So-called revisionists do not know what they are doing.
Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2025 2:32 pm
I presume most, if not all, of you have a job. Imagine someone arrives at your work, with no training, or experience, and they assert you are doing it all wrong and you have made a huge mistake.
That is what happens when so-called revisionists, assert to historians, lawyers, criminal investigators and journalists, who have investigated the Holocaust, that they have got it horribly wrong. When so-called revisionists critique intelligence reports, witness statements and archaeological surveys, they do so as unskilled amateurs. That means, they are more likely to be wrong, they are the ones who have made the big mistakes. When people pitch themselves as sceptics, critiquing the evidence, it seems reasonable that they should have some experience. Otherwise, as the new person at work, with no experience or training, is dismissed, then should they be.
When so-called revisionists do try to revise the history of the Holocaust, they fail, dreadfully. Some argue it is fine to have no conclusion, the Jews just went where they went! Some even argue asking them to revise the history, is reversing the burden of proof! Some do try to revise the history, but when they do so, they fall apart into disagreement and often flat out contradiction. The Kremas gas chambers were never used for any gassing or they were used as delousing chambers. None of the various claims about the actual function of the Kremas, or AR camps, is well enough evidenced, to be convincing to the majority of so-called revisionists. That failure to produce an evidenced chronology of events, should be a red flag to cause people to think again.
If so-called revisionists got some training in the core subjects used by those who have investigated the Holocaust, I say they would start to see where they have gone wrong. Until that happens, they are doomed to be the new person at work, who has just made a complete fool of themselves in front of the far better trained and more experienced colleagues.
That is what happens when so-called revisionists, assert to historians, lawyers, criminal investigators and journalists, who have investigated the Holocaust, that they have got it horribly wrong. When so-called revisionists critique intelligence reports, witness statements and archaeological surveys, they do so as unskilled amateurs. That means, they are more likely to be wrong, they are the ones who have made the big mistakes. When people pitch themselves as sceptics, critiquing the evidence, it seems reasonable that they should have some experience. Otherwise, as the new person at work, with no experience or training, is dismissed, then should they be.
When so-called revisionists do try to revise the history of the Holocaust, they fail, dreadfully. Some argue it is fine to have no conclusion, the Jews just went where they went! Some even argue asking them to revise the history, is reversing the burden of proof! Some do try to revise the history, but when they do so, they fall apart into disagreement and often flat out contradiction. The Kremas gas chambers were never used for any gassing or they were used as delousing chambers. None of the various claims about the actual function of the Kremas, or AR camps, is well enough evidenced, to be convincing to the majority of so-called revisionists. That failure to produce an evidenced chronology of events, should be a red flag to cause people to think again.
If so-called revisionists got some training in the core subjects used by those who have investigated the Holocaust, I say they would start to see where they have gone wrong. Until that happens, they are doomed to be the new person at work, who has just made a complete fool of themselves in front of the far better trained and more experienced colleagues.
