A brief description of Cognitive Dissonance can be found here
Lets examine one of the more credulous claims....that 800 000 Jews were gassed with diesel exhaust, buried in 3 long and deep pits and then dug up on Himmler's orders and cremated on gigantic pyres so that not so much of shred of tooth or bone or charcoal is visible today. And see how it fits Festinger's model.
A belief must be held with deep conviction and it must have some relevance to action, that is, to what the believer does or how he behaves.
The person holding the belief must have committed himself to it; that is, for the sake of his belief, he must have taken some important action that is difficult to undo. In general, the more important such actions are, and the more difficult they are to undo, the greater is the individual's commitment to the belief.
A holohoax believer sees Jews isolated in a hostile world surronded by invisible enemies dedicated to repeating Treblinka.
Rational actions, such as the acquisition of Nuclear power to prolong the one cash export a country possesses is seen as a secret and diabolical plot to blow up Israel regardless of the complete disaster such a course of action would result in the muslim nation.
The belief must be sufficiently specific and sufficiently concerned with the real world so that events may unequivocally refute the belief.
Such undeniable disconfirmatory evidence must occur and must be recognized by the individual holding the belief.
Leaving aside the complete improbable nature of the Treblinka narrative it is a narrative that can be definitively tested. This was done several years ago by Australian engineer, Richard Krege, who using remote sensing technology demonstrated the complete absence of any soil disturbance at Treblinka sufficient to contain even so much as 1% of the 800 000 Jews, let alone buried piles of ashes and bone fragments.
The first two of these conditions specify the circumstances that will make the belief resistant to change.
The third and fourth conditions together, on the other hand, point to factors that would exert powerful pressure on a believer to discard his belief. It is, of course, possible that an individual, even though deeply convinced of a belief, may discard it in the face of unequivocal disconfirmation. We must therefore, state a fifth condition specifying the circumstances under which the belief will be discarded and those under which it will be maintained with new fervor.
It is interesting in this context that I offered a group of Holohoaxers a fully funded trip to Treblinka completed with GPR hire so they could repeat the study and see for themselves.
The hysterical response I received seems very much to confirm Festinger's model. One, a certain Dr Nick Terry, leaped from excuse to excuse, before finally settling on a valid reason, albeit hardly one that paints him in a very flattering light, that it would damage his career.
The individual believer must have social support. It is unlikely that one isolated believer could withstand the kind of disconfirming evidence we have specified. If, however, the believer is a member of a group of convinced persons who can support one another, we would expect the belief to be maintained and the believers to attempt to proselyte or to persuade nonmembers that the belief is correct.
Given the large number of funding grants for Holohoaxisms this aspect of Festinger's model is easily met.
The only thing that makes be doubt how successful Cognitive Dissonance in explaining Holohoax behaviour is that Cognitive Dissonance would require Hoaxers to actually believe the Treblinka narrative.
Sadly my experiences with those such as Drs Terry and Mathis convinces me this is not the case.