The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 2:35 pm The thread is getting mired already. Ive got to ask, is there a way we could get nessie to respond to the question posed by 'Fangers in the OP?

I would like to see an essay from him outlining 3-4 witnesses he finds credible and showing that the actually do corroborate each other.

I am not writing an essay, instead I have named witnesses, explained about the difference between credibility and truthfulness and explained how they corroborate. I have just provided another example of Tauber, Kula and a document that corroborate.

Given the last response by Nessie, I suggest throwing a lock on the thread and letting it sink into obscurity and die.

Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 3:22 pm Given the last response by Nessie, I suggest throwing a lock on the thread and letting it sink into obscurity and die.

I get why you want to restrict debate over methodology, in particular how to accurately assess witness evidence. You want you obviously flawed and opinion based method of assessment to not be challenged.

Nessie, you are filibustering and obfuscating. That's why I want to throw a lock on this one. You have 5 threads where you have already been ripped apart going over 'witness assessment'.

This thread was meant for you to defend a group of witness testimony with regard to a particular physical location.

You failed and you refuse to do this.

The thread is cooked.

No wonder you are performing so terribly when your threshold for corroboration is an item in a different location to where you need it to be

Drahtnetzeinschiebvorrichtung Inventoried to the wrong location.

viewtopic.php?t=549&sid=f48d906545d3359 ... 4d2e542e47

You either:

- Have pathetic thresholds for corroboration
- Dont understand how to read an inventory sheet
- Dishonestly invoking a deus ex machina to force a narrative
- Brazenly lying & attempting to manipulate those less familiar with the events
- All of the above

Absolute slop as always

Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 2:35 pm The thread is getting mired already. Ive got to ask, is there a way we could get nessie to respond to the question posed by 'Fangers in the OP?

Of course nesserto will respond to your question, but if you are waiting for an actual answer, or, more unlikely still, an honest answer, then you are just wasting your time.

Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 2:35 pm I would like to see an essay from him outlining 3-4 witnesses he finds credible and showing that they actually do corroborate each other.

cor·rob·or·ation

evidence which confirms - OR - supports a statement or theory

Stubble, when you use the word "corroboration" / "corroborate", do you mean "confirm" or "support"?

Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 3:39 pm Nessie, you are filibustering and obfuscating. That's why I want to throw a lock on this one. You have 5 threads where you have already been ripped apart going over 'witness assessment'.

This thread was meant for you to defend a group of witness testimony with regard to a particular physical location.

You failed and you refuse to do this.

The thread is cooked.

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

HansHill wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 3:45 pm

No wonder you are performing so terribly when your threshold for corroboration is an item in a different location to where you need it to be

Drahtnetzeinschiebvorrichtung Inventoried to the wrong location.

viewtopic.php?t=549&sid=f48d906545d3359 ... 4d2e542e47

You either:

- Have pathetic thresholds for corroboration
- Dont understand how to read an inventory sheet
- Dishonestly invoking a deus ex machina to force a narrative
- Brazenly lying & attempting to manipulate those less familiar with the events
- All of the above

Absolute slop as always

And the answer is:

All of the above.

Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 3:22 pm Given the last response by Nessie, I suggest throwing a lock on the thread and letting it sink into obscurity and die.

Or we could focus on one issue and one issue only.

Like this issue for example:

viewtopic.php?p=24886#p24886

Where all the ground work has already been laid out:

viewtopic.php?p=24673#p24673

Keen wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 3:54 pm

Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 2:35 pm The thread is getting mired already. Ive got to ask, is there a way we could get nessie to respond to the question posed by 'Fangers in the OP?

Of course nesserto will respond to your question, but if you are waiting for an actual answer, or, more unlikely still, an honest answer, then you are just wasting your time.

Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 2:35 pm I would like to see an essay from him outlining 3-4 witnesses he finds credible and showing that they actually do corroborate each other.

cor·rob·or·ation

evidence which confirms - OR - supports a statement or theory

Stubble, when you use the word "corroboration" / "corroborate", do you mean "confirm" or "support"?

I'd actually be satisfied if Nessie could show either confirmation or support between these accounts in a meaningful way. Just 'he said gas' and 'he also said gas' is insufficient. Descriptions should provide an account congruent with both one another and with the current description of process.

It can not be done, the modern-day fable is a composite of many descriptions that was never articulated in a single description.

HansHill wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 3:45 pm

No wonder you are performing so terribly when your threshold for corroboration is an item in a different location to where you need it to be

Drahtnetzeinschiebvorrichtung Inventoried to the wrong location.

viewtopic.php?t=549&sid=f48d906545d3359 ... 4d2e542e47

You either:

- Have pathetic thresholds for corroboration
- Dont understand how to read an inventory sheet
- Dishonestly invoking a deus ex machina to force a narrative
- Brazenly lying & attempting to manipulate those less familiar with the events
- All of the above

Absolute slop as always

Two eyewitnesses describe the same item, with both being specific about it being located in the gas chamber. A document also describes the same item in an inventory, but it appears to list it in a different room. But all three locate it inside the same building. The discrepancy can be simply explained as a mistake in the inventory, no need for a deus ex machina. I have lied about nothing, with quotes from both witneses and a link to the document.

You are seriously stretching credibility, claiming that there is no corroborative evidence for the columns. If the type of evidence used here, was used for something that you were happy to accept, you would declare there is corroboration. If two Jews and a document described a mesh column that was used for improved ventilation inside a Krema corpse store, you would accept that as corroborating evidence, without any problems!

Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 4:03 pm I'd actually be satisfied if Nessie could show either confirmation or support between these accounts in a meaningful way.

The problem of course is that "in a meaningful way" is open to interpretation.

nesserto is a mentall ill pathologicaly lying POS cult member who's interpretation reflects its mental illness, and of course will be different than the sane people here like you.

Nesserto wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 4:06 pm I have lied about nothing.

Nesserto:

A mass grave is defined as a grave containing multiple human corpses, or the remains of multiple people.

Nessie, how many actual mass graves did CSC actually prove actually exist within the boundary of the Treblinka II camp?

Nessie's answer:

12 - G32, G29, G1, G44, G4, G38, G36, G50, G51, G52, G53, G54.

You forgot about this one nesserto:

Two people describe two different things and a third thing is somewhere else!

Corroboration!



The absolute state of Holocaust enjoyers.

Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2026 4:03 pm ...

I'd actually be satisfied if Nessie could show either confirmation or support between these accounts in a meaningful way. Just 'he said gas' and 'he also said gas' is insufficient.

The eyewitnesses provide more detail than that.

Descriptions should provide an account congruent with both one another and with the current description of process.

It can not be done, the modern-day fable is a composite of many descriptions that was never articulated in a single description.

When only eyewitnesses to the gassing process are used, their descriptions have a lot of similarities, with no significant differences. The eyewitnesses at the A-B Kremas agree people going into one room made like a changing room, where they undress and are told they going for a shower. They are then moved into the gas chamber, gassed and then the corpses are removed at taken to the cremation ovens. No one differs from that process. The eyewitnesses to the process at the farm house/bunker chambers vary, as the buildings and their layout was different.

The AR camp eyewitnesses also describe the same process, with different witnesses seeing different parts, depending on whether they worked at the unloading ramps, in the property sorting buildings, or at the gas chambers, graves or pyres.

You are trying to come up with excuses to disbelieve, commenting on witness evidence as if it is something you have any expertise or training in.