The Instigator
Cin
Pro (for)
Winning
27 Points
The Contender
Shicklgruber88
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points

Did the Holocaust really exist?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
Cin
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/6/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,943 times Debate No: 51743
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (11)
Votes (6)

 

Cin

Pro

I believe the Holocaust did actually happen. There is so much evidence for it. People trying to play it off as a "hoax" are not accurately accessing what happened?
Shicklgruber88

Con

it didn't, because the Jews are now saying the lampshades are hoaxes! The Auchwitz Gas chamber has been chemically tested and it showed no evidence whatsoever of Zyklon B.... Zyklon B was used to kill the lice on peoples' heads.... there was a swimming pool, money, and dentists office! there has been no paperwork of Adolf Hitler ordering the holocaust! Zionist lies.... Adolf Hitler said one day my spirit will rise from the grave and the whole world will know I was right... April 30th 1945 the day of his death. Let's not forget who killed 60,000,000 of his own people Joseph Stalin. They raped Germans at the end of the war. and the gulags were far much worse! Joseph Goebbels: They can never hide the truth no matter how hard they try. There will come a day, when all the lies will collapse under their own weight, and the truth will triumph again. 1945 do yourself a favour and watch TGSNT.tv ad you'll awaken!
Debate Round No. 1
Cin

Pro

Let's look at your claims one at a time:

That's right, Zyklon B was used to kill lice. But it was also used to kill people on a massive scale. HCN (hydrocyanic acid, the gas released by Zyklon-B) has a "side effect" which the SS found very useful: it kills human beings quite well.
The same concentration kills humans and other mammals much faster than it kills lice and bugs. The concentration used for delousing, 8-10 grams per cubic meter, kills humans very quickly, though it takes up to 32 hours to get rid of bugs and clothes moths. Even when a lower concentration is used, death comes swiftly.

Of course there is paperwork. Himmler, Eichmann, H"ss, and others have said that the orders for the genocide came directly from Hitler. Furthermore, don't discount Hitler's own public speeches. He stated his intentions to exterminate the Jews no fewer than three times, in public.

So, in conclusion, you should look at your history, as I suggest you do more credible research.
Shicklgruber88

Con

it didn't, because the Jews are now saying the lampshades are hoaxes! The Auchwitz Gas chamber has been chemically tested and it showed no evidence whatsoever of Zyklon B.... Zyklon B was used to kill the lice on peoples' heads.... there was a swimming pool, money, and dentists office! there has been no paperwork of Adolf Hitler ordering the holocaust!Zionist lies.... Adolf Hitler said one day my spirit will rise from the grave and the whole world will know I was right... April 30th 1945 the day of his death. Let's not forget who killed 60,000,000 of his own people Joseph Stalin. They raped Germans at the end of the war. and the gulags were far much worse! Joseph Goebbels: They can never hide the truth no matter how hard they try. There will come a day, when all the lies will collapse under their own weight, and the truth will triumph again. 1945 do yourself a favour and watch TGSNT.tv ad you'll awaken! if you only knew who I was, furthermore, the Zionists Mistranslated Mein Kampf. the only correct translation is the Ford translation. you'll freak at this... Auchwitz's four Crematorium ovens capacity was 400 corpses 5 mins, 4,800 corpses 1 hour, 115,200 corpses 1 day, and 42,048,000 corpses in a year.... modern crematory ovens:400 corpses-8.3 days 4,800 corpses 1 year and 1 month, 115,200 corpses 26 years and 3 months, and 42,048,000 corpses 9,600 years! and now Jews are diversifying Europe, well that's genocide itself! you anti-whites are breeding us off the earth! and there's no way that many people could fit inside of an gas camber... furthermore people could've pushed there selves out of the gas chambers, the flimsy doors... Stalin had the chimney built after war! and the Jews are not god's chosen people! pic.twitter.com/5KuFWx0oAK Tgsnt.tv
Debate Round No. 2
Cin

Pro

You're just repeating yourself.

Consider Auschwitz-Birkenau alone. In fact, let's consider only the two largest crematory facilities (out of five). Those two ovens alone, working at their full estimated capacity 24 hours a day from their installation in April 1943 to their decommissioning in November 1944, could have incinerated over 1.7 million corpses.

This is simple arithmetic, based on the furnace capacity that the Nazis themselves estimated.

Note that the Nazis later began to realize that the theoretical capacity of the ovens was too impractical, and in late 1942 reduced their estimates from 1440 per Krema per day to 800. Using that more-accurate figure, not quite a million corpses could be incinerated, in those 20 months, by those two Auschwitz crematoria.

This corresponds with reality, since there were other Kremas available to incinerate corpses, and since we know that the ovens were often overburdened by the sheer number of corpses, requiring bodies to be burned in open pits. In total, 1.1 million to 1.5 million people were killed at Auschwitz and their bodies incinerated.

