Undeserved reply to CJ on population statistics

[Stubble]

(Unironically, a man added his dog to the yad vashim 'holocaust victims database', which also contains many multiple entries and a host of other problems)

Don't see any evidence that this is true. Some of the stuff that you guys argue is based in facts, wrongly interpreted, but a lot is simply not true. I'm not accusing you of lying, just not being very discerning.

You know what, I don't remember the name of the guy Zundel was interviewing when it was said, or what episode of Another Voice of Freedom it was, and I'm sure you wouldn't consider the source 'kosher' anyhow, so, I'll just let that one go. I'm certainly not going to go dig for it for you to just say 'I don't like the source'.

There are some articles about the database and some research papers floating around, some of which can be read on CODOH's website.

Regardless, 80+ year, and even if the database had 0 problems (it doesn't, it needs to be culled), it would still be incomplete...

How is that even possible? How can even just names of missing persons still not exist, what's less their remains?

[Archie]

Why would the statistical difficulties be greater after the war for pre-war figures? It's clearly the opposite.

Historians’ interpretation of those censuses gets more accurate over time as archives open up, giving access to raw census tables rather than summaries. Scholars cross-checked census numbers against other records. Demographic methods improve, allowing corrections for undercounts, misclassification, or regional inconsistencies.

You are demonstrating that you don't understand how actual historical revisionism works.

Also referencing a single report that fits your narrative as the sole credible authority is the definition of cherry picking.

You think that it was easier to get accurate numbers in 1945 with everything in shambles than it was in the 1930s? Delusional.

[Wahrheitssucher]

You forget that the burden of proof is yours, not mine. You have to prove they were killed…

Your accusation necessitates that you prove beyond reasonable doubt that these Jews were killed.

And gentle, reasonable doubt is all I have applied here, yet it causes your entire house of cards to crumble.

Why is the burden of proof on me?

The overwhelming majority of the world agrees and agrees that so many different kinds of evidence prove that the Holocaust did happen.

As I recently pointed out [here: viewtopic.php?p=15671#p15671], CJ is now constantly reframing the discussion to his own delusional ‘strawman’ argument.

The burden of proof is on me in order to do what exactly?

Ho-hum! The ‘burden of proof’ lies on the ones making a claim.
NOT on the ones who doubt it.

In this case, the ones who claim the German Third Reich mass-murdered 6 million jews — approx. 4 million by gassing — have the ‘burden of proof’ upon them to prove that.

If anyone argues, ‘no the vast majority of people believe this. So YOU doubters have to prove it didn’t happen’ they are reversing the ‘burden of proof’ based upon the logical fallacy of Argumentum ad populum

Do you even know what you are saying or what kind of appeals you are making?

This is another sign of this person’s Dunning-Kruger syndrome.

[Nessie]

Called to gather at Babi Yar is?

Yes, it is circumstantial evidence, evidence of opportunity.

[Nessie]

You forget that the burden of proof is yours, not mine. You have to prove they were killed -- to show otherwise is not a requisite for my position to be upheld. Your accusation necessitates that you prove beyond reasonable doubt that these Jews were killed. And gentle, reasonable doubt is all I have applied here, yet it causes your entire house of cards to crumble.

Why is the burden of proof on me?

The so-called revisionist think that they are defence lawyers for the Nazis, and all they have to do is pick at the prosecution (with you acting as prosecution) evidence, so that their clients walk free, because the crime they are alleged to commit, has not been proven to have happened.

That is not how history is normally investigated and it ignores their clients admitted that the crime took place, whether they were subject to any coercion or not, no matter what country they were in, or what decade after the war it was.

So-called revisionist make all sorts of allegations about the prosecution evidence, such as not enough corpses have been found at the AR camps, or that all Nazis were subject to coercion, or that claims about the gas chambers were physical impossibilities, but they forget that a defence cannot merely allege. It has to prove its claims. For example, if the defence was to argue at the TII trial, that there were not c800,000 corpses buried there, they would have to produce their own expert witness, to present the evidence to prove the claim.

The so-called revisionists obviously cannot find any experts who agree with them, so they arrogantly pitch themselves as experts, Mattogno being a classic example of that. Then they fall into using the logical fallacy of argument from incredulity. They argue that because they cannot believe the evidence of the mass graves at TII, therefore there cannot be c800,000 buried there.

The overwhelming majority of the world agrees and agrees that so many different kinds of evidence prove that the Holocaust did happen.

The burden of proof is on me in order to do what exactly?

Do not worry, you have met your burden of proof, there is overwhelming evidence of the mass murders. They just chose to not accept that evidence and demand you run rings for them. They do that, to dodge their lack of evidence to prove what happened instead. They are happy with a non-history, where the Jews were not murdered in their millions, but they do not know what happened inside TII, or where the Jews sent there were in 1945. That is why their demand to be called revisionists, not deniers, is laughable.

