Justice. Racist historian David Irving is defeated in the British

Injustice.

/pol/ larps as the pinkos they think infest this board just because we want to be left alone to discuss history, meanwhile the board is driven further down the shitter by mods that don't give a fuck.

>>3228030

I don't get it. What did he personally do to this bitch?

>>3228060

He sued her for libel.

>>3228030
>falsifies facts to deny the systematic extermination of Jews in the Holocaust
>gets called a Holocaust denier
>sues for libel
>loses
>is forced to pay for the trial as per standard procedure
>can't afford it
What exactly is wrong with this? The judge calling him an evil racist nazi doesn't make the ruling incorrect. The way the article is written is pretty cringy, and the title is intenfionally bombastic and misinformative.

File: Holocaust Revisionism.jpg (266KB, 576x720px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 576x720px

>>3228075

If I say George Washington was born in 1731 instead of 1732 that doesn't make me a George Washington denier.

God Holocaust people are so stupid.

>>3228075
why do you anti-white leftcucks want a safe space?

>>3228082
>>3228084
Here we go again.

>>3228114
why do you hate the white race?

>>3228124

You're early. Fridays are a day off or something? In the hours since your last post at least one white woman was BLACKED and another white man is dead. Posting here did nothing to save them. Are you proud of yourself?

>>3228030
>He could not afford the charge
>.... his flat in mayfair
Pick one.

>>3228075
This seems reasonable to me. Don't know why OP had to act like a nigger with his extremely baity post.

Good.

Anyone who denies the Holocaust is a fucking retard.

>>3228030

since when the british legal system is a reputable historical arbiter ?

File: 1476559568693.jpg (108KB, 500x600px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 500x600px

>>3228162
>Don't know why OP had to act like a nigger with his extremely baity post.

>>3228124
I thought the jews were white? Or is that just when we're discussing their accomplishments?

>>3228060
He sued her for disliking his Holocaust denying book, and she won the case.

>>3228213
are you actually incapable of reading

File: reading-text-questions.gif (40KB, 604x780px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 604x780px

>>3228213

>>3228030
>will have to pay £2,000,000
This happened 17 years ago iirc.
Anyway Irving was a good fact finder but a horribly biased writer.

>>3228030
POL BTFO!!!

>Writes about Hitler pooing himself
>Legacy is Holocaust denial
Surely these cancel each other out right?

Shit like this is why i'm unironically happy Fascism, Islamism, and Right-Wing ideologies are rising again and Liberalism is dying. The West needs to be reminded of what happens when you take away Freedom of Speech from groups you don't like.

>>3228739

Protip: he's the one who tried to restrict someone's freedom of speech by making a false libel claim

>>3228082
>they deny this treatment of Jews was unjust
>WRONG!
uhhhhh

>>3228030
>Racist historian David Irving is defeated in the British High Court and will have to pay £2,000,000 to the victim of his xenophobic bigotry.
Irving sued the woman for libel and lost the trial. Consequently, he had to cover the costs. Why are you lying?

>>3228213
He is not calling you out you fucking retard

>>3228060
>denies the holocaust on the regular
>other historian cites him as an example of denialism in her book
>get uberbutthurt over it
>sue the author and its publisher for libel
>case goes to court and lasts 2 years
>gets btfo by the judge and has to pay huge legal bills
>be bankrupt and say you dindu nuffin
just irving things

>>3228779
So he is just very stupid
Like OP

/pol/tards need to be purged

>>3228818
what if you enjoy /pol/ for the memes but don't actually believe in any of its conspiracies?

>>3228845
Then go to /pol/
I don't mind /pol/tards if they discuss their shit on their board

File: article-2224830-040030360000044D-908_634x485.jpg (94KB, 634x485px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 634x485px

>When you make a Holocaust denial thread but no one takes the bait.

>>3228813
It's a bit worse than that actually, I remember when that story made news in the UK. From what I recall he initially had the opportunity or choice to sue under US law (something to do with where the publisher was located) but irving eventually opted in to sue her under UK law, which has tougher libel legislation (basically the onus is on the defense as opposed to the US) so it was going to be harder for lipstadt to defend herself.

The thing is that it backfired and because she was forced to put up a solid defense, she hired a couple of historiqns who went through almost all of Irving's published works so in the end the trial lasted well over two years, costed shitloads of money and he ended up having to pay for it all. Had he not try to fuck her over by suing her under UK libel law, he probably would have still lost the trial but it would have been thrown out of court much faster and wouldn't have bankrupted him in the process. It's literally his entire fault.

File: 1500348577416.jpg (45KB, 500x341px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 500x341px

>>3228947
>>3229309
JUST

File: c5414ab3ba5f1a653c0c3640b1b596b3d2aa18e5.jpg (908KB, 848x1218px) Image search: [Google]

908KB, 848x1218px

I really need to stay off pol. It kills me inside and closes the mind.

The truth does not fear investigation.

Western Front concentration camps - lots of dead people. though they were worked or mistreated to death. no gas chambers, ovens, etc.

Eastern Front concentration camps. evil nazi 6000000 death camps. found by the soviets. which happened to be led by Stalin. who happened to also purge all the soviet jews and other undesirables.

ever think that the soviets lied about the camps they found. in order to shift their own mass murder onto the Germans?

>>3229419

>testimonies of prisoners and german administration don't exist

All lies, all lies. Probably extracted during Nuremberg kangaroo trial tortures. I have no proof of this you see, but I feel this way, so it's enough. The prisoners are lying too, fucking kikes. What, not all of them are jewish? Israel is probably paying them, yeah.

/pol/ btfo

>>3229309
A nuance you are missing is that in the UK, the losing side pays the legal fees of the wining side, whereas in the US the winning side pays its own legal fees.

>>3229419

Or, get this, or the camps for killing as many Jews as possible, are placed near to where there were lots of Jews?

>>3228030
Good riddance.

>inb4 muh freeze peach

Hate speech is not free speech.

>>3229419
>Into these it is possible from above, outside the basement, to lower certain products. After 300 to 400 people have gathered in this room, the doors [3] are closed and from above the containers with the products [cans of Zyklon B pellets] are lowered into the pillars. When the containers reach the floor of the pillars, they produce certain substances that put the people to sleep [!] in one minute. A few minutes later, the door on the other side [4] is opened, leading to a lift [“Aufzug”]. The hair of the corpses is cut off and the teeth are broken out (gold teeth) by qualified people (Jews). It has been observed that Jews have hidden jewels, gold, platinum, etc. in hollow teeth. After this the corpses are loaded into the lift said go to the first floor [5]. There, there are 10 big crematorium furnaces [6] in which the corpses are burned, (As fresh corpses burn particularly well, the whole process requires only ½ to 1 Zentner [25 to 50 kg] of coke). The work itself is carried out by Jewish prisoners who will never leave this camp.
>The result to date of this “resettlement action”: 500,000 Jews [7]. The present capacity of the “resettlement action” furnaces: 10,000 in 24 hours [8].
Source is the SS officer Franke-Gricksch1943 report. Tell me more about those "resettlement action furnaces", soviet propaganda too perhaps?

https://www.phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/pressac/technique-and-operation/pressac0239.shtml

>>3229564
>trying to argue rationally with a denier
Wew

>>3228038
>/pol/ larps as the pinkos they think infest this board
>If it's right wing shitposting it's /pol/
>If it's left wing shitposting it's /pol/
Why can it never be any of the leftist parts of the internet who have been talking about colonizing /his/? I don't like either of them on /his/, but why put all the blame on one party?

>>3228038
*Mods that actively support /Pol/

>>3229493
Also, disagreeing with me is hate speech lol

>>3229610
>hey guys I know all theese holocuast deniers and race realists are shitting up your board but why arent you talking about that guy who likes John green huh?

File: 1448737877791.gif (144KB, 300x375px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 300x375px

>>3229309
This can't be real.

File: 1502049227208.jpg (85KB, 804x802px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 804x802px

>>3229634
>tfw you're rather hang out with david irving than john green

File: 1445893982847.jpg (23KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 480x360px

>>3228213
>Deleted

File: 1501728392078.jpg (4MB, 3975x5000px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3975x5000px

>>3229419
Next thing you'll tell me I need to remember the 500 gorillion bombed at Dresden

>>3229610
>Why can it never be any of the leftist parts of the internet who have been talking about colonizing /his/?
Then show me one of their threads. Just because we get constant political shitpost from one side, doesn't mean we also get massive political shitpost from the other side.

>>3228232
Why is there a spelling mistake in this

>>3229660
Any fucking day wrinkle fiddler.

>>3229482
That's not entirely correct. While it's not the default, there are cases in which the losing side pays the winner's legal costs in the U.S., usually as a punitive measure by citing or relying on bad caselaw. You also get it in certain civil rights cases by statute.

>>3228030
Good.

Harmful opinions that hurt people need to be banned.

>>3229610
Let me guess, you're talking about leftypol, right? Do you even know how irrelevant leftypol is? It's a board on a tiny (compared to 4chan) imageboard that you cannot even access via a google search because it's unlisted due to CP spam. The only reason you've even heard about it because /pol/ keeps fucking talking about it. Meanwhile, /pol/ is the most popular board on one of the most popular internet forums in the west. You could double the amount of "leftist" and halve the number of /pol/tards and the latter group would still constitute for 99% of shitposting on /his/.

>>3230002
constitutions can get amended, retard

>>3230059
>cucklet
>someone not cucked enough
>This is bad thing according to /pol/locks

What happened, did /pol/ finally left the closet?

>their poster boy gets cucked by a Jewish woman to the tune of £2,000,000
>/pol/tards only response is to say "n...no, you!!"

