Holocaust Revisionism vs. Flat-Earth Theory

[ConfusedJew]

.
HolyH believers are actually the ones most comparable to religious flat-earthers

There is a well-known observation encapsulated in the phrase "every accusation is an admission" which applies here.

Confused jew is accusing those who have questioned, considered, investigated, read, researched, checked and double-checked of being as ill-informed and as impervious to reason as a ‘flat-earther’.

Is this true? Is every accusation an admission?

Did I ever accuse anyone here of being ill informed or being impervious to reason? I disagreed with the reasoning here but I don't think I ever did either of those things. But even if I did, would that have been a confession on my part? You are accusing me of things, are you just confessing to what you are alleging?

[bombsaway]

re Sobibor "Coup de grace", yawn
Kues is just plain wrong (7 years later!), study was published in 2001 and it's a similar story to Belzec

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/holocau ... t1071.html

I think you are not posting in good faith BA.



MGK are clearly aware of this research report from Kola and have referenced it themselves as shown above. Likewise the translation you sent to me appears to be blogger-commissioned translation. I won't attack the veracity of the translation or call it amateur, I'm sure it's just fine but... that is kind of the point that MGK are making, isn't it Bombsaway?

Why is this not good faith?

You referenced Kues saying in 2008: Despite seven years having passed since the drills and diggings were reportedly made, not a single article, paper or scientific report has appeared on them, neither in English, Polish, nor in any other language."

And you said:

"No articles, papers or scientific reports have been published because A. Kola and his team had nothing to report that would benefit the claim that Sobibor was an extermination camp."

If you and Kues are confused, it's not up to me to stay on track of that. The study was clearly published, and whadya know a scan of the original is in the link I sent you.

Nevertheless all this is a diversion from the point that I'm making which is the similarity of revisionists and flat earthers in terms of asserting historical realities with no positive evidence. In both cases, the mainstream story is deemed impossible, therefore, in process of elimination fashion, these events must have occurred. For flat earthers, this is a mass cover up of flat earth by scientific and governmental institutions, for revisionists this is mass resettlement / coverup / plus conspiracy to fabricate evidence (witnesses and documents and archeological studies).

You actually diverted here https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=14346#p14346

It makes sense to divert, because your own evidentiary case is so bad. Just like the flat earthers, you can only critique. But for your own good you should reckon with the singular nature of your positive claims - every other established mass event in recent history is backed by a large amount of direct evidence, even minor events are substantiated, you have nothing.

[Wahrheitssucher]

HolyH believers are actually the ones most comparable to religious flat-earthers

There is a well-known observation encapsulated in the phrase "every accusation is an admission" which applies here.

Confused jew is accusing those who have questioned, considered, investigated, read, researched, checked and double-checked of being as ill-informed and as impervious to reason as a ‘flat-earther’.

Did I ever accuse anyone here of being ill informed or being impervious to reason?

Yes you did. Repeatedly.
Likening revisionists to flat-earthers is obviously suggesting that.
Are you now in denial about even this?

One of your great weaknesses is that your replies are not actually ‘yours’. That is because you appear to just cut and paste from an Ai-answer most of the time. Consequently you don’t recall what you have posted.
This would also explain why others have noted that your posts make statements diametrically contradicting each other, on occasion.

Here’s where you pasted from Ai alleging holocaust revisionists aren’t really revising nor do they apply logical reasoning:

…In short, pseudo-revisionists violate every principle of critical historical methodology: proper source evaluation, context, cross-checking, logical reasoning, and impartiality.

Do you concede?

I suggest to you that the main flaw in your attitude to discussion on the jewish WW2 narrative is that you are unable to understand what revisionists are actually arguing.
You don’t study but instead rely on strawman misrepresentation. And also ludicrously false accusations.
E.g. Like this:

Ways in which Holocaust denial is similar to Flat Earth Theorizing:
1. Both involve dismissing overwhelming evidence and expert consensus. Holocaust deniers ignore extensive historical documentation, eyewitness testimony, and physical evidence. Flat-Earth believers reject centuries of astronomical observation, satellite imagery, and physics.