In law, the burden of proof requires one party to show enough evidence to qualify for a specific legal action. That's not relevant here.

Reasonable doubt is a legal standard only relevant in criminal cases. Do you even know what you are saying or what kind of appeals you are making?

The Holocaust was a criminal and historical act. The main crimes alleged have been widely investigated by criminal investigators and historians, and proven. That includes investigations by German and Austria prosecutors. What the so-called revisionists ignore, is that all over Europe, national prosecutors accused their citizens of also taking part. Some countries, such as Latvia, have never gone as far as to prosecute one of their own citizens for murdering Jews, but those countries admit it happened.

The so-called revisionists demand that we believe that is just a huge hoax, with all of those countries making false accusations, not just against Germany, but also themselves, for their various roles in the Holocaust. It is a conspiracy on a massive scale, that would be laughed out of any court, as totally unproven.

The only people who do not accept that, are largely untrained, and all are biased conspiracists.

[Nessie]

Rather than try to show vague statistics, which were revised post war, and 'just happen' to support the number 6,000,000, if you squint and don't look too closely, coincidentally, of course, how about showing us who met their demise where?

That's probably the best way.

If you could provide names, that would help. I'd prefer a list free of family pets...

(Unironically, a man added his dog to the yad vashim 'holocaust victims database', which also contains many multiple entries and a host of other problems)

Note: seriously, how the fuck is it still not known who is missing? 80+ years and no one even knows who is missing? What in the fuck kind of shit is that?

Yes, there are some errors in the database. But there are also thousands of examples, where countries all over Europe, had Jewish citizens from villages, towns and cities arrested and sent to camps and ghettos, who failed to return after the war. Nationally, there is a lot of detailed information on whom those people were. The Western countries and Germany have very accurate details, such that Berlin is full of brass plaques, with the names of Jews arrested from the houses they lived in, and what camp they were sent to, to the Dutch who know how many were sent to Sobibor and how few returned in 1945. The eastern European countries have less detail, as in many cases, Jews were rounded up and shot in local actions. But there are many villages and towns that, by 1945, the entire Jewish population had vanished and never returned.

It is notable that the Danish and Finnish Jew's whereabouts were known throughout the war and they had a very high survival rate, because they were not arrested. The Norwegian Jews, who never returned home, all came from the group who were arrested. The group, who escaped to Sweden, all returned home.

As well as the large databases, such as Yad Vashem and Bad Arolsen, there are multiple smaller, national databases. For example, at the Riga ghetto, there is a displaced list of the names of German Jews sent there. None returned home.

You have created an inaccurate fantasy for yourself, about the evidence for the Holocaust, about the graves, the archives, where you refuse to accept the scale of evidence that millions of Jews were living in Europe in 1939, then fell under the control of the Nazis and their allies, who then conducted mass arrests and millions had disappeared by 1945.

[ConfusedJew]

Why would the statistical difficulties be greater after the war for pre-war figures? It's clearly the opposite.

Historians’ interpretation of those censuses gets more accurate over time as archives open up, giving access to raw census tables rather than summaries. Scholars cross-checked census numbers against other records. Demographic methods improve, allowing corrections for undercounts, misclassification, or regional inconsistencies.

You are demonstrating that you don't understand how actual historical revisionism works.

Also referencing a single report that fits your narrative as the sole credible authority is the definition of cherry picking.

You think that it was easier to get accurate numbers in 1945 with everything in shambles than it was in the 1930s? Delusional.

That's not what I said. IQ test!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!

[ConfusedJew]

Do not worry, you have met your burden of proof, there is overwhelming evidence of the mass murders. They just chose to not accept that evidence and demand you run rings for them. They do that, to dodge their lack of evidence to prove what happened instead. They are happy with a non-history, where the Jews were not murdered in their millions, but they do not know what happened inside TII, or where the Jews sent there were in 1945. That is why their demand to be called revisionists, not deniers, is laughable.

I came here to see if I would be able to find some shared version of reality with these people. I know that in a court of law or before any expert, they would never believe what they are saying and would quickly and incisively get to the root of the matter.

I wanted to see why these people believed what they do and how they thought. I've successfully discovered the latter but I still don't know why they have adopted such beliefs that spread so much hatred. It is clear to me that they don't have real intellectual curiosity, I doubt that they have many "intellectual pursuits" outside of this. I'm curious where these people live, what they do for work, what they are like in their free time, how they grew up, and I wasn't able to figure that out.