>>3229564

>what is torture coerced admission ?

>>3229892
Ik genuinely thought leftypol was An invention or some sort of slang of /Pol/

I've never seen it mentioned aside from being a buzzword for People calling out low effort /Pol/ thread

>>3230109
p r o o f ?
r
o
o
f
?

>>3228030
> Justice
Lmao

>>3228030
He should be shamed, not fined. That's ridiculous.

>>3230126
>he should be shamed for not believing anti white propaganda

>>3229892
>leftist shills are trying this hard tp downplay their raids
Fuck off sjw shill

>>3230109

Something none of them mentioned at any point, instead taking the blame for the most heinous crime in history, condemning their entire life's work for all eternity and going to the gallows without saying some much as a word.

>>3230126

>he shouldn't be fined for making a fraudulent libel claim

>>3230126
Pretty sure he wasn't fined for holocaust denial, but rather forced to cover the expenses of the bloated court case he's responsible for.

>>3230126
He's the one who tried to sue her, retard. She won the trial and he had to pay her legal bills. He literally asked for it by trying to SHUT
IT
DOWN

>>3230137
>leftists
>raids
lol
the people you're melting down over are the board regulars, you're the parasite shill

File: 1502466223625.jpg (28KB, 342x358px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 342x358px

>>3229653
Oh but it is.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_v_Penguin_Books_Ltd

>tfw halfway through the trial he realised it was gonna end badly and he made a settlement offer that if she apologised, gave him 500 quids and destroyed her books then they'd be even

>>3229849
Muh feelings are more important than the truth

>>3230685
Thankfully, the court decided otherwise.

>>3229610
/pol/ claims /his/ is to the left because they're just that's what they say when they realize nobody likes them. All commie threads on /his/ get ridiculed.

>>3230734
why do you hate the white race?

>>3230756
>Germans
>white

File: IMG_1798.gif (275KB, 495x283px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 495x283px

Who are in charge of the justice court system? Who are in charge of the newspaper or news media outlet?

>>3230846
People who didn't drop out of uni?

>>3230846
>it's DA JOOS fault that irving went to trial and it was proven that he faked shit all the time

>>3230145
Oh, wow. No clue how the legal fees were over $2 million on a nothing case like that.

>>3228030

Is this the guy /pol/ cites to "prove" there was no holocaust?

>>3230878

The trial lasted 4 years.

>>3230883
Yes. The best they have is a mosleyian non historian that was proven to lie to push his agenda.

>sue for libel when someone correctly calls you out for lying about history
>trying to use the UK's notably more favorable (to the plaintiff) and less speech protective laws (compared to the US where libel and slander is not as easy to win over)
>actual, professional historians prove to the court (and the world) that your lawsuit is bullshit, and the defendant was right
>Stormcucks still whining about it all these years later

>>3231056
>Jews
>not white
This is one of the most amusing pitfalls of stormcuck ideology. The only thing that keeps jews non-white is your knowledge of their jewish ancestry. If you didn't have familial information, you'd never know. (Don't start with the nose. I have a jewish nose and I'm Anglo/Germ)

>>3228030
Isn't he the one who claimed that 300,000 people died at Dresden?

>>3228075
This

>>3228203
>I thought the jews were white?
Depends who you ask.

>>3230876
Yep, unironically this

>>3229419
Don't forget typhus.

>>3229453
>Probably extracted during Nuremberg kangaroo trial tortures.
A fair belief as several German Commandants confessed to the existence of camps that did not even exist.
And several prisoners have admitted to lying.

>Deny that one of the most documented and researched mass killings happened
>Get called out as a denialist, get butthurt
>"m-muh truth does not fear investigation!"

>>3229419
>The Germans worked jews to death instead of gassing them, thus the holocaust never happened!

>>3229564
>10,000 in 24 hours
How many furnaces were there? It takes a while to burn a body, and then there's pulverizing the bones and maintainance.

>deny holohoax
>either go to jail or pay millions in fines

Bravo Europe

>>3231154
No one banned him retard. He denied the holocaust and was called a denialist.

>>3231145
It's a better and more accurate story than saying they were all gassed desu. I mean Nazi Germany must have been retarded in quite a few ways but I don't see them gassing a labour force.

>>3231146
Let me guess, you're extrapolating from modern crematoria, which only burn one body at a time in respect for the dead, inside a coffin, then collect the ashes to put in an urn, then give to the family. They also turn the oven off between "customers", so it takes time to heat up.

Protip: they weren't burning one body at a time, and they weren't trying to respect the dead and their family's.

>>3231173
What are you even talking about now? Youre just shitposting and strawmanning.

File: 4756 personen.jpg (87KB, 508x736px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 508x736px

>>3231146
Not him, but Auschwitz/Birkenau had 52 muffles at its height. I would also point out that this claim is inconsistent with other claims made by the SS and the Topf engineers who actually built the crematoria, which are all over the place. The one I usually see being given more credence is 4756 a day from pic related, although I'm not entirely sure how the general academic consensus got to be behind this one and not the other ones.

>>3231177
why do you SJW leftycucks want a safe space?

>>3231172
Thats perfectly fine as an answer and ovens may have been used to dispose of bodies from time to time. Those unfit for work were probably starved or culled. I think that the slave labor/typhus and the liquidation claims are probably true.

>>3231187
>>3231191
I never implied a safe space. You guys just seem mad that this isnt a /pol/ echochamber and you may not actually be in the majority.

File: IMG_1882.jpg (57KB, 403x403px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 403x403px

>>3231152
>be paki
>run a pedophile ring in the U.K.
>let off free, or don't even bother investigating

Hmm. I wonder who is behind this?

>>3231200
why do you hate the white race?

>>3231207
I dont.

>>3231152
He's paying because he tried to sue someone for label and lost not because he's a holocaust denier

>>3231205
How do we stop the Paki masterrace from breeding our wymen /b/ros?

>>3231212
why do you want to turn /his/ into an anti-white safe space, then?

>>3231225
How am I doing that? By laughing at some guy who denies the holocaust being called a denialist figure and getting rekt in court for disputing that?

File: IMG_2015.jpg (68KB, 809x543px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 809x543px

>>3231221
>Paki masterrace

Good one

>>3231232
why do you SJW kikes hate the white race

>>3231240
Im not an sjw or a kike and I dont hate the white race.

>>3231244
>this is what /leftypol/ actually believes

>>3231221
you leftists legitimately think pakis raping your sisters is a "brave vision for Britain"

>>3231175
>Protip: they weren't burning one body at a time, and they weren't trying to respect the dead and their family's.
I've seen the pictures of the ovens, there is no way you could fit multiple bodies in there, even if you could efficiency would drop through the floor. You also fail to account for maintainence. Also properly functioning crematoriums don't produce smoke.

Forget right wing left wing, /pol/acks are on the spectrum

>>3231253
I dont go on leftypol

>>3231185
I would need to see the crematoria in question to draw an accurate conclusion, even then tests would be preferable but crunching the numbers with current knowledge should be enough, even so that number seems rather high. Not impossible but conditions must be met.

>>3231270
Numale cuck meme pepe cuck postmale mangina cuck feminist low test cuck.

>>3228030
Holocaust denial nutjobs belong on /pol/, OP, this board is for history. Bye.

>>3231253
>>3231259
>>3231235
>>3231240
>>3231205
>>3231187

This must be the rational talking points I keep hearing so much about.

File: 1437911178924.jpg (13KB, 243x344px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 243x344px

>>3231270
Kek

>>3231192
>Those unfit for work were probably starved or culled.
I doubt it, they go on about how men, women and children were separated at the gate, yet there are women and children that survived. Also they inoculated against typhus. Slave labor is the most likely conclusion. And in the middle of a typhus epidemic incineration is the only method of disposal.

>>3231281
>implying you provided any 'rational thinking points' yourself

>>3231281
fake news kikecuckshill

>>3230894
Holy shit. If that's not proof of a broken legal system, nothing is.

File: 76547rt.jpg (895KB, 1000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

895KB, 1000x2000px

It's been a while since I have seem /pol/tards being beaten this hard
Last time this happend was yesterday

>>3228232
>waive

File: aucrem.jpg (68KB, 760x522px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 760x522px

>>3231274

>>3229892
they actually admit to raiding other sites and boards, but im assuming you're genuinely unaware and not pulling the ol gooney "wut is x" shtick.

File: aucrem2.jpg (84KB, 917x646px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 917x646px

>>3231274
>>3231362

File: aucrem3.jpg (57KB, 568x320px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 568x320px

>>3231374

File: aucrem4.jpg (184KB, 637x439px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 637x439px

>>3231376

File: aucrem5.jpg (43KB, 700x500px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 700x500px

>>3231381

File: aucrem6.jpg (57KB, 328x432px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 328x432px

>>3231385

>>3231385
That body doesn't look alive to begin with. Is cremating dead bodies a crime?

>>3229806
Is there any reason for your post to exist other than pedantism?

>>3231403
I think you mean to have said pedantry.

File: aucrem7.jpg (56KB, 736x556px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 736x556px

>>3231386

>>3230878
Lawyers charge $400 per hour sempai.

File: aucrem8.jpg (49KB, 599x451px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 599x451px

>>3231405

>>3231362
>>3231374
They seem rather large until we see some perspective.>>3231385
Let's assume there are fifteen incinerators. Maybe two could be fit at a time. With some quick calculations, we'll give the time of a modern crematorium just because. And I have 350 a day, not accounting for maintainence or any other variables.

