Hitler didnt kill 6 million jews?

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by Geedorah, Oct 17, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. KRich662

    KRich662 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,043
    Even though German scientist admitted to the death camps during the war-crimes trials?

    You guys are retarded
    test
  2. Noncentz

    Noncentz Sieg Heil, M'fer!

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    6,044
    Less talk.

    More math.
    test
  3. x calibur

    x calibur

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 1999
    Messages:
    54,155
    yes, issues like water content and body fat would be an issue. still, a 1 hour incineration time is not unrealistic. modern cremation requires the furnace to be warmed up first, which makes a significant difference in time. Also, modern cremation ensures that the body is reduced to fine dust. In the Holocaust, they weren't concerned with getting perfect results, just in incinerating well enough so that the remains were out of the way or easily swept up, regardless of flakes or bone fragments.

    and the chicken wing example doesn't disprove my point in any way.

    lol, I'm not sure what sort of stunt you're trying to pull here. there was nothing wrong with my math. I calculated what fraction of the total daily Holocaust death rate Auschwitz by itself could handle. to do this, I took the number of oven slots available [46], and multiplied that by hours in the day [24] (which assumes the average turn-around was 1 hour) to get 1104 per day.
    Since Auschwitz by itself could burn around half of the total daily bodies of the Holocaust, and there were other death camps, it becomes clear that the figures are very reasonable.

    let's see what you did. you took the minutes in 2 hours (120), and multiplied that by the oven racks (46)... lolwut? that doesn't make sense. If it took 2 hours to burn a body, and you put 46 bodies into a single oven consecutively, then your equation would apply. so yes, you ARE assuming that there was just 1 crematorium oven in Europe, LOL.
    and after that, there's even more wrong. You divided 5520 minutes by 24, which makes no sense. to get days, you divide minutes by 60 to get hours, then divide the hours by 24. yikes.
    the actual answer to your equation is that it would take 3.8333... days for a single oven to burn 46 bodies. I don't see the problem here?

    clearly there would be some extra delays here and there, but that wouldn't make an enormous difference. there's no reason they couldn't burn bodies while the gas chambers operated.
    test
  4. x calibur

    x calibur

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 1999
    Messages:
    54,155
    I agree with this. there's always room for new findings or modification to old information. that's how anything scientific works!

    I have nothing against questioning, criticizing, and debating about WWII and the Holocaust. but a problem arises when you reach as far as you can to deny well-established facts. It's like the theory of evolution, as I was saying. Skepticism is one thing, but when a Bible-thumper is extremely "skeptical" about evolution, in spite of the mountain of evidence for it, it does become denial and you do have to question motives.

    and I assume you meant Garamantes. I need to read more about those dudes.
    test
  5. WWByeye

    WWByeye former White widow

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,691
    I feel like Pulp Fiction
    Chick said she`s gonna go put make-up, but had few lines
    I just replace it by reading about history and smoking
    But seriously, I don`t wanna go out tonite. I should get some courage 2 say that straight. One guy once shouted 2 someone "Damn can`t u see I`m in the middle of sthing!" after promising 2 come, but I can`t do that, I don`t wanna piss him off.
    Maybe that`s a good sign.
    But I should be "putting myself up" to a reggae party
    Him has been talking all day him almost smoked w Tarja Halonen
    I`m going 2 boat soon
    test
  6. x calibur

    x calibur

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 1999
    Messages:
    54,155
    genocide has a particular definition. it is the organized extermination of a certain people by an organized group. So, even a brutal sacking of a city in a war, like the Rape of Nanking, does not constitute genocide.

    I'm not denying the brutal regime of the Belgian Congo. I'm well aware - in that pic you posted at first, the people were missing their hands because the colonial officials chopped off hands as a common legal penalty.

    To my understanding, King Leopold II and his men had the aim of exploiting the Congo's resources and its people as far as possible, even if that meant a high death toll. It wasn't genocidal in nature though, since they weren't trying to exterminate the inhabitants. and while I'm sure the death toll was significant, 22 million sounds a bit too high.


    there are differences of degree. for example, the hutus killing of the tutsis in Rwanda was genocide, but it was much looser and more chaotic. there were random militant groups running around, and violence happening on a local scale influenced but not controlled by authorities. the Armenian genocide was carried out by government and military, however even that was not as tightly organized.
    the Nazi Holocaust stands out in how it was so organized and methodical from the top down. different sections of their bureaucracy were complicit and worked together in it. so, in their level of organization and deliberation, they were a special case. that's not to take anything away from other genocides, of course.
    test
  7. Geedorah

    Geedorah King

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    11,872
    Did he say the number?
    You are retarded for your reading and logical skills.
    We are discussing the number.
    test
  8. Geedorah

    Geedorah King

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    11,872
    :eyecrazy::beat:
    test
  9. KRich662

    KRich662 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,043
    First it was, "we are talking about gas chambers" then it was "everyone does it"

    Whenever someone post something to proves you're retarded you change your argument.
    test
  10. Noncentz

    Noncentz Sieg Heil, M'fer!

