This post will be updated from time to time with short debunkings of the more or less popular denier videos from YouTube.
For standalone posts debunking the denier videos see:
Debunking Denierbud's One Third of the Holocaust series.
Debunking Denierbud's "Auschwitz - The Surprising Hidden Truth"
Also, this post, while not directly addressing Denierbud's Buchenwald series, directly debunks his core thesis: Nazi shrunken heads, human skin lampshades, human soap, textiles from human hair? Sorting out the truth from the legends.
Debunking David Cole's Auschwitz video
Eric Hunt's videos won't be bothered with since Eric has since abandoned and denounced denial in no uncertain terms: Eric Hunt is No Longer a Holocaust Denier. And obviously, if his own videos no longer convince him, there's no need to waste time.
Short debunking of Steven Anderson's video "The Holocaust Hoax Exposed"
The French denier Vincent Reynouard and his clownish denial innovations
Is The French Holocaust Denier Thierry Gosselin As Dense As a Black Hole?
1. Debunking of the video "Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told."
2. Debunking of the video "Jewish Holocaust lies exposed"
3. Debunking of the video "10 Hard Facts About the Holocaust"
4. Debunking of the video "Holocaust Myths"
5. Debunking of the video "Europa The Last Battle Holocaust Segment #8"
1. Debunking of the video "Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told."
We treat only the Holocaust denial part here, if it is not credible, the rest falls apart on its own.
The Nuremberg Danzig soap has never been debunked. It was not mass-produced but some human soap was indeed made. It was obviously not the "Jewish soap", which is a myth. This claim is fully treated here.
The shrunken heads are supported by documentary evidence, as elucidated here.
So are the tattoos, which were gathered from corpses for research on criminality, as explained here.
The existence of the extermination decision is documented in Goebbels' diary entry describing Hitler's speech in a small circle of high-ranking officials on 12.12.41:
The author then raises a strawman as well as a false dichotomy. First he implies that the only evidence that should count is autopsy reports, photos or footage.
He then "forgets" about the documentary evidence e.g.:
Contemporary German Documents on Homicidal Gas Vans
Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 5: Construction Documents, G: Gas Chambers
Then he implies that the only gassing witnesses that count testified at Nuremberg (and yes, Nuremberg witnesses could be cross-examined).
The fact is that there were many dozens of trials having to do specifically with gassings, and hundreds about the Holocaust in general (which is not reducible to gassings). Of them many took place in West Germany, so the "Soviets" part was just another strawman.
The "Auschwitz had lots of non-extermination stuff" idiocy is debunked here. Also this.
David Cole now admits that Nazis gassed and shot Jews on a massive scale which debunks the film right there and then. Some of Cole's nitpicks about the small Auschwitz gas chamber are treated here and here.
Also see Debunking David Cole's Auschwitz video.
All Cole debunked were misconceptions about the small gas chamber (which was not in the extermination camp Birkenau in the first place and in which only a few gassings happened).
Sure, the Soviets tried to reconstruct the small gas chamber (after the crematorium morgue had been converted into an air-raid shelter) and partially botched the job, big deal. This doesn't refute the small gas chamber in the slightest, nor, of course, the big gas chambers at Birkenau.
He is of course wrong about there being only witness evidence:
Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
"Separate accommodation" in Auschwitz: a code word for extrajudicial executions
The Kinna Report - German Document on the Killing of Unfit Jews in Auschwitz
Aerial photos do show smoke.
The cyanide residue has been found, Leuchter has been exposed as a fraud.
The alleged photo fakery is dealt with here.
The "300,000 dead" argument is a lie, only registered inmates were meant in that footage, very obviously (the "official" figure was 4,000,000 after all).
The plaque argument is debunked here.
The First Holocaust nonsense is debunked here.
There are laws against denying the Communist crimes, the Armenian genocide and the law in Turkey that bans the assertion of the Armenian genocide, so the claim about the Holocaust being the only such event is another lie.
Of course, the author never ever deals with the extensive documentary evidence for the Holocaust, you're totally silent about the massacres of Jews like Babiy Yar or other mobile killing units massacres.
