The CODOH Revisionist Forum

viewtopic.php?p=24589#p24589

Why people — like yourself and the only other defender here at CODOH and elsewhere — avoid addressing the empirical evidence...

I do not avoid discussing the empirical evidence. I have discussed how so-called revisionist doubts over the possibility of the gassing, mass grave and cremation claims are erroneous, so much, I have ended up being quarantined.

Nessie wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2026 12:27 pm viewtopic.php?p=24589#p24589

Why people — like yourself and the only other defender here at CODOH and elsewhere — avoid addressing the empirical evidence...

I do not avoid discussing the empirical evidence. I have discussed how so-called revisionist doubts over the possibility of the gassing, mass grave and cremation claims are erroneous, so much, I have ended up being quarantined.

Your side ignores physical evidence. It's discussed only to compete with revisionist critiques.

In your case, your approach is to simply lie and claim you have evidence that you don't have. "56 Olympic swimming pools!" "Photos galore!"

Nesserto wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2026 12:27 pm I do not avoid discussing the empirical evidence.

Says the mentally ill pathological liar who cravenly runs away every time it's challenged to defend its unsubstantiated allegations about the fraudulently alleged "huge mass graves" at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II.

viewtopic.php?p=24577#p24577

viewtopic.php?p=24578#p24578

Archie wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2026 1:27 pm

Nessie wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2026 12:27 pm viewtopic.php?p=24589#p24589

Why people — like yourself and the only other defender here at CODOH and elsewhere — avoid addressing the empirical evidence...

I do not avoid discussing the empirical evidence. I have discussed how so-called revisionist doubts over the possibility of the gassing, mass grave and cremation claims are erroneous, so much, I have ended up being quarantined.

Your side ignores physical evidence. It's discussed only to compete with revisionist critiques.

In your case, your approach is to simply lie and claim you have evidence that you don't have. "56 Olympic swimming pools!" "Photos galore!"

"Photos galore" indeed!

F16:



One of the 6 fraudulently alleged "eyewitness mass graves:"

Nessie, Is it - True. - or - False. - that; Non-nefarious diggings for such things as garbage pits, cellars, wells, latrines, septic pits, etc. - were dug at Treblinka II - ??

nesserto's answer: True

Nessie, of the 15 alleged Treblinka II graves / cremation pits in question - the one that you can conclusively prove currently contains the most human remains is number: _?_.

Nesserto's answer:

I don't know.


nesserto:

Geophysics scientifically and conclusively proves that there are pits, G32, G29, G1, G44, G4, G38, G36, G50, G51, G52, G53, G54 and that they exist. But it does not prove that those pits contain human remains.

CSC:

Without intrusive activity - it is not possible to conclusively determine the nature of these pits.

Archie wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2026 1:27 pm

Nessie wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2026 12:27 pm viewtopic.php?p=24589#p24589

Why people — like yourself and the only other defender here at CODOH and elsewhere — avoid addressing the empirical evidence...

I do not avoid discussing the empirical evidence. I have discussed how so-called revisionist doubts over the possibility of the gassing, mass grave and cremation claims are erroneous, so much, I have ended up being quarantined.

Your side ignores physical evidence. It's discussed only to compete with revisionist critiques.

My "side" has various parts to it. The archaeologists have certainly not ignored the physical evidence, as they have gathered much of it. The Poles started that process in 1945. There have been various forensic examinations of the buildings, or remains thereof, that are evidenced to have functioned as gas chambers. Depending on how physical evidence is defined, it can include documents, for which historians are largely responsible.

You think historians largely ignore the physical evidence, because they concentrate on the narratives provided best by the eyewitness evidence.

In your case, your approach is to simply lie and claim you have evidence that you don't have. "56 Olympic swimming pools!" "Photos galore!"

The 56 Olympic swimming pools was a way of conveying the volume of the area identified by the 1945 Polish site survey as the main area containing cremated human remains, identified to them by eyewitnesses as the location of the main mass graves.

My comment "photos galore" was hyperbole, not to be taken literally. I did have photographic evidence, which is way more than you. You lack pretty much any source of evidence.

Borjastick makes an unevidenced assertion;

viewtopic.php?p=24588#p24588

The Irish left and were not recorded anywhere...

Irish migrants into the USA, Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand, which is where the majority have gone, on transports that are recorded, are also recorded as having arrived and settled at those places.

The so-called revisionists cannot do that for the vast majority of Jews arrested by the Nazis and their allies, 1939-45. For them, all evidence of their existence ends in certain specific camps. They cannot be traced to other countries after the war.

HansHill is at it as well;

viewtopic.php?p=24602#p24602

...by necessity must use Soviet (Polish) figures, especially on a per-camp basis.

Many camps were liberated by the Western Allies and western historians could use Nazi records and records from each occupied and aligned country to get population totals.

Immediate post-war figures will use a base assumption of 4 million dead in Auschwitz alone.

Any evidence of that, with western historians? Bear in mind, Soviet historians produced no studies of the Holocaust, so there are no Soviet death tolls from them. The Soviet death tolls came from their media, fed and controlled by the government.