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    6,044
    1. The chicken example still applies. Humans are flesh and bone.

    2. You're right the math is not right with the days in the second example.

    3. but unless they had millions and I do mean millions of these massive ovens ... It would still take about 300 years for 1.4 million and for the claimed 2.8 million DOUBLE THAT about 600 years total...

    LOL...

    test
  11. Noncentz

    Noncentz Sieg Heil, M'fer!

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    6,044
    Do you know how many crematoria would have to be running 24/7 in Europe to make it even realistic? Take a guess.

    AND EVEN THEN! (Cause the number would be so huge as to be laughable.)

    No matter how many ovens you have BODIES DON'T BURN ANY FASTER.
    test
  12. Noncentz

    Noncentz Sieg Heil, M'fer!

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    6,044
    Nope, I mean Garmantes, I still use the term that I believe is the most likely.

    They had a few names, so choose whatever one you like.
    test
  13. Noncentz

    Noncentz Sieg Heil, M'fer!

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    6,044
    You're assuming wrong however...

    (Here come the numbers, lol)

    1. Modern state of the art crematoriums take 2 2/12 hours per body, this is in the presence of professionals. (Cremation FAQ)

    2. You cannot persuade me to believe that these crude ovens from the 40's were somehow superior to the modern versions, no evidence to suggest this either.

    3. So, again - Bodies take 2 2 1/2 hours to be cremated.

    4. And once more for your 'massive ovens' idea. If I had a kitchen with 80 skillets and one at home ---How long does it take to cook one burger?


    That's right roughly the same amount of time regardless.
    test
  14. KRich662

    KRich662 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,043
    Stop arguing the gas chambers, that's besides the fact.


    Just because that many weren't killed in the gas chambers doesn't mean that there's no way to kill them

    See, there's these things called guns; and well, they're pretty reliable when it comes to killing people. Just thought you might like to know
    test
  15. Geedorah

    Geedorah King

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    11,872
    What argument?
    Im asking questions.


    7th post in thread.
    SO what did I change exactly?
    test
  16. tequila togorgeous

    tequila togorgeous New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,133
    Noncentz, why are do you think cremation is a useful baseline to use for the purposes of this discussion? Cremation is a funeral rite undertaken as as a mark of respect for the deceased. The incineration of jewish corpses by contrast was the opposite, a final insult to the dead. Cremation takes as long as it does(not always 2 and a half hours by the way) because there is a very specific purpose in mind, to leave the remains in such a state that they can be processed into a fine power and then given to the family. The nazi's obviously didnt give a shit about that. For them they were simply burning waste and they are hardly going to be wondering about the amount of carbon left in the resulting remains or how suitable it was for powderising.

    Instead of analogising it to a hypothetical incident of mass cremation analogise it to the real incidences - much closer in terms of purpose and psychology - of mass culling of animals. In cases of infectious disease it is not rare for many millions of a country's cattle stock to be killed and burned in a single year. Either the world's veternarians are in on it or there is no insurmountable logistical difficulty in killing and burning millions of living things in a short period of time.
    test
  17. Geedorah

    Geedorah King

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    11,872
    When u dont have anything smart to say u neg rep KRich662?
    Like I care bout it :funny:
    test
  18. x calibur

    x calibur

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 1999
    Messages:
    54,155
    that may be true; but the more bodies that burn at the same time, the less time it takes to burn through a set amount. lmao.

    you remind me of Black Israelites the way you're so completely obstinate in the face of facts.


    like myself and Teq said, modern cremation isn't even a good example. the idea was to incinerate and dispose of bodies, not burn them into a fine powder.

    ovens may have improved since the 40's, but the furnaces available were more than adequate to the task.

    yes, but you can cook 80 burgers much faster with 80 skillets than you could with 1 skillet. lmao, this is ridiculous. you don't even get math, or basic reasoning for that matter.


    yes indeed, exactly. I touched on this before, but you fully articulated this point.

    I'm sure Noncentz is going to have an emotional breakdown as he realizes that his denialism is simply untenable. It's ok, Non - many Jews who were slaughtered in this fashion remained in denial to the bitter end. The Holocaust is a bitter pill to swallow, but it is true. By trying to deny it, you are killing those Jews a second time.

    yet another point I brought up on the first page:

    test
  19. Geedorah

    Geedorah King

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    11,872
    Toward the end of the 19th century, estimates of the number of Jews in the world ranged from about 6,200,000 (Encyclopædia Britannica, 1881) to 10,932,777 (American Jewish Year-Book, 1904–1905).
    test
  20. KRich662

    KRich662 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,043
    Before WWII even began there were 3 million jews in Poland alone. Stop reaching
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)