That is an example of an “accusation that is a confession”.
You yourself (and holocaust promoters generally) are the ones who do that.
Its you guys who have to “dismiss overwhelming evidence” to maintain your belief.
You (and they) routinely “ignore extensive historical documentation, eyewitness testimony, and physical evidence” if and when it refutes your cherished belief system.
I’m not aware of ANY serious revisionists doing that. On the contrary.

[HansHill]

re Sobibor "Coup de grace", yawn
Kues is just plain wrong (7 years later!), study was published in 2001 and it's a similar story to Belzec

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/holocau ... t1071.html

I think you are not posting in good faith BA.



MGK are clearly aware of this research report from Kola and have referenced it themselves as shown above. Likewise the translation you sent to me appears to be blogger-commissioned translation. I won't attack the veracity of the translation or call it amateur, I'm sure it's just fine but... that is kind of the point that MGK are making, isn't it Bombsaway?

Why is this not good faith?

You referenced Kues saying in 2008: Despite seven years having passed since the drills and diggings were reportedly made, not a single article, paper or scientific report has appeared on them, neither in English, Polish, nor in any other language."

And you said:

"No articles, papers or scientific reports have been published because A. Kola and his team had nothing to report that would benefit the claim that Sobibor was an extermination camp."

If you and Kues are confused, it's not up to me to stay on track of that. The study was clearly published, and whadya know a scan of the original is in the link I sent you.

Nevertheless all this is a diversion from the point that I'm making which is the similarity of revisionists and flat earthers in terms of asserting historical realities with no positive evidence. In both cases, the mainstream story is deemed impossible, therefore, in process of elimination fashion, these events must have occurred. For flat earthers, this is a mass cover up of flat earth by scientific and governmental institutions, for revisionists this is mass resettlement / coverup / plus conspiracy to fabricate evidence (witnesses and documents and archeological studies).

You actually diverted here https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=14346#p14346

It makes sense to divert, because your own evidentiary case is so bad. Just like the flat earthers, you can only critique. But for your own good you should reckon with the singular nature of your positive claims - every other established mass event in recent history is backed by a large amount of direct evidence, even minor events are substantiated, you have nothing.

1) I think you're not arguing in good faith because you are not addressing the substance of the point being made. I'm not going to sit here and mock the good people of "Past and Memory" because I'm sure they are very nice and do good work but... really? Is there a DOI code for this paper that I can use to index and scrape with all my other papers? Has this just not hit Western audiences aside from *checks notes* a blog translation?

Additionally just look at the snippets you pulled from the blog - i tallied them all, including the ones you omitted: Of the 7 "mass graves", the descriptions run to 700 words including headers. That averages out to 100 words per "mass grave", again including headers. Are you serious Bombsaway? This is to be taken as your paper on the remains of 250,000 people?

If it were anybody else I would probably just move on and chalk this down to semantics over what a "published paper" means but because its you, and this thread is all about Holocaust Revisionism VS Flat Earth, i think it's delicious that you are passing this blog post off as your winning argument.

2) Technically yes off topic, but as explained in my paragraph immediately above, I think Callafangers will allow this to remain.

3) "Single nature of your positive claims"

Get over yourself, you know the nature of our positive claims:

- You don't have the bodies
- You don't have the murder weapon(s)
- Your witnesses are contradictory and not credible

[bombsaway]

3) "Single nature of your positive claims"

Sticking to the thread topic, what's a comparable event to *mass resettlement* that has been accepted in history? Select one and then we can compare the evidence to what you have for the thing you believe in. I will show you that it is closer to flat earth theory than accepted history.

[ConfusedJew]

Did I ever accuse anyone here of being ill informed or being impervious to reason?