Although the furnaces were designed with three muffles, two to three bodies could almost always be placed in each muffle. Remember that many children were present, and that the victims were often inmates who had been at Auschwitz for months and who were malnourished in the extreme. The Nazis took 70 to 100 kg of animal remains as a "unit" that could be incinerated in one muffle; whether that was one large person or three small ones was irrelevant, technically speaking.
The furnaces would consume the bodies in anywhere from half an hour to 45 minutes maximum. This is not only verified by eyewitnesses, but by numerous Nazi memos concerning a variety of incineration jobs.

Five furnaces, each with three muffles, each muffle capable of holding two to three corpses simultaneously, and burning them in half an hour, could reduce 1440 bodies to ash in twenty-four working hours. 5 times 3 times 2, divided by one-half, times 24, equals 1440.

A captured memo dated June 28, 1943, sent to SS General Kammler in Berlin, cites the number of bodies that can be disposed of in one day, at Auschwitz-Birkenau, as 4,756. There is argument among historians and technical experts as to whether this represents a theoretical maximum that was never reached in reality except with the aid of additional cremation done in burning pits, or a figure that was reached and possibly exceeded during the worst of the extermination action. Nevertheless, it is clear that Lagace's claim of 184 bodies daily is not even within an order of magnitude of being correct.
Shicklgruber88

Con

That's bullcrap! the allies would take pictures of the *jews* that were about to be gassed, I even have a friend who's father worked at the so *death camps* and she said that the tractors were American driven, seriously... I'm Hitler's Niece I know these things! Adolf never visited a death camp either!
Debate Round No. 3
Cin

Pro

http://www.nazigassings.com...

Check this website, and see the pictures yourself.

http://furtherglory.wordpress.com...

Once again, you should check your history.
Shicklgruber88

Con

If it was real they would've been undressed! faked images, the allies and you're a Zionist yourself.. Jews have said they went to get a shower and lived, they thought they were going to be gassed, no they weren't!
Debate Round No. 4
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
Guys, for all who voted for Cin, I regret to tell you all that she was C and P-ing directly from sources:

http://www.nizkor.org...

Sorry Cin, just needed to know where your info came from :/
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Good debate Cin.
Posted by Cin 3 years ago
Cin
Hey thanks for looking at my post guys :) This was my first debate :)
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
People really need to be able to put their personal biases aside and vote fairly.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
why is there so many vote bombs on this debate?
Posted by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
Just because people hold unorthodox beliefs about society doesn't necessarily mean that he/she is a bad person.
Posted by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
And why is that?
Posted by ararmer1919 3 years ago
ararmer1919
I really hope con is just trolling.
Posted by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
I would accept this, if only my views on the issue were developed enough. I certainly believed something happened. But I doubt that it was to the magnitude that was reported by the victors
Posted by Kreakin 3 years ago
Kreakin
You should go con perhaps and do the research yourself in doing so?
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
CinShicklgruber88Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Poor arguments from both sides. However pro had burden of proof and only provided rebuttals. Pro structures arguments a little better. Pro gets conduct due to cons Zionist accusations, among other things.
Vote Placed by Haroush 3 years ago
Haroush
CinShicklgruber88Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: To make this short.. I wasn't impressed with this debate at all! I think both debaters could have done a much better job at making this debate much more organized and interesting. Anyways, it is clear who won here. Con wasn't even able to touch pro's argument. This is why con got mad and said this was bull crap going on ranting without any proof in return. Look at WilliamsP's vote about spelling and grammar. This isn't a reliable source at all.. pic.twitter.com/5KuFWx0oAK Tgsnt.tv Let alone the fact, it is the ONLY source given by con.
Vote Placed by WheezySquash8 3 years ago
WheezySquash8
CinShicklgruber88Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro cited sources, did not give only opinions, gave evidence, and I agreed with her at first and after because of her reasoning.
Vote Placed by Sswdwm 3 years ago
Sswdwm
CinShicklgruber88Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: This is not the votebomb it appears to be. Conduct to Pro due to Con's final two round outbursts claiming 'bullcrap' and alluding to Pro being a Zionist. S&G was leagues better from Pro, who capitalized letters for one, and was much more readable. Also Pro was the only one to provide references (Con's link was broken), As for arguments, con went off topic with Stalin's regime and Pro effectively rebutted the crematory capacity counter arguments and provided a few (rather weak) lines to support the holocaust regarding Hitlet's orders. Pro, the BoP is on you an you need to make the positive case more strongly, you got the arguments point here, but only just. Next time spend more time making a positive case if defending the positive resolution.
Vote Placed by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
CinShicklgruber88Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: WilliamsP vote was unfair; he comes from a biased background. That can be seen from "Cin is correct" I felt like this debate was a hard one; both sides presented arguments, although I felt like con's arguments were more well thought out. Con's spelling initially hinders the main punch of her argument. Pro's s&g was much better.
Vote Placed by WilliamsP 3 years ago
WilliamsP
CinShicklgruber88Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: First of all, Pro is correct. Both candidates had desirable conduct and therefore the points are tied. Pro had much better spelling and grammar. An example of Con's bad grammar is "That's bullcrap! the allies would take pictures of the *jews* that were about to be gassed." Pro made much more convincing arguments because of the formatting and wording. Finally, neither debater used sources, thus resulting in a tie for those points.