Holocaust Revisionism vs. Flat-Earth Theory

[HansHill]

Uh oh!

The available data from the last decades of the nineteenth century depict
Western European Jewry in already a quite advanced stage of demographic transition. Livi
Bacci (1986) cited and analyzed fragmentary data on early Jewish fertility patterns, and his
findings for eighteenth-century Italian towns such as Florence, Pitigliano, and Leghorn
indicate that already at this time Jews in these towns had relatively low fertility

My analysis of Jewish fertility in Bohemia points toward the same direction as the
evidence from Italy: Jewish crude birth rates (CBR) were lower than those of the total
population already by the end of the eighteenth century

The Estimated CBR in the late eighteenth century was lower than the CBR of the total
population by about one fifth. This relative difference stayed about the same until the mid-
nineteenth century. At the same time both Jewish and total populations' CBR were decreasing

The gradual decline in the CBR accelerated from 1880, dropping from 27 per thousand
to 13 per thousand in 1910. The onset of this accelerated decline began with women born
in the 1840s, 1850s, and 1860s. The oldest of these three generations already had a non-
universal marriage pattern and entered marriage later than their peers in the total
population (Chapter 5). It can be expected that the low fertility of these generations was
already due to all three factors of a later start, longer intervals, and an earlier stop to
childbearing.

Forerunners of the Fertility Transition: Jews in Bohemia
from the Enlightenment until the Interwar Times - Jana Vobecká

https://paa2013.populationassociation.org/papers/132328

[HansHill]

Current state of debate for those in the cheap seats:

Prologue 1: Archie has already explained all of this with two links to prior posts back in May so yes this is all redundant.
Prologue 2: Hans Hill (me) has asked Confused Jew to support his claim that the census data shows clearly a 6 million drop, by asking for a before and after set of census records, showing the names of those gassed / shot / soaped in their respective cities.

Claim By Confused Jew: Global Jewry had a uniform and consistent fertility rate of 1.7% (considered remarkably high) year on year between 1881 - 1939 (58 years!) to even accommodate a 6 million drop in population

Rebuttal by Hans Hill: Western Jews had a relatively low fertility rate as is well documented and supported by the literature. Additionally, we are told that Eastern Jews were being exterminated, pogrommed, holocausted and famined during this period.

Expectation of Confused Jew:

1) Support his claim that the census records show who clearly was murdered in each location - I originally set him 1 day to do this, but we are in day 2 already
2) Explain how Eastern Jewry (for example POS Jews) can hit not only a 1.7% population growth year on year for over half a century, but to exceed this rate wildly to accommodate their Western counterparts' lack of contribution to this pop growth, all while surviving famines, holocausts, exterminations and pogroms.

And remember! We are the flat earthers here

[ConfusedJew]

You picked a study in a single region showing that the Jewish fertility rate in Bohemian was lower than the general population in Bohemia and are trying to show that that Jewish fertility in Europe was very low?

A sixth grader could tell you why that is dumb. If you don't see why that is wrong on so many levels, you are worse than a flat earther.

Also nowhere did I say that the Jewish fertility rate across the entirety of Europe was uniform.

[ConfusedJew]

I'll answer anyway but that was really dumb.

Jewish fertility was not uniform across time or regions. In Western and Central Europe Jewish fertility declined early (classic demographic transition).

Overall, Jewish communities entered modernity with earlier declines in mortality and fertility, at different speeds by country and level of urbanization—again, the opposite of a uniform rate.

In Eastern Europe the natural increase was high in the late 19th century, although mass migration where more than 2 million Jews left Eastern Europe for the US offset rapid growth in addition to shocks from WWI, the 1918–19 influenza pandemic, civil war, and interwar crises all disrupted fertility and mortality.

The best-in-field estimates (DellaPergola and others) put world Jewry at ~16.6 million in 1939, with ~9.5 million in Europe; by 1945, the global Jewish population was ~11 million—a loss on the order of six million in Europe due to the Holocaust. These figures are consistent across independent lines of evidence and are not derived from a simplistic fertility assumption.