Yes you did. Repeatedly.
Likening revisionists to flat-earthers is obviously suggesting that.
Are you now in denial about even this?

One of your great weaknesses is that your replies are not actually ‘yours’. That is because you appear to just cut and paste from an Ai-answer most of the time. Consequently you don’t recall what you have posted.
This would also explain why others have noted that your posts make statements diametrically contradicting each other, on occasion.

[/quote]

Having flawed logical reasoning is not the same thing as being impervious to reason. I will say the logic here is much better than I expected but there is so much motivated reasoning that I think the weights being put on certain decisions are very unreasonable.

That one statement that you highlighted was from AI and it wasn't as strong as you suggested but I also wouldn't say that lack of logical reasoning is my biggest disagreement here. Except for the missing 6 million Jews based on the census. I have never seen anything remotely reasonable that counters that very powerful fact. That is totally beyond reason to me. And the total disregard for the thousands of eyewitness reports.

[Callafangers]

Sticking to the thread topic, what's a comparable event to *mass resettlement* that has been accepted in history? Select one and then we can compare the evidence to what you have for the thing you believe in. I will show you that it is closer to flat earth theory than accepted history.

If we are playing this game, bombsaway, then we will have to make a version for yourself as well:

• What other events in history have had so little cross-examination and accountability for so much indisputable lying?
• What other investigations and narratives have so little regard for conflicts of interest, source criticism, and chains of custody?
• How much physical evidence is typically required to convict a single murder (e.g. in a police investigation) and, scaling this to the numbers alleged for the 'Holocaust', what percentage is actually evidenced versus what should be expected?
• Perhaps above all for the current thread's topic: how much has science been shown to support the 'Holocaust' narrative versus to refute it?

Your position is eyeballs-deep in 'flat earth-style' arguments and narrative -- revisionists are clearing the waters.

[bombsaway]

Sticking to the thread topic, what's a comparable event to *mass resettlement* that has been accepted in history? Select one and then we can compare the evidence to what you have for the thing you believe in. I will show you that it is closer to flat earth theory than accepted history.

If we are playing this game, bombsaway, then we will have to make a version for yourself as well:

• What other events in history have had so little cross-examination and accountability for so much indisputable lying?
• What other investigations and narratives have so little regard for conflicts of interest, source criticism, and chains of custody?
• How much physical evidence is typically required to convict a single murder (e.g. in a police investigation) and, scaling this to the numbers alleged for the 'Holocaust', what percentage is actually evidenced versus what should be expected?
• Perhaps above all for the current thread's topic: how much has science been shown to support the 'Holocaust' narrative versus to refute it?

Your position is eyeballs-deep in 'flat earth-style' arguments and narrative -- revisionists are clearing the waters.

I don't know, by these standards other accepted events like mass killing of civilians by communist regimes, Japan genocide against China, Amerenian genocide, should be thrown out.

Nice diversion

[Callafangers]

If we are playing this game, bombsaway, then we will have to make a version for yourself as well:

• What other events in history have had so little cross-examination and accountability for so much indisputable lying?
• What other investigations and narratives have so little regard for conflicts of interest, source criticism, and chains of custody?
• How much physical evidence is typically required to convict a single murder (e.g. in a police investigation) and, scaling this to the numbers alleged for the 'Holocaust', what percentage is actually evidenced versus what should be expected?
• Perhaps above all for the current thread's topic: how much has science been shown to support the 'Holocaust' narrative versus to refute it?

Your position is eyeballs-deep in 'flat earth-style' arguments and narrative -- revisionists are clearing the waters.

I don't know, by these standards other accepted events like mass killing of civilians by communist regimes, Japan genocide against China, Amerenian genocide, should be thrown out.

Nice diversion

There is no diversion, bombsaway -- and I will note that you did not actually answer my questions. Nonetheless I will answer yours more directly. You said:

what's a comparable event to *mass resettlement* that has been accepted in history?