Here is just a very small sample of documentary evidence:
Contemporary German Documents on Homicidal Gas Vans
Sonderkommando Kulmhof in German Documents - The Extermination of 100,000 Jews
The Kinna Report - German Document on the Killing of Unfit Jews in Auschwitz
Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
Evidence on the Babi Yar Massacre 29 & 30 September 1941: Contemporary Sources
The Jäger Report
Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 5: Construction Documents, G: Gas Chambers
More Than 100 Nazi Extermination Remarks, 1939-1944
More Nazi Mass Murder Statements
This "chapter" of the film fell apart like a cheap suit, this means the rest of it is just as deceptive and not credible.
2. Debunking of the video "Jewish Holocaust lies exposed"
This 6:54 long video has since been blocked. It's a typical "video list" Gish gallop.
World Almanac claim debunked here.
Pre-Holocaust Holocaust debunked here.
Claim about Weissmandl and "6 million":
1. It is somewhat ironic how the obviously anti-Zionist author of the video quotes the anti-Zionist Weissmandel as a hoaxer.
2. Tom Segev expresses doubts about Weissmandl's claims in The Seventh Million, p. 92:
4. Let's assume for the sake of the argument that the alleged letter is genuine. Then it's just another example of cherrypicking - among a large set of letters of course you can find any number. It only becomes "meaningful" if you ignore all the other numbers you omitted.
Ehrenburg's quote is from December 1944, late enough to make such an estimate as the absolute bulk of the Holocaust victims have been dead by then.
Auschwitz plaque nonsense debunked here.
Listed estimated death tolls come from random mostly unauthoritative sources and mean exactly nothing for the evidence-based historiography. You can find extremely diverging estimates of Stalin's victims, does that mean Stalin wasn't a criminal? Also see here.
The list is topped off with the lie about what the Red Cross allegedly claims, debunked here.
So just another useless YouTube video full of denier lies.
3. Debunking of the video "10 Hard Facts About the Holocaust"
6 minutes.
Claim #1: refuted here.
Claim #2: refuted here.
Claim #3: refuted here.
Claim #4: addressed here and here.
Claim #5: refuted here.
Claim #6: refuted here.
Claim #7: the truth does not fear an honest investigation; Holocaust deniers are, en masse, not honest and engage in pure propaganda. And propaganda can destroy the truth. Hence the anti-HD laws (which I don't support). Also, to take another example, Turkey has a law against the affirmation of the Armenian genocide, while several countries have laws against the denial of the Armenian genocide. None of this is relevant to whether the Armenian genocide happened. Same applies to the laws against denial of Communist crimes - do they mean there were no Communist crimes?
Claim #8: refuted here.
Claim #9: the claims were mere rumors without any serious support, except the one about shrunken heads those were indeed made in Buchenwald (not from Jews).
I didn't quite get what the claim #10 was. Was it about the Holocaust being a dogma? But if so, why do most deniers whom I send these links which lead to sourced, informative articles refuse to tackle the arguments in them and instead engage in character assassination, ad hominems and insults?
4. Debunking of the video "Holocaust Myths"
21 minutes, apparently by Jim Rizoli.
Claim about revised Auschwitz death toll debunked here. (Note that finding some random book that took it seriously does not prove anything.)
Claim about no German records of a homicidal gas chamber program: obvious lie debunked at
Contemporary German Documents on Homicidal Gas Vans
Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 5: Construction Documents, G: Gas Chambers
Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
Claim about Auschwitz gastight doors: the doors for the homicidal gas chambers were the same doors used for Zyklon B delousing gas chambers, so they obviously were gastight by definition. Less cyanide is used for short-period homicidal gassings than for multi-hour delousings.
Krema I is not in its original state so the claims about its doors are meaningless.
The claim about "combined strength" of thousands of people pushing on the doors is a macabre absurdity. Thousands of people were never near the door. Maybe a few naked, confused people at the door, and they're dead pretty soon. Addressed in detail here.
See more here.
None of the experts who have honestly studied Auschwitz have ever denied the gassings. Only the dishonest ignoramuses like Lindsey made such claims. Why is Lindsey dishonest?
1. He claimed that the underground were "cool", not mentioning that they were preheated before gassings, and that the heat of hundreds or thousands of bodies would generate enormous amounts of heat too (he was forced to admit it later). He also did not mention the Nazi wartime studies showing that HCN evaporates readily even at cold temperatures.
2. He used the dishonest flimsy doors argument mentioned above.
3. The "skin absorption" argument has been debunked even by a denier star Fritz Berg:
Fred Leuchter has been thoroughly debunked.
