?c ... tive=false

pre-war and during the war yeah. your graphs make that point for me. Thanks for the research, good job.

"Four Million Jews": The graph shows a peak in 1944. The frequency in 1943 is on the steep rise to that peak, estimated to be approximately 0.00000055%.

"Five Million Jews": The graph is explicitly labeled with a peak in 1943, with a frequency of 0.0000014730%.

"Six Million Jews": The frequency in 1943 is on an upward trend but is still relatively low compared to its later peaks. The estimated frequency is approximately 0.00000008%.

"Seven Million Jews": Similar to the "Four Million" phrase, the graph peaks in 1944. The frequency in 1943 is on the rise to that peak, estimated to be approximately 0.00000017%.

five million Jews was by far the most common during the war, I am again, only arguing that believing "6" had significance during this time period and prior is not evidenced, therefore a silly belief which should be cause for serious self reflection.

[Stubble]

Already addressed.

I wrote an article in 1943, I claim 5,000,000.

I write an article in 44-45, I claim 6,000,000.

I have modified the number.

You aren't this dense Bombsaway, you are playing dumb.

Go look at your sources for 5,000,000. By the end of the war, the same authors and outlets were saying 6,000,000. As one would expect.

[bombsaway]

Already addressed.

I wrote an article in 1943, I claim 5,000,000.

I write an article in 44-45, I claim 6,000,000.

I have modified the number.

You aren't this dense Bombsaway, you are playing dumb.

Go look at your sources for 5,000,000. By the end of the war, the same authors and outlets were saying 6,000,000. As one would expect.

it's only in 1945 are there more mentions, and even then it's close .16 to .19 (adjusted)

In 1940 , 5 million gets mention three times as much

as I said during the war and prior, there is no special significance to the 6 million figure

The tribunal gave a figure of 5.7 million, which rounds up to 6, so you would expect to see consensus start to form with things like that





https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?c ... itive=true

[Callafangers]

pre-war and during the war yeah. your graphs make that point for me. Thanks for the research, good job.

Pre-war, the levels were still much higher for "six million" (about 50% higher):

PreWW2.jpg (150.73 KiB) Viewed 608 times

Importantly, the First World War seems to have spiked the "six million" claims but not so much for "five million". Let's also keep in mind that some of the "five million" were potentially describing a portion of "six million" (this wouldn't apply the other way around).

"Four Million Jews": The graph shows a peak in 1944. The frequency in 1943 is on the steep rise to that peak, estimated to be approximately 0.00000055%.

"Five Million Jews": The graph is explicitly labeled with a peak in 1943, with a frequency of 0.0000014730%.

"Six Million Jews": The frequency in 1943 is on an upward trend but is still relatively low compared to its later peaks. The estimated frequency is approximately 0.00000008%.

"Seven Million Jews": Similar to the "Four Million" phrase, the graph peaks in 1944. The frequency in 1943 is on the rise to that peak, estimated to be approximately 0.00000017%.

five million Jews was by far the most common during the war, I am again, only arguing that believing "6" had significance during this time period and prior is not evidenced, therefore a silly belief which should be cause for serious self reflection.

Uhh, you're just dead-wrong, here. "Five million" momentarily peaked in 1943 at 0.0000014730% however "Six million" was at this same level that year (more or less identical) and then kept rising to circa 1950 and then steadily beyond. None of the other millions' peaks surpass that of 'six million'.

Most importantly: you glossed over the extent to which "six million" has been stated repeatedly since the war, long before such figures could have reasonably been known, and despite "four million" or "five million" being relatively rare (and sometimes striving toward "six million") and "seven million" almost completely unheard of by comparison.

Where does this number come from, supporting the frequency at which it is claimed? This has been covered in part by Rudolf, here:

"The First Holocaust: The Surprising Origin of the Six-Million Figure"
https://holocausthandbooks.com/video/th ... holocaust/

In the above, there are examples of things like "five million to six million" -- i.e. where "five million" is likely used just to add credibility to the "six million" by avoiding over-specification.

[Archie]

I don't think I ever said 5 million was the dominant figure, or there was a special significance to it. The google search turned more hits for 5 million, but it's hard to draw conclusions from this though it isn't what we would expect assuming mystical/psychological significance to 6 million. You are drawing conclusions without proper neutrality, explaining what is going on mechanistically.

The reason figures were often around 5-6 million in the pre-war period and during the war, when talking about Jewish suffering was that this was the approximate amount of Jews that fell under Nazi control, and before that, the amount of Jews in Eastern Europe + Poland where anti semitism was strongest

You are conflating the question of mystical interpretation with the larger issue of the figure being used prematurely. You cannot explain the latter and you are avoiding confronting that difficulty in favor of numerological questions. Let's set aside momentarily the question of whether the 6 million had any special significance. That can be investigated separately. Even if it were the case that the number simply caught on randomly, we still have the fact that it was used too early.

