The Holocaust happened

Pro, do you have another eye-witness that can corroborate Mr. Tauber's testimony? You have thus far cited a singleperson to establish your claim of homocidal gas chambers. We already agree the Nazis employed gas chambers for delousing clothes, so proof of gas chambers is not proof of homocidal gas chambers. You say the efficiency of commercial crematoria is "wholly irrelevant." I beg to differ. If the Nazis were reducing seven corpses to ash every muffle-hour, and modern muffles can't finish a cremation in two hours, the Germansmust've been in possession of some highly advanced technology. Literally futuristic technology, since we arepresently in the year 2015 and have yet to achieve anwhere near such efficiency.You say, "The crematoria at Birkenau had multiple muffles, and no one cared to separate the ashes of one corpsefrom the rest." But my calculations account for the multiple muffles, and I don't see what difference it makes howmuch care is taken with modern cremations. Carelessness does not make a process more efficient. The Naziswould not be able to increase their cremation rate by 1400% simply by taking less "care;" less care would result,rather, in a gigantic pile of partially-cremated bodies. Where are the uncremated bones of the tens (hundreds?) ofthousands of poorly-cremated victims? Do you assert the Germans had a large-scale bone-pulverizing operation, in addition to their homocidal gassing?Pro cites a document allegedly typed up by Prufer, an engineer who constructed the Auschwitz furnaces. Thedocument refers to future furnace installations of a suspiciously large capacity. Pro concludes this was fordisposing of the bodies of mass-gassing victims.Too bad the paper is a hoax: It is a recent "discovery," only arising out of obscurity (fraudulence) decades after the War's end. It describes muffles capable of cremating over four corpses an hour. Bogus! That's several times more efficient than modern crematoria, and this was 70 years ago. It also contradicts its author's testimony at the Nuremberg Trials, where both he and a coworker agreed their ovens operated at a rate of one corpse per muffle-hour.(5) The numbers make no sense, apparently having been fabricated out of whole cloth. One would expect an oven's cremation speed to fall with increased muffle count, since that's equivalent to keeping the number of heat sources constant while raising the number of things you're trying to burn with it. But there is absolutely no correlation between muffle count and muffle cremation rate: Installed double-muffle ovens cremate five corpses per muffle-hour Triple-muffle ovens (under construction) cremate two Octo-muffle ovens (soon to arrive) cremate four Equally bizarre, if not moreso, is the fact that each new oven, whether on the way or under construction, is less efficient than the ones already in use. We must conclude the document is fraudulent. The numbers were pulled out of thin air to substantiate the myth of mass gassings. The obscene cremation capacity was required to dispose of all those hypothetical bodies. That way, those who promote belief in the legend of the Holocaust can explain the lack of physical evidence (bodies) for mass extermination by accusing the crematories of destroying it all. How convenient! Too bad the fraudster didn't put any effort into coming up with numbers that make sense. The cremating capacity of Auschwitz was not, in reality, 2,500 bodies a day.Pro has conceded delousing chambers were referred to as "gassing rooms." Good. This greatly undermines his assertion that the "gassing cellar" was necessarily a homocidal gas chamber.Pro says it's a "problem" for my proposal that this "gassing cellar" was a delousing room because the blueprint calls it a "morgue." This is a bizarre claim, since it is Pro, not I, trying to argue the blueprint lied about the identity of the cellar. If you click on Pro's link, you'll be in for a pleasant surprise. The argument is therein made that the reference to the "morgue" as a "gassing cellar" was an accident; a slip of the pen, exposing a Nazi conspiracy to never call the homocidal gas chamber by its true name. This is funny, becuase it means Pro is also a conspiracy theoriest (welcome to the club!) and moreover, implies the Nazis were complete idiots. After all, how could anyone seriously think it possible to keep underwraps a mass murder on the scale of millions of victims, simply by calling a "gas chamber" a "morgue?"Pro says, "There is zero evidence of the room every being used as either a delousing chamber or a morgue; there is, however, evidence of it being a gas chamber." I take it he means no evidence of of being a gas chamber specifically for killing lice, since otherwise his statement is a contradiction; a gas chamber is a gas chamber whether it's used to kill lice or human beings.Pro asserts traces of cyanide in the room would be higher if it were actually used for delousing and not gassing people, but this is a rash claim. Killing lice requires more gas than killing people, yes, but I assume Pro isn't proposing mass gassing took place in this room on only one occurence. Correct me if I'm misrepresenting your position, Pro, but isn't it true you would like us to accept hundreds of thousands of people were gassed in this "cellar?" If that's the case, the small quantity of cyanide you say was detected is certain disproof of your thesis. Pro cites an instance of the German word "vergasen" used in reference to euthanasia, the insinuation being "vergasungkeller" must mean not merely gassing cellar, but homocidal gassing cellar. But this is an unfounded conclusion; in the early 1900s, Americans employed rooms for delousing called "gas chambers."(6) Using Pro's logic, we would have to conclude Americans were exterminating Mexican immigrants in these chambers just because it's possible to use the term "gas chamber" in the context of genocide.Since Pro insists I identify the blueprint-labeled "morgue" room, I will oblige. The room was, I submit, a morgue. That was easy. Let's look at the controversial quote from Pro's document: "The reinforced concrete ceiling of the morgue could not yet be eliminated due to the freezing weather. However, this is not significant, as the gassing cellar could be used for this purpose." Maybe I'm missing something, but I see no indication that "morgue" and "gassing cellar" are considered one and the same in this quote. (5) Search online: "In a crematorium with five furnaces and fifteen muffles, fifteen corpses were burned."(6) http://www.npr.org...