Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Conspiracy Theories
 What is the physical evidence for the holocaust?
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 10

Rudolfo
Banned

124 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  08:43:37  Show Profile Send Rudolfo a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I'm skeptical of the holocaust narrative. What is the physical evidence that supports it?

A prominent holocaust scholar, Robert Jan Van Pelt, writes that ...

"Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge."

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/742965--a-case-for-letting-nature-take-back-auschwitz

According to van Pelt, we don't have physical evidence for 99% of the holocaust, and it is not part of my inherited knowledge. And, I'm skeptical of inherited knowledge anyhow.

So, we have essentially no physical evidence. I take that to mean no bodies, no murder weapon, no documents, no photographs.

Is Van Pelt correct, is it true that there is essentially no physical evidence of the holocaust?

If there is physical evidence, what is it?

We know that there is testimonial evidence of the holocaust. But I would like to evaluate that in another thread.

The only the issue I'll address in this thread is the existence and evaluation of the physical evidence of the holocaust.


Edited by - Rudolfo on 03/27/2010 08:50:40

Starman
SFN Regular

Sweden
1613 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  09:01:51   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Starman a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Rudolfo

.... no photographs....
http://images.google.com/images?q=+holocaust


"Any religion that makes a form of torture into an icon that they worship seems to me a pretty sick sort of religion quite honestly"
-- Terry Jones
Go to Top of Page

Rudolfo
Banned

124 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  09:26:32   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Rudolfo a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Starman,

These are photos that are frequently shown as evidence of the holocaust. I assume Van Pelt was aware of them. So, why would he say there is no physical evidence? Let's investigate.

First, we need some sort of 'definition' of the holocaust, so that we'll know exactly what it is we're talking about. I suggest the following from the USHMM web site ...

Between 1941 and 1944, Nazi German authorities deported millions of Jews from Germany, from occupied territories, and from the countries of many of its Axis allies to ghettos and to killing centers, often called extermination camps, where they were murdered in specially developed gassing facilities.

And, I'll choose one photo, you can choose another if you like, I'll choose this one showing a pile of bodies ..

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/images/holocaust00_1.jpg

It's from the Yad Vashem web site, but they do not give, as far as I see, any info on when and where the photo was taken.

However, there are many like it, and they were taken at camps entered by the British and US at the end of the war. The photo is probably from Dachau or Belsen.

So, the question is, does this photo support the holocaust narrative, that the Nazis exterminated Jews in extermination camps?

We, let's be skeptical. First, there are now only six recognized death camps, Auschwitz, Majdanek, Chelmo, Belsec, Treblinka, and Sobibor. These camps are in Poland. They were all liberated by the Soviet army.

So, the photo was not taken at a death camp.

Also, we need to know why the prisoners died. And, fortunately, we do. The Soviets approached the eastern camps and they were evacuated by the Nazis, and the prisoners brought to camps in Germany where the conditions were a disaster. As a result disease ravaged the camps, in particular typhus which plagued the camps throughout the war. You can read a report here of the epidemic at Belsen that killed 35,000 at the end of the war, many dying after the wars end.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-11-25-holocaust-archive_x.htm

Thus, these prisoners died of disease, they were not deliberately killed by the Nazis.

So, this photo does not support the holocaust narrative that the Nazis killed the Jews in death camps, or that they deliberately killed the Jews.

So, I remain skeptical of the holocaust narrative.

There are other photos that were taken at Belsen and Dachau when the British entered the camps which most people have not seen, for example ...

http://www.codoh.com/memorial/belsen2.jpg

http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/gifs/r098.gif

and many more. Prisoners who died at the end of the war in concentration camps due to illness are not evidence of the holocaust.


Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13457 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  09:30:50   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Rudolfo:
We know that there is testimonial evidence of the holocaust. But I would like to evaluate that in another thread.


If the words of Nazi officers shed some light on what we know about the physical evidence, I can't see any reason why that should not be allowed. None of the evidence exists in a vacuum.

Rudolfo:
The only the issue I'll address in this thread is the existence and evaluation of the physical evidence of the holocaust.


How can you evaluate the physical evidence honestly, if you don't also consider what is clearly stated by people like Himmler and what the Nazi intentions for the Jews were? You can say that most of the Jews might have died from disease, for example, but there are some very clear statements that extermination was the Nazi plan. Speculating on death by disease is to wave away evidence like what Himmler said in a secret meeting in Pozan to his own SS officers. You can speculate all you want to, but unless you want to call Himmler a liar, the evidence is strong in favor of mass murder with the goal of exterminating of the Jews. Even if some of the Jews did die of disease.

