Red pill me. What basis do holocaust denyers have for their claims...

Red pill me. What basis do holocaust denyers have for their claims? Because I just got back from a talk with an ex Nazi doctor, and an Jew who lived through Auschwitz.

Or maybe I'm misunderstanding your point of view.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=hbp61fOVFaE
youtu.be/dtlPlZGvgY0
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

- maths

- 6 million number appeared before

- jews

...

Not sure what you mean by that. Elaborate?

There is no physical evidence which supports the notion that Hitler wanted to gas 6 million Jews. Those who support the holocaust meme have the burden of proof on them.

Where is the proof?
Where are the bones?
Where are the documents?

Show me a single scrap of paper from Nazi Germany which suggests that the gassing of Jews was a part of Hitler's plans.

Mix this in with unreliable narrators like Weisel and his fountains of blood, Germans bayonetting Jew babies, lampshades, soap, mechanized death roller coasters and the objective, historical fact that Hitler worked with Jewish groups in an attempt to resettle the Jews in a nation of their own; either Madagascar or Israel.

Hitler was a Zionist.

Pic related is a good summary of the whole debacle.

I dont see a conspiracy there, I see people voting for what they believe to be in their best interests.

Fair point. I agree that it's good to be skeptical if there is a lack of evidence. And there are death certificates signed by Nazi doctors from the gas chambers, instead of writing out one fr each Jew, they just made a collective Death certificate.

Even if you don\t take stuff like that as credible, there are still plenty of people alive today who lived through it.

reading

>still plenty of people alive today who lived through it.
Right. Who make fantastic claims about blood geysers and being gassed 7 times.

That's obviously not real, but that's just one of many. The fact that his claims are unreasonable doesn't detract from everyone else's who are reasonable

>The fact that his claims are unreasonable doesn't detract from everyone else's who are reasonable
Of course it does. And I don't deny that Jews died in concentration camps and pogroms. I don't suggest the Nazis treated the Jews particularly well.

I deny that 6 millions Jews were deliberately mass murdered by Nazi leadership.

There is just no evidence to support these claims.

Denying the Holocaust, no I do not deny Jews were rounded up and put into camps, sure that is true, some were executed of course, others forced labor. However the numbers is what is called into question as well as "gas" chambers. As well as the events that led to the persecution of Jews such as the failed Jewish Communist revolution of 1918. Well before NSDAP and the rise of Hitler.

Jews seem to be very fond of that six million number. You can find it in articles as early as 1920s.

What about accounts from Nazis who described their process?

Every day Sherman faces a choice: get his own job and pursue financial and real independence, or schlepp to his uncle Sidney's troll farm and ask the same god-damn shill questions in the same god-damn way.

Confessions under duress. I can describe how I swam to Jupiter. Doesn't mean it happened.

You'd think we'd have found some Jew tooth or some Jew ash by now if 6 millions Jews were systematically slaughtered across Germany and Poland.

Here's the important questions surrounded the Jews and WWII. Why did the Nazis so dislike the Eternal Jew?

>ex Nazi doctor
Really? Who.

Not sure, but given the right amount of torture and threats to your family you would say nearly anything if it meant you or them may be spared.
youtube.com/watch?v=hbp61fOVFaE

>Mix this in with unreliable narrators like Weisel and his fountains of blood, Germans bayonetting Jew babies, lampshades, soap, mechanized death roller coasters and the objective, historical fact that Hitler worked with Jewish groups in an attempt to resettle the Jews in a nation of their own; either Madagascar or Israel.

Debunking fake proofs does not make automatically invalidate all other proofs.

I'm really skeptical about a lot of things around Holocaust, notably the constant reminding and places in history programs (it basically takes more place than WW2 events today), the industry of entertainment around it or the laws preventing to criticize it in some countries (like France for example) and finally its use use to deflect criticism against the jew community and Zionism.

However, and I will get shit for it but if you look at the amount and credibility of proofs, either the people who built that are superiorly intelligent and organized or the holocaust actually happened.

I think most here think it was highly exaggerated. It also doesn't help there are hundreds of stories about people living without water for weeks, escaping and living with Wolves, watching people get masterbated to death and skin lampshades. There are so many obviously fake stories people get annoyed.