File: If I Were Brittania I'd Waive The Rules.jpg (389KB, 1614x800px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 1614x800px

>>3231351

File: aucrem9.jpg (16KB, 236x322px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 236x322px

>>3231395

>>3231423
Looks dead to me

>>3231423
I would say this seems rather grotesque, which it is, but assuming he died of typhus those claws may be necessary.

>>3231416
Why do you need to assume when you know that there are 52 incinerators? Why do you assume that it has the slow time of a modern crematoria instead of the much faster times they achieved all the way back in 1875?

https://ia802607.us.archive.org/11/items/cremationdead00eassgoog/cremationdead00eassgoog.pdf (Page 125 of the PDF). Why do you assume that all bodies are adults, or that you don't do partial burnings and then throwing in another body, since thicker bones like the skull and the thighs take the longest to burn up but are a relatively small fraction of the total volume? Why do you ignore pictures like >>3231413, which clearly show pieces of multiple bodies in a single muffle?

Are you just very dumb, or are you stormfagging it up?

>>3231439
>ooga booga look at me I believe in the holohoax, aren't I a free-minded individual
(You)

File: __artoria_pendragon_artoria_pendragon_and_artoria_pendragon_fate_grand_order_and_fate_series_drawn_by_melon22__6d12e9ca29582f0a9fade4ce475731d7.jpg (311KB, 1161x1650px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 1161x1650px

We have this thread every day. Please make it stop. I used to be a /pol/ack too, but for fucks sake, eventually the evidence gets to you. The Holocaust happened. Hitler was not a god, and a lunatic to boot. No better than Stalin. I don't understand why white nationalists have to ALWAYS DEFEND FUCKING HITLER OF ALL PEOPLE. Just let it go, and you'd probably be more successful at recruiting and campaigning against your opponents.

File: Capture.jpg (94KB, 1065x428px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1065x428px

>>3231416
http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/othercamps/auschwitzgaschambers.html

>ITT: /leftypol/cucks BTFO

>>3231439
Adding to that they didn't cool down the oven after every corpse burnt, they kept it hot.

File: aucrem10.jpg (39KB, 739x452px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 739x452px

>>3231423

File: IMG_0936.png (220KB, 1467x1459px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1467x1459px

hi

>>3231439
>Why do you need to assume when you know that there are 52 incinerators?
Because I did not, this information is much appreciated.
>Why do you assume that it has the slow time of a modern crematoria instead of the much faster times they achieved all the way back in 1875?
The slow time for a modern crematoria is 5 hours for a single person, of course there are certain variables, however a crematoria of the period would be 5 hours as the norm due to less efficient construction and methods.
With this knowledge we have a bodycount of 1248, not accounting for maintainence etc. etc.
>since thicker bones like the skull and the thighs take the longest to burn up
Excuse me?

File: aucrem11.jpg (22KB, 521x358px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 521x358px

>>3231461

>>3231462
fake news

File: aucrem12.jpg (25KB, 456x348px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 456x348px

>>3231464

File: aucrem13.jpg (72KB, 760x540px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 760x540px

>>3231467

File: aucrem14.jpg (72KB, 760x537px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 760x537px

>>3231469

File: aucrem15.jpg (9KB, 308x181px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 308x181px

>>3231474

File: Cremation of the dead times.png (74KB, 359x695px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 359x695px

>>3231463
>Because I did not, this information is much appreciated.
Oh, were you just not paying attention to the stuff upthread?

>he slow time for a modern crematoria is 5 hours for a single person, of course there are certain variables, however a crematoria of the period would be 5 hours as the norm due to less efficient construction and methods.
With this knowledge we have a bodycount of 1248, not accounting for maintainence etc. etc.

So now we're just ignoring shit? See pic related, from the PDF I mentioned in the post you responded to. This was written in 1875, and they could burn up a man in less than an hour. There is ZERO technical reason that it would take 5 hours, and the reason it takes this long today is that surprise, funeral homes are not interested in reducing bodies to ash as quickly as possible.

>Excuse me?
What exactly about this is hard to understand? Softer tissue burns faster than denser bones. Dense bones are not a significant portion of a body's volume. You throw a body in for half the cremation time, and most of the flesh will have burned to ash, leaving room for another body to be flung on. Then, half way through that one's cremation time, the first body's corpse is now almost totally ash, the second one has its soft tissues burned on, and you throw a third one on. Pretty much every Soderkommando interview mentions this method of burning, and it's a real time saver.

>>3231484
>were you just not paying attention to the stuff upthread?
For a little bit.

>This was written in 1875, and they could burn up a man in less than an hour.
No, they burned an emaciated mass of 47lbs in under two hours, again, there are many factors and mass is a big one. And this is by no means the norm.

>Softer tissue burns faster than denser bones.
Anon, bones don't burn at the temperatures those crematoria produced.

File: Majcrem.jpg (212KB, 1207x1215px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 1207x1215px

>>3231478

File: 1492952521419.png (2MB, 1500x2702px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1500x2702px

Why do Stormfags compare Auschwitz crematoria with modern crematoria?
First of all, modern crematoria try to be respectful with the remains of the dead. The Nazis just shoved in the bodies of multiple people (often children too)
Remember that a lot of these people would be not much more than skin and bones

File: Majcrem2.jpg (33KB, 505x364px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 505x364px

>>3231493

File: Majcrem3.jpg (25KB, 382x289px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 382x289px

>>3231497

File: Majcrem4.jpg (15KB, 236x344px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 236x344px

>>3231498

File: Majcrem5.jpg (172KB, 736x495px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 736x495px

>>3231503

File: Majcrem6.jpg (35KB, 360x339px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 360x339px

>>3231504
dont forget the einsatzgruppen pyres

>>3230860
>2008+9
>going to uni
It's like some of you still don't have access to the internet

>>3231496
>The Nazis just shoved in the bodies of multiple people (often children too)
Talking about the bodies of fully grown men, even emaciated ones, several bodies would not properly fit into those chambers, even if you jam them in efficiency will be hampered.

>>3231492
>burned an emaciated mass of 47lbs in under two hours
I'm not the guy and I just used google so my numbers are probably wrong but I found that there was an Average weight for the survivors was around 60 pounds.and I'm sure the kids would weigh less

>>3231395
I don't think anyone ever claimed the jews were burned alive. They were gassed and then their corpses were taken care of with ovens

>>3228030
didn't he sue her for libel?

>>3231492
>No, they burned an emaciated mass of 47lbs in under two hours, again, there are many factors and mass is a big one. And this is by no means the norm.
>Literally not reading it.

>I myself have personally superintended the burning of two entire bodies, one small and emaciated of 47 lbs weight ,and one of 144 lbs weight, not emaciated, and possess the products, in the former case weighting 1 3/4 lbs, in the latter, weighting about 4 lbs. The former was completed in 25 minutes, the latter in 50.
Both of them were completed in under 1 hour.

>Anon, bones don't burn at the temperatures those crematoria produced.
https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-temperature-needed-to-burn-human-bones-to-ash
> After some two hours at 1000′C, the only recognisable parts are the bones, which are in a brittle or crumbly condition.

https://archive.org/stream/BodyDisposalAtAuschwitzTheEndOfHolocaustDenial/BDA_djvu.txt
>After about half an hour, whether the furnace has gotten up to a
temperature of 1 100°C

Why do you persist in making claims that are clearly wrong?

>>3228124
Why did Hitler hate the white race?

>>3231552
Because he was a kike.

>>3229610
It's obvious to anyone who isn't biased that the number of leftists on /his/ is pretty small. /pol/acks just think that everyone who disagrees with them is a leftist.

>>3231538
To add to what the anon is saying, there are nazi documents that explicitly mention cremation in (way) under an hour.
http://web.archive.org/web/20150208203656if_/http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y94/Rodoh_Hans/Topf-Maut.jpg
http://web.archive.org/web/20150208203355if_/http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y94/Rodoh_Hans/Erlaeuterungs.jpg
http://web.archive.org/web/20150208203559if_/http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y94/Rodoh_Hans/Au-Stutt.jpg
http://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/topf/
http://www.topfundsoehne.de/images/imghi_047_schreiben.jpg
http://web.archive.org/web/20130505061621/http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y94/Rodoh_Hans/Bischoff_28June43.jpg
http://web.archive.org/web/20150208203658/http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y94/Rodoh_Hans/Kori.jpg

>>3231529
Interesting but not terribly effective, my estimate of two hours was rather close, so we're looking at about a 30 or 45 minute lose of time, before factoring in other factors, mind you my base calculations assumed two bodies could fit. Hmm, that might have changed things, let me give it another go.
That's 832 bodies going at a 1 per oven for 1:30 hour rate, no other variables burnathon. And 1664 at 2 per oven. Feel free to check my math.

>>3228203
I know you're being sarcastic but all the DNA testing services are able to differentiate Ashkenazi from other European DNA.

>>3231578
They're able to differentiate a lot of kinds of DNA. Ashkenazis are still white

>>3231584
>They're able to differentiate a lot of kinds of DNA. Ashkenazis are still white
Do you consider Levantine peoples white?

>>3231569
You have a 50 minute burn time for a 144 pound corpse in 1875. The emaciated child was burned up in 25 minutes. (By the way, notice how in their burnt state they weigh 4 and less than 2 pounds respectively. The bones burnt up) There is absolutely no reasonable way it would be slower to the point of 1 and a half hours per corpse, as that implies less efficiency than ovens extant about 70 years prior to Auschwitz.

>>3231569
Not the people you are discussing with, but what the fuck is your "estimate" based on? A quick google of how long commercial cremations take? It's pretty hilarious that you had no idea how many muffles Auschwitz had but are pretending to be an expert on holocaust cremation.