Rabbi Michael Dov Weissmandl (the man behind the Vrba-Wetzler report), May 1944

“Till now six times a million Jews have Europe and Russia have been destroyed.” (Dawidowicz, Holocaust Reader, pg. 327)

“And you, our brothers in all free countries; and you, governments of all free lands, where are you? What are you doing to hinder the carnage that is now going on? Already 6,000,000 Jews have been massacred and this number is increasing by ten thousands every day.” (WRB Archives, material sent with Vrba-Wetzler material)

Now. Bombsaway. This guy is on record multiple times in May 1944 saying that six million Jews HAD died. Past tense. With earlier examples that say X million Jews in peril or whatever you can maybe wriggle out of it by saying it's generic and not that relevant. But do you honestly not see the problem here? Do you really not see why it's a problem for them to be using the number in the middle of the war?

And this is not an isolated example. Joel Brand was also using the number in June 1944. Below is from his interview with Moshe Shertok.

“Similarly, the Nazis believed that by offering to release the remaining 2,000,000 Jews, they might get away with the killing of 6,000,000.”

“Please believe me: they have killed six million Jews; there are only two million left alive.”

Ilya Ehrenberg, 22 Dec 1944 (Soviet War News)
“In regions they seized, the Germans killed all the Jews, from the old folk to infants in arms. Ask any German prisoner why his fellow countrymen annihilated six million innocent people, and he will reply quite simply: ‘Why, they were Jews.’”

So that is at least three different very notable people saying in 1944 that six million Jews had already died. And fairly recently there was a discovery of an example from January 1944 of a rabbi saying in a newspaper article that six million had died. That is the earliest past tense example that I am aware of.

In January 1945, Jacob Lestchinsky published an estimate that six million Jews had died. This might be the earliest that had any purported statistical basis. Need I again state the obvious and say that this is too early for any reliable statistics to have been calculated?
“6,000,000 Jews Dead: Jacob Lestchinsky Estimates Reduction in Europe Since ‘39,” NYT, 8 Jan 1945, pg. 17

Jacob Robinson, June 1945, meeting with Justice Jackson

How great were those losses? inquired Jackson, seeking a figure to use at the coming trial. 'Six million,' responded Dr Robinson, and indicated that the figure included Jews in all Nazi-occupied lands 'from the Channel to Stalingrad.'

Jackson noted that day:

I was particularly interested in knowing the source and reliability of his estimate as I know no authentic data on it. (David Irving, Nuremberg: The Last Battle, pg. 62)

Sydney Gruson, reports from Zionists in London, Aug/Sep 1945. These example are also pre-Nuremberg and they show that the number was well-established in British circles as well.

About 1,500,000 Jews are left in Europe outside the Soviet Union. Six million have perished at the hands of the Nazis. Palestine is the only hope for the ones who are left, the Zionists declare, and they must be given the chance to go without delay. "It cannot be expected, Dr. Weizmann said, "that a people should look with equanimity on the agony of their brothers who survived so fearful a holocaust. (NYT, 4 Aug 1945)

Loss of six million Jews during the war has made extremists of all Zionists in the sense that they do not believe that there can be any more delay in establishing a Jewish homeland, and that their demands are considerate in proportion to Jewry's sacrifices in the war and its contribution to the United Nations' war effort. (NYT, 2 Sep 1945)

The only honest argument that can be made here is that these people were guesstimating and coincidentally got the "correct" answer.

[bombsaway]

Now. Bombsaway. This guy is on record multiple times in May 1944 saying that six million Jews HAD died. Past tense. With earlier examples that say X million Jews in peril or whatever you can maybe wriggle out of it by saying it's generic and not that relevant. But do you honestly not see the problem here? Do you really not see why it's a problem for them to be using the number in the middle of the war?

A reasonable estimate based on pre-war populations was 6-7 million Jews under Nazi control. And they believed (as did British intelligence) that they were all being killed. So that's where you get the number.

But some people did think 5 million were being killed, eg this from 1943 https://www.google.com/books/edition/Se ... frontcover IF you spent as much time looking for 6 million as 5 million, and found much more that would be one thing. But there's nothing systematic about what you're doing, it is silliness.

Hey someone used 6 million except talking about survivors? Any connection there?

https://www.nytimes.com/1918/10/18/arch ... -help.html

[bombsaway]

pre-war and during the war yeah. your graphs make that point for me. Thanks for the research, good job.

Pre-war, the levels were still much higher for "six million" (about 50% higher):


PreWW2.jpg


Importantly, the First World War seems to have spiked the "six million" claims but not so much for "five million". Let's also keep in mind that some of the "five million" were potentially describing a portion of "six million" (this wouldn't apply the other way around).

