Callafangers wrote: ↑Sun Oct 19, 2025 12:40 pm
Nessie wrote: ↑Sat Oct 18, 2025 4:42 pmFrom the start, the evidence was from local witnesses, who reported months of cremation activity from the camps. Then from witnesses inside the camps, there were descriptions of various attempts to cremate corpses, starting with inside the graves, to then settle on the use of pyres. Those pyres worked by piling decomposing corpses on top of metal rails and using some fuel and wood to start the pyres. The corpses would then catch fire and burn. After hours of burning, the partially cremated remains would be then be reburied, with some evidence of cremains being rendered. Exactly what quantities of wood and fuel were used, is not known.
Hilarious how huge the scale of what you're claiming is relative to the evidence (in both quality and quantity) that you put forth to support it.
The "scale" of evidence to prove mass cremations, is huge. It consists of
- 100% of the Nazi and Jewish eyewitnesses who worked inside the camps in 1942.
- many local people who lived near to the camps
- every archaeological survey of the sites, that have all found large areas of buried cremated remains
- contemporaneous photos showing buried remains
- circumstantial evidence of Nazi operations and motive to destroy evidence and their use of cremation.
"From the start" there were reports of lots of absurdities,
Those "absurdities" are easily explained, as early rumour and hearsay, used in the initial intelligence reports, before more detailed investigations could take place.
... but also reports that some burning (including at least some corpses) was taking place there. But we also know that giant trash heaps were being burnt at these camps, including but not limited to any of the property being sorted which needed to be disposed of (which, one can imagine in a typhus/lice epidemic, was more than a few items on a regular basis). So, there's lots of burning. Of course, there were also diseased corpses, and they too were a sanitation risk, and cremation was by far the best option to handle that matter. So, even if we take all claims of "I saw smoke" or even "I smelled burning corpses" as valid, you're still far short of your conclusions.
That covers people who lived near to the camps, who reported smell and months of burning, but they could not know what was being burnt.
So, we are forced to turn to documents, testimony, and other witnesses, right?
That is normal in any investigation. Gather evidence from as many contemporaneous, relevant sources as possible.
But your other witnesses are outrageous liars...
In your biased opinion.
And your physical evidence reflects scattered cremations.....
You are dishonestly minimising the scale of buried cremated remains that have been found.
And your documentary evidence simply doesn't exist at all.......
That no AR camp, or Chelmno document survives, is evidence of the criminal cover up. Documents prove mass arrivals, with no corresponding mass departures and how AR operated.
This is all very unfortunate for you,
Not really, since it is clearly you being dishonest about the scale of evidence, as you deflect from your inability to evidence what took place inside the camps.
which is why Where did they go?™ has become the 'last flag standing' for exterminationists,
No, it further reinforces the evidence of mass killings and cremations.
...mainly due to the nature of demographic data being so easy to control and manipulate compared to things like physical evidence, contemporary documents, or consistent patterns in testimony.
But here we are. The 'Holocaust' tale is crumbling, it's just a slow burn. *yawn* I'll wait.
It survives because I can evidence what happened and you cannot.
