Pilpul Activities on the CODOH Forum

[HansHill]

This is what I am curious about. Why do they think this was a massive conspiracy with hundreds of thousands of people. It would be far harder to pull that off than a secret genocide even. Is there any positive evidence of a conspiracy? Alleged even?

For a confused jew attempting to learn more about holocaust revisionism, you don't seem to actually be reading what we are saying, so I will hammer this home as many times as needed.

"hundreds of thousands of people" - You don't need hundreds of thousands of people, and I'll demonstrate why not.



Here we see evidence of Poles, Americans and the Jews conspiring to fabricate the Dachau fake gas chamber which is no longer claimed to be a gas chamber. This was not hundreds of thousands of people, but rather something closer to dozens of people, maybe triple digits at the top end.

Once the myth is locked in, then your hundreds of thousands and your millions and your billions can start to believe in it. But those people don't need to be conspirators. I assume you now fully understand how the gas chamber myth became locked in.

**Edit** Franz Blaha was Czech not Polish, my mistake.

[ConfusedJew]

I visited Dachau in maybe 2006. What I was told was that it was the first concentration camp, built for political prisoners, and there was a gas chamber there, which I believe I saw, but it was not a death camp.

Checking more facts - there was a gas chamber in Barrack X, built in 1942–43. It definitely existed and had fake shower heads but it was not used for systematic mass exterminations.

There is still some debate among historians about whether it was used on small groups or in limited executions. No definitive records confirm large-scale use.

[ConfusedJew]

I live for this feigned disbelief, as if atrocitypropaganda has never been deployed as a tactic ever in the history of human conflict.

This is real disbelief. People use atrocities for propaganda reasons all the time and the Holocaust is weaponized all the time, but to my knowledge, no large scale atrocity in history has ever been completely made up or exaggerated to anywhere near that degree.

Feel free to correct me if I am missing something.

[Callafangers]

I could get this but it would take me a long time and its not like you would expect people to do this after the Holocaust unless they are professionals or deeply curious.

What I can say, is that genetic ancestry tests can connect you with long lost relatives all over the globe, and I've seen a few who have survived the Holocaust but none of the ones that "went missing" showed up in there.

If the Holocuast was a hoax, you'd see a ton of people show up that lost touch with their families before the war and that's much more rare than you would expect if the Holocaust were actually fake.

People are finding all kinds of secret siblings and missing cousins but not long lost Holocaust survivors.

Genetic testing like 23andMe (founded and run by the same Jewess who owns YouTube, by the way, up until March of this year) would not expose a bunch of lost 'survivors'. A vast majority of people aren't even in these databases, and first-generation 'survivors' are basically all dead, so you are dealing with second or third-gen Jews whose DNA matches are weaker (far less certain or "matchable").

Also, due to Ashkenazi Jews being all genetically of the same ~350 original people, they often show matches that look close but are actually not -- just from ancient/inbred DNA, nothing to do with WW2:

https://www.haaretz.com/science-and-hea ... fd58830000)

Legal rules and privacy opt-ins also mean you won't see many (if not most) of the potential matches. And in any case, DNA data means nothing without historical records or other evidence to back it up.

Thus, a lack of technology-driven reunions does not (and likely cannot) support what you claim.

As for your claim that you "could get" evidence that any of your relatives was 'exterminated' (e.g. via gas chambers, or as part of some racially-driven genocide campaign): no, you absolutely could not. I'm calling your bluff, here.

[Wetzelrad]

There is some interesting astronomy that's relevant to the flat earth "debate," but I have never felt even the slightest desire to debate a flat earth person. I would maybe consider reading a pamphlet of watching a video about it for fun and curiosity. As far as actually interacting with them, I suspect I would lose interest after a few days at most.

Exactly. Hearing out conspiracy theories is a form of entertainment - see for example the History Channel - but arguing against them is not something that can be done as a hobby. The arguments for flat earth quickly deplete themselves. The field is very shallow. Likewise for QAnon and aliens and many other topics. Amusing from afar but if you take it seriously for, as you say, a few days it becomes boring. Bombsaway has been at this for years now.

Incidentally, that is also why I don't engage very much in Holocaust debate. The believers come back day after day citing something well tred like the Wannsee Conference, then when it's demonstrated how that actually vindicates revisionists they run to a different piece of evidence and never concede their original mistake. It wouldn't be worth my trouble to keep engaging if it were other than a mass delusion with the whole globe in its thrall.

[Callafangers]

I can't speak for the others but I think you guys are interesting psychologically…

Oh please. Empress of Pilpul Tactics, spare us the condescension.

I've always found it "interesting" to see how the hoaxers weave psychology into their arguments. Whether studying the 'psychological phenomena of Holocaust denialists' or focusing on the 'psychology of evil [Nazis]', or of the 'psychology and trauma of survivors', etc... it seems all of these things are attempts to push forward the narrative without actually saying anything about it.

