Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

[InuYasha]

They are not really historians, or even revisionists, they are deniers. That is because of their failure to produce an evidenced, chronological history of what did happen. Instead, they deny mass murders, so suggesting mass survival, but they cannot evidence the whereabouts of the millions of Jews they say were not murdered, in 1944-5.

As Arthur Butz noted, the main argument against the Holocaust theory was that they were still there at the end of the war. However, I believe that the intensification of violence and political degradation of the National Socialist regime in the second half of the war could have led to mass executions of Jews, just as ethnic Germans themselves were executed on suspicion of "treason" in the last year of WWII. This would explain the lack of any meaningful documentation (orders) about the Holocaust from the German government - violence and paranoia created a vicious cycle that intensified over a long period of time. The executions on Soviet territory are fairly well documented by the "Commission for the Investigation of Nazi Crimes", and are informally called the "Shoah/Holocaust by Bullets".

That is how denial works. It finds what can be described as odd and then alleges that means, therefore, it did not happen. That method is best described as the logical fallacy of argument from incredulity.

If a person asserts something that is contrary to the laws of chemistry and physics (and the continuous cycle of deliveries to the camps, gassing in the chambers, and cremation of corpses - on such a scale - would have been impossible with the technology of the 1940s), then doubting his words is not a logical fallacy. If I say that you can fit 14 people on one square meter, is that credible? With the same success you can say that you can jump on the roof of a skyscraper without much effort, and criticize those who doubt as committing the fallacy of "argument from incredulity."

That change happened, because the earliest reports were hearsay and rumour, about activity inside the death camps. They were inaccurate, which is the nature of hearsay and rumour. As eyewitnesses came forward and other evidenced gathered, the actual means of death was established.

In 1942, the English press was already reporting on "mobile gas chambers" in which 700,000 people died in Poland. Surprisingly, in 1916, the same newspaper reported on the gassing of 700,000 people in Serbia. You can check this in the Daily Telegraph for March 22, 1916 and June 25, 1942. A mere coincidence? Perhaps. However, the word "Holocaust" in the sense of "oppression/murder of Jews" and the number 6,000,000 were around long before WWII, even before the National Socialist revolution in Germany. If something happens once, it's an accident, twice is a coincidence, three or more is a trend.

In other words, these stories, which partially form the basis of modern historiography of WWII and the Shoah, existed long before they actually happened.

No, the major death camps were in Poland, or the General Government, because Poland had the largest population of Jews. Ukraine and Serbia also had death camps. There were also gas chambers in camps and hospitals in Germany and Austria, used to euthanise inform prisoners and the disabled.

Oddly enough, in the fifties historians believed that the program of mass extermination was not only in Poland, but also in Germany and Austria. In 1960 and later it was recognized that mass extermination took place only in the General Government.

Because research found them to be an exaggeration, atrocity story. It is correct to eliminate such.

The scale of the supposed Holocaust is similarly exaggerated, and there is disagreement among historians about the total number of victims.

The Auschwitz total was an exaggerated Soviet one, that the Poles used until the collapse of the Soviet Union. Then they switched to using the more accurate western death toll.

If the number of victims was exaggerated by the Soviets, how come the figure of 6,000,000 people remained after it was reduced? Why are people still being tried in Germany and Austria for denying the figure of 6,000,000 dead, and not, say, 3,500,000?

The "weird stuff" is revisionism concentrating on atrocity stories and rumours, rather than finding the accurate narrative and doing the basic task of any historian. That you believe the Auschwitz death toll revisionist maths, without doing any research to find out how the figures were achieved, tells me that you are blindly believing the revisionist narrative. You should apply your doubts to revisionism. It cannot be trusted, since many are anti-Semitic, far-right, conspiracy theorists pushing an agenda. They also commonly lack relevant training and expertise on the topics they discuss.

I do not "blindly believe the revisionists." In fact, when I first read Graf's book, I was skeptical, fearing that he was trying to trick me into revisionism with false facts. However, all the oddities of the Holocaust stories - which are supported by official historians, not revisionists - such as the 2,000 or 3,000 prisoners in the Auschwitz gas chambers, the fantastic use of Sonderkommandos to remove corpses just 20 or 30 minutes after they were gassed, and without the use of gas masks, are still there. This is not based on rumors, but on the testimony of those very witnesses and the works of historians. Of course, politically biased groups such as anti-Semites are not to be trusted. However, not all revisionists are far-right.

[Nessie]

They are not really historians, or even revisionists, they are deniers. That is because of their failure to produce an evidenced, chronological history of what did happen. Instead, they deny mass murders, so suggesting mass survival, but they cannot evidence the whereabouts of the millions of Jews they say were not murdered, in 1944-5.

As Arthur Butz noted, the main argument against the Holocaust theory was that they were still there at the end of the war.

There is no evidence that the millions of Jews the Nazis arrested, 1939-44, were still being accommodated in camps and ghettos in 1944 and liberated in 1945.