The answer is: there are many examples in history of mass population resettlement however none so unique as that of Jews under a [well-documented] Final Solution policy that became interrupted by war led by mendacious propaganda and which ended under an extraordinary 'Iron Curtain' construct, immediately followed by the creation of a Jewish state and the largest diaspora the world has ever seen, all while the same mendacious propaganda[ists] that caused the war continued to advance itself thereafter.

Make sense? If you feel there is any event in history with circumstances remotely comparable to these, I would really love to learn more about it. Please feel free to copy-paste ChatGPT in your effort here, just this once.

The reason I have taken time out of my busy day to write you such a lengthy response above is because I am hopeful you will do the same for the questions I have provided you. Would you be so kind as to respond?

[bombsaway]

If we are playing this game, bombsaway, then we will have to make a version for yourself as well:

• What other events in history have had so little cross-examination and accountability for so much indisputable lying?
• What other investigations and narratives have so little regard for conflicts of interest, source criticism, and chains of custody?
• How much physical evidence is typically required to convict a single murder (e.g. in a police investigation) and, scaling this to the numbers alleged for the 'Holocaust', what percentage is actually evidenced versus what should be expected?
• Perhaps above all for the current thread's topic: how much has science been shown to support the 'Holocaust' narrative versus to refute it?

Your position is eyeballs-deep in 'flat earth-style' arguments and narrative -- revisionists are clearing the waters.

I don't know, by these standards other accepted events like mass killing of civilians by communist regimes, Japan genocide against China, Amerenian genocide, should be thrown out.

Nice diversion

There is no diversion, bombsaway -- and I will note that you did not actually answer my questions. Nonetheless I will answer yours more directly. You said:

what's a comparable event to *mass resettlement* that has been accepted in history?

The answer is: there are many examples in history of mass population resettlement however none so unique as that of Jews under a [well-documented] Final Solution policy that became interrupted by war led by mendacious propaganda and which ended under an extraordinary 'Iron Curtain' construct, immediately followed by the creation of a Jewish state and the largest diaspora the world has ever seen, all while the same mendacious propaganda[ists] that caused the war continued to advance itself thereafter.

Make sense? If you feel there is any event in history with circumstances remotely comparable to these, I would really love to learn more about it. Please feel free to copy-paste ChatGPT in your effort here, just this once.

The reason I have taken time out of my busy day to write you such a lengthy response above is because I am hopeful you will do the same for the questions I have provided you. Would you be so kind as to respond?

Start a new thread and I'll go one question at a time. Call it Flat Earth Theory vs Holocaust belief, but check it out, that's not the thread topic.

[Nessie]

...

The answer is: there are many examples in history of mass population resettlement however none so unique as that of Jews under a [well-documented] Final Solution policy that became interrupted by war led by mendacious propaganda and which ended under an extraordinary 'Iron Curtain' construct, immediately followed by the creation of a Jewish state and the largest diaspora the world has ever seen, all while the same mendacious propaganda[ists] that caused the war continued to advance itself thereafter.

...

Jewish mass resettlement by the Nazis, during WWII is indeed unique, in that it has no evidence and there is plenty of evidence, mainly from Nazi sources, that contradicts it happened. Instead, mass killings are evidenced, which explains that lack of evidence of mass resettlement.

[Nessie]

...

• What other events in history have had so little cross-examination and accountability for so much indisputable lying?

Your claim of mass lying, such that you dismiss 100% of those who worked inside the AR camps, Chelmno and A-B Kremas as liars and you cannot find a single eyewitness who you believe, is disputed. You have not proved mass lying. The witnesses have been subject to scrutiny and many were cross-examined in court, it is a fiction by you to suggest otherwise.

[*] What other investigations and narratives have so little regard for conflicts of interest, source criticism, and chains of custody?