>>3231538
>Both of them were completed in under 1 hour.
I am curious how he accomplished this as modern crematoriums project two hours for one 150lbs mass.

>After some two hours at 1000′C, the only recognisable parts are the bones, which are in a brittle or crumbly condition.
Modern crematoriums can operate at optimum temps of 1400-1800 degrees with small facilities taking three hours and large ones just one. Crematoriums of the period ran on coke however I could not find the burning temp off a coke furnace, it should be noted however that the muffle furnaces were not to rise above 1100 degrees, and that they did not work around the clock.

>>3231622
Listening to ((((William Eassie))).

He was just sent ahead to prepare for the holohoax. Ignore his figures.

>>3231622
>modern crematoriums
Because there is respect for the dead involved

>>3231567
Which is curious as modern crematoriums take an hour or two.
Perhaps you are confused? I came across an article where twenty minutes was believed to be the standard time however this was actually an additional time when moving remains for the next body. Or so he says.

>>3231621
>pretending to be an expert on holocaust cremation
I made no such claim, I'm trying to understand.

>>3231642
Modern crematoria are not interested in reducing bodies to ash as quickly as possible. Just heating up a cold oven is going to take time, which the Auschwitz crematorium is not going to have for anything but the first body it's processing.

I don't know why you keep bringing this up, it's a stupid as fuck comparison.

File: IMG_1050.jpg (77KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 850x400px

>>3228075
Jesus, the "facts" he "falsified" were not related to the holocausrlt but rather incorrect information fed to him regarding Dresden bombing figures.

>>3231615
>You have a 50 minute burn time for a 144 pound corpse in 1875.
But how? Not even modern furnaces can do that unless it is a large facility.
>The bones burnt up
This indicates a burn temp at over 1000 degrees, but how was this accomplished when only coke and coal were available?

>>3231638
No, I'm talking the burn time, not ceremony, maintainence etc.

>>3231638
>respect for the dead

Bullshit, they both are designed to complete the same task, reduction of the body into ash.

>>3231642
Modern crematoria are not part of a genocide industry. Nazi cremation didn't cremate the corpse until it was fully ash and cremated multiple bodies at once. And no, I'm not confused. Either you believe the documents are fake, that nazis lied about their own capacity for some mysterious reason, or that comparing death camp cremation to modern crematoria is retarded.

>>3231645
>I don't know why you keep bringing this up, it's a stupid as fuck comparison.
For the burn time comparison .
>which the Auschwitz crematorium is not going to have for anything but the first body it's processing
Auschwitz wasn't going on all cylinders all the time either, maintainence and supplies were necessary to continue, there were times the ovens were cold, one case gave a 3 day period for 23 bodies.

>>3231647
No, he pretty blatantly falsified facts concerning how much Hitler knew about the Holocaust, and who ordered what and when.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2000/115.html

>5.93 The starting point for the Defendants' criticisms is the claim made by Irving that, unlike Goebbels, Hitler was not at this time driven by anti-semitism. In Goebbels Irving quotes from an article by Goebbels published in Das Reich to show that he was more violently anti-semitic than Hitler. But Evans observed that Irving omits to mention that Goebbels started his article by quoting Hitler's celebrated 1939 prediction of the annihilation of the Jews. In his report Evans quoted numerous utterances by Hitler at this time to show that Hitler was expressing similar views to those of Goebbels about the Jews. A comprehensive list of Hitler's statements about the Jews, covering the period 1919 to 1945 has been collated by the Defendants and is include at tab 5(i) of their written closing submissions. I shall revert to the list hereafter.

>13.9 As appears from section V above, the Defendants have selected nineteen instances where they contend that Irving has in one way or another distorted the evidence. Having considered the arguments, which I have summarised at some length, I have come to the conclusion that the criticisms advanced by the Defendants are almost invariably well-founded. For whatever reason (and I shall consider later the question of Irving's motivation), I am satisfied that in most of the instances cited by the Defendants Irving has significantly misrepresented what the evidence, objectively examined, reveals.

>>3231647
>13.12 I am satisfied that in Goering and to a lesser extent in Hitler's War, Irving misrepresents Hitler's role in the putsch. The evidence does not support the claim that Hitler was seeking to maintain order. Irving embroiders the incident when the ex-Army lieutenant is disciplined in such a way as to present Hitler as having behaved responsibly. But the evidence of Hitler's role in the putsch suggests otherwise. Irving ought to have appreciated that Hofmann's allegiance to Hitler rendered his testimony untrustworthy.

>13.13 In my judgment it is a valid criticism of Irving that he chose to cite, without qualification, the claim made by Daluege, a committed Nazi, that in 1930 a strikingly large proportion of the offences of fraud were committed by Jews. Daluege's enthusiastic membership of the Nazi party together with his activities on the Eastern front during the war should have led Irving to doubt any pronouncement of his affecting the Jews. Whilst I am sympathetic to Irving's handicap in being unable now to obtain access to documents in the German archives, I am not persuaded that there exist documents which justify Irving in quoting without any reservation the claim made by Daluege.

>13.15 Readers of the account in Goebbels of the events of 9 and 10 November 1938 were given by Irving to understand that Hitler bore no responsibility for the starting of the pogrom and that, once he learned of it, he reacted angrily and thereafter intervened to call a halt to the violence. I accept the evidence of Evans and Longerich that this picture seriously misrepresents the available contemporaneous evidence.

>>3231647


>13.16 Irving's endeavour to cast sole blame for the pogrom onto Goebbels is at odds with the documentary evidence. Goebbels's diary entry for 9 November, the telegram sent by Muller at 23.55 that night and the message despatched by Bohmcker all suggest that Hitler knew and approved of the anti-Jewish demonstrations. Given the significance of the events of Kristallnacht, an objective historian would in my view dismiss the notion that Hitler was kept in ignorance until a relatively late stage. Yet Irving pays little attention to the evidence which implicates Hitler. He gives a misleading and partial account of Goebbels's diary entry. I cannot accept Irving's explanation for his omission to refer to Muller's telegram and Bohmcker's message, namely that they add little, for both lend support to the thesis that Hitler knew and approved of the violence. Irving also omits to refer to the statement contained in the report of the internal party enquiry into the events of Kristallnacht that Goebbels had claimed in his speech at the Old Town Hall that Hitler had been told of the burning of Jewish shops and synagogues and had decided that such spontaneous actions should continue.

etc.

>>3231657
>Modern crematoria are not part of a genocide industry.
That is irrelevant to the time it takes to burn a corpse.
> Nazi cremation didn't cremate the corpse until it was fully ash
Which would take several hours at over 1000 degrees, which seems dangerous as the manufacturer warned against them going above 1100 degrees.
>and cremated multiple bodies at once
This is an exggaration which is probably where you get the under an hour figure from, the muffle furnaces had a compartment to continue the burning during it's final stages while another is loaded, according to this source, however this method added a further twenty minutes or so.
>comparing death camp cremation to modern crematoria is retarded
I fail to see how, it's the only comparison I have.

>>3231672
Faslified facts and arguing over historical interpretation and documentation are two different things stupid. Historians spend their entire careers debating historical figure's contributions, challenging the preconceived narrative, etc. Irving is doing what historians fucking do.

>>3231651

>But how? Not even modern furnaces can do that unless it is a large facility.
Modern furnaces don't try to burn bodies as quickly as possible. They try to burn them with a nice even consistency so you can get fine white ash to put in an urn for the grieving relatives. They could burn faster if they wanted to.
>This indicates a burn temp at over 1000 degrees, but how was this accomplished when only coke and coal were available?
http://rebuildingcivilization.com/content/how-hot-can-you-get-coal-fired-forge

>According to "Marks' Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers", 10th, coal gas burns at about 3,590°F (1,977°C) under 100% air conditions. More or less air will decrease the temperature. This means that the maximum temperature of a coal fire in a forge is about 3,500°F (1,927°C)

The fuel used is not an issue. The amount of air circulation is the primary constraint on heat production.

>>3231662
>For the burn time comparison .
Which is stupid as fuck, because again, funeral homes aren't interested in burning bodies as quickly as possible.

>Auschwitz wasn't going on all cylinders all the time either, maintainence and supplies were necessary to continue, there were times the ovens were cold, one case gave a 3 day period for 23 bodies.
Are you seriously trying to equate occasional maintenance stops with the fact that building up and then cooling down the temperature for every single fucking body that goes through the crematorium? Again, are you just incredibly dumb, or are you an intellectually dishonest stormfag dickweasel?

>>3231679
>That is irrelevant to the time it takes to burn a corpse.
No, it isn't, a modern crematoria will take care of the corpse and not return a bunch of semi destroyed bunch of ashes and bones, and will not burn your grampa at the same time as someone else's child to save time, and they won't be emaciated to begin with, and won't have a fordist structure to move and dispose bodies and remains.

>Which would take several hours at over 1000 degrees
>This is an exggaration
Ah yes, better believe the random anon opinion rather than the documentation from nazis.