Himmler's words

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  09:44:47   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Rudolfo

I'm skeptical of the holocaust narrative. What is the physical evidence that supports it?

A prominent holocaust scholar, Robert Jan Van Pelt, writes that ...

"Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge."

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/742965--a-case-for-letting-nature-take-back-auschwitz
Why didn't you quote the rest of what he said?
I don't think that the Holocaust is an exceptional case in that sense. We in the future – remembering the Holocaust – will operate in the same way that we remember most things from the past. We will know about it from literature and eyewitness testimony. . . . We are very successful in remembering the past in that manner. That's how we know that Cesar was killed on the Ides of March. To put the holocaust in some separate category and to demand that it be there – to demand that we have more material evidence – is actually us somehow giving in to the Holocaust deniers by providing some sort of special evidence.
Emphasis mine.
According to van Pelt, we don't have physical evidence for 99% of the holocaust, and it is not part of my inherited knowledge. And, I'm skeptical of inherited knowledge anyhow.
99% of the physical evidence that my mother gave birth to me is now gone. 100% of the physical evidence that the pennies in my pocket were minted by the United States government is gone. Just because evidence is now missing does not mean it is reasonable to think that such evidence never existed.
So, we have essentially no physical evidence. I take that to mean no bodies, no murder weapon, no documents, no photographs.

Is Van Pelt correct, is it true that there is essentially no physical evidence of the holocaust?

If there is physical evidence, what is it?

We know that there is testimonial evidence of the holocaust. But I would like to evaluate that in another thread.

The only the issue I'll address in this thread is the existence and evaluation of the physical evidence of the holocaust.
So I take it that you reject documentary evidence as "physical," and instead lump it in with the testimony? No, wait, you ask for documents. What's wrong with the report by Lukaszkiewicz from November, 1945?

Also, Van Pelt's statement is testimony, but it's the basis for this discussion. That seems odd.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  10:06:37   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Rudolfo

These are photos that are frequently shown as evidence of the holocaust. I assume Van Pelt was aware of them. So, why would he say there is no physical evidence? Let's investigate.
He didn't say "there is no physical evidence." He said (and you quoted) that 99% of the physical evidence is now gone. Why misrepresent your own source like that?
And, I'll choose one photo, you can choose another if you like, I'll choose this one showing a pile of bodies ..

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/images/holocaust00_1.jpg

It's from the Yad Vashem web site...
No, it's not. It's from Pamela Geller's Atlas Shrugs blog.
...but they do not give, as far as I see, any info on when and where the photo was taken.

However, there are many like it, and they were taken at camps entered by the British and US at the end of the war. The photo is probably from Dachau or Belsen.
Note the quesswork about the photo's provenance.
...So, the photo was not taken at a death camp.
The provenance has suddenly become a fact, despite the lack of any evidence being presented towards that end.
...Thus, these prisoners died of disease, they were not deliberately killed by the Nazis.
Thus, we see that the complete lack of evidence about the provenance of a photo can be easily transformed into "evidence" that the Nazis didn't kill the people in the photo.
...So, I remain skeptical of the holocaust narrative.
For all we know about the photo you picked, it might have been taken in the late 1960s in Southeat Asia, but you've convinced yourself that it somehow has something to do with the Nazis.

I thought you wanted to be skeptical.
There are other photos that were taken at Belsen and Dachau when the British entered the camps which most people have not seen, for example ...

http://www.codoh.com/memorial/belsen2.jpg

http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/gifs/r098.gif
I see no provenance for those photos, either. What evidence is there that they "were taken at Belsen and Dachau when the British entered the camps?"
Prisoners who died at the end of the war in concentration camps due to illness are not evidence of the holocaust.
You have yet to show that any photo is actually of prisoners who died at the end of the war due to illness. What support do you have for such a claim? Let's be skeptical.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Starman
SFN Regular

Sweden
1613 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  10:14:59   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Starman a Private Message  Reply with Quote
You said "no photos" and when I showed that statement to be false you try play the definition game.

Your definition is bullshit and so is your "skepticism".



"Any religion that makes a form of torture into an icon that they worship seems to me a pretty sick sort of religion quite honestly"
-- Terry Jones
Go to Top of Page

Rudolfo
Banned

124 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  11:40:53   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Rudolfo a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Reply to Dave W.

I couldn't get the quote mechanism to work for me ... so I'm not quoting ...

The reason I didn't continue Van Pelt's quote is that I think it is absurd, and it's certainly easy to refute. It does make for an amusing post and I've quoted it before, along with a picture of a battleship, or the Pearl Harbor attack. There is no shortage of physical evidence for real events. It would take us off topic however to demonstrate this.


You're right about the source of the photo of the bodies, I misread the caption above it.

But, I did not choose the photo, it was the second one on the list linked by Starman. As I said, you are free to choose your own photo, and I encourage you to do so.

In any case, the site where the photo was posted didn't provide any info as to its origin. But it is representative of many similar photos taken at Dachau and Belsen. There are no similar photos from death camps. Here is a similar photo from Dachau .... from www.scrapbookpages.com, a good source of Holocaust photos ..

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/dachauscrapbook/DachauPhotos/OldPhotos/DachauBodies.jpg

As for the Lukaszkiewicz report, I'm not familiar with it. What does it state? Prove?

I should have given the web site for the Dachau liberation photo .. it is ...

http://isurvived.org/TOC-VI.html

The Belsen photo of smiling children was taken from a documentary made by the British when they entered Belsen. It was shelved for 60 years and finally shown on Frontline, you can see it here ...

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/camp/

A remarkable photo is it not? Doesn't it make you skeptical of the holocaust narrative. And don't you wonder why you have never seen it before.


Edited by - Rudolfo on 03/23/2010 12:03:54
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  11:55:56   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Rudolfo

The reason I didn't continue Van Pelt's quote is that I think it is absurd, and it's certainly easy to refute.
Then do so. Why should more evidence be required for the Holocaust than is required for the historicity of George Washington?
It does make for an amusing post and I've quoted it before, along with a picture of a battleship, or the Pearl Harbor attack. There is no shortage of physical evidence for real events. It would take us off topic however to demonstrate this.
No, it seems to be eminently on-topic. What does a picture of a battleship prove? Where is there any physical evidence that the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor?
In any case, the site where the photo was posted didn't provide any info as to its origin. But it is representative of many similar photos taken at Dachau and Belsen.
So you say. I see no evidence of this. But what's it matter, anyway? It's similar to photos taken of mass graves anywhere. Why should we think that such photos are necessarily from Dachau or Belsen?
There are no similar photos from death camps.
Again, that's not something that I'm aware of being true. Is there support for it?
As for the Lukaszkiewicz report, I'm not familiar with it. What does it state? Prove?
Lukaszkiewicz was a Polish judge who, in November of 1945, officially reported that his team had found many acres of human bone fragments, ash and decomposing flesh mixed in with the soil at Treblinka.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
25973 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  12:07:50   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Rudolfo

I should have given the web site for the Dachau liberation photo .. it is ...

http://isurvived.org/TOC-VI.html
What's this supposed to prove, again? Dachau wasn't an extermination camp. Neither was Belsen. Are you suggesting that because there are photos of smiling prisoners in prison camps greeting their liberators, that millions did not die in total?

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  12:26:40   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Hi Rudolpho and welcome to SFN.

But didn't we go through all this not too long ago?

Oh well, no matter. Here's the timeline of the Holocaust:
1933

Jan 30, 1933 - Adolf Hitler is appointed Chancellor of Germany a nation with a Jewish population of 566,000.

Feb 22, 1933 - 40,000 SA and SS men are sworn in as auxiliary police.

Feb 27, 1933 - Nazis burn Reichstag building to create crisis atmosphere.

Feb 28, 1933 - Emergency powers granted to Hitler as a result of the Reichstag fire.

March 22, 1933 - Nazis open Dachau concentration camp near Munich, to be followed by Buchenwald near Weimar in central Germany, Sachsenhausen near Berlin in northern Germany, and Ravensbrück for women.

March 24, 1933 - German Parliament passes Enabling Act giving Hitler dictatorial powers.

See also - The Rise of Hitler - from Unknown to Dictator of Germany

April 1, 1933 - Nazis stage boycott of Jewish shops and businesses.

April 11, 1933 - Nazis issue a decree defining a non-Aryan as "anyone descended from non-Aryan, especially Jewish, parents or grandparents. One parent or grandparent classifies the descendant as non-Aryan...especially if one parent or grandparent was of the Jewish faith."

And a history:
The Holocaust (also called Shoah in Hebrew) refers to the period from January 30, 1933, when Adolf Hitler became chancellor of Germany, to May 8, 1945 (V­E Day), when the war in Europe ended. During this time, Jews in Europe were subjected to progressively harsh persecution that ultimately led to the murder of 6,000,000 Jews (1.5 million of these being children) and the destruction of 5,000 Jewish communities. These deaths represented two-thirds of European Jewry and one-third of world Jewry. The Jews who died were not casualties of the fighting that ravaged Europe during World War II. Rather, they were the victims of Germany's deliberate and systematic attempt to annihilate the entire Jewish population of Europe, a plan Hitler called the “Final Solution” (Endlosung).

