What is this Veeky Forums?

Occam would have had you burned at the stake.

can you give a link to the video in the archive?

>occam's razor would dictate it's fake as opposed to "soft concrete."

That's what I would think too... which is why I wondered. They even give a demonstration of these gas chambers in the video.

>can you give a link to the video in the archive?

The link is on the screenshot, but I transcribed it for you:

ushmm.org/online/film/display/detail.php?file_num=7

oops, im an idiot. thanks

Does Zyklon B soften concrete?

>oops, im an idiot. thanks

It's easy to miss.

Don't they teach you goyim anything in school? We chosenites can mold concrete to our will on a whim!

That's not at all what occams razor would dictate, as that would require not only apparently planting that evidence to be discovered later (I presume, though the article says "excavated"), but also a massive conspiracy involving thousands of people who planted not only it but countless other documents and evidence

hmm.. do I trust worldwide consensus or do I trust a bunch of autists Bangladeshi rice juggling board who communicate their arguments using poorly sourced infographs?

Of course if I wanted to prove an outlandish claim, I would create evidence that would seem absurd and impossible to accept for non-experts, like handprints in cement walls.

>That's not at all what occams razor would dictate, as that would require not only apparently planting that evidence to be discovered later

Well, all the "gas chambers" were discovered by the Soviets - but this is US footage.

>I trust worldwide consensus or do I trust a bunch of autists Bangladeshi rice juggling board who communicate their arguments using poorly sourced infographs?

I'm talking about the evidence not the consensus...

youtube.com/watch?v=o2m_pmFkEVE

So what does your diseased mind do with this apparent contradiction?

>Well, all the "gas chambers" were discovered by the Soviets - but this is US footage.
they couldn't record video after the Soviets discovered it?

>So what does your diseased mind do with this apparent contradiction?

Well, the evidence for the holocaust is supposedly overwhelming, but this footage is clearly a fabrication.

Do go on, explain why Americans apparently "clearly" fabricated footage that even contradicts the official narrative.

>Do go on, explain why Americans apparently "clearly" fabricated footage that even contradicts the official narrative.

That's what I'm asking you - they even demonstrate the gas chambers...

No, really, I'm curious how you manage to twist these incoherent factoids into a narrative, because I have no idea where you're going with this. I understand that you want to arrive at "and therefore it was all an hoax" but here's what I'm getting so far:

- All the death camps were liberated by soviets
- There's one US Signal Corps tape held by an holocaust archive that shows, among several hours of mixed footage, an "inspection of gas chambers" (actually seems to be a short documentary of german execution methods)
- The documentary also shows a cement wall covered in hand prints and scratch marks

What the evidence actually looks like.

>No, really, I'm curious how you manage to twist these incoherent factoids into a narrative, because I have no idea where you're going with this

I'm asking about this particular piece of footage. I'm not making a narrative. I already know the fate of the Jews - my opinion makes no difference...

youtube.com/watch?v=cdGZilkhXvY

I'm just curious about the narrative surrounding the events in WWII because "there's overwhelming evidence" but yet they apparently felt the need to fabricate evidence.

like the soft concrete that the guy from shawshank redemption was able to dig through

>No, really, I'm curious how you manage to twist these incoherent factoids into a narrative, because I have no idea where you're going with this

I'm asking about this particular piece of footage. I'm not making a narrative. I already know the fate of the Jews - my opinion makes no difference...

youtube.com/watch?v=cdGZilkhXvY

I'm just curious about the narrative surrounding the events in WWII because "there's overwhelming evidence" but yet they apparently felt the need to fabricate evidence.

This is actually vandalism by tourists....it is a kind of "gotcha" image naziboos use, but really there is vandalism everywhere.

telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/poland/10808868/Auschwitz-museum-hit-by-thefts-as-visitors-remove-souvenirs-from-Nazi-death-camp.html

>I'm asking about this particular piece of footage.
Well that's easy then, all we know is that the footage was filed away by NARA sometime after the war with the following commentary:
catalog.archives.gov/id/16140
Note that it was part of an effort by some Signal Corps clerks to compile and record thousands of films they had lying around (as I said, there's apparently more than 2 hours of jumbled WWII-related footage on this particular tape, there doesn't appear to be any chronological or thematic ordering.) Later, this tape was part of the truckload purchased by the USHMM.

>"there's overwhelming evidence" but yet they apparently felt the need to fabricate evidence
Who says it was fabricated evidence? Commentary aside, the footage has not been presented as evidence for the gas chambers, and it's likely it found its way in the holocaust memorial archive because they purchased in bulk any NARA tape that had the keywords "mass grave" or "gas chamber" in the description. For one thing, the "gas chamber inspection" footage looks like a documentary or a guideline on what to look for.

>Who says it was fabricated evidence? Commentary aside, the footage has not been presented as evidence for the gas chambers

Well, according to the museum website it is evidence for gas chambers - that's what it says "hand prints and scratches dug into cement wall of gas chamber." "INTs of gas chamber used by the Germans in execution of prisoners."

>Commentary aside
They simply copied what the Signal Corps clerk wrote down when he filed away the film, see the NARA archive. It's doubtful whether they even paid attention to this film they had in their possession, for example the film is filed away as taking place in "Belgium, 1944) but that's clearly only the visit of Lt Gen Hodges, which has no relation to the other shorts on the film.
More importantly, it has not been presented as evidence of the gas chambers.

>Belgium 1945
About one year before they buried her alive
And only weeks before the guns all came and rained on everyone

1944, and again the footage has no chronological or thematic relation to the rest.