Now to the issues of ventilation. Note that the gas chambers were not planned as such from the beginning. It has been shown by Pressac that they were at first planned as morgues and converted into gas chambers pretty late in the planning. Hence the things that might seem incongruous, like undressing room having more air exchanges per hour than the gas chamber.
The problem for the deniers is that we do know that a gas chamber existed there, in Leichenkeller 1. It was described as a "gas cellar" (Gaskeller) and a "gassing cellar" (Vergasungskeller):
The denier explanations have been pretty varied - some claim, without any evidence, that it was an air-raid shelter but this cannot be since no such air-raid shelter would be described as a Vergasungskeller (it would be Gasschutzkeller or something similar).
Another explanation, promoted by Mattogno among others, is that they tried to install a delousing chamber in Leichenkeller 1. But if so, then the deniers admit that the ventilation system in the morgue was sufficient for handling of Zyklon B, and moreover the undressing room still had a slightly more powerful ventilation as the delousing chamber in this case too. So it's hardly an issue only for the homicidal chamber.
(More on the "delousing chamber" argument why it is wrong see here.)
Long story short: ventilation existed, it was sufficient.
And it was not a delousing chamber since Auschwitz had dedicated delousing chambers elsewhere, and the facilities were not on the list of the delousing installations.
Skin color of corpses has been dealt with here.
The denier then distorts a witnesses quote about faces. He was obviously using metaphoric language to describe people becoming a mound of dead flesh. Obvious from the context. So the denier is simply dishonest.
The denier then distorts yet another witnesses' quote, claiming he claimed skin turned into glue. He of course claimed no such thing. Rather he referred to difficulty of detaching corpses from one another - which would be an obvious effect of rigor mortis, among other things.
The denier then jumps to crematoria capacities but, of course, compares apples and oranges - modern crematoria, or more specifically the modern cremation procedures prescribed by law cannot be compared to the procedures employed in the wartime Nazi camps. This is explained at length here.
Due to the differences in procedure the Nazis were able to achieve the average capacities that were much larger than the modern crematoria as numerous documents attest.
I'm afraid I'll take the word of the Nazi cremation specialists over that of some amateur deniers who lie about other matters as well. But even Mattogno had to concede that in Gusen cremations took much shorter than than 1 hour.
As for coke in Gusen, this has no bearing on Auschwitz at all. A Nazi engineer calculated the needed amounts of coke for the ovens as they were used in Auschwitz for a 12-hour period, based on the information from the oven manufacturer. He noted that through continuous use (bei Dauerbetrieb) the amounts of coke needed are significantly smaller. Indeed, the continuous cremation differs starkly from many individual cremations (with their heating down and heating up cycles).
For example the magistrate of Wiesbaden wrote to the firm Topf & Söhne (who had constructed the Auschwitz ovens) on 19.12.1949 (ThHStAW, Bestand Topf u. Söhne, 231, Bl. 35):
As for the photos, the first question is whether the smoke from chimneys would be observable on the aerial photos at all. Second issue is whether the crematoria smoked continuously during the operation or only in certain periods (that they did smoke we know from photos showing soot on chimneys).
Third issue is whether they were taken in the periods of crematoria inactivity (which could be on a particular day without any transports, on the days where crematoria were inactive because of repairs; and possibly every day for a few hours for the oven maintenance) or when the open-air incineration pits were used instead (clearly visible on the photos). Merely throwing out "peak extermination activity" doesn't mean anything. One has to go through the photos day by day and see what happened on those days. One will find that on several of those dates there is no evidence of transports, and on three dates the corpses were burned in the incineration pits, the smoke being clearly visible. On May 31 one chimney can seen to be "glowing" from the inside.
This issue is further examined here.
The refractory brick stuff is an old canard. A German researcher found that refractory bricks fail after a certain number of cremation cycles. That makes sense. But this only refers to individual cremations in civil crematoria with heating and cooling cycles, obviously not to continuous multiple cremations as practiced in Auschwitz, where one cremation cycle meant hundreds of bodies, not 1. More about that here.
Conclusion: the author is an ignorant liar repeating debunked claims.
5. Debunking of the video "Europa The Last Battle Holocaust Segment #8"
This video is peak Gish gallop. I did not bother to go through each frame.
The author begins by outright lying that the majority of partisans were Jews and that Jews were shot as partisans and not Jews. After this everything else he says can be ignored.
