There is documentary and witness evidence they did exist. What is your evidence for their non-existence?
How come so-called revisionists cannot do that? Some have tried, but none of the suggested revisions are well enough evidenced for even so-called revisionists to support any one in particular.The historiography needs revision.
OPENING / FUNDAMENTAL STATEMENT OF FACT: It is alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, the bodies and burnt remains of hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of jews were buried in numerous “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II. However, despite all the deceptive allegations to the contrary, the truth is, the largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the one hundred graves / cremation pits that are fraudulently alleged to have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at these five sites, in which verified human remains have been uncovered / tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology, contained the remains of - ONLY FIVE PEOPLE.
...
CLOSING STATEMENT OF FACT: Using the information presented on this website and applying legal standards used in U.S. courts, this website's opening / fundamental statement of fact can be LEGALLY established as fact in a U.S. court.
NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE - PROVES - NO MASS GRAVES, WHICH - PROVES - ARCHAEOLOGICAL FRAUD
Additionally, and independent of any other reward offered on this website, a reward of - $5,000.00 - will be remitted to anyone who can refute the above closing statement of fact in a publicized debate against Greg Gerdes. Rules are essentially the same as those for the other challenges on this site. Contact Greg Gerdes for details.
https://thisisaboutscience.com/
That's right, revisionists are not writing history. As weak as revisionists believe orthodox history to be, they're unable to offer an alternative, if they're being honest with themselves. They're just theorists, hence the conspiracy theorist comparison.
were to guess why no t4 personnel were chosen to perform gassing that had experience with gassing, it would be because THERE WERE NONE.
You are failed revisionists, as you CANNOT even agree on a REVISED narrative! The AR camps were variously, transit, customs, train stops, hygiene stations and property sorting centres. The Kremas were delousing chambers, or could not have been used for delousing, showers, bomb shelters and corpse stores.Stubble wrote: ↑Tue Aug 19, 2025 3:56 pm I beg your pardon?
Revisionist documentarians have made great progress in the effort of refining our understanding of the event referred to as 'the holocaust'.
Revisionist authors have also made great strides in both uncovering and exposing the facts of the matter.
That you asked Mr Hill for an opinion, then attacked him for offering an opinion and have now said, this, is quite revealing.
were to guess why no t4 personnel were chosen to perform gassing that had experience with gassing, it would be because THERE WERE NONE.
By writing history I mean, saying what has happened. They have offered theories or speculations, which puts them in the conspiracy theorist camp.
You are shifting your embarrassing little analogy away from "you don't offer any evidence" to "you haven't re-written the history of the Soviet Union yet!" while throwing around Reddit tier armchair psychology. I'm waiting for you to tell me how disappointed you are and cut my allowance. Pathetic.HansHill wrote: ↑Mon Aug 18, 2025 6:32 pmFair enough it's a negative assertion, in the sense that in a debate (which we are, due to being in the debate forum) there is an affirmative position, and a negative position. So yes I'm in the negative position and you are in the affirmative, but that's not what you originally were arguing.
Then when i listed a small handful of examples of positive evidence it's now "a negative assertion". If you misspoke fine, but HR do promote positive evidence.
No different than the orthodoxy Bombsaway...
were to guess why no t4 personnel were chosen to perform gassing that had experience with gassing, it would be because THERE WERE NONE.
You have dodged my point, because you cannot refute it. You are not revisionists. Like flat earthers, you have a theory, or should I say theories, none of which you can prove, even to yourselves!
It is a theory, like so-called revisionism, that cannot evidence its core claim and there is a stack of evidence to prove it is wrong.
The best you can offer is, as I said, a giant question mark. If the supposition is those Jews were sent east and maintained there by the Nazis, that supposition is contradicted by the circumstantial evidence that we have, which is that the Jews there were mass killed.
How about you steelman the Revisionist position in that these Jews were not gassed en masse and buried / cremated in the locations asserted?
For fucks sake, do you have any idea the sheer volume of documents I'm currently wrestling with? How difficult this is with my 'cursory' German? The amount of digital tools I am using to transcribe from microfilm reels into text, to verify fidelity to original and then to translate into English and verify verbatim translation?
were to guess why no t4 personnel were chosen to perform gassing that had experience with gassing, it would be because THERE WERE NONE.
I could do it easily it's just a question of time. The gist of it is the orthodox narrative, in all of its varied forms, is impossible and/or deeply implausible, based on scientific principles, the forensic evidence available, and the muddled witness statements. Beyond this, there is a direct analogy made between asserting a historical event and prosecuting a crime, and since orthodoxy has failed to live up the rigor of such prosecution, the event cannot be reasonably asserted.