Very sneaky, if you ask me...

[ConfusedJew]

As for your claim that you "could get" evidence that any of your relatives was 'exterminated' (e.g. via gas chambers, or as part of some racially-driven genocide campaign): no, you absolutely could not. I'm calling your bluff, here.

You misunderstood my point. You would be able to find missing relatives or descendants of relatives that were not exterminated.

The fact that there was supposedly a population bottleneck within the Ashkenazi gene pool is kind of irrelevant but it would make it easier, not harder to locate missing relatives.

Same with the fact that 23andMe was founded by a Jew. There are other similar services too that do the same thing and show very similar results.

[Wetzelrad]

But my point is that if these people went missing, you'd definitely find them with 23andMe testing and we aren't seeing that.

What a strange comment. There are in fact many survivors who used DNA testing to find family that was believed to be dead. The stories are easy to find with a cursory Google search. Here's one example:

I visited Dachau in maybe 2006. What I was told was that it was the first concentration camp, built for political prisoners, and there was a gas chamber there, which I believe I saw, but it was not a death camp.

Checking more facts - there was a gas chamber in Barrack X, built in 1942–43. It definitely existed and had fake shower heads but it was not used for systematic mass exterminations.

There is still some debate among historians about whether it was used on small groups or in limited executions. No definitive records confirm large-scale use.

It's a room that has been called a gas chamber by the Allies, but since there is no plausible method of operation and no convincing evidence it was ever used, it probably should not be called as such. More to the point, the US Army claimed that humans were killed in it. In their propaganda film the narration of this begins, "Hanging in orderly rows were the clothes of prisoners who had been suffocated in a lethal gas chamber."

The number of people involved in propagating this story is much higher than three, while the number of people who invented it could be as few as one, since we don't know its exact origin. So whether you consider this a conspiracy of three, one, or one hundred, it makes no matter, because it satisfies exactly the conditions for the "conspiracy" said not to exist above. If lying about gas chambers can happen at Dachau, nothing prevents it from happening at other camps, especially so because Dachau was liberated by Americans and the major "death camps" were liberated by Soviets.

[ConfusedJew]

But my point is that if these people went missing, you'd definitely find them with 23andMe testing and we aren't seeing that.

What a strange comment. There are in fact many survivors who used DNA testing to find family that was believed to be dead. The stories are easy to find with a cursory Google search. Here's one example:

Yes I mentioned there are exceptions but they are very rare. In this case, the survivor was adopted by a different family because he lost all of his birth family and he wouldn't be able to connect with his extended birth family without DNA because the records were lost.

Using this as an example is strange because it demonstrates that the Holocaust did actually happen?

[ConfusedJew]

It's a room that has been called a gas chamber by the Allies, but since there is no plausible method of operation and no convincing evidence it was ever used, it probably should not be called as such. More to the point, the US Army claimed that humans were killed in it. In their propaganda film the narration of this begins, "Hanging in orderly rows were the clothes of prisoners who had been suffocated in a lethal gas chamber."

The number of people involved in propagating this story is much higher than three, while the number of people who invented it could be as few as one, since we don't know its exact origin. So whether you consider this a conspiracy of three, one, or one hundred, it makes no matter, because it satisfies exactly the conditions for the "conspiracy" said not to exist above. If lying about gas chambers can happen at Dachau, nothing prevents it from happening at other camps, especially so because Dachau was liberated by Americans and the major "death camps" were liberated by Soviets.

I'm not sure what your point is exactly. I went to Dachau and they didn't try to present it as a gas chamber that was used for mass extermination like the other ones. That exact newspaper clipping that you mentioned was factually accurate although maybe you didn't present the full context.

Even if you were correct in that people said the wrong thing, do you think that immediately after the war, people will instantly have the entire body of facts in their accurate form? It would be way more suspicious if there were no inaccuracies.

[ConfusedJew]

Flat Earthers say the same thing. The difference between me and the revisionists and flat earthers, is that my conspiracy is grounded in a large body evidence, which defines its parameters.

Flat Earthers do not follow a sound scientific methodology.

Neither do you.

The mainstream historical consensus follows many different accepted sound historical methods and they all converge to the same source. I would be happy to debate that though and would be curious to see why you think that they don't.

Sound historical and scientific methods within the historical discipline include:

Primary Source Analysis: They rigorously analyze contemporaneous documents such as Nazi orders, government records, photographs, diaries, and testimonies from both victims and perpetrators.

Corroboration: Evidence is cross-referenced across independent sources to validate facts. For example, camp records, train schedules, survivor testimonies, and postwar confessions are compared to establish consistency.

Peer Review: Most of the research by professional historians is published in peer-reviewed journals or by reputable academic presses, subjecting the work to expert critique and revision.