Just for the fun of it I skimmed through the rest. He lies about Jews declaring war on Germany (they didn't; a tabloid "fake news" headline is not evidence of an actual war declaration) and this allegedly giving a legal right to Germany to put Jews into camps (it didn't).
People in labor camps were dying in great numbers due to systemic mistreatment (that is, even ignoring the extermination for a sec) long before the end of the war and the bombing of the infrastructure (see e.g. Wachsmann's KL).
The video gathers random internet memes without factchecking them.
E.g. the Zündel trial memes handled here and here.
He outright lies about no documents referring to policy of extermination - see here, here, here just for starters.
He outright lies about the Red Cross, which was not able to visit all camps and certainly not any extermination camps. He fabricates the alleged Red Cross quote about the alleged interrogations of detainees about the gas chambers.
He repeats the ignorant "flimsy door" non-argument.
He relies on the fraud Leuchter and on the dishonest Lüftl.
He relies on an outright and long-ago debunked fake "Lachout document".
He relied on Cole, who has been totally debunked.
He repeats the Buchenwald photo nonsense.
And uses some random online photo fakes.
He distorts Bruno Baum's claim.
He relies on the fraud Krege who made lots of claims about GPR tests at Treblinka but has failed to publish his results in 18 years. Leading deniers reject his hoax contention that the soil was not disturbed at all - after all, they claim that there was a transit camp there (with at least several of thousands of Jews buried). I.e. Krege is an outright liar.
He brings up the braindead Larson canard.
From the existence of the Prussian Blue in the delousing chambers does not follow the necessity of such in the homicidal chambers - completely different modes of operation.
He lies about a court's decision about the Anne Frank diary - never happened; he lied about significant portions of the diary being written in ballpoint pen or about BKA concluding so; he lied about the handwriting not matching; on the contrary, the diary was fully forensically tested and found genuine.
He repeats the usual nonsensical "leisure stuff means no extermination" idiocy.
He lies about the non-existent Red Cross death stats - Red Cross never gave any such numbers.
He repeats the zombie argument about the Auschwitz plaque and the total Holocaust death toll, showing that he has not mastered the basic arithmetic.
He repeats the decrypts nonsense.
He repeats the "pre-Holocaust 6m" non sequitur that makes zero sense.
He carps on some fake witnesses as if it proved anything.
He repeats the debunked "Wiesel-impostor" nonsense.
As well as the "witnesses that saw no gas chambers" nonsense.
Since I was just skimming, I've probably missed a lot of stuff and could probably double the above list.
It is clear that the author of the video is nothing but a fabricator and/or a mindless regurgitator of other denier lies who has merely amassed as many internet memes (debunked here) as possible but has never done any real research.
For standalone posts debunking the denier videos see:
Debunking Denierbud's One Third of the Holocaust series.
Debunking Denierbud's "Auschwitz - The Surprising Hidden Truth"
Also, this post, while not directly addressing Denierbud's Buchenwald series, directly debunks his core thesis: Nazi shrunken heads, human skin lampshades, human soap, textiles from human hair? Sorting out the truth from the legends.
Debunking David Cole's Auschwitz video
Eric Hunt's videos won't be bothered with since Eric has since abandoned and denounced denial in no uncertain terms: Eric Hunt is No Longer a Holocaust Denier. And obviously, if his own videos no longer convince him, there's no need to waste time.
Short debunking of Steven Anderson's video "The Holocaust Hoax Exposed"
The French denier Vincent Reynouard and his clownish denial innovations
Is The French Holocaust Denier Thierry Gosselin As Dense As a Black Hole?
1. Debunking of the video "Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told."
2. Debunking of the video "Jewish Holocaust lies exposed"
3. Debunking of the video "10 Hard Facts About the Holocaust"
4. Debunking of the video "Holocaust Myths"
5. Debunking of the video "Europa The Last Battle Holocaust Segment #8"
1. Debunking of the video "Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told."
We treat only the Holocaust denial part here, if it is not credible, the rest falls apart on its own.
The Nuremberg Danzig soap has never been debunked. It was not mass-produced but some human soap was indeed made. It was obviously not the "Jewish soap", which is a myth. This claim is fully treated here.
The shrunken heads are supported by documentary evidence, as elucidated here.
So are the tattoos, which were gathered from corpses for research on criminality, as explained here.
