Archaeological Evidence of Mass Graves at Treblinka II

[Nessie]

The round circles representing the graves in the grave area here;



Correspond with the yellow areas that are the G50-54 pits found in the 2011 survey here;



Bear in mind the orientations are different.

[Stubble]

The round circles representing the graves in the grave area here;



Correspond with the yellow areas that are the G50-54 pits found in the 2011 survey here;



Bear in mind the orientations are different.

My gosh Nessie! You are right!

Could that be the grave space available?

Guys, guys, I think we have solved it! The graves were at that spot, it corresponds to the witnesses and everything!

Eureka!

So, how many hectares of grave space are we talking Nessie? How much volume?

(This is the available space for burial...)

[TlsMS93]

So-called revisionists have rejected a Polish and British surveys and they will reject any and all, no matter the source, when they merely confirm what has already been found. This is why it is more accurate to call people deniers, as all they do is deny the evidence of mass graves. They produce zero evidence to prove there were no mass graves.

I believe in the Roman positive, black and white and not in circumstances, not in anecdotal testimonies, not in code words, in my legal system and in the culture in which I am inserted this does not satisfy, if it satisfies you that is your problem, I do not make extrapolations, Jews with their stories and traditions do this from their literature, the problem is wanting the rest of the world to swallow this, I will not contest whether biblical events were historical or not with Jews, now in a classroom it is different, with the Holocaust it is the same thing.

[Archie]

Roughly how much dry wood(kg) do you need to cremate a corpse, Nessie?

this question is a diversion from the archeological evidence, the point of the thread

the archeological evidence, based on the immediate post war survey, indicates mass burial and body destruction

most of the camp is now forested, so the GPR scans of the non-forested parts do not allow us to set a limit on maximum amount of grave space in the camp

this question is a diversion from the archeological evidence, the point of the thread

The mass graves rely on the cremation fairytale being true.
No cremations = No mass graves.

I’ll concede it’s a slight diversion off topic, this thread has become very repetitive.

It is a slight diversion but ultimately these are complementary topics.

They only want to talk about ash because this is a way for them sweep 95% of the problem under the rug. The big difficulty for them is the enormous initial body mass and jumping ahead to ash is their way of skipping over the hard part. The issue of the initial burial space (of WHOLE bodies) and the issue of cremation both highlight the same underlying problem which is what happened to the 40,000,000 kg of so of human tissue.

Actual, confirmed mass graves in the real world tend to have relatively pedestrian burial densities, usually not even 5 bodies per cubic meter. They are unable to cite a single confirmed example of a grave, even a small one, that has a density approaching their absurd 20 or 30 bodies per cubic metric. The claim there were ever 1.5M bodies buried at the AR camps is already looking extremely doubtful on this point alone. But when you add to this the additional difficulty of cremating such a mass of bodies in open air this gives us additional certainty that the story is totally absurd.

At Treblinka, they would have had to have burned around 6,400 bodies per day for months. We can debate exactly how much wood such an operation might require (there are a range of possible assumptions), but even in dedicated cremation ovens the Germans were using around 30 kg of fuel per corpse. Taking that as a rough minimum, we are looking at something like 200 metric tons of wood per day (for months) as a very conservative figure. If they couldn't burn all those bodies, then they were never there to begin with. They generally assume that every last inch of disturbed soil was absolutely packed with bodies. The cremation angle is further reason to reject this claim.

[Nessie]

My gosh Nessie! You are right!

Could that be the grave space available?

Guys, guys, I think we have solved it! The graves were at that spot, it corresponds to the witnesses and everything!

Eureka!

So, how many hectares of grave space are we talking Nessie? How much volume?

(This is the available space for burial...)

This overlay of the pits (yellow) found by GPR around the memorial, on the 1944 aerial photo, shows that G50-54 are at the edge of the disturbed ground in the area of the camp identified as the main grave area. That area was recorded by the 1945 survey as 2 hectares, with an excavation that was 7m deep before undisturbed ground was found.



That main grave area is now mostly covered by the larger memorial. The pits at the other side, are in the Lazarette area, which was also shown by witnesses to have mass graves. Part of that is covered by the smaller memorial. The pits around the gas chambers (blue) are potential graves, but they may be for waste. It is all in the report, if you bothered to read it.