I still don't know if they actually believe what they say that they believe. I'm inclined to think that deep down, they feel there is something wrong or incoherent in their belief system kind of like I would imagine flat earthers feel the same way, but I don't know.

[Nessie]

Do not worry, you have met your burden of proof, there is overwhelming evidence of the mass murders. They just chose to not accept that evidence and demand you run rings for them. They do that, to dodge their lack of evidence to prove what happened instead. They are happy with a non-history, where the Jews were not murdered in their millions, but they do not know what happened inside TII, or where the Jews sent there were in 1945. That is why their demand to be called revisionists, not deniers, is laughable.

I came here to see if I would be able to find some shared version of reality with these people. I know that in a court of law or before any expert, they would never believe what they are saying and would quickly and incisively get to the root of the matter.

I wanted to see why these people believed what they do and how they thought. I've successfully discovered the latter but I still don't know why they have adopted such beliefs that spread so much hatred. It is clear to me that they don't have real intellectual curiosity, I doubt that they have many "intellectual pursuits" outside of this. I'm curious where these people live, what they do for work, what they are like in their free time, how they grew up, and I wasn't able to figure that out.

I still don't know if they actually believe what they say that they believe. I'm inclined to think that deep down, they feel there is something wrong or incoherent in their belief system kind of like I would imagine flat earthers feel the same way, but I don't know.

They are part of a concerning rise of people who have belief systems that are not based on what is evidenced. They are like the witch finders who genuinely believed there was such a thing as witchcraft, or those in the church who condemned Galileo. I think they just do not understand evidencing and they are so committed to their beliefs, like a religious zealot, they will not see sense.

It amazes me how they will pretend parts of the Holocaust lack evidence and they are not bothered that they cannot find millions of Jews still alive in 1944-5. They are quite happy with a non-history.

[ConfusedJew]

They are part of a concerning rise of people who have belief systems that are not based on what is evidenced. They are like the witch finders who genuinely believed there was such a thing as witchcraft, or those in the church who condemned Galileo. I think they just do not understand evidencing and they are so committed to their beliefs, like a religious zealot, they will not see sense.

Since the dawn of time, humans have rejected hard evidence. But yes I see them as committed to their belief system like a fanatic religion. There are so many better religions out there though in my opinion. Why have they adopted this one?

It amazes me how they will pretend parts of the Holocaust lack evidence and they are not bothered that they cannot find millions of Jews still alive in 1944-5. They are quite happy with a non-history.

Yes, there is massive amounts of evidence out there. No evidence will be perfect but they have become world experts as magnifying the imperfections in the massive body of evidence.

I understand the broad picture of how they think now but they're not able to connect the dots. If they were being intellectually honest, they would recognize that there is so much evidence out there from different sources that it would take an impossible conspiracy to hold those inaccuracies together. They're not unique in that regard because there are a ton of religious fanatics in the world but this is the one that they've chosen or it has chosen them for whatever reason.

[Nessie]

They are part of a concerning rise of people who have belief systems that are not based on what is evidenced. They are like the witch finders who genuinely believed there was such a thing as witchcraft, or those in the church who condemned Galileo. I think they just do not understand evidencing and they are so committed to their beliefs, like a religious zealot, they will not see sense.

Since the dawn of time, humans have rejected hard evidence. But yes I see them as committed to their belief system like a fanatic religion. There are so many better religions out there though in my opinion. Why have they adopted this one?

A combination of anti-Semitism and love of conspiracies. I think they are the two main drives so-called revisionists have.

It amazes me how they will pretend parts of the Holocaust lack evidence and they are not bothered that they cannot find millions of Jews still alive in 1944-5. They are quite happy with a non-history.

Yes, there is massive amounts of evidence out there. No evidence will be perfect but they have become world experts as magnifying the imperfections in the massive body of evidence.

They cherry-pick at the weakest evidence, such as hearsay claims about electrocutions in the chambers and ignore the strongest evidence, such as the huge drop in the population of Jews recorded by the Nazis and their allies.

I understand the broad picture of how they think now but they're not able to connect the dots. If they were being intellectually honest, they would recognize that there is so much evidence out there from different sources that it would take an impossible conspiracy to hold those inaccuracies together. They're not unique in that regard because there are a ton of religious fanatics in the world but this is the one that they've chosen or it has chosen them for whatever reason.

Only someone who loves a conspiracy, thinks that one the size of the Holocaust, is possible to fake.

[Wahrheitssucher]

I came here to see if I would be able to find some shared version of reality with these people.

In the light of CJ’s many months of avoidance of information, inability to genuinely study a rival viewpoint and instead denial of facts that demolish the holyH, true-believer worldview, this statement I regard as extremely doubtful.

I know that in a court of law or before any expert, they would never believe what they are saying and would quickly and incisively get to the root of the matter.