Don't you think a single independent demographer would have figured it out if 6 million Jews weren't killed during WW2?

Like how a single physicist or even scientist has come out and said that the earth is flat?

[HansHill]

Also nowhere did I say that the Jewish fertility rate across the entirety of Europe was uniform.

Correct, you didn't. Finally something we agree on. You're right, you didn't say what the fertility rate was.

You simply worked backwards from 6 million, and said what you needed it to be, to arrive at that. In argumentation, what's that called?

[ConfusedJew]

No, I didn't do that. Demography is probably one of the most studied aspects of Jewish history.

"Fertility was typically high and unchecked among Jewish women in Eastern Europe who had children in the second half of the 19th century, meaning that a woman with one or five children had an equal probability of having one further child. Fertility control began among Jewish women in Central Europe shortly after the mid of the century, and emerged in Eastern Europe at least one generation later, by stopping higher parities and distancing more between births. The next stage was a clear partition of the Jewish population across Europe between a larger segment with declining birth rates and a smaller one with persisting high fertility. This also characterized Israel’s population well into the 20th century. Finally, much lower, down to extremely low, fertility prevailed, but a bi-modal profile could still be observed toward the end of the 20th century. Bimodality implies a diffused decline in the propensity to add a child once one, two, or three are already born. On the other hand, women with relatively larger families—around six births in the past, and later around four—apparently made no or lesser efforts to prevent a further birth.

https://www.mdpi.com/2313-5778/8/1/2

In Galicia the Jewish birth rate at the end of the 19th century stood at the extraordinary figure of 40.4; in 1931-35 (when Galicia was part of Poland), the Jewish birth rate in Poland was 19.3. In Bulgaria, the Jewish birth rate dropped from 30.8 in 1909-12 to 6.9 in 1933-36; in Lithuania, it fell from 16.5 in 1925-7 to the extraordinarily low figure of 12 in 1931-5; and so on. Subcarpathian Ruthenia itself, whose Jewish population was among the most prolific in Europe, saw its high birth rate begin to decline in the last years before the war: it fell from 35.2 in 1930 to 30.7 in 1933.

https://www.commentary.org/articles/l-h ... opulation/

The demographic developments just outlined were not synchronic and were mainly noted in Eastern Europe (Stampfer 1989, 1997). Yearly growth rates of over 2% were typical of Jews in Eastern Europe during the last quarter of the 19th century, higher than Europe’s faster growing general populations such as England, Poland and Russia between the 1880s and 1910 (McEvedy and Jones 1978). The demographic evolution of East Europe’s Jewish communities is better illustrated by the fact that whilst around 1650 they possibly numbered between 250,000 and 350,000 people (following Weinryb 1972), by 1900, their total size could be projected at 8.5 million—also considering the families of Eastern European Jewish emigrants to western countries. These estimates are consistent with Jewish vital statistics of Jewish deaths and births and translated into estimates of life expectancy and fertility rates for various countries in the 18th and 19th centuries (Ruppin 1913; DellaPergola 1983; Schmelz and DellaPergola 2006a). The very rapid Jewish population growth in Eastern Europe, namely in the Pale of Settlement (Rowland 1986) during the 19th and early 20th century does not need alternative explanations, such as large-scale immigration or conversions to Judaism—which surely did not occur during the modern era.

https://www.jewishdatabank.org/api/down ... udyId=1249

You clearly don't know anything about demographics so I suggest you take the time to actually think about what it is you are denying so you don't say ridiculous things.

[Archie]

ConfusedJew has been given a two week suspension for spamming the forum with AI. And for being an all around bad poster.

[Callafangers]

ConfusedJew has been given a two week suspension for spamming the forum with AI. And for being an all around bad poster.

limits.jpg (111.02 KiB) Viewed 71 times

[Nessie]

You preach about training and yet it seems to do you (and anyone else) no favors. Gee, I wonder what extreme religious leaders would say about why it is you don't follow or lead in their cult... I'm willing to bet they'll point out your "lack of training".