Iike the nuremberg trials? they must have done a really bad job of torture because most of the defendants denied knowing it happened, only 3 admitted it.

World Almanac 1933:
15,315,000

World Almanac 1948:
15,753,000.

>Debunking fake proofs does not make automatically invalidate all other proofs.
True. It does cast shadows of doubt when the most visible proponent of the Shoa is an obvious liar.
>either the people who built that are superiorly intelligent
No one said the Jews aren't smart. I'd love to see these credible proofs though.

I repeat: I have never seen any evidence to suggest a plot by the Nazi leadership to murder 6 millions Jews in gas chambers.

There is lots of evidence that suggests a plot by the Nazi leadership to deport the Jews to Israel.

What's the point of the gas chambers and the crematoriums anyways? Aren't German's supposed to be efficient?

Anyone have the post showing that the holocaust was mathematically impossible due to the time it takes to actually burn a corpse?

shitposting at it's finest

You have exceptionally low standards of evidence

>Anyone have the post showing that the holocaust was mathematically impossible due to the time it takes to actually burn a corpse?

It's just the alleged number and the time for burning can't fit with the manpower in all the extermination camps.

Also, I do not deny anything. People were killed by lack of nutrition and ills.

They were of the following 'unfit' groups:

- political opposition as communists, anarchists
- racial unfit as gypsies
- religious groups as jews
- handicapped, criminals, crazies and GAY PEOPLE.

But not 6 miliions and not only of the jewish religion.

>global jew population pre-holocaust
11 million
>global jew population post-holocaust
12 million
>if 6 million died this is numerically impossible, even for rabbits

Didnt happen.

Show it to me please.

I think it deserves an answer. "Nazi doctor's" aren't exactly a plentiful commodity around the US, and yet OP says he just spoke with one?
Assuming any "doctor" would be 25 years old at the time (training, med school, this would be bare minimum) and he served at least in 1945 in order to qualify as a "Nazi doctor" that would put said doctors age at a minimum of 96 years old.

The list of 96 year old Nazi doctors currently living in the US can't be particularly long, so who is OP having lunch dates with?

>Anyone have the post showing that the holocaust was mathematically impossible due to the time it takes to actually burn a corpse?

I have seen this argument that a human body would take 1h30 to burn into fine ash but I have seen a counter argument that apparently nazi officers explained that they could enter up to 3 bodies in one oven and since past 25 minutes most soft tissues would be burned they would empty the new void space with other corpses.
That seems a reasonnable explanation for me.

The explanation about the absence of ashpile is that the nazis reused them as fertilizers.

>implying every corpse was burned and not thrown in a mass grave
>implying we don't have mountains of photographic evidence, first-hand accounts on all sides and the actual, physical remains of concentration camps to prove the Holocaust happened on some level

>most soft tissues would be burned they would empty the new void space with other corpses.
Where are the bones?

>implying every corpse was burned and not thrown in a mass grave
Even better. Where are the graves and where are the corpses?
>photographic evidence
Looks shooped to me.
>first-hand accounts on all sides
Eye witness testimony is the least reliable.
>actual, physical remains of concentration camps to prove the Holocaust happened on some level
I never denied the camps. This doesn't prove any Jews were gassed.

Well the crux of the moral outrage involved with the holocaust is that the Germans used industrial means to intentionally murder as many as possible. Demonstrating that there was no murder industry, and inmate deaths where the result of nutrition and typhus would relegate the shoah to a lower tier of genocide, like the Armenian, or cambodian...those genocides no one ever talks about, let alone donates money for, or which garner political pressure.

What about these claims?
youtu.be/dtlPlZGvgY0

Oh you meant a couple Holocaust survivors?

I had the pleasure of being forced to read a novel about the Holocaust from the perspective of someone who lived through it: Elie Wiesel, who won a Nobel Peace Prize for his work.

And guess what? He lies through his teeth in the novel. He won a Nobel Peace Prize for peddling lies as fact, and it's STILL mandatory reading in most schools.

The point is you can't trust a kike.

Bones count for 4 to 6 kg in a man body, since the density of bone is around 1,1 that's the equivalent of 4,5 liters, the volume of 2 big coke bottles.