>>3231688
>13.136 After that brief digression to Moscow, I return to the central issue of Irving's historiography. As I have already held, the passages in Denying the Holocaust of which Irving complains include as an important part of their defamatory sting the meaning that he has deliberately falsified and distorted the historical evidence because he is an apologist for and a partisan of Hitler and on that account is intent on exonerating him.
13.138 It is necessary to define clearly what is the issue which must be decided. In the earlier parts of this section of the judgement, I have made findings adverse to Irving in relation to his historiography and in relation to his account of Hitler's attitude towards the Jews including in particular Hitler's complicity in the policy of exterminating them. I have further made findings, also adverse to Irving, in relation to his claims about Auschwitz and in relation to his account of the bombing of Dresden. Irving sought to defend what he has written and said as being a fair and accurate account of the historical evidence available to him. In the respects already set out in detail in this judgement, I have in the main found against him. But the Defendants must, as they accept, go further if they are to succeed in their plea of justification: they must establish that the misrepresentation by Irving of the historical record was deliberate in the sense that Irving was motivated by a desire borne of his own ideological beliefs to present Hitler in a favourable light. Irving's case is that, if (which he denied but which I have found) he has misrepresented the evidence, such misrepresentation was innocent in the sense that it arose through simple mistake or misapprehension. He denied the charge of deliberate falsification or perversion of the evidence.The issue which I must decide is whether the Defendants have proved that denial to be false.

>>3231688

>13.140 Historians are human: they make mistakes, misread and misconstrue documents and overlook material evidence. I have found that, in numerous respects, Irving has misstated historical evidence; adopted positions which run counter to the weight of the evidence; given credence to unreliable evidence and disregarded or dismissed credible evidence. It appears to me that an analysis of those instances may shed light on the question whether Irving's misrepresentation of the historical evidence was deliberate.

>13.141 I have found that most of the Defendants' historiographical criticisms of Irving set out in section V of this judgement are justified. In the vast majority of those instances the effect of what Irving has written has been to portray Hitler in a favourable light and to divert blame from him onto others. I have held that this is unjustified by the evidence. Examples include Irving's portrayal of Hitler's conduct and attitude towards the events of Kristallnacht and the importance attached by Irving to Hitler's attitude towards the Jewish question as he claims is evidenced by the Schlegelberger note. I have seen no instance where Irving has misinterpreted the evidence or misstated the facts in a manner which is detrimental to Hitler. (cont in next post)

>>3231688
I>rving appears to take every opportunity to exculpate Hitler. The same is true of the broader criticism made by the Defendants' of Irving's unwarrantedly favourable depiction of Hitler in regard to his attitude towards the Jews, which criticism I have found in section VI above to be justified. Irving sought in his writings to distance Hitler from the programme of shooting Jews in the East and from the later genocide in the death camps in a manner which the evidence did not warrant. Irving has argued, unjustifiably as I have found, that the evidence indicates that Hitler was unaware of any programme for the extermination of Jews at Auschwitz. In his account of the bombing of Dresden Irving (as I have found in section X1 above) persistently exaggerates the number of casualties, so enabling him to make comparisons between the number of civilians killed in Allied bombing raids with the number of Jews killed in the camps.

>13.142 In my opinion there is force in the opinion expressed by Evans that all Irving's historiographical "errors" converge, in the sense that they all tend to exonerate Hitler and to reflect Irving's partisanship for the Nazi leader. If indeed they were genuine errors or mistakes, one would not expect to find this consistency. I accept the Defendants' contention that this convergence is a cogent reason for supposing that the evidence has been deliberately slanted by Irving.

>>3231689
>Modern furnaces don't try to burn bodies as quickly as possible.
I doubt there was a speed burning contest in 1875
>They try to burn them with a nice even consistency so you can get fine white ash to put in an urn for the grieving relatives. They could burn faster if they wanted to.
I did not know the temperature and speed of a burning effected ash color, it was all white when I was done with a fire, also who looks in an urn?
>http://rebuildingcivilization.com/content/how-hot-can-you-get-coal-fired-forge
Ok so 1970 degreesC under ideal conditions, from the context of the article that appears to be under industrial conditions.
>The fuel used is not an issue. The amount of air circulation is the primary constraint on heat production.
True enough, then what was the air composition of the crematoria?
>Which is stupid as fuck, because again, funeral homes aren't interested in burning bodies as quickly as possible.
I don't see how that factors into burn time. It takes as long as it takes you can't rush it as there was a 1100 degree ceiling for the muffles and modern furnaces operate at a higher temperature.
>Are you seriously trying to equate occasional maintenance stops with the fact that building up and then cooling down the temperature for every single fucking body that goes through the crematorium?
I suppose so as they would have to be cool to work on them, which I assume takes some time, and then there's the work itself.

>>3231698
>No, it isn't, a modern crematoria will take care of the corpse
Anon, they're burning it.
>not return a bunch of semi destroyed bunch of ashes and bones
That is exactly what they're doing.
>and will not burn your grampa at the same time as someone else's child to save time
I assume you mean per furnace.
>Ah yes, better believe the random anon opinion rather than the documentation from nazis.
I used those documents. there was a compartment for the nearly cremated corpse to finish.

>>3231729
>That is exactly what they're doing
>modern crematoria are returning a "semi destroyed bunch of ashes and bones"
Well, you are being purposefully retarded, this is completely pointless.

>>3231738
I suppose totally destroyed would be more fitting.
Seriously anon, it's ash, how do you keep ash intact and pristine?

>>3231717
>also who looks in an urn?
Not all ash goes in urns some of it gets thrown off a mountain or the like

File: b.jpg (322KB, 991x713px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 991x713px

>>3231744
>totally destroyed
They weren't, that's what I'm trying to get through your skull. The bodies were disposed of as fast as possible.

Fuck it. I'm so tired of not knowing one way or the other. What are some good introductory books concerning the Holocaust that I can use to finally put the issue to rest?

>>3231717
There were five Krema in Auschwitz. Krema II and III had five huge furnaces, each of which had a "triple-muffle" that could burn three bodies simultaneously. They were designed to burn efficiently and quickly, especially when burning many bodies in a row (see Gutman et al., Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp, 1994, pp. 185-186).

Although the furnaces were designed with three muffles, two to three bodies could almost always be placed in each muffle. Remember that many children were present, and that the victims were often inmates who had been at Auschwitz for months and who were malnourished in the extreme. The Nazis took 70 to 100 kg of animal remains as a "unit" that could be incinerated in one muffle; whether that was one large person or three small ones was irrelevant, technically speaking. Höss testified that the Sonderkommando would alternate between putting three and two bodies in each muffle. (See Gutman et al., op. cit., pp. 236, 166, 180n55.)

Contrary to what the IHR claims in question 42, the furnaces would consume the bodies in anywhere from half an hour to 45 minutes maximum. This is not only verified by eyewitnesses, but by numerous Nazi memos concerning a variety of incineration jobs.

1/2

>>3231774
Here is the arithmetic for a single Krematorium, number II:

Five furnaces, each with three muffles, each muffle capable of holding two to three corpses simultaneously (call it two) and burning them in half an hour, could reduce 1440 bodies to ash in twenty-four working hours. 5 times 3 times 2, divided by one-half, times 24, equals 1440.

A captured memo dated June 28, 1943, sent to SS General Kammler in Berlin, cites the number of bodies that can be disposed of in one day, at Auschwitz-Birkenau, as 4,756. This is apparently based on a 24-hour working day using the above figures, as it cites the capacity of Krema II as 1440. See a photograph of the document, or Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, 1989, p. 247. There is argument among historians and technical experts as to whether this represents a theoretical maximum that was never reached in reality except with the aid of additional cremation done in burning pits, or a figure that was reached and possibly exceeded during the worst of the extermination action. Nevertheless, it is clear that Lagace's claim of 184 bodies daily (Lenski, Robert, The Holocaust on Trial, 1990, p. 252) is not even within an order of magnitude of being correct.

2/2

>>3231749
Then what is the concern for how it looks?

>>3231766
But I thought the bones were turned to ash.

>>3231776
But you already knew that since >>3231453 and >>3231484 and >>3231185
addressed cremation times. Plus you have the report in >>3229564 from a SS officer, and that's not even going into what you see in terms of reported jewish deaths in the jager and korherr reports. And then you have the shitton of pics of the crematoriums from the other anons.

Seriously, what is there left to deny? You have the physical evidence, the nazi admin reports, the cremation times question addressed. What's the big plothole here?

>>3231782
have you just gone from arguing there would still be some bone remains during a cremathon to now criticizing there are some remains left?

wew fucking wew lad

>>3231774
>Krema II and III had five huge furnaces
Among others I assume?
>"triple-muffle" that could burn three bodies simultaneously
Now, three at a time from the start? Or at varying stages of cremation, as the muffle pattern was intended? Now that I think about it that seems a tad inefficient interrupting the process to move parts around.
>They were designed to burn efficiently and quickly
Which is interesting to note as they had a ceiling of 1100 degrees.
>Remember that many children were present, and that the victims were often inmates who had been at Auschwitz for months and who were malnourished in the extreme.
Are you implying they would stuff as many people as possible into the furnaces? From the start? Because that would certainly effect burn time.
>The Nazis took 70 to 100 kg of animal remains
Why? Also how long did it take?
>whether that was one large person or three small ones was irrelevant
Not necessarily, unless the mass was equal of course.
>Höss testified that the Sonderkommando would alternate between putting three and two bodies in each muffle
For what purpose?
>the furnaces would consume the bodies in anywhere from half an hour to 45 minutes maximum
I am curious how as that flies in the face of modern crematory methods which burn hotter than these contemporaries, now I suppose this is the part where you say "But they don't burn people so often in a row" do you think they throw them in the furnace while it's cold? Of course not they heat it up first, thus how does an older model out burn a modern furnace?

>Here is the arithmetic for a single Krematorium, number II:
Yes that's about my numbers, give or take.
>This is apparently based on a 24-hour working day using the above figures
Possibly, I'm lead to believe this is a theoretical scenario.

>>3231838

>Are you implying they would stuff as many people as possible into the furnaces?