The existence of the extermination decision is documented in Goebbels' diary entry describing Hitler's speech in a small circle of high-ranking officials on 12.12.41:
"Regarding the Jewish question, the Führer is determined to clear the table. He warned the Jews that if they were to cause another world war, it would lead to their own destruction.See here for more documents on the extermination intent.
Those were not empty words. Now the world war has come. The destruction of the Jews must be its necessary consequence. We cannot be sentimental about it. It is not for us to feel sympathy for the Jews. We should have sympathy rather with our own German people. If the German people have to sacrifice 160,000 victims in yet another campaign in the east, then those responsible for this bloody conflict will have to pay for it with their lives."
The author then raises a strawman as well as a false dichotomy. First he implies that the only evidence that should count is autopsy reports, photos or footage.
He then "forgets" about the documentary evidence e.g.:
Contemporary German Documents on Homicidal Gas Vans
Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 5: Construction Documents, G: Gas Chambers
Then he implies that the only gassing witnesses that count testified at Nuremberg (and yes, Nuremberg witnesses could be cross-examined).
The fact is that there were many dozens of trials having to do specifically with gassings, and hundreds about the Holocaust in general (which is not reducible to gassings). Of them many took place in West Germany, so the "Soviets" part was just another strawman.
The "Auschwitz had lots of non-extermination stuff" idiocy is debunked here. Also this.
David Cole now admits that Nazis gassed and shot Jews on a massive scale which debunks the film right there and then. Some of Cole's nitpicks about the small Auschwitz gas chamber are treated here and here.
Also see Debunking David Cole's Auschwitz video.
All Cole debunked were misconceptions about the small gas chamber (which was not in the extermination camp Birkenau in the first place and in which only a few gassings happened).
Sure, the Soviets tried to reconstruct the small gas chamber (after the crematorium morgue had been converted into an air-raid shelter) and partially botched the job, big deal. This doesn't refute the small gas chamber in the slightest, nor, of course, the big gas chambers at Birkenau.
He is of course wrong about there being only witness evidence:
Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
"Separate accommodation" in Auschwitz: a code word for extrajudicial executions
The Kinna Report - German Document on the Killing of Unfit Jews in Auschwitz
Aerial photos do show smoke.
The cyanide residue has been found, Leuchter has been exposed as a fraud.
The alleged photo fakery is dealt with here.
The "300,000 dead" argument is a lie, only registered inmates were meant in that footage, very obviously (the "official" figure was 4,000,000 after all).
The plaque argument is debunked here.
The First Holocaust nonsense is debunked here.
There are laws against denying the Communist crimes, the Armenian genocide and the law in Turkey that bans the assertion of the Armenian genocide, so the claim about the Holocaust being the only such event is another lie.
Of course, the author never ever deals with the extensive documentary evidence for the Holocaust, you're totally silent about the massacres of Jews like Babiy Yar or other mobile killing units massacres.
Here is just a very small sample of documentary evidence:
Contemporary German Documents on Homicidal Gas Vans
Sonderkommando Kulmhof in German Documents - The Extermination of 100,000 Jews
The Kinna Report - German Document on the Killing of Unfit Jews in Auschwitz
Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
Evidence on the Babi Yar Massacre 29 & 30 September 1941: Contemporary Sources
The Jäger Report
Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 5: Construction Documents, G: Gas Chambers
More Than 100 Nazi Extermination Remarks, 1939-1944
More Nazi Mass Murder Statements
This "chapter" of the film fell apart like a cheap suit, this means the rest of it is just as deceptive and not credible.
2. Debunking of the video "Jewish Holocaust lies exposed"
This 6:54 long video has since been blocked. It's a typical "video list" Gish gallop.
World Almanac claim debunked here.
Pre-Holocaust Holocaust debunked here.
Claim about Weissmandl and "6 million":
1. It is somewhat ironic how the obviously anti-Zionist author of the video quotes the anti-Zionist Weissmandel as a hoaxer.
2. Tom Segev expresses doubts about Weissmandl's claims in The Seventh Million, p. 92:
"Later he published a terrible indictment of the Zionist movement. The Zionists have abandoned him and his people because they were ultraorthodox non-Zionists, he charged, as if Gisi Fleischmann had not been his partner. He based his arguments on letters he quoted from memory; they are unavailable in any archives. They may have been lost or spirited away, or they may never have been written."3. Indeed, this letter purports to have been written on May 15, 1944 "in a cave near Lublin", and presents the Hungarian deportations as if they're in full swing. And yet May 15 was the day the first Hungarian transports left Hungary. They arrived in Auschwitz only on May 16. Clearly the text as quoted cannot be authentic.