And for most of ww2, up until 1945 , 5 million was mentioned more

Dude it's quite obvious, 5 million was at least as commonly used over this period, you're cherry picking

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?c ... itive=true

[Callafangers]

And for most of ww2, up until 1945 , 5 million was mentioned more

Dude it's quite obvious, 5 million was at least as commonly used over this period, you're cherry picking

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?c ... itive=true

bombsaway, why are you lying again? Why do you choose "6 million Jews" and "5 million Jews" when both of these are incorrect grammar (single-digit numbers are typically spelled out, e.g. "one", "two", etc., rather than "1", "2", etc., in books and writing), and after I'd already provided you the charts with the proper "five million" and "six million"? This explains why your examples in your linked NGram have an order of magnitude less data, both for "5 million" and "6 million". You're only including books whose authors made errors or were otherwise incompetent.

Here is the data for the actual, proper usage of "five million Jews" and "six million Jews":

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?c ... moothing=1

Notice that the only period where "five million Jews" is a bit higher is after Hitler came to power until the peak of the war (~1933-1942). This is because all different figures/numbers of Jews were being reported on, spiking every conceivable figure of Jews written about in books in general (Jewish populations being spoken about far more, diluting any "six million" propagation efforts). But outside of this statistical noise, we see that the pattern of pressuring "six million" remains constant near-end and following both World Wars (which is exactly when Zionist Jews would be expected to claim "six million" dead or otherwise imperiled, justifying their prophetic 'return to Israel minus six [million]').

Will you admit your failure, bombsaway?

[bombsaway]

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?c ... tive=false

"five" million is still more frequently used over the period in question, that's the average. Your ngram proves nothing. The spike during WW2 is an effective rebuttal to your claims here. AI , take it away, you're not worth the effort Callafangers. Noise lol, noise is whatever you want it be huh.

This is a classic attempt to dismiss inconvenient data.

Here's a breakdown

1. The "Noise" is Actually the Most Relevant Evidence
The period from 1933 to 1945 is not an irrelevant distraction; it is the actual period in question. It's when the persecution, war, and genocide were happening. The information being published at that time reflects what people were thinking, reporting, and estimating as the events unfolded. To label the data from the most critical timeframe as "noise" is to essentially say, "Ignore the evidence from the time of the crime and only look at the data before and after." It's a completely backward approach to analysis. The spike in "five million" during the war isn't "diluting" a signal; it is the signal.

2. It Disproves the "Constant Pressure" Theory
If there were a "constant pressure" or a coordinated campaign to implant the "six million" number, it would have been at its most intense and consistent during the war itself, when the propaganda would have been most urgent. The data shows the opposite. The supposed "propagation effort" not only got "diluted," but it was overtaken by a different number. A propaganda campaign that fails and is replaced by a different message at the most crucial moment is not a very effective or well-orchestrated campaign. The much simpler explanation is that there was no singular "six million" campaign at the time; there was a desperate effort to report on a catastrophe with evolving, uncertain numbers.

3. It Offers a More Logical Explanation for the Numbers
Callafangers wants you to believe in a complex, multi-decade Zionist conspiracy to justify a "prophetic return." The "five million" spike supports a much simpler explanation (an application of Ockham's Razor):

The numbers used by commentators and Jewish groups during the war were based on demography, not prophecy. The pre-war Jewish population in the territories that would fall under Nazi control was estimated to be between 5 and 7 million.
As reports of mass murder emerged, people used the best numbers they had. "Five million" was clearly a very common and credible estimate for the number of Jews being affected or killed, as reflected in its dominant usage in books from that time.
The argument wasn't about a mystical number; it was about trying to grasp the scale of the destruction of the known European Jewish population.
In short, Callafangers's claim is an attempt to hand-wave away the single most important piece of data that contradicts his theory. By framing the wartime peak of "five million" as "noise," he avoids confronting the obvious conclusion: there was no single, pre-ordained, mystical "six million" narrative being pushed during the war. Instead, there were various estimates, and "five million" was, for a critical period, the most prominent one.

[Nessie]

I wrote an article in 1943, I claim 5,000,000.

I write an article in 44-45, I claim 6,000,000.

I have modified the number.

You aren't this dense Bombsaway, you are playing dumb.

As the Final Solution progressed, the number got bigger. In 1943, Korherr told Himmler that number was 4 million. In 1945, Hoettl gave evidence at the IMT, it was 6 million.

If before the war, 4, 5 and 6 million Jews were variously feared at risk, it is hardly surprising, that by the end of the war, one of those figures would be met. Turns out it was, and that number was 6.

[Nessie]

...

In January 1945, Jacob Lestchinsky published an estimate that six million Jews had died. This might be the earliest that had any purported statistical basis. Need I again state the obvious and say that this is too early for any reliable statistics to have been calculated?
“6,000,000 Jews Dead: Jacob Lestchinsky Estimates Reduction in Europe Since ‘39,” NYT, 8 Jan 1945, pg. 17

....