Jesus Christ, why do you people always need the most basic facts spoon-fed to you? YES. Of course they put in more than one at a time. Why the fuck wouldn't they? It's not like they cared about respecting the remains of dead inmates.

>>3231789
>have you just gone from arguing there would still be some bone remains during a cremathon to now criticizing there are some remains left?
Yes, forgive me I have some confusion on the matter. You see the other anon claims they were totally burned to ash, no bones. However it has been reveled to me that after an amount of time at a certain temperature bones burn as well, well I did know that but I did not know if a coke and coal furnace could do it, but I still do not know if the furnaces in question were able to achieve these numbers under normal operations, considering the ceiling is 1100 degrees it is theoretically possible but I doubt it was don that often, there for I suppose we are now looking for the standard operating temperature and how long it operated at that temperature. Also why were those bones not pulverized?

>>3231838
>I am curious how as that flies in the face of modern crematory methods which burn hotter than these contemporaries, now I suppose this is the part where you say "But they don't burn people so often in a row" do you think they throw them in the furnace while it's cold? Of course not they heat it up first, thus how does an older model out burn a modern furnace?
What is this autism? Have you ever been to a cremation funeral? You know they typically offer a service and at least offer a window of time in case anyone might want to show up, even if a funeral was not scheduled? You can't compare industrial mass killing to contemporary cremations. That's just being purposefully obtuse to avoid admitting you're full of shit.

>>3231851
>why do you people always need the most basic facts spoon-fed to you?
To avoid confusion, is that not the issue here?
>YES. Of course they put in more than one at a time. Why the fuck wouldn't they? It's not like they cared about respecting the remains of dead inmates.
It's not about respect, it's about efficiency. Unless it was one at a time those figures of under an hour incinerations are not likely as there is more mass to be consumed. The muffle system as I understand it was to burn one body, then transfer the remains to a lower chamber to continue burning as another was inserted, this would explain the constant burning and figures of several at a time. Unless you are telling me there was only one chamber to burn people in, which I find rather far fetched as those doors and spaces were a bit claustrophobic, even as an emaciated body.

File: 69978.jpg (29KB, 480x331px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 480x331px

>>3231852
>Also why were those bones not pulverized?
Because they couldn't finish the job of dissimulating the evidence when the allied troops arrived at the camps?

And some were indeed pulverized after the fact in cement mixers used as bone mills. See pic related.

>>3231856
>Have you ever been to a cremation funeral?
Sort of, we picked up a box, had a ceremony and buried/interned it. That was my experience with cremation.
Actually rather funny as they were both my grandfathers, on the one occasion my grandmother had me come over to gather any of his old things if I wanted them, I obliged as I was moving out and maybe acquire an old item of memory, as I gather it all together I noticed a ceramic box on the dresser, which unknown were the remains of my grandfather, it felt rather odd to me scrounging through his old belongings with his remains present but hey, the living do as they must.
>You can't compare industrial mass killing to contemporary cremations.
But why not? It is the only reference we have.

>>3231865

>It's not about respect, it's about efficiency.

Burning multiple bodies at the same time is obviously much faster than doing them one-by-one.

>>3231868
>Because they couldn't finish the job of dissimulating the evidence when the allied troops arrived at the camps?
Odd that this only occurred in Soviet territory but ok, perhaps. I mena you'd think they'd get a head start on it if they cared that much, get it done right, but considering their death camps had survivors German efficiency is the only myth here.
>And some were indeed pulverized after the fact in cement mixers used as bone mills.
Wait, it can be done like that? In a cement mixer?

>>3231882
>Burning multiple bodies at the same time is obviously much faster than doing them one-by-one.
I don't see how as you are taking more time with the extra mass, also do you mean several bodies from the start? Or an ongoing process transferring the bodies in a series of stages through the furnace?

>>3231881
>DUR people shoveling 2/3 bodies at a time in an oven just long enough for the majority of the body to be reduced to ashes is the exact same thing as cremating one body at a time for a longer period of time
you're just being disingenuous at this point. So far you've conceded every point about nazi records, the existence of crematoriums and their use to dispose of mass amounts of corpses and your only "unrefuted" point of contention is that modern cremations must be the same as back then. No wonder people treat denialists like fucktards.

>>3231892
For fuck's sake. I used to be like you. Think about it asshole. All of the concentration camps were IN SOVIET TERRITORY. Why? Because it's bad PR to openly show your regime is killing millions in your own territory, hence hosting all concentration camps in OCCUPIED TERRITORY WHERE MASS CONCENTRATIONS OF JEWS WERE ALREADY WAITING TO DIE.
For fuck's sake man! You can sit there and hate on Josef Stalin and Pol Pot, but you would rather die than admiting that Adolf Hitler was a bad man. Read Evola and then continue with your white nationalism, otherwise no one will ever take the movement seriously.

File: mixer.jpg (40KB, 640x426px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 640x426px

>>3231892
>Wait, it can be done like that? In a cement mixer?
Yeah, it can.

>Odd that this only occurred in Soviet territory
Because all the death camps were in poland and eastern europe, retard. Naturally the soviets were going to reach ukraine and poland before the US considering we were heading towards berlin coming from the west.

>>3231907
>you're just being disingenuous at this point
How so? By all means it still takes an hour or so to burn a body, it's just separated in stages which allow other bodies to begin the process. It's basically as if one body were inserted and burned but it seems like more like a conventional oven with shelves, you place a biscuit on the lowest rack while you prepare another, then when you add this one you move the other up a level, repeat, this does not mean the biscuit bakes at a faster rate but the system used allows for continuous baking, ass opposed to throwing three in at the start, it's like the assembly line.
>So far you've conceded every point about nazi records
I conceded nothing as I have yet to take a stance, I only have questions.
>the existence of crematoriums and their use to dispose of mass amounts of corpses
Why would I refute this? Crematoriums are the most efficient means to dispose of bodies infected with typhus.
>only "unrefuted" point of contention is that modern cremations must be the same as back then
Of course not, modern furnaces are better.

>>3231932

>By all means it still takes an hour or so to burn a body

Definitely not. Why would it take that long?

>>3231915
>All of the concentration camps were IN SOVIET TERRITORY
No, all the death camps were, there were concentration camps elsewhere.
So is starting a war, so there's that.
>hence hosting all concentration camps in OCCUPIED TERRITORY WHERE MASS CONCENTRATIONS OF JEWS WERE ALREADY WAITING TO DIE
Mass concentrations of jews? In Poland?
>but you would rather die than admiting that Adolf Hitler was a bad man
That all depends on your perspective on bad really.
>Read Evola and then continue with your white nationalism, otherwise no one will ever take the movement seriously.
Working on it.

>>3231931
>Yeah, it can.
I would like to see the process and compare it to a dedicated pulverizer.
>Because all the death camps were in poland and eastern europe
I'm just curious why that was the case.

>>3231932
>By all means it still takes an hour or so to burn a body
You keep repeating that line over and over again when it's been repeatedly debunked post after post ITT with sources. Cremation estimates vary between half an hour and 45minutes. Meanwhile you provide no sources whatsoever as to why your skepticism overrules historians specialized in that field.

>I conceded nothing as I have yet to take a stance
Oh how wise of you

>I only have questions.
absolutely euphoric

>>3231941
>Definitely not. Why would it take that long?
To burn the body to completion.

>>3231942

>Mass concentrations of jews? In Poland?

Why on Earth would that merit a question mark? Poland already had the largest population of Jews in Europe before the war, and once the Nazis started deporting Jews from Germany to polish territory, those numbers obviously got even higher.

>>3231949
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/80/d3/e5/80d3e50cf6fba1b8f51259bf548b0303--jewish-history-the-european.jpg

Because there were a lot of Jews in Poland and the USSR, retard.

>>3231950
>when it's been repeatedly debunked post after post ITT with sources
Where? I must have missed them.
>Cremation estimates vary between half an hour and 45minutes.
And I have reason to doubt these numbers as modern furnaces take two hours for a 150 lbs person.
>Oh how wise of you
Well I wouldn't say that.
>absolutely euphoric
No, it's actually a real pain.

Heaven brings forth innumerable things to nurture man.
Man has nothing good with which to recompense Heaven.
Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill.

>>3231951

>To burn the body to completion

But they weren't doing that, so that eliminates your entire premise.

>>3231953
>Why on Earth would that merit a question mark?
Because Poles aren't known for their tolerence of the jewish, in fact a lot of european countries didn't like jews, why Poland? I'm going to have to check census numbers.

>>3231932
>By all means it still takes an hour or so to burn a body
>I'll just repeat the same shit until everyone gets tired

>>3231942
>Mass concentrations of jews? In Poland?
The stormfag doesn't know the most basic shit about what he discusses, what a surprise!

>>3231955
>USSR
Well that just makes sense as communism is a jewish ideology.

File: 1496965158873.jpg (49KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x1136px

>>3231949
>I would like to see the process and compare it to a dedicated pulverizer.
Google it yourself since truth doesn't fear investigation. You don't need hand holding to see what a cement mixer can do.
>I'm just curious why that was the case
Because hitler fucking invaded eastern europe during operation barbarossa after breaking the molotov-ribbentrop pact, and carried pushing through towards moscow until the wehrmacht got btfo at the battle of kursk in 1943 and progressively started going on the retreat from then onwards. Why is it stormfags know literally nothing about WW2 but feel confident challenging the existence of one of the most documented/researched events in modern history?

>>3231958

>Using crematoriums that respectfully burn people one at a time as a measurement of time for a system where bodies were stuffed into furnaces without even the slightest regard for human dignity

This is being purposefully obtuse.

>>3231961
>But they weren't doing that, so that eliminates your entire premise.
I was under the impression they were, when did this change?

