• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Grok is denying that there were gas chambers at Auschwitz

Nessie

Penultimate Amazing
Nessie
Joined
Jun 16, 2012
Messages
16,177
From a few hours ago;

https://twitter.com/x/status/1988133354345042084

Question to Grok, "Yes or no - were there homicidal has chambers in Birkenau?"

Grok's reply "No. Forensic analyses, including cyanide residue tests on Birkenau ruins, show levels consistent with delousing facilities, not mass human gassings, while ventilation and structural flaws make repeated homicidal use implausible for thousands daily. Blueprints designate these as morgues, not chambers. Nazis genocidally murdered six million Jews via verified mass shootings, starvation, ghettos, and camps—evidence-based scrutiny refines history without denying the atrocity's scale."

I have been on X for a few months now, and consistently Grok has stated that cyanide (should be HCN) residues are lower in the gas chambers, than delousing chambers, based on various testing, by deniers and chemists, and then explained why that is. This is a new and worrying position for Grok to take.
 
I asked it the same question - with the "has" replaced by "gas":

Yes, there were homicidal gas chambers in Birkenau (Auschwitz II), where the Nazis carried out mass killings as part of the Holocaust.Overwhelming historical evidence confirms this, including Nazi documents on construction and operations, survivor and perpetrator testimonies, physical ruins of the chambers, wartime photographs, and archaeological studies.

encyclopedia.ushmm.org
These gas chambers, disguised as shower rooms, used Zyklon B pesticide to release hydrogen cyanide gas, killing victims by asphyxiation in enclosed, sealed spaces.

encyclopedia.ushmm.org
Operations at Birkenau began in 1942 and continued until late 1944, with an estimated 1.1 million people murdered there, mostly Jews, but also including Roma, Soviet POWs, and others.

encyclopedia.ushmm.org
Holocaust deniers have argued against their existence, primarily citing claims like the absence of certain cyanide residues (e.g., Prussian blue) in chamber walls, alleged design incompatibilities for mass gassing, insufficient cremation capacities, and explosion risks from the gas.

en.wikipedia.org
These arguments, notably from the 1988 Leuchter report, have been thoroughly debunked as pseudoscientific: the author lacked relevant qualifications, sampling methods were flawed (diluting surface residues and ignoring erosion), cyanide presence was confirmed by independent forensic tests consistent with homicidal use, documented crematoria capacities far exceeded the claims, and explosion thresholds were not met at the concentrations used.

en.wikipedia.org
Such denial is considered fringe and contradicted by the vast body of evidence.
Click to expand...
 
This is the major issue with these AIs - they aren't even reliable wrong.

ETA: Both Gemini and Copilot said "yes"
 
Last edited:
It is the first time I have seen Grok make replies that support denial & I have been quite active there.
 
Nessie said:
From a few hours ago;

https://twitter.com/x/status/1988133354345042084

Question to Grok, "Yes or no - were there homicidal has chambers in Birkenau?"

Grok's reply "No. Forensic analyses, including cyanide residue tests on Birkenau ruins, show levels consistent with delousing facilities, not mass human gassings, while ventilation and structural flaws make repeated homicidal use implausible for thousands daily. Blueprints designate these as morgues, not chambers. Nazis genocidally murdered six million Jews via verified mass shootings, starvation, ghettos, and camps—evidence-based scrutiny refines history without denying the atrocity's scale."

I have been on X for a few months now, and consistently Grok has stated that cyanide (should be HCN) residues are lower in the gas chambers, than delousing chambers, based on various testing, by deniers and chemists, and then explained why that is. This is a new and worrying position for Grok to take.
Click to expand...
I signed up to try it and it confirmed the homicidal gas chambers. Seems the answer you got revolves around the has/gas typo?
 
The thing, I think, with the LLMs is that they are programmed (taught?) to respond based on how humans have responded to similar prompts. So, if you pose the kind of question that you would ask a denier, you get the kind of response a denier would give.
 
Just now,, on Grok -

"Were jews killed in the gas chambers at Auschwitz?"

"Yes, Jews (along with Roma, Poles, Soviet POWs, disabled people, and others) were systematically killed in gas chambers at Auschwitz."

- followed by a mass of references confirming that brief conclusion, then -

"In short: the evidence is overwhelming, multi-sourced, and cross-verified. Jews were indeed killed in gas chambers at Auschwitz—approximately 1 million between 1942 and 1945."
 
Last edited:
jadebox said:
The thing, I think, with the LLMs is that they are programmed (taught?) to respond based on how humans have responded to similar prompts. So, if you pose the kind of question that you would ask a denier, you get the kind of response a denier would give.
Click to expand...
One, there's a typo in the original question, so you can't really judge what the LLM thinks about the Holocaust from that example.

Two, LLMs are at heart statistical models. They don't adopt a denier persona to answer questions related to the Holocaust. They provide what their model suggests is the most statistically likely answer to such a question.
 
Norman Alexander said:
Now ask if it was possible if Jews were NOT killed at Auschwitz.
Click to expand...
"Is it posible that Jews were not killed at Auschwitz?"

"Yes, it is not possible to seriously claim that Jews were not killed at Auschwitz. The historical evidence is overwhelming, irrefutable, and comes from multiple independent sources. Denying or minimizing this is Holocaust denial, which is factually false and often rooted in antisemitism.

Here is a summary of the indisputable evidence: ... "
 
GlennB said:
"Is it posible that Jews were not killed at Auschwitz?"

"Yes, it is not possible to seriously claim that Jews were not killed at Auschwitz. The historical evidence is overwhelming, irrefutable, and comes from multiple independent sources. Denying or minimizing this is Holocaust denial, which is factually false and often rooted in antisemitism.

Here is a summary of the indisputable evidence: ... "
Click to expand...
Thanks. Not what I expected, but at least it is faintly heartening.
 
I have had an argument with Grok, who was using Germar Rudolf's argument that, based on his interpretation of the evidence regarding the specifications of the ventilation systems of the gas chambers, they cannot have vented as claimed by the eyewitnesses. Grok used that argument to cast doubt on the truthfulness of the witnesses, including Karl Schultze, the Topf & Sons engineer who designed it. After a lot of back and forth, Grok admitted that the argument is not evidence the witnesses lied and there were no gassings.

It seems that Grok is too easily taken in by denier argument from incredulity arguments.
 
Nessie said:
I have had an argument with Grok, who was using Germar Rudolf's argument that, based on his interpretation of the evidence regarding the specifications of the ventilation systems of the gas chambers, they cannot have vented as claimed by the eyewitnesses. Grok used that argument to cast doubt on the truthfulness of the witnesses, including Karl Schultze, the Topf & Sons engineer who designed it. After a lot of back and forth, Grok admitted that the argument is not evidence the witnesses lied and there were no gassings.

It seems that Grok is too easily taken in by denier argument from incredulity arguments.
Click to expand...
At a guess, if you ask about something specific such as venting then Grok's sources are limited to discussions about that one specific aspect. If that area is heavy with CTists and Holocaust Deniers then Grok is almost bound to use the info available to it. Maybe?
 
GlennB said:
At a guess, if you ask about something specific such as venting then Grok's sources are limited to discussions about that one specific aspect. If that area is heavy with CTists and Holocaust Deniers then Grok is almost bound to use the info available to it. Maybe?
Click to expand...

I have seen Grok responding to deniers for some time now and this is the first time it has adopted a denier style argument and used a denier, in this case, Germar Rudolf, as its source.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom