![Crematoriums [1299x903 - 440KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/TUAP7Z.jpg){kind=link}
It's all the same argument. If you kill them you have to do something with the bodies. This side of the argument makes the gas chamber argument moot as regardless of the method of death, you sill have to dispose of the bodies.
Not true. Because they do not claim they were cremated. Mass graves is their argument. The "cremation" argument has never been a legitimate argument. It's a strawman. It targets a claim the Holocaust pushers (the actual holocaust pushers, not morons who don't know history and think the Nazis burned all the bodies) just do not push. The mass grave arguments should be the one pursued, not cremation.
Tell everyone you know to stop pushing the cremation argument to counter the holocaust pushers.
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.
No, cremation is their argument, because Auschwitz is built in a swamp so burying the bodies would've created problems. The narrative is that Auschwitz cremated all the bodies that they created. If 4 million were murdered at Auschwitz (as proven at Nuremberg) then where did all the fuel come from?
(post is archived)