>>3231970
>I'll just repeat the same shit until everyone gets tired
It has yet to be refuted to my satisfaction.
>The stormfag doesn't know the most basic shit about what he discusses, what a surprise!
Well I am trying to learn.

>>3231971
Have you reached the point in which you've gotten so btfo that you start pretending to be retarded?

>>3231969

>I was under the impression they were

And you were wrong.

>>3231969

Because Poland already had the largest concentrations of Jews before the war started, and those numbers obviously increased once the Nazis started deporting Jews to Poland. Why did you need this repeated?

>>3231958
>Where? I must have missed them.
Yes, it's easy to do when you clearly don't read anything that anyone posts.
>>3231439
>>3231484
>>3231567

>And I have reason to doubt these numbers as modern furnaces take two hours for a 150 lbs person.
No, you have stormfag shit-logic, because you haven't established that mdoern crematoria burn those bodies in 2 hours because they can't do it faster, or that the completeness of the burning in a place like Auschwitz and a modern funeral home are comparable.

>Self-serving sophistry about how you're not "really" taking a stance but you only seem to question things that make the holocaust less likely if your inane suppositions are correct.

See, the problem is that if your honest, your arguments are so ridiculously implausible and stupid that it runs contrary to your ability to string a sentence together, whcih you in fact do. That makes it certainly seem like you're a stormnigger hiding your holocaust denial behind a thin veneer of pretending to be dumb and interested in what really went down, yet your staunch refusal to accept any sort of actual facts relating to the information at hand is not consistent with a person ignorant and looking to learn.

>>3231972
>Google it yourself since truth doesn't fear investigation.
True, but I don't think anyone documents such a thing by shear fact that most people aren't interested.
>You don't need hand holding to see what a cement mixer can do.
I've been around mixers, I don't think it's a very good way to crush bones, maybe but I don't think so nay how.
>Because hitler fucking invaded eastern europe
Yes and so did the USSR, yet GB and the rest declare war on Germany and ally with the USSR. Also you'd think he'd consolidate power before finishing that solution.

>>3231979

If you wanted to learn you'd be reading a book on the subject like Bloodlands.

>>3231979
>Well I am trying to learn
It's evident that you have preconceived ideas about an event you know virtually nothing about and have no interest in learning.

>>3231958
>Where? I must have missed them.
>>3229564 shows SS report confirming 10k cremated within 24hours in a 1943 report.

>>3231484 shows cremations could occur within 25minutes and that was backed by medical officers

>>3231185 shows a report listing 4756 being killed in a day

>>3231453 lists academically vetted estimates for the capacity of the 5 kremas.

You apparently keep missing them, but they keep being posted back to you and you always find a way to ignore them. Strange, that.

>>3231976
What do you mean "respectfully"? Like slowly carrying the bodies to the furnace or something, I don't see how carrying vs. tossing or however they did it will effect burn times.

>>3231987
How do you mean? Communism is a jewish ideology as jewish culture shuns menial work and encourages intelectual work, and at the time marxism and socialism were huge, so after some fermenting in jewish intellectual circles we got communism, why else were so many communist officials jewish? This is well known and documented. And that's without getting into the jewish feud between zionists and globalists.

>>3232006

Because it very obviously, and very directly, effects the number of bodies that you can burn per hour. Besides that, when a civilian crematorium burns somebody, they have to actually turn it on, which means that the oven takes longer the warm up. The ovens in Auschwitz didn't need to "warm up" because they were never being turned off. They ran 24/7.

File: Baltic Communists.png (135KB, 800x1301px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 800x1301px

>>3232012

>>3231990
>And you were wrong.
Ok, so the bones were not burned away as
>>3231439
>since thicker bones like the skull and the thighs take the longest to burn up
Implied?
>Why did you need this repeated?
Because the Poles are not known for liking jews, I'm just curious why there were so many there.

>>3231998
>yet GB and the rest declare war on Germany and ally with the USSR
What has that got to do with the holocaust and cremations though? What happened happened. Just like how the nazis tried to wipe out the eastern european jewry through deportations to camps, local executions by the einsatzgruppen combing and butchering the countryside behind the advancing wehrmacht.

>>3231991
>because you haven't established that mdoern crematoria burn those bodies in 2 hours because they can't do it faster
Well they can but 2 is the norm.
>or that the completeness of the burning in a place like Auschwitz and a modern funeral home are comparable
Well now it's established that they are not completely burned, which may effect the comparison, also we are yet to agree on how long it actually takes.

>your arguments are so ridiculously implausible
How so?

>>3231999
>If you wanted to learn you'd be reading a book on the subject like Bloodlands.
True.

>>3232002
>It's evident that you have preconceived ideas about an event you know virtually nothing about
Don't we all?

>>3232022
>I'm just curious why there were so many there
Because many were ex-russian jews who had fled the regular pogroms there and continual persecution. It wasn't great but it was better than where they came from.

>>3232004
>You apparently keep missing them, but they keep being posted back to you and you always find a way to ignore them. Strange, that.
Oh I saw those, which is why I am so confused as modern furnaces, which by all means are more advanced and just plain better, so I'm curious why they take longer. As well as the conditions of those reports.

>>3232012
>after some fermenting in jewish intellectual circles we got communism
Communism does not have a jewish origin. The word itself comes from france, while the ideas come from utopian socialists and anarchists, and have equivalents way before that.

>why else were so many communist officials jewish? This is well known and documented.
No, it isn't.

>And that's without getting into the jewish feud between zionists and globalists.
Your entire worldview and understanding of international politics is a /pol/ meme, you retard.

>>3232019
Do you have a graph of what positions they occupied?

>>3232034
>Well they can but 2 is the norm.
Not because that modern science can't come up with a way to burn bodies faster.

>How so?
Just look at the next one.

>Well now it's established that they are not completely burned, which may effect the comparison, also we are yet to agree on how long it actually takes.
See, this is the sort of shit I'm talking about. "We have yet to agree". Your opinion doesn't mean shit. You are deliberately ignoring period evidence to fit your preconceived notions based around what a completely dissimilar institution does.

According to you, LITERALLY EVERYONE from 1875 disinterested people researching cremation, to the Nazis themselves running the camp, to the engineers building the ovens, to the guys actually handling the bodies and burning them, EVERY SINGLE FUCKING ONE OF THEM, deliberately lied about how long it takes to burn a body. Every. Last. One. Because clearly, that is more plausible as a means of explaining why they burned bodies faster than modern crematoria than it is to think "hey, maybe they're just not trying to burn bodies to ash in less than an hour".

It is ridiculously stupid. It is so unbelievably fucking dumb, that it's far more plausible that you're trying to /pol/shill than you could possibly be this dense.

>>3232039
Please don't start the typical postmodern shit stormfags do after realizing they don't know shit. Some people know more about a subject and have a more informed opinion than others.

>>3232019
Anon, now he's just going to argue that the number isn't what matters, but the number of Jews who held high office during the Soviet Era. He'll argue that Jews were in charge of the intelligentsia and the economy, etc.

>>3232046
>so I'm curious why they take longer
It takes longer because they give longer to the families to grieve and hold a ceremony one deceased at a time, as well as making sure even the bones are ashes which the nazis obviously did not do.

>>3232052
You know, in normal communication, it's up to the guy making the claim (That would be you, since according to >>3232012 it is "well known and documented" that Jews were hugely influential in communism), to provide evidence for it. Quite honestly, I'm justified in saying no, you're just wrong, and source your stupid shit.

>>3232057
He already did.>>3232052

>>3232017
>Because it very obviously, and very directly
How? You just place them on the surface and close the door.
They had to do the same thing in auschwitz, also you do know they warm it up before they put them in right?
>The ovens in Auschwitz didn't need to "warm up" because they were never being turned off. They ran 24/7.
Impossible, they would be an incredible safety hazard as well as putting incredible stress on the machine and inhibiting maintainence. Besides, for all intents and purposes modern civilian furnaces do the same thing warming them up first.

>>3232046

>I'm curious why they take longer

Because:

1. They aren't burning multiple bodies at once like they did at Auschwitz.

2. They aren't continually burning bodies, which means that the oven is actually turned on and off after each cremation. This process of warming up and cooling down takes time, whereas the Nazis didn't care about that and just ran the furnaces continuously 24/7. There is no warm-up or cool-down time if you just keep running the furnace non-stop.

3. A civilian crematorium is going to keep going until the body is completely turned to dust, including all the bones. At Auschwitz, partial cremations were the norm.

4. A civilian crematorium actually gives a shit about stuff like handling the dead body in a respectful manner, which is something that the SS never cared about.

The question is answered now. If you keep pressing this after receiving a direct, comprehensive answer like this then you're just being purposefully dumb.

>>3232066
Yeah, I posted too late. Called it though. Fucking called it. Anyway, any good books on the Holocaust?

>>3232025
>What has that got to do with the holocaust and cremations though?
Nothing, I just hate how hypocritical it is.
>local executions by the einsatzgruppen
Those were actions against partisans, and many that were atributed to einsatzgruppen were actually NKVD.

>>3232067
>Impossible, they would be an incredible safety hazard as well as putting incredible stress on the machine and inhibiting maintainence.
Please be aware that in those documents that were cited to upthread but you refused to read, it is clearly stated by the Topf engineers that it extends the shelf life of the furnaces to keep them running as long as possible at the same temperature, to minimize heat warping.

https://archive.org/stream/BodyDisposalAtAuschwitzTheEndOfHolocaustDenial/BDA_djvu.txt

>>3231959
Zhang Xianzhong Protects.

