Abandoned Murder Methods
Today, the Holocaust orthodoxy commonly claims only one or two mass-murder methods for each of the alleged extermination camps. But during the war and in its immediate aftermath, many different methods were claimed. Most of these methods were later relegated to the dustbins of historiography. In mainstream accounts of these camps, these abandoned methods are rarely mentioned, if at all. Most orthodox historians are too embarrassed to mention these absurdities, since it is rather difficult to explain how such anecdotal anarchy could exist. The table below lists in the center column all the methods quietly dropped, while the right column lists what is still claimed by the orthodoxy to this very day.
|
Camp |
Once-Claimed Method, Now Abandoned |
Still-Claimed Method |
|---|---|---|
|
war gases, high-voltage, gas showers, gas bombs, pneumatic hammer, conveyor belt, burned alive |
||
|
machine guns, mobile gas chamber, stunning gas, vacuum, unslaked lime, hot steam, high voltage, chlorine, ether, death bridge, burned alive |
||
|
subterranean murder chamber, |
||
|
chlorine gas, a black liquid, high voltage, collapsible gas-chamber floor, gas showers |
engine exhaust gas |
|
|
bottled carbon monoxide |
For the Bełżec, Sobibór and Treblinka camps, murder methods dominating accounts made during and right after the war are rendered in bold face. These claims were dismissed by early orthodox investigators. For decades, murder with Diesel-engine exhaust has been claimed instead. Since the early 2010s, that claim is challenged even by orthodox scholars, as Diesel-engine exhaust gases are unsuitable for the claim type of mass murder. (See the entry on Diesel Exhaust.)
The Majdanek Camp is a special case, since the local museum authorities still give the impression to visitors that Zyklon B was also used for murder, although they admit when put on the spot that neither of the two rooms where mass-murder is said to have happened possessed the necessary features and/or equipment for Zyklon-B murder.
The process of discarding evidently implausible or unreliable claims highlights the need for a skeptical attitude toward atrocity claims, particularly when made during or after a war. (See the entries on Source Criticism and Propaganda for more.) It also emphasizes that revising a historical narrative, even in a drastic fashion, is common practice in the field of historical research, including Holocaust studies.
As a result, mass-murder methods still claimed to this day cannot and should not be exempted from skeptical scrutiny either. In fact, as the entries for each of the still-claimed methods show, they are not more plausible or reliable than those which orthodox historians have discarded.
For sources and more details, see the entries for each individual camp, as well as the entry on Homicidal Gas Chambers.
You need to be a registered user, logged into your account, and your comment must comply with our Acceptable Use Policy, for your comment to get published. (Click here to log in or register.)