This is incoherent, self-delusional babbling.

I wanted to see why these people believed what they do and how they thought. I've successfully discovered the latter…

CJ hasn’t successfully done anything other than show an unwillingness to investigate the factual evidence or engage in genuine, reasonable discussion.

…but I still don't know why they have adopted such beliefs that spread so much hatred.

It is actually the holyH narrative that spreads hatred.
We are witnessing that holyH inspired hatred in Gaza right now.
Zionist Jews are writing things on social-media like ‘never again will jewish blood be considered cheap’.

It is clear to me that they don't have real intellectual curiosity, I doubt that they have many "intellectual pursuits" outside of this.

This is pure psychological projection. I.e. this accusation is a confession.
For the record, I have just written a 1,000 page historical investigation and re-evaluation of a philosophical/religious movement that is TOTALLY unrelated to this pseudo-historical, cultish, belief-system.

I'm curious where these people live, what they do for work, what they are like in their free time, how they grew up, and I wasn't able to figure that out.

Hunh!

I still don't know if they actually believe what they say that they believe.

This looks like blatant lying. He knows we believe our words. What bothers him is that we can support them with detailed, factual information and logical reasoning. Something he himself can not do, but relies on Ai robots to do his thinking for him.

I'm inclined to think that deep down, they feel there is something wrong or incoherent in their belief system, but I don't know.

This is again pure psychological projection. I.e. this is another accusation that is actually a confession.

[Archie]

Do not worry, you have met your burden of proof, there is overwhelming evidence of the mass murders. They just chose to not accept that evidence and demand you run rings for them. They do that, to dodge their lack of evidence to prove what happened instead. They are happy with a non-history, where the Jews were not murdered in their millions, but they do not know what happened inside TII, or where the Jews sent there were in 1945. That is why their demand to be called revisionists, not deniers, is laughable.

I came here to see if I would be able to find some shared version of reality with these people. I know that in a court of law or before any expert, they would never believe what they are saying and would quickly and incisively get to the root of the matter.

I wanted to see why these people believed what they do and how they thought. I've successfully discovered the latter but I still don't know why they have adopted such beliefs that spread so much hatred. It is clear to me that they don't have real intellectual curiosity, I doubt that they have many "intellectual pursuits" outside of this. I'm curious where these people live, what they do for work, what they are like in their free time, how they grew up, and I wasn't able to figure that out.

I still don't know if they actually believe what they say that they believe. I'm inclined to think that deep down, they feel there is something wrong or incoherent in their belief system kind of like I would imagine flat earthers feel the same way, but I don't know.

You are here to mindlessly defend your ethnic tribe, and you are doing a very poor job of it.

If you were here for intellectual reasons, then 1) you'd actually be curious about it and would have started reading up and researching it, 2) you would actually listen to what others have to say and you would give their comments serious thought. You don't do either of those things at all. We see a lot of people who are starting to get into this. We know what it looks like when someone is truly interested (on either side), and you ain't it.

[Archie]

Why would the statistical difficulties be greater after the war for pre-war figures? It's clearly the opposite.

Historians’ interpretation of those censuses gets more accurate over time as archives open up, giving access to raw census tables rather than summaries. Scholars cross-checked census numbers against other records. Demographic methods improve, allowing corrections for undercounts, misclassification, or regional inconsistencies.

You are demonstrating that you don't understand how actual historical revisionism works.

Also referencing a single report that fits your narrative as the sole credible authority is the definition of cherry picking.

You think that it was easier to get accurate numbers in 1945 with everything in shambles than it was in the 1930s? Delusional.

That's not what I said. IQ test!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!

If you agree with what I said then you are not realizing the implications.

Your argument was that the prewar and postwar stats showing a decrease of perhaps five and a half million or so was proof of the Holocaust. If you acknowledge that there was considerable variation in the prewar figure and that the postwar figure is even more uncertain, that completely undermines your entire argument.

[Nessie]

The pre-war population of Jews in Europe is well evidenced by national census figures and Nazi estimates, that they then firmed up on, as they occupied countries and identified and registered Jews. The wartime figures come from the Nazis and they all record huge drops in the population. They are corroborated by journalists reporting on rumours and intelligence about mass killings, that were running into the millions. In 1945, there was chaos, but there are reliable sources to prove there was a huge number of missing Jews. First, the displaced persons agencies only dealt with a few hundred thousand Jews. Second, the Allies only liberated a few hundred thousand Jews. Third, all over Europe, countries reported very few Jews returning home to reclaim homes, businesses and other property. As the decades have gone by and historians have researched and gathered evidence, all they have found is evidence of a decline and that in 1945, of the millions of Jews the Nazis arrested, only a few hundred thousand survived.