Callafangers joins in;

viewtopic.php?p=24600#p24600

...it stands to reason that a German man would have considered the independent German government led by Adolf Hitler as more representative of Germans than they would a postwar 'denazifying' government that was sanctioned by people who hated Germans.

I would like to see evidence that the majority of Germans, who were never in the Nazi party, and many of whom suffered under Nazi rule, were not represented better by the postwar Germanys, East and West, particularly in the West.

The two Germanys found themselves under control of competing powers and on the front line of the Cold War. Those two nations themselves became hyper competitive. We are supposed to believe that somehow, without any evidence of it happening, that they cooperated to perpetrate a Holocaust hoax, that was very much not in each nation's interests.

What better way to fight back against denazification, than by blowing the mass murder in gas chambers hoax.

Can anyone explain to me how so-called revisionist inability to work out how claimed and evidenced high cremation rates at A-B were possible, is evidence to prove that there were no such mass cremations?

viewtopic.php?t=171

Nessie wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2026 3:55 pm My comment "photos galore" was hyperbole, not to be taken literally. I did have photographic evidence

"Did"???

Let's see your so-called "evidence" you lying POS.

Post them here:

viewtopic.php?t=678

Nessie wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2026 6:26 am Borjastick makes an unevidenced assertion;

viewtopic.php?p=24588#p24588

The Irish left and were not recorded anywhere...

Irish migrants into the USA, Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand, which is where the majority have gone, on transports that are recorded, are also recorded as having arrived and settled at those places.

The so-called revisionists cannot do that for the vast majority of Jews arrested by the Nazis and their allies, 1939-45. For them, all evidence of their existence ends in certain specific camps. They cannot be traced to other countries after the war.

Look at the mentally ill pathologically lying POS HC cult member attemt to steer the conversation away from all the lies it's been caught in.

Why are you running from this:

viewtopic.php?p=24577#p24577

and this:

viewtopic.php?p=24578#p24578

you coward?

Nessie wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2026 6:31 am HansHill is at it as well;

viewtopic.php?p=24602#p24602

...by necessity must use Soviet (Polish) figures, especially on a per-camp basis.

Many camps were liberated by the Western Allies and western historians could use Nazi records and records from each occupied and aligned country to get population totals.

Immediate post-war figures will use a base assumption of 4 million dead in Auschwitz alone.

Any evidence of that, with western historians? Bear in mind, Soviet historians produced no studies of the Holocaust, so there are no Soviet death tolls from them. The Soviet death tolls came from their media, fed and controlled by the government.

Look at the mentally ill pathologically lying POS HC cult member attemt to steer the conversation away from all the lies it's been caught in.

Why are you running from this:

viewtopic.php?p=24577#p24577

and this:

viewtopic.php?p=24578#p24578

you coward?

Nessie wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2026 6:40 am Callafangers joins in;

viewtopic.php?p=24600#p24600

...it stands to reason that a German man would have considered the independent German government led by Adolf Hitler as more representative of Germans than they would a postwar 'denazifying' government that was sanctioned by people who hated Germans.

I would like to see evidence that the majority of Germans, who were never in the Nazi party, and many of whom suffered under Nazi rule, were not represented better by the postwar Germanys, East and West, particularly in the West.

The two Germanys found themselves under control of competing powers and on the front line of the Cold War. Those two nations themselves became hyper competitive. We are supposed to believe that somehow, without any evidence of it happening, that they cooperated to perpetrate a Holocaust hoax, that was very much not in each nation's interests.

What better way to fight back against denazification, than by blowing the mass murder in gas chambers hoax.

Look at the mentally ill pathologically lying POS HC cult member attemt to steer the conversation away from all the lies it's been caught in.

Why are you running from this:

viewtopic.php?p=24577#p24577

and this:

viewtopic.php?p=24578#p24578

you coward?

Nessie wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2026 6:43 am Can anyone explain to me how so-called revisionist inability to work out how claimed and evidenced high cremation rates at A-B were possible, is evidence to prove that there were no such mass cremations?

I have already done so here:

viewtopic.php?p=24577#p24577

and here:

viewtopic.php?p=24578#p24578

viewtopic.php?p=24648#p24648

I brought up the Majdanek trial merely to refute the notion defense couldn't contest "established" facts. They did repeatedly, apparently without consequence, because the legal strategy was in many ways successful.

I make a point about those West German trials that is very broad, we have hundreds of testimonies of people who self implicated. There's a question of 'why?' that I think you're skirting over, wrongly, because it does matter. Now I get the sense you're trying to tell me this question is not important. Look away, nothing to see here. It's uninteresting and self evident.

For SS camp staff to deny the use of camps for gassings, requires evidence of usage. It was and still is not illegal to deny mass gassings at Dachau and Bergen-Belsen, because of the evidence there were no mass gassings at those camps. Even when it was not illegal to deny mass gassings, SS staff admitted camps such as TII were used for gassings, which was because of the evidence of usage. That evidence means it is now illegal to deny such.

The denier/revisionists just do not want to accept the evidence for gassings, so they resort to dreaming up conspiracies, that the SS participated in rather than objected to or pushed back against. They position themselves as defence lawyers for the SS, but defence who allege that their clients are cowardly liars who hide the evidence of what really took place.