Your assertion that the Holocaust has not been investigated, checked and verified to the same standard as other historical events, is untrue. Much of the evidence comes from Nazi sources, so where is the conflict of interests there? Initially, the claims of mass murder, were treated with scepticism, such as flat out disbelief by British intelligence in 1942-3. As for chains of custody, that is used as an excuse to dismiss so many documents that the revisionists just do not want to accept.

[*] How much physical evidence is typically required to convict a single murder (e.g. in a police investigation) and, scaling this to the numbers alleged for the 'Holocaust', what percentage is actually evidenced versus what should be expected?

When there is evidence of a massive cover-up and destruction of evidence, then of course, less evidence will be found. Nazi conduct, when they knew they were accused of mass murder, destroying evidence, is, in itself, evidence of criminality. If TII was not a death camp, then why not leave the buried corpses to be exhumed, counted and cause of death established? If the Kremas were never used for gassings, why not leave them intact, when the rest of A-B was left intact? If millions had been accommodated in camps and ghettos in 1944, why not preserve the documentation that would have generated?

[*] Perhaps above all for the current thread's topic: how much has science been shown to support the 'Holocaust' narrative versus to refute it?[/list]

So-called revisionist use of science, is to argue that because they cannot work out how gassings etc were possible, using the evidence we have, therefore it did not happen.

Your position is eyeballs-deep in 'flat earth-style' arguments and narrative -- revisionists are clearing the waters.

No, you have fooled yourself into believing something so impossible, that it is akin to fooling yourself into believing the earth is flat.

[Wahrheitssucher]

CJ wrote: Did I ever accuse anyone here of being ill informed or being impervious to reason?

Yes you did. Repeatedly.
1. Likening revisionists to flat-earthers is obviously suggesting that.
Question: Are you now in denial about even this?

2. One of your great weaknesses is that your replies are not actually ‘yours’. That is because you appear to just cut and paste from an Ai-answer most of the time. Consequently you don’t recall what you have posted.
This would also explain why others have noted that your posts make statements diametrically contradicting each other, on occasion.

Having flawed logical reasoning is not the same thing as being impervious to reason.

I agree.
But for the purposes of this conversation (on who is most like a flat-earther) I would argue it is, if:
i.) you won’t study critique of your own reasoning, with openness and some humility,
ii.) won’t discuss your reasoning honestly and fairly.
Both of which I believe apply to you and your involvement here at CODOH.
Which is why I tried to explain that your flat-earther accusation is actually a confession.

I will say the logic here is much better than I expected but there is so much motivated reasoning that I think the weights being put on certain decisions are very unreasonable.

What “certain decisions”? Please explain.

That one statement that you highlighted was from AI

Yes. I know. I just pointed out that’s a great flaw and weakness of yours. Did you not comprehend even that?

…I wouldn't say that lack of logical reasoning is my biggest disagreement here.

We aren’t discussing here size of areas of disagreement. I am suggesting that you creating THIS topic thread on flat-earthers shows that whatever area of disagreement we discuss YOU THINK revisionists are as impervious to reason as a flat-earther.
That you can’t comprehend and concede this simple point I suggest shows you are in denial again.

Except for the missing 6 million Jews based on the census. I have never seen anything remotely reasonable that counters that very powerful fact.

Hmmmm! It isn’t “six million MISSING jews”, CJ. That is NOT what your legally-protected, sacrosanct holocaust narrative alleges. Try to understand from this that you do not even understand in detail what the narrative is, let alone what the points of debate and disagreement are.
I suggest to you that as a jewish person you have been indoctrinated into a deeply flawed ‘history’ and consequently have a strong emotional attachment to it in an imprecise, vague way. This explains why you are impervious to reason concerning the actual points of debate about it.

That is totally beyond reason to me.

Yeah! So you think we are beyond reasoning, but also you don’t think we are. Got it.

And the total disregard for the thousands of eyewitness reports.