Due to known population figures and arrests by Nazis, which were being monitored by Jewish groups and national governments, such as the Polish Government in Exile and the Dutch civil service, it was possible, during the war, to estimate how many Jews were being killed. By 1945, it was being estimated to be 6 million. When Hoettl also used that death toll at Nuremberg, it is hardly surprising it stuck as a single figure. Historians buck that trend and prefer the range of 5 to 6 million.

That so many Jews had disappeared, whilst in Nazi captivity, was compelling circumstantial evidence to corroborate the eyewitness, documentary and other evidence of mass murders.

[Callafangers]

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?c ... tive=false

"five" million is still more frequently used over the period in question, that's the average. Your ngram proves nothing. The spike during WW2 is an effective rebuttal to your claims here. AI , take it away, you're not worth the effort Callafangers. Noise lol, noise is whatever you want it be huh.

More laziness from you, when desperate, back to ChatGPT. What a gift that not one but two members here with a reputation for scheming, lying, pilpul, and all-around highly-Jewish activity fall back to ChatGPT over and over again.

Here's the one and only time I'll respond directly to your ChatGPT nonsense:

This is a classic attempt to dismiss inconvenient data.

Here's a breakdown

1. The "Noise" is Actually the Most Relevant Evidence
The period from 1933 to 1945 is not an irrelevant distraction; it is the actual period in question. It's when the persecution, war, and genocide were happening. The information being published at that time reflects what people were thinking, reporting, and estimating as the events unfolded. To label the data from the most critical timeframe as "noise" is to essentially say, "Ignore the evidence from the time of the crime and only look at the data before and after." It's a completely backward approach to analysis. The spike in "five million" during the war isn't "diluting" a signal; it is the signal.

ChatGPT is correct: this is the period in which "people were thinking, reporting, and estimating as the events unfolded" -- this is exactly my point. It was not the time in which we'd expect a message intended to justify the state of Israel to be front-and-center in global news. There was simply too much happening "as the events unfolded". But at war's ending and immediately thereafter is precisely when one could claim Jews as 'missing' -- and that is when we see the '6 million' claims booming.

Does bombsaway believe five million Jews were already 'exterminated' in 1941-42 or earlier?

2. It Disproves the "Constant Pressure" Theory
If there were a "constant pressure" or a coordinated campaign to implant the "six million" number, it would have been at its most intense and consistent during the war itself, when the propaganda would have been most urgent. The data shows the opposite. The supposed "propagation effort" not only got "diluted," but it was overtaken by a different number. A propaganda campaign that fails and is replaced by a different message at the most crucial moment is not a very effective or well-orchestrated campaign. The much simpler explanation is that there was no singular "six million" campaign at the time; there was a desperate effort to report on a catastrophe with evolving, uncertain numbers.

"Constant Pressure Theory"? Whose thesis is this? This point continues on ChatGPT's same false premise from point 1. Nothing further to add.

3. It Offers a More Logical Explanation for the Numbers
Callafangers wants you to believe in a complex, multi-decade Zionist conspiracy to justify a "prophetic return." The "five million" spike supports a much simpler explanation (an application of Ockham's Razor):

The numbers used by commentators and Jewish groups during the war were based on demography, not prophecy. The pre-war Jewish population in the territories that would fall under Nazi control was estimated to be between 5 and 7 million.
As reports of mass murder emerged, people used the best numbers they had. "Five million" was clearly a very common and credible estimate for the number of Jews being affected or killed, as reflected in its dominant usage in books from that time.
The argument wasn't about a mystical number; it was about trying to grasp the scale of the destruction of the known European Jewish population.

Even today, many claim the estimate is "between 5 and 7 million". Thus, if this was the claim as far back as the 1940s, why on Earth do we see "six million" blowing up by orders of magnitude in the decades post-war? Not to mention the similar spike post-WW1. ChatGPT doesn't touch this in the latest point above, because it demonstrates an indisputable distinction in how "six million" versus "five", "seven", or whatever have evidently unfolded. The Occam's razor for why patterns of "six million" look so very different than "five million" and certainly "seven million" is that something beyond regular, honest reporting of 'millions' has occurred.

In short, Callafangers's claim is an attempt to hand-wave away the single most important piece of data that contradicts his theory. By framing the wartime peak of "five million" as "noise," he avoids confronting the obvious conclusion: there was no single, pre-ordained, mystical "six million" narrative being pushed during the war. Instead, there were various estimates, and "five million" was, for a critical period, the most prominent one.

In short, bombsaway has used more ChatGPT to hone-in on a very bad argument, based on the irrational claim that Hitler's reign in Germany would be the best time to promote a Zionist global narrative and agenda. bombsaway has no argument of his own to make, and this is the best his ChatGPT can do. Pathetic.