And a few photos, many taken by the Nazi soldiers themselves.


Mass mass execution of Jews in Nazi-occupied Ukraine


It must also be remembered that there were some 15,000 camps scattered around Europe, most, but not all of them sub-camps of the major ones.

Again, welcome!




"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Edited by - filthy on 03/23/2010 12:43:13
Go to Top of Page

Rudolfo
Banned

124 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  12:29:03   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Rudolfo a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Physical evidence of the Pearl Harbor attack is abundant, if in doubt pay a visit, but off topic.

As for the Lukaszkiewicz report, reading the link, we see that

"The Examining Judge of Siedlce, on November 13, 1945, rules in consideration of the fact that with great probability no mass graves are any longer to be found on the grounds of the former camp today, as is to be concluded from the witness testimonies examined so far and from the results of the works carried out at the site, and in consideration of the oncoming autumn, the present rainfall and the necessity of a rapid conclusion of the judicial preliminary investigations, in view of all these facts to stop the work on the territory of the former death camp Treblinka."

So, no mass graves.

There were bomb craters with signs of ashes and remains of bodies on the walls which does not seem relevant.

And there was a large area covered with ashes and 'countless' bones. That is, no data was taken on this at all. He mentions an odor of burning and decay. The camp had been razed years ago. He mentions skulls with no signs of injury but not how many. No data whatever. It's hard to know what to make of this.


Go to Top of Page

Rudolfo
Banned

124 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  12:35:17   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Rudolfo a Private Message  Reply with Quote
There are two points with the photos I've discussed ....

First, they are not evidence of the holocaust.

And second, photos that show healthy prisoners and happy children in the concentration camps at the end of the war fuel my skepticism that there was a plan to exterminate anyone in the camps.
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13457 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  12:58:41   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Rudolfo

There are two points with the photos I've discussed ....

First, they are not evidence of the holocaust.

And second, photos that show healthy prisoners and happy children in the concentration camps at the end of the war fuel my skepticism that there was a plan to exterminate anyone in the camps.

Ineresting that the gruesome photo's are not evidence but the one or two photo's with people smiling fuels your skepticism.

Remember in the emails between us, we talked about confirmation bias?



Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

Rudolfo
Banned

124 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  13:42:14   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Rudolfo a Private Message  Reply with Quote
[Ineresting that the gruesome photo's are not evidence but the one or two photo's with people smiling fuels your skepticism.]

The issues are separate. The gruesome photos are of typhus victims and are not evidence of the holocaust. That's just a fact.

The photos of the healthy prisoners, and smiling children, and many were Jews I believe, is in no way compatible with the standard holocaust narrative. It suggests to me that the narrative is false.

I don't have a confirmation bias, I'm not a Jew, or a Nazi, or a white-supremacist, or even a Democrat or Republican, I'm a real skeptic. Always have been. And I studied the matter for a bit before coming to any conclusions.

But, one does have to always be aware of confirmation bias, even me. You should consider your own bias !
Edited by - Rudolfo on 03/23/2010 13:45:26
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13457 Posts

Posted - 03/23/2010 :  14:10:37   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Rudolfo

[Ineresting that the gruesome photo's are not evidence but the one or two photo's with people smiling fuels your skepticism.]

The issues are separate. The gruesome photos are of typhus victims and are not evidence of the holocaust. That's just a fact.

The photos of the healthy prisoners, and smiling children, and many were Jews I believe, is in no way compatible with the standard holocaust narrative. It suggests to me that the narrative is false.

I don't have a confirmation bias, I'm not a Jew, or a Nazi, or a white-supremacist, or even a Democrat or Republican, I'm a real skeptic. Always have been. And I studied the matter for a bit before coming to any conclusions.

But, one does have to always be aware of confirmation bias, even me. You should consider your own bias !


Why thanks for the lecture, Rudolfo. You really put this old dog of a skeptic is his place. It's not often I have run up against a "real skeptic." It's such an honor to meet you, sir.

Wait--a--second. That's the same thing the climate change denier said to me. And the creationist. And the 9/11 conspiracy loose changer, and the guy who claimed that we didn't go to the moon!!! Darn. I almost fell for that line again!

I really do need to be more skeptical...


Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 10 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.81 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000