4. Let's assume for the sake of the argument that the alleged letter is genuine. Then it's just another example of cherrypicking - among a large set of letters of course you can find any number. It only becomes "meaningful" if you ignore all the other numbers you omitted.
Ehrenburg's quote is from December 1944, late enough to make such an estimate as the absolute bulk of the Holocaust victims have been dead by then.
Auschwitz plaque nonsense debunked here.
Listed estimated death tolls come from random mostly unauthoritative sources and mean exactly nothing for the evidence-based historiography. You can find extremely diverging estimates of Stalin's victims, does that mean Stalin wasn't a criminal? Also see here.
The list is topped off with the lie about what the Red Cross allegedly claims, debunked here.
So just another useless YouTube video full of denier lies.
3. Debunking of the video "10 Hard Facts About the Holocaust"
6 minutes.
Claim #1: refuted here.
Claim #2: refuted here.
Claim #3: refuted here.
Claim #4: addressed here and here.
Claim #5: refuted here.
Claim #6: refuted here.
Claim #7: the truth does not fear an honest investigation; Holocaust deniers are, en masse, not honest and engage in pure propaganda. And propaganda can destroy the truth. Hence the anti-HD laws (which I don't support). Also, to take another example, Turkey has a law against the affirmation of the Armenian genocide, while several countries have laws against the denial of the Armenian genocide. None of this is relevant to whether the Armenian genocide happened. Same applies to the laws against denial of Communist crimes - do they mean there were no Communist crimes?
Claim #8: refuted here.
Claim #9: the claims were mere rumors without any serious support, except the one about shrunken heads those were indeed made in Buchenwald (not from Jews).
I didn't quite get what the claim #10 was. Was it about the Holocaust being a dogma? But if so, why do most deniers whom I send these links which lead to sourced, informative articles refuse to tackle the arguments in them and instead engage in character assassination, ad hominems and insults?
4. Debunking of the video "Holocaust Myths"
21 minutes, apparently by Jim Rizoli.
Claim about revised Auschwitz death toll debunked here. (Note that finding some random book that took it seriously does not prove anything.)
Claim about no German records of a homicidal gas chamber program: obvious lie debunked at
Contemporary German Documents on Homicidal Gas Vans
Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 5: Construction Documents, G: Gas Chambers
Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
Claim about Auschwitz gastight doors: the doors for the homicidal gas chambers were the same doors used for Zyklon B delousing gas chambers, so they obviously were gastight by definition. Less cyanide is used for short-period homicidal gassings than for multi-hour delousings.
Krema I is not in its original state so the claims about its doors are meaningless.
The claim about "combined strength" of thousands of people pushing on the doors is a macabre absurdity. Thousands of people were never near the door. Maybe a few naked, confused people at the door, and they're dead pretty soon. Addressed in detail here.
See more here.
None of the experts who have honestly studied Auschwitz have ever denied the gassings. Only the dishonest ignoramuses like Lindsey made such claims. Why is Lindsey dishonest?
1. He claimed that the underground were "cool", not mentioning that they were preheated before gassings, and that the heat of hundreds or thousands of bodies would generate enormous amounts of heat too (he was forced to admit it later). He also did not mention the Nazi wartime studies showing that HCN evaporates readily even at cold temperatures.
2. He used the dishonest flimsy doors argument mentioned above.
3. The "skin absorption" argument has been debunked even by a denier star Fritz Berg:
"Faurisson has repeatedly overstated the danger of HCN absorption through the skin. Although skin certainly does absorb HCN, it does so rather slowly. According to a source which Faurisson has himself used, 10 minutes are required to overcome a man with a gas mask whose skin is exposed to a concentration of 2% HCN in air."The letter from some Roubeix guy doesn't cite any arguments and can be instantly dismissed.
“It should also be remembered that a man may be overcome by the absorption of hydrocyanic acid gas through the skin; a concentration of 2 percent hydrocyanic acid being sufficient to thus overcome a man in about 10 minutes. Therefore, even if one wears a gas mask, exposure to concentrations of hydrocyanic acid gas of 1 percent by volume or greater should be made only in case of necessity and then for a period not longer than 1 minute at a time. In general, places containing this gas should be well ventilated with fresh air before the wearer of the mask enters, thus reducing the concentration of hydrocyanic acid gas to low fractional percentages.” (See: The Gas Mask, Technical Manual No. 3-205, War Department, Washington, October 9, 1941, p. 144, NA RG 407, Records of the Adjutant General's Office, 1917 TM 3-205.)