The fact of the Holocaust industry and ideologues censoring and silencing their opposition slams in the face of your claim to its intellectual or academic rigor or authority. It's really that simple, open and shut. Good luck explaining the 'pristine authority' of your thought leaders while acknowledging this embarrassing fact alone.

If some at your work, arrives with no training and then tells you that you are all doing it wrong and they know right, what is your attitude towards them? You would in effect, shut them down. If some at your work, who has the training, but then decides that the training is all wrong and you were now mistaken, what would you do? You would in effect shut them down.

Whether it is you, or Germar Rudolf, unless you can prove that the normal method of gathering evidence to establish a chronology of events, is wrong and that your method of doubting the evidence and failing to prove what did happen, is right, then you will both be in effect, shut down.

Nessie, you didn't really respond to one of my points above, highlighted in green for easier reading. Please try again.

Is this embarrassing, discrediting condition of 'Holocaust' scholarship/academia allowable because it 'protects the memory of victims'?

I have answered your point, highlighted in green. The reason why people who deny parts of the Holocaust took place, is because they are using a research methodology that is clearly wrong, whilst they assert that the existing methodology is flawed. Obviously, the existing methodology is going to hit back and clamp down on the flawed methodology.

When a so-called revisionist, fails to revise history, they are not a genuine revisionist, and for them to announce it is those who can evidence what happened as failures, causes them to be silenced and censored. That failure to revise applies to David Irving, Rudolf Germar, Carlos Mattogno, and everyone here. None can produce an evidenced chronology of what actually happened during WWII, to Jews arrested by the Nazis.

Some, as Archie has recently done, try and get round that by just hand waving away the need to establish what happened, and that the Jews just went where they went. Others, try a bit harder, and claim that the Jews somehow ended up in the east and just melting away when the war ended, but their evidencing is so poor, that none can produce any detail at all.

When asked to evidence what happened inside the AR camps, Chelmno and A-B Kremas, so-called revisionists fall apart and cannot even agree amongst themselves. None of the various claims are well enough evidenced to be convincing to form a consensus. To historians, who are using the existing research methodology, that is a fail, one so bad, it renders so-called revisionism as a waste of time and space, not worth engaging with and those who believe it is correct, as worthy of ostracisation.

I predict you will hand wave away my answer, because you cannot dispute it.

[Nessie]

....
Jews were using the six million number before the war was even over. It is a demonstrably false number.

That was often in relation to fear of threat from the Soviets, not the Nazis, and you are ignoring that 4 and 5 million were also used before the war. For example;

https://www.google.com/search?q=%225%2C ... -wiz-books

The origin of 6 million as the WWII death toll, was Wilhelm Hoettl, in 1945;

https://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/docum ... ?mode=text

"Approximately four million Jews had been killed in the various extermination camps while an additional two million met death in other ways, the major part of which were shot by operational squads of the Security Police during the campaign against Russia."

Read the link, idiot.
viewtopic.php?p=11432&#p11432

And lol at you defending Hoettl as legitimate source.

When fears were being expressed, for the safety and security of 4, 5 and 6 million Jews, before WWII, initially from the Soviets and then the Nazis, and then by the end of the war, Jewish and Nazi sources were stating 6 million had been murdered, which has subsequently been evidenced to be within the death toll range, that is not evidence of an organised hoax.

What it evidences, is so-called revisionist desires to find patterns, that can make them believe there was an organised hoax. It is evidence that helps to prove that so-called revisionists are conspiracists, who will cherry-pick evidence, to support their desired belief.

[Nessie]

In is indisputable that the number was used prematurely. They were saying six million in 1944 and they are still saying it in 2025. This strongly suggests the origin of the number is based on legend rather than any rigorous accounting. The accounting is post hoc.

"Also just because a number was thrown out there during the war doesn't make it necessarily wrong."

Yeah, it does. Sure, there is some microscopic probability that Zionist activists "guessed" the correct number in their propaganda, but Occam's razor says the number is simply a legend. You are not being objective if you say the premature usage is meaningless.