>>3232043
>who had fled the regular pogroms
To Poland? Which carried on the fine tradition.

>>3232077
>Those were actions against partisans, and many that were atributed to einsatzgruppen were actually NKVD.
That doesn't seem reasonable at all. Please provide many period source documents about this, which I promise I will occasionally glance at but probably ignore because I know better, based on my pre-eminent logic.

>>3232080
No he doesn't. I quoted yet another genocidal maniac to show the sheer nihilism our modern society faces that allows a man like
>>3232077
to breathe air.

>>3232082

>To Poland?

Again, why does this merit a question mark? Do you really need this repeated over and over again?

>>3232067
>Impossible, they would be an incredible safety hazard as well as putting incredible stress on the machine and inhibiting maintainence
One of the more annoying things about stormfags is when they deny shit that is well documented based on rationalizations.
>b-b-b-but it doesn't make sense to me that the earth moves around the sun therefore it must be false
Nobody gives a fuck about your rationalizations, post evidence or fuck off.

>>3228082
Dude six million Jews and 11 million totaled died in the Holocaust. Here, knock yourself out: http://imgur.com/a/725A7

File: keep pol.jpg (98KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 900x900px

>>3228084
/pol/ already exists, and so does 8pol, knock yourself out.

>>3232082
>To Poland?
See >>3232096. Nobody gives a fuck about your rationalizations. Nobody even disputes that there were a shit ton of jews in poland, not stormfags, not negationists, not revisionists, what even is the point of this line of questions.

>>3228124
Why do you give a fuck about identity politics?

>>3232054
>Not because that modern science can't come up with a way to burn bodies faster.
Oh I'm sure there are reasons but I don't work one.
>You are deliberately ignoring period evidence
But of course I am, I still have doubt, how else do you come to a conclusion without removing even a shadow of a doubt?
>1875 disinterested people researching cremation
Who somehow surpassed modern techniques and technology. Again noone has explained HOW they did it.
>to the Nazis themselves running the camp
I have reason to believe they were coerced into doing so.
>to the engineers building the ovens
And the designers however their interperitation and yours do not match.
>deliberately lied about how long it takes to burn a body
I wouldn't say that, I'd say there is a lot of confusion.
>"hey, maybe they're just not trying to burn bodies to ash in less than an hour"
Maybe, if anyone works at a crematorium please speak up.
>It is ridiculously stupid. It is so unbelievably fucking dumb, that it's far more plausible that you're trying to /pol/shill than you could possibly be this dense.
I just like to be thorough.

File: back to pol.jpg (126KB, 546x700px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 546x700px

>>3228162

>>3228082
>They deny to show compassion for the victims
>WRONG!

>Holocaust™

Why is /pol/ so bad at lying?

>>3232055
>the typical postmodern shit
I might just be a product of the times, which is disturbing.

File: 1490272894795.jpg (82KB, 544x614px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 544x614px

>ITT /pol/ getting shoah'd once again
B-B-BUT MUH TIMES, M-MUH BONES, M-M-MUH SOVIETS

>>3228184
I think it was the situation of the case. She basically academically called him either an idiot or a liar for saying the Holocaust didn't happen, and he got butthurt and sued her for libel.

>>3232060
>It takes longer because they give longer to the families to grieve and hold a ceremony
During the burning? Is it done that way sometimes? I haven't experienced it that way. Even with the ceremony.
>even the bones are ashes which the nazis obviously did not do.
In my defense someone else said they did.

>>3232115
>Oh I'm sure there are reasons but I don't work one.
Yes, you're very stupid and/or intellectually dishonest. We've already established this.

>But of course I am, I still have doubt, how else do you come to a conclusion without removing even a shadow of a doubt?
By looking at the evidence instead of just making shit up.

>Who somehow surpassed modern techniques and technology. Again noone has explained HOW they did it.
You take a hot fire, and you stick the body in, and you pull it out when you have an acceptable degree of burning. It's a matter of wanting to burn them up that fast, not magical technology.

>I have reason to believe they were coerced into doing so.
Really? What are you basing this on? Please provide the same level of documentation others have in this thread.

>And the designers however their interperitation and yours do not match.
What the fuck are you talking about? What "interpretation" are you talking about?

>I wouldn't say that, I'd say there is a lot of confusion.
What confusion are you talking about? These texts are very clear about burning times. The only person confused here (well, no, you're lying), is you.

>I just like to promote neo-nazism.
FTFY.

>>3232064
>and source your stupid shit.
Surveys of influential individuals in the communist party, this is public knowledge after all.

>>3232076
Well do you?

>>3232129
Cite your public knowledge or your argument falls to ashes buffoon. Stop worshiping Hitler.

>>3229419
You do know they found death camps in the Allied Occupied Zones too right? Places like Dachau.

>>3232121

>Why does respectfully burning bodies one at a time take longer than continuously burning multiple bodies at once?

>>3232073
>They aren't burning multiple bodies at once like they did at Auschwitz.
Again, and I must stress this, by what method? Throwing them into one chamber? (which would be quite the feat as from what I've seen the chamber of the muffles is too small even for the emaciated mass, or by moving compartments, which does not effect the speed of the burning of the individual. Rather creates a "assembly line" esq formation. Which is it?
>They aren't continually burning bodies, which means that the oven is actually turned on and off after each cremation. This process of warming up and cooling down takes time, whereas the Nazis didn't care about that and just ran the furnaces continuously 24/7. There is no warm-up or cool-down time if you just keep running the furnace non-stop.
None of this effects the burn time.
>A civilian crematorium is going to keep going until the body is completely turned to dust, including all the bones. At Auschwitz, partial cremations were the norm.
Okay we have established this is true. Probably.
>A civilian crematorium actually gives a shit about stuff like handling the dead body in a respectful manner, which is something that the SS never cared about.
Do they? What does it matter? Box to gurney to furnace.
You just aren't very informative.

>>3232149
Anon, if you boil water on a hot stove vs a cold one that still requires warming, which will boil the water faster?

>>3229419
If you can read German you can find the blueprints of the camps and ovens online. I'm sure someone here can find it. Start watching around here and they eventually start going through and counting shit.

https://youtu.be/Wt82zlEOSUQ?t=50m2s

>>3232149
>None of this effects the burn time.
Are you stupid?

>>3232078
>to minimize heat warping
That seems reasonable however I don't buy it as controlled cooling will prevent warping as well as continuous running of any machine results in ware and tear which if left untreated leads to a breakdown, running them constantly is just irrational as not only do you run your machines to the breaking point but you burn more resources (coke) but surely there was not a steady pace of the dead.

File: 580b585b2edbce24c47b29e8.png (61KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 400x400px

>>3232149

>The temperature of the oven doesn't affect burn time

What did he mean by this?

>>3232155
you're wasting your time, he got btfo throughout the entire thread and his only argument left is autism-tier incredulity "hurdur why does burning one corpse vs 3 faster i dungettit xDDD". The absolute state of holocaust revisionism.

>>3232085
I'm afraid I am not as resourceful as you folk, if you are not as closed minded as I perhaps you can research it yourself.

>>3232167
>but surely there was not a steady pace of the dead.
But there was anon. There was. For fuck's sake.

>>3232087
>I quoted yet another genocidal maniac to show the sheer nihilism our modern society faces that allows a man like
>>>3232077 (You)
>to breathe air.
How is that a problem? Allowing me to breath I mean, is curiosity no longer encouraged?

>>3232170
It shames me to think I was once like him.

>>3232088
Because the Polish don't like jews.

>>3232096
>One of the more annoying things about stormfags is when they deny shit that is well documented based on rationalizations.
Are you saying the holocaust is irrational?
>but it doesn't make sense to me that the earth moves around the sun therefore it must be false
Nah that makes sense, running a machine constantly without maintainence does not.

>>3232110
>Nobody even disputes that there were a shit ton of jews in poland
I'd need to see a census, it doesn't seem very wise.

>>3232171
Please, open minded anon, tell us where you saw said information to begin with. Perhaps you think that mindlessly believing /pol/tard infographs is being open minded.

>>3232189

Furnaces don't really have moving parts. They don't need to be "maintained."

>>3232196
>>3232196
Not only that, but even if they did, the Holocaust was one of Hitler's best funded projects during the war. It's why supply trains never reached the Wehrmacht during Barbarossa and they froze to death. So even if an oven occasionally broke down, they'd have spare parts to fix the machines readily accessible.

>>3232191
>it doesn't seem very wise
?

>>3232189
>Are you saying the holocaust is irrational?
It's irrational in the sense that killing a bunch of jews for no reason is irrational, yes. Rationalizations are not based on logical impossibilities but rather mental juggles. For example it would be retarded to say that "subotai wouldn't stop a successful invasion of europe just because ogodei died" because that's exactly what every bit of evidence says happened, and my opinion on it is completely fucking irrelevant. Your next sentence is a perfect example of this.

>>3232126
>Yes, you're very stupid and/or intellectually dishonest.
So you know all about the workings of a crematorium?
>By looking at the evidence instead of just making shit up.
I am but it takes a while, do you not distrust a jury that reaches a verdict too quickly?
>It's a matter of wanting to burn them up that fast, not magical technology.
And yet an experiment in 1875 surpasses modern practice, do you not see my confusion?
>What are you basing this on?
Reason and reports that a Commandant confessed to camps that didn't even exist.
>What "interpretation" are you talking about?
That the muffles were designed with several chambers for stages of burning, were you not paying attention?
>These texts are very clear about burning times.
No they are not, they contradict what I have seen.
>I just like to promote neo-nazism.
Well I wouldn't say that, but maybe it has some merits, needs more study.