Use of Forensic and Archaeological Evidence: Scholars also integrate findings from forensic investigations of mass graves, excavations of concentration and extermination camp sites, and analysis of structures like gas chambers.

Transparency and Revision: Like all scientific disciplines, Holocaust historiography evolves with new evidence or methodologies. Reputable historians are open about limitations and update conclusions accordingly.

The whole body of Holocaust history has withstood decades of scrutiny and has included contributions from a range of disciplines including history, sociology, law, and forensic science. All of these diverse disciplines point to the same or very similar conclusions with a few gaps in our knowledge as is always the case.

[AreYouSirius]

I can't speak for the others but I think you guys are interesting psychologically…

Oh please. Empress of Pilpul Tactics, spare us the condescension.

I've always found it "interesting" to see how the hoaxers weave psychology into their arguments. Whether studying the 'psychological phenomena of Holocaust denialists' or focusing on the 'psychology of evil [Nazis]', or of the 'psychology and trauma of survivors', etc... it seems all of these things are attempts to push forward the narrative without actually saying anything about it.

Very sneaky, if you ask me...

For SURE. I am grateful that this old go-to trick of casting aspersions on somebody’s mental state in order to deflect from a weak argument is falling out of fashion. It reeks of insecurity.

[ConfusedJew]

Oh please. Empress of Pilpul Tactics, spare us the condescension.

I've always found it "interesting" to see how the hoaxers weave psychology into their arguments. Whether studying the 'psychological phenomena of Holocaust denialists' or focusing on the 'psychology of evil [Nazis]', or of the 'psychology and trauma of survivors', etc... it seems all of these things are attempts to push forward the narrative without actually saying anything about it.

Very sneaky, if you ask me...

For SURE. I am grateful that this old go-to trick of casting aspersions on somebody’s mental state in order to deflect from a weak argument is falling out of fashion. It reeks of insecurity.

He's not casting aspersions. He's just saying you guys are interesting.

[bombsaway]

Oh please. Empress of Pilpul Tactics, spare us the condescension.

I've always found it "interesting" to see how the hoaxers weave psychology into their arguments. Whether studying the 'psychological phenomena of Holocaust denialists' or focusing on the 'psychology of evil [Nazis]', or of the 'psychology and trauma of survivors', etc... it seems all of these things are attempts to push forward the narrative without actually saying anything about it.

Very sneaky, if you ask me...

For SURE. I am grateful that this old go-to trick of casting aspersions on somebody’s mental state in order to deflect from a weak argument is falling out of fashion. It reeks of insecurity.

I think delusion is something that comes very natural to people so I wouldn't call it an illness. Nevertheless you have to reckon with the fact that I don't think you're very different or inherently more interesting than flat earthers, Q Anon people, etc . I think we share some interest in the subject matter, albeit for different reasons. I'm interested in perpetrator psychology, and I definitely don't think the Nazis were "crazy" - this was a mass and very generalized delusion, see Ordinary Men

[Wetzelrad]

Yes I mentioned there are exceptions but they are very rare. In this case, the survivor was adopted by a different family because he lost all of his birth family and he wouldn't be able to connect with his extended birth family without DNA because the records were lost.

Using this as an example is strange because it demonstrates that the Holocaust did actually happen?

You are very hard to take seriously. When presented with evidence directly contrary to your claims you double down. DNA evidence has done exactly the thing you claim that "we aren't seeing" and that is "very rare". Not only has it happened repeatedly, but these incidents were deemed so remarkable that they made it into news broadcasts. Isn't it rather atypical for a family reunion to make it into the news? Thus we are assured that these many incidents are just the tip of the iceberg.

In that example, she believed all her father's relatives were dead. The words "family all assumed killed" and "completely annihilated" are used. They were mistaken, as her father's brother's son was still alive 79 years later, proved by DNA tests.

Here's another example. Man thought his grandmother was a "sole survivor". DNA tests found her living relatives in another country. Separated, not killed.

Another example. This individual marked his own grandfather's aunt as "killed in the Holocaust" only to later discover her grave in Detroit, marked 1949, thanks to a DNA match.

Or this one. “I couldn’t believe it was possible that two of my mother’s brothers were living just an hour away from me in New York for many years.”

Or there is this video from the DNA Reunion Project which was started for exactly this purpose. A choice quote: "It ended up being of course that it was the family she believed lost everyone in the Holocaust."

Another quote: "So they have the same parents, and they never knew about each other until their eighties."

Doesn't the fact that someone is making a business out of reuniting Holocaust survivors using DNA tests suggest to you that this phenomenon is not "very rare"? This is leaving aside the many separate instances where families were reunited by social media posts.

Finally, consider newsworthiness. A reunion of living relatives is a story you can put on the news, but a reveal that someone believed to have died eighty years ago actually died forty years ago is not something that would normally make headlines. Holocaust survivors today are very old.