The typical lethal concentration for an execution chamber and for delousing is only 0.1% HCN in air, in other words, the lethal gas need only be one-twentieth as strong as the gas discussed in Faurisson's reference. If one applies a rule of thumb or reciprocity known sometimes as Henderson's Rule, one would need twenty times as long to cause the same toxic effect. In other words, approximately 200 minutes or three hours of exposure to 0.1% HCN would be needed to overcome a worker wearing a gas mask but whose skin is exposed. It is almost inconceivable, however, that workers removing corpses would be exposed to anything near these concentrations after the doors were opened."
Fred Leuchter has been thoroughly debunked.
Now to the issues of ventilation. Note that the gas chambers were not planned as such from the beginning. It has been shown by Pressac that they were at first planned as morgues and converted into gas chambers pretty late in the planning. Hence the things that might seem incongruous, like undressing room having more air exchanges per hour than the gas chamber.
The problem for the deniers is that we do know that a gas chamber existed there, in Leichenkeller 1. It was described as a "gas cellar" (Gaskeller) and a "gassing cellar" (Vergasungskeller):
The denier explanations have been pretty varied - some claim, without any evidence, that it was an air-raid shelter but this cannot be since no such air-raid shelter would be described as a Vergasungskeller (it would be Gasschutzkeller or something similar).
Another explanation, promoted by Mattogno among others, is that they tried to install a delousing chamber in Leichenkeller 1. But if so, then the deniers admit that the ventilation system in the morgue was sufficient for handling of Zyklon B, and moreover the undressing room still had a slightly more powerful ventilation as the delousing chamber in this case too. So it's hardly an issue only for the homicidal chamber.
(More on the "delousing chamber" argument why it is wrong see here.)
Long story short: ventilation existed, it was sufficient.
And it was not a delousing chamber since Auschwitz had dedicated delousing chambers elsewhere, and the facilities were not on the list of the delousing installations.
Skin color of corpses has been dealt with here.
The denier then distorts a witnesses quote about faces. He was obviously using metaphoric language to describe people becoming a mound of dead flesh. Obvious from the context. So the denier is simply dishonest.
The denier then distorts yet another witnesses' quote, claiming he claimed skin turned into glue. He of course claimed no such thing. Rather he referred to difficulty of detaching corpses from one another - which would be an obvious effect of rigor mortis, among other things.
The denier then jumps to crematoria capacities but, of course, compares apples and oranges - modern crematoria, or more specifically the modern cremation procedures prescribed by law cannot be compared to the procedures employed in the wartime Nazi camps. This is explained at length here.
Due to the differences in procedure the Nazis were able to achieve the average capacities that were much larger than the modern crematoria as numerous documents attest.
I'm afraid I'll take the word of the Nazi cremation specialists over that of some amateur deniers who lie about other matters as well. But even Mattogno had to concede that in Gusen cremations took much shorter than than 1 hour.
As for coke in Gusen, this has no bearing on Auschwitz at all. A Nazi engineer calculated the needed amounts of coke for the ovens as they were used in Auschwitz for a 12-hour period, based on the information from the oven manufacturer. He noted that through continuous use (bei Dauerbetrieb) the amounts of coke needed are significantly smaller. Indeed, the continuous cremation differs starkly from many individual cremations (with their heating down and heating up cycles).
For example the magistrate of Wiesbaden wrote to the firm Topf & Söhne (who had constructed the Auschwitz ovens) on 19.12.1949 (ThHStAW, Bestand Topf u. Söhne, 231, Bl. 35):
"It is hereby confirmed that Mr. chief engineer Klettner carried out the planned conversion of the cremation furnace in 2 1/2 weeks, taking into account improvements according to your latest experiences.Chimney fires are of course possible and have nothing whatsoever to do with coke but rather with the soot accumulating in the chimneys (the more, the more actively the ovens are used). Duh.
Mr. Klettner demonstrated the furnace in operation and handed it over after three days of trial operation with a total of 16 cremations to our complete satisfaction today.
The performance of the oven, especially in terms of fuel consumption, exceeded all expectations. On the third day after the commissioning, cremation times of 40 minutes were already being achieved without any fuel consumption except for the required heating up [of the oven].