Early claims that six million Jews had been killed
viewtopic.php?p=11432&#p11432

On the unreliability of the census figures see here (where I quote from Jewish sources admitting the opposite)
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=8332&#p8332
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=8281&#p8281

...

Gerald Reitlinger (1953) was one of the first major Holocaust historians. He himself estimated between 4.2 and 5.7 million Jews killed — which is why deniers love quoting him. But they ignore that even Reitlinger said millions were murdered and that “the total number of Jewish victims was at least 4 million and may well have been 6 million.”

There is no anchoring....

Exactly, so-called revisionists are cherry-picking pre and post-war references to 6 million, and they ignore when other figures were used.

[Nessie]

Examples of why so-called revisionism is like flat earth theory, in that it is clearly wrong;

1 - use of a US almanac, to claim that the Jewish population of Europe hardly changed during WWII.
2 - claiming pre-war fears about 6 million Jews at risk of Soviet repression, is evidence that a hoax was being prepared against the Nazis.
3 - belief that the wooden door that presently leads into the gas chambers at Krema I, was the door used in 1942.
4 - belief that a wooden door cannot be made gas tight.
5 - belief that the IRC camp death toll figure of 274k, covers the entirety of Jewish deaths during WWII.
6 - claiming Jews just went where they went, as if that is an acceptable revision to the Holocaust.
7 - suggestion that it was the Soviets who were responsible for the hoax, when they had hardly any interest in the Holocaust at all and it was primarily publicised by the Polish.
8 - claims that Churchill did not mention the Holocaust, when he did.
9 - wholesale bare faced lying that there is no evidence for the Holocaust.
10 - puzzlement at why the Holocaust cannot be proved with just one piece of evidence.

[HansHill]

ConfusedJew has been given a two week suspension for spamming the forum with AI. And for being an all around bad poster.

Dang, and he was just about to prove the Holocaust

[Archie]

That was often in relation to fear of threat from the Soviets, not the Nazis, and you are ignoring that 4 and 5 million were also used before the war. For example;

https://www.google.com/search?q=%225%2C ... -wiz-books

The origin of 6 million as the WWII death toll, was Wilhelm Hoettl, in 1945;

https://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/docum ... ?mode=text

"Approximately four million Jews had been killed in the various extermination camps while an additional two million met death in other ways, the major part of which were shot by operational squads of the Security Police during the campaign against Russia."

Read the link, idiot.
viewtopic.php?p=11432&#p11432

And lol at you defending Hoettl as legitimate source.

When fears were being expressed, for the safety and security of 4, 5 and 6 million Jews, before WWII, initially from the Soviets and then the Nazis, and then by the end of the war, Jewish and Nazi sources were stating 6 million had been murdered, which has subsequently been evidenced to be within the death toll range, that is not evidence of an organised hoax.

What it evidences, is so-called revisionist desires to find patterns, that can make them believe there was an organised hoax. It is evidence that helps to prove that so-called revisionists are conspiracists, who will cherry-pick evidence, to support their desired belief.

We have this six million meme that we've all heard. If you had any intellectual curiosity whatsoever, you would be asking where that meme came from.

Even non-revisionists have noticed essentially the same thing as revisionists have, that the number was used very early and despite having little support. Leon Poliakov in 1956.

Many publications dealing with the racial persecution during the last war have set the total number of Jews destroyed by the Nazis at six million. However, this figure, which has appeared in numerous publications in many lands, is generally quoted without documentary or statistical support. The question then is: where did the figure of six million originate, and how reliable is it?

This is apparently not a question for Nessie who thinks we should just mindlessly defer to Yad Vashem.

Here is why the six million number is significant and revealing. It takes only a couple of hours for any competent, objective researcher to determine that the origins of the number are dubious and that it was used too early to have any valid basis. Yet despite this, it remains the "official" number even to this day. If a fake number can get official status that easily, this demonstrates the unreliability of the Holocaust scholarship. Yes, there were a couple of exceptions, very early ones whose lower figures were ignored, but these counterexamples simply show that even on the orthodox side they know deep down that the number is bogus. Yet it persists for purely symbolic reasons. All of this is damning.