However, I believe that the intensification of violence and political degradation of the National Socialist regime in the second half of the war could have led to mass executions of Jews, just as ethnic Germans themselves were executed on suspicion of "treason" in the last year of WWII. This would explain the lack of any meaningful documentation (orders) about the Holocaust from the German government - violence and paranoia created a vicious cycle that intensified over a long period of time. The executions on Soviet territory are fairly well documented by the "Commission for the Investigation of Nazi Crimes", and are informally called the "Shoah/Holocaust by Bullets".

There are plenty of documents recording the execution of Jews during the Holocaust by bullets. Those involved in the gassings were more circumspect about their documentation.

That is how denial works. It finds what can be described as odd and then alleges that means, therefore, it did not happen. That method is best described as the logical fallacy of argument from incredulity.

If a person asserts something that is contrary to the laws of chemistry and physics (and the continuous cycle of deliveries to the camps, gassing in the chambers, and cremation of corpses - on such a scale - would have been impossible with the technology of the 1940s), then doubting his words is not a logical fallacy. If I say that you can fit 14 people on one square meter, is that credible? With the same success you can say that you can jump on the roof of a skyscraper without much effort, and criticize those who doubt as committing the fallacy of "argument from incredulity."

The fallacy of incredulity applies when arguing against something that is physically possible. Germans designing and running gas chambers, using engines to pump in CO, or by modifying a room in a crematorium to drop in Zyklon B and then vent the room, are physical possibilities.

That witnesses overestimated how many people fitted inside, is explained by how poor most people are at estimating sizes. Your analogy with jumping a skyscraper is a false one.

That change happened, because the earliest reports were hearsay and rumour, about activity inside the death camps. They were inaccurate, which is the nature of hearsay and rumour. As eyewitnesses came forward and other evidenced gathered, the actual means of death was established.

In 1942, the English press was already reporting on "mobile gas chambers" in which 700,000 people died in Poland. Surprisingly, in 1916, the same newspaper reported on the gassing of 700,000 people in Serbia. You can check this in the Daily Telegraph for March 22, 1916 and June 25, 1942. A mere coincidence? Perhaps. However, the word "Holocaust" in the sense of "oppression/murder of Jews" and the number 6,000,000 were around long before WWII, even before the National Socialist revolution in Germany. If something happens once, it's an accident, twice is a coincidence, three or more is a trend.

In other words, these stories, which partially form the basis of modern historiography of WWII and the Shoah, existed long before they actually happened.

That WWII had atrocity claims similar to WWI is hardly surprising. There were also predictions about 4 and 5 million Jews at risk, as well as 6 million, made before the war. That the word holocaust was used before the war, possibly helps explain how it became the most common descriptive after the war.

No, the major death camps were in Poland, or the General Government, because Poland had the largest population of Jews. Ukraine and Serbia also had death camps. There were also gas chambers in camps and hospitals in Germany and Austria, used to euthanise inform prisoners and the disabled.

Oddly enough, in the fifties historians believed that the program of mass extermination was not only in Poland, but also in Germany and Austria. In 1960 and later it was recognized that mass extermination took place only in the General Government.

What mass exterminations were located in Germany and Austria and who made those claims?

Because research found them to be an exaggeration, atrocity story. It is correct to eliminate such.

The scale of the supposed Holocaust is similarly exaggerated, and there is disagreement among historians about the total number of victims.

It is agreed it is between 5 and 6 million killed.

The Auschwitz total was an exaggerated Soviet one, that the Poles used until the collapse of the Soviet Union. Then they switched to using the more accurate western death toll.

If the number of victims was exaggerated by the Soviets, how come the figure of 6,000,000 people remained after it was reduced? Why are people still being tried in Germany and Austria for denying the figure of 6,000,000 dead, and not, say, 3,500,000?

Because the 6 million was already in use, in the West. The exaggerated Soviet total was dropped by Eastern European countries, after the collapse of the SU, in the early 1990s.

The "weird stuff" is revisionism concentrating on atrocity stories and rumours, rather than finding the accurate narrative and doing the basic task of any historian. That you believe the Auschwitz death toll revisionist maths, without doing any research to find out how the figures were achieved, tells me that you are blindly believing the revisionist narrative. You should apply your doubts to revisionism. It cannot be trusted, since many are anti-Semitic, far-right, conspiracy theorists pushing an agenda. They also commonly lack relevant training and expertise on the topics they discuss.

I do not "blindly believe the revisionists." In fact, when I first read Graf's book, I was skeptical, fearing that he was trying to trick me into revisionism with false facts. However, all the oddities of the Holocaust stories - which are supported by official historians, not revisionists - such as the 2,000 or 3,000 prisoners in the Auschwitz gas chambers, the fantastic use of Sonderkommandos to remove corpses just 20 or 30 minutes after they were gassed, and without the use of gas masks, are still there. This is not based on rumors, but on the testimony of those very witnesses and the works of historians. Of course, politically biased groups such as anti-Semites are not to be trusted. However, not all revisionists are far-right.

Witnesses are poor at estimations, so exaggerated numbers for gassings and how long the gas took to clear, are to be expected. That is normal for witnesses, and since revisionists do not know much about witness behaviour, memory and recollection, they make mistakes.