No, we do NOT disregard them. On the contrary! THEY are the most powerful proof that this allegation —of an attempted genocide of ALL jews in Axis-occupied Europe, principally via mass-gassing — does not withstand close scrutiny!

Do you want me to elucidate?

Or are you — like a flat-earther — impervious to reason?

[Callafangers]

...

• What other events in history have had so little cross-examination and accountability for so much indisputable lying?

Your claim of mass lying, such that you dismiss 100% of those who worked inside the AR camps, Chelmno and A-B Kremas as liars and you cannot find a single eyewitness who you believe, is disputed. You have not proved mass lying. The witnesses have been subject to scrutiny and many were cross-examined in court, it is a fiction by you to suggest otherwise.

Given there is documentation showing AR camps had benign roles (see here: https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=26) and that there are only relatively trace amounts of corpse ash underground, and given our 'missing Jews' are most certainly not where you said they are, it logically follows that the well-documented, official policy of mass resettlement persisted.

Witnesses appear because some feared the worst for their families (Germans), and others sought to continue the war effort to ensure the German idea of freedom from Jewish tyranny could not persist (post-war 'denazification'). The pattern of false, mendacious testimony as a non-Holocaust aligns neatly with these proven circumstances.

[*] What other investigations and narratives have so little regard for conflicts of interest, source criticism, and chains of custody?

Your assertion that the Holocaust has not been investigated, checked and verified to the same standard as other historical events, is untrue. Much of the evidence comes from Nazi sources, so where is the conflict of interests there? Initially, the claims of mass murder, were treated with scepticism, such as flat out disbelief by British intelligence in 1942-3. As for chains of custody, that is used as an excuse to dismiss so many documents that the revisionists just do not want to accept.

The conflicts of interest are obvious, Nessie. If you have my family tied up in your garage, I will say or do whatever you ask of me.

[*] How much physical evidence is typically required to convict a single murder (e.g. in a police investigation) and, scaling this to the numbers alleged for the 'Holocaust', what percentage is actually evidenced versus what should be expected?

When there is evidence of a massive cover-up and destruction of evidence, then of course, less evidence will be found. Nazi conduct, when they knew they were accused of mass murder, destroying evidence, is, in itself, evidence of criminality. If TII was not a death camp, then why not leave the buried corpses to be exhumed, counted and cause of death established? If the Kremas were never used for gassings, why not leave them intact, when the rest of A-B was left intact? If millions had been accommodated in camps and ghettos in 1944, why not preserve the documentation that would have generated?

When there is evidence of group motives and a pattern of deception, then the group's testimony cannot be trusted at face value -- no matter how large the group (and especially with the kind of enmity that war entails). Such testimony being 'corroborated' by people at gunpoint means a zero, zilch, nada.

[*] Perhaps above all for the current thread's topic: how much has science been shown to support the 'Holocaust' narrative versus to refute it?[/list]

So-called revisionist use of science, is to argue that because they cannot work out how gassings etc were possible, using the evidence we have, therefore it did not happen.

Nessie: can you work out how they were scientifically possible? You have failed every attempt thus far. So has Richard Green. So has Jan Markiewicz.

Your position is eyeballs-deep in 'flat earth-style' arguments and narrative -- revisionists are clearing the waters.

No, you have fooled yourself into believing something so impossible, that it is akin to fooling yourself into believing the earth is flat.

Yet here you are, the fool.

[HansHill]

Sticking to the thread topic, what's a comparable event to *mass resettlement* that has been accepted in history? Select one and then we can compare the evidence to what you have for the thing you believe in. I will show you that it is closer to flat earth theory than accepted history.

You seem to be in this game longer than I am, i used to lurk the old board and saw you posting there. So why don't we skip one entire round of exchanges and you just tell me what positions within Holocaust Revisionism (HR) equate to Flat Earth (FE) and why, since after all i) you are the one asserting it and ii) this is what you are so eager to tell me anyway?

I'll be eagerly reading between website blackouts.