What evidence are you asking for, exactly? The Nuremberg trials? Head of the Generalgouvernement's leader Hans Frank admitting the atrocities but playing blame game and saying he was only executing Himmler's orders?
Nuremberger trials hold only little evidence due to emotional abuse and actualy physical abuse. You can hear the statement of Julius Streicher for example - but I guess he is lying because he is a Nazis, right? But let us assume he is lying - then why should we believe in the so called atrocities - despite the fact he never commited to any atrocity whatsoever in the first place...? I really do not get that logic.
Or this perserved DOCUMENT from the bundesarchives dating 1942 from the institute of 'agrarian studies' describing mass deportations of Poles from their own state to make way for german settlers?
This piece of text is more about territories in the east, economy within these territories, special rights to it, heritage and general administration and logistics:
On page 17, you can read how they want to maintain the situation via "Reichsgaue".
Part B starts at page 28 and it is all about economics and funding.
On Page 37 you can see how they want to maintain the agriculture. On the following pages we can find of how they want to maintain water supply and electricity. Same goes for the pages after 59/60.
On page 46/47 we can find the word "Arbeitslager" which means labour camp. This is something normal when it comes to wars. But you can see it as "evil" if you really want to. But it is far away from an actual "atrocity". If it is an atrocity, then every other nation is guilty of it as well.
On page 59 we can find an elaborated list on stuff they want to create and its costs to it:
I will translate a bit so people might get a better grasp on it:
1. Agriculture
2. Road building / "Reichsautobahn"
3 Facilities
4. Housebuilding
The numbers next to it shows of how much money it might cost (in billions).
The literature to it is somewhat weird as well. Some sources are fine but stuff like "Vernichtungspolitik" (policy of extermination) really shows that it is biased since it is not about extermination:
"Aly, G., Heim, S., Vordenker der Vernichtung. Auschwitz und die deutschen Pläne für eine neue europäische Ordnung, Hamburg 1991.
Esch, M.G., "Gesunde Verhältnisse". Deutsche und polnische Bevölkerungspolitik in Ostmitteleuropa 1939-1950, Marburg 1998.
Heinemann, I., Wissenschaft und Homogenisierungsplanungen für Osteuropa. Konrad Meyer, der "Generalplan Ost" und die deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, in: Heinemann, I., Wagner, P. (Hg.), Wissenschaft, Planung, Vertreibung. Neuordnungskonzepte und Umsiedlungspolitik im 20. Jahrhundert, Stuttgart 2006, S. 45-72 (= Beiträge zur Geschichte der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft, Bd. 1).
Heinemann, I., "Rasse, Siedlung, deutsches Blut". Das Rasse- und Siedlungshauptamt der SS und die rassenpolitische Neuordnung Europas, Göttingen 2003 (= Moderne Zeit. Neue Forschungen zur Gesellschafts- und Kulturgeschichte des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts, Bd. 2).
Leendertz, A., Ordnung schaffen. Deutsche Raumplanung im 20. Jahrhundert, Göttingen 2008 (=Beiträge zur Geschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts, Bd. 7).
Madajczyk, C., Vom Generalplan Ost zum Generalsiedlungsplan, München u.a. 1994 (= Einzelveröffentlichungen der Historischen Kommission zu Berlin, Bd. 80).
Mai, U., "Rasse und Raum". Agrarpolitik, Sozial- und Raumplanung im NS-Staat, Paderborn u.a. 2002 (= Sammlung Schöningh zur Geschichte und Gegenwart, o. Bd.).
Rössler, M., Schleiermacher, S. (Hg.), Der "Generalplan Ost". Hauptlinien der nationalsozialistischen Planungs- und Vernichtungspolitik, Berlin 1993.
Scheffler, D., Fall 8: Der Prozeß gegen das SS-Rasse- und Siedlungshauptamt ("RuSHA-Case"), in: Der Nationalsozialismus vor Gericht. Die alliierten Prozesse gegen Kriegsverbrecher und Soldaten 1943-1952. Hg. v. G.R. Ueberschär, Frankfurt a.M. 1999, S. 155-163.
Wasser, B., Himmlers Raumplanung im Osten. Der Generalplan Ost in Polen 1940-1944, Basel u.a. 1993."
Hard to debate anything when everything could be countered with a obscure stomrcel blogpost or called 'jew propaganda' when it doesn't suit your juvenile contrarian tastes.
Not an argument and I really do not know why you have to rely on it. It is also quite contradictory since on the other hand you think that everything else is just Nazi propaganda because it does not suit you. If everything would be reversed, you would blindly believe in Nazi propaganda instead.