You are free to show the oven to the interested parties after a prior notification.
Publication of the above letter without prior permission on this side is not permitted."
As for the photos, the first question is whether the smoke from chimneys would be observable on the aerial photos at all. Second issue is whether the crematoria smoked continuously during the operation or only in certain periods (that they did smoke we know from photos showing soot on chimneys).
Third issue is whether they were taken in the periods of crematoria inactivity (which could be on a particular day without any transports, on the days where crematoria were inactive because of repairs; and possibly every day for a few hours for the oven maintenance) or when the open-air incineration pits were used instead (clearly visible on the photos). Merely throwing out "peak extermination activity" doesn't mean anything. One has to go through the photos day by day and see what happened on those days. One will find that on several of those dates there is no evidence of transports, and on three dates the corpses were burned in the incineration pits, the smoke being clearly visible. On May 31 one chimney can seen to be "glowing" from the inside.
This issue is further examined here.
The refractory brick stuff is an old canard. A German researcher found that refractory bricks fail after a certain number of cremation cycles. That makes sense. But this only refers to individual cremations in civil crematoria with heating and cooling cycles, obviously not to continuous multiple cremations as practiced in Auschwitz, where one cremation cycle meant hundreds of bodies, not 1. More about that here.
Conclusion: the author is an ignorant liar repeating debunked claims.
5. Debunking of the video "Europa The Last Battle Holocaust Segment #8"
This video is peak Gish gallop. I did not bother to go through each frame.
The author begins by outright lying that the majority of partisans were Jews and that Jews were shot as partisans and not Jews. After this everything else he says can be ignored.
Just for the fun of it I skimmed through the rest. He lies about Jews declaring war on Germany (they didn't; a tabloid "fake news" headline is not evidence of an actual war declaration) and this allegedly giving a legal right to Germany to put Jews into camps (it didn't).
People in labor camps were dying in great numbers due to systemic mistreatment (that is, even ignoring the extermination for a sec) long before the end of the war and the bombing of the infrastructure (see e.g. Wachsmann's KL).
The video gathers random internet memes without factchecking them.
E.g. the Zündel trial memes handled here and here.
He outright lies about no documents referring to policy of extermination - see here, here, here just for starters.
He outright lies about the Red Cross, which was not able to visit all camps and certainly not any extermination camps. He fabricates the alleged Red Cross quote about the alleged interrogations of detainees about the gas chambers.
He repeats the ignorant "flimsy door" non-argument.
He relies on the fraud Leuchter and on the dishonest Lüftl.
He relies on an outright and long-ago debunked fake "Lachout document".
He relied on Cole, who has been totally debunked.
He repeats the Buchenwald photo nonsense.
And uses some random online photo fakes.
He distorts Bruno Baum's claim.
He relies on the fraud Krege who made lots of claims about GPR tests at Treblinka but has failed to publish his results in 18 years. Leading deniers reject his hoax contention that the soil was not disturbed at all - after all, they claim that there was a transit camp there (with at least several of thousands of Jews buried). I.e. Krege is an outright liar.
He brings up the braindead Larson canard.
From the existence of the Prussian Blue in the delousing chambers does not follow the necessity of such in the homicidal chambers - completely different modes of operation.
He lies about a court's decision about the Anne Frank diary - never happened; he lied about significant portions of the diary being written in ballpoint pen or about BKA concluding so; he lied about the handwriting not matching; on the contrary, the diary was fully forensically tested and found genuine.
He repeats the usual nonsensical "leisure stuff means no extermination" idiocy.
He lies about the non-existent Red Cross death stats - Red Cross never gave any such numbers.
He repeats the zombie argument about the Auschwitz plaque and the total Holocaust death toll, showing that he has not mastered the basic arithmetic.
He repeats the decrypts nonsense.
He repeats the "pre-Holocaust 6m" non sequitur that makes zero sense.
He carps on some fake witnesses as if it proved anything.
He repeats the debunked "Wiesel-impostor" nonsense.
As well as the "witnesses that saw no gas chambers" nonsense.
Since I was just skimming, I've probably missed a lot of stuff and could probably double the above list.
It is clear that the author of the video is nothing but a fabricator and/or a mindless regurgitator of other denier lies who has merely amassed as many internet memes (debunked here) as possible but has never done any real research.