![Crematoriums [1299x903 - 440KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/TUAP7Z.jpg){kind=link}
I believe the mass graves argument quickly leads to the same conclusion.
Mass graves argument is supported with evidence. The scale of the mass graves is the debate. We have plenty of evidence of mass graves - but to scale from 600K to 6million is the issue.
Exactly. Most importantly, if they were not burned it is by definition not a holocaust, even if it were 6 billion.
As I said, it's the same argument. It's not that no one died. It's that it was never at the scale, there was never gas chambers, and the evidence was never destroyed. Total Jewish deaths during WWII was roughly 300,000. Their population globally grew or stayed the same.
Most most importantly, if they were not burned it is by definition not a holocaust, even if it were 6 billion
I don't understand this statement of yours. I'm not being difficult, I'm literally too ignorant to understand your point. Is it the "fire" part of the etymology of the word "holocaust"* that you are referring to?
*note my use is the lowercase which is the common word and definition, not the capital word which is used to refer to the WWII Holocaust.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/holocaust
In which case, "by fire" is not a required definition for either the common holocaust term or The Holocaust term. It just needs to be the mass loss of life (definitions 4 and 3, respectively).
Their population globally grew or stayed the same.
This is very interesting. Interesting since not a single major source backs up this claim (but most of those sources are well known to be tainted). Do you have a credible source of this? Everyone is whining/celebrating about the decline of the Jewish population. Everyone.
(post is archived)