That means the witnesses are corroborated by the photographic evidence of disturbed ground and the archaeological evidence of large pits in an area of disturbed ground containing cremated human remains. That volume of evidence proves mass graves.

Since we have witness estimations of the grave sizes and the memorial prevents a full site survey, we cannot say, precisely, how large the original mass graves were.

[Nessie]

So-called revisionists have rejected a Polish and British surveys and they will reject any and all, no matter the source, when they merely confirm what has already been found. This is why it is more accurate to call people deniers, as all they do is deny the evidence of mass graves. They produce zero evidence to prove there were no mass graves.

I believe in the Roman positive, black and white and not in circumstances, not in anecdotal testimonies, not in code words, in my legal system and in the culture in which I am inserted this does not satisfy, if it satisfies you that is your problem, I do not make extrapolations, Jews with their stories and traditions do this from their literature, the problem is wanting the rest of the world to swallow this, I will not contest whether biblical events were historical or not with Jews, now in a classroom it is different, with the Holocaust it is the same thing.

Neither the Polish nor the British surveys were conducted by Jewish people. The majority of the eyewitnesses to the mass graves, were German or Ukrainian SS staff. Many of the photos were taken by Germans.

You have decided to deny all of that evidence and then believe in something that you cannot evidence.

[Stubble]

My gosh Nessie! You are right!

Could that be the grave space available?

Guys, guys, I think we have solved it! The graves were at that spot, it corresponds to the witnesses and everything!

Eureka!

So, how many hectares of grave space are we talking Nessie? How much volume?

(This is the available space for burial...)

This overlay of the pits (yellow) found by GPR around the memorial, on the 1944 aerial photo, shows that G50-54 are at the edge of the disturbed ground in the area of the camp identified as the main grave area. That area was recorded by the 1945 survey as 2 hectares, with an excavation that was 7m deep before undisturbed ground was found.



That main grave area is now mostly covered by the larger memorial. The pits at the other side, are in the Lazarette area, which was also shown by witnesses to have mass graves. Part of that is covered by the smaller memorial. The pits around the gas chambers (blue) are potential graves, but they may be for waste. It is all in the report, if you bothered to read it.

That means the witnesses are corroborated by the photographic evidence of disturbed ground and the archaeological evidence of large pits in an area of disturbed ground containing cremated human remains. That volume of evidence proves mass graves.

Since we have witness estimations of the grave sizes and the memorial prevents a full site survey, we cannot say, precisely, how large the original mass graves were.

My gosh! That's 56 Olympic swimming pools Nessie!

Have we, been over this before?

Also, I don't think you are qualified to examine an aerial photograph, are you? I seem to recall you berating people for looking at aerial photographs in the babi yar thread...

[Nessie]

....

It is a slight diversion but ultimately these are complementary topics.

They only want to talk about ash because this is a way for them sweep 95% of the problem under the rug. The big difficulty for them is the enormous initial body mass and jumping ahead to ash is their way of skipping over the hard part. The issue of the initial burial space (of WHOLE bodies) and the issue of cremation both highlight the same underlying problem which is what happened to the 40,000,000 kg of so of human tissue.

Actual, confirmed mass graves in the real world tend to have relatively pedestrian burial densities, usually not even 5 bodies per cubic meter. They are unable to cite a single confirmed example of a grave, even a small one, that has a density approaching their absurd 20 or 30 bodies per cubic metric. The claim there were ever 1.5M bodies buried at the AR camps is already looking extremely doubtful on this point alone. But when you add to this the additional difficulty of cremating such a mass of bodies in open air this gives us additional certainty that the story is totally absurd.

At Treblinka, they would have had to have burned around 6,400 bodies per day for months. We can debate exactly how much wood such an operation might require (there are a range of possible assumptions), but even in dedicated cremation ovens the Germans were using around 30 kg of fuel per corpse. Taking that as a rough minimum, we are looking at something like 200 metric tons of wood per day (for months) as a very conservative figure. If they couldn't burn all those bodies, then they were never there to begin with. They generally assume that every last inch of disturbed soil was absolutely packed with bodies. The cremation angle is further reason to reject this claim.

You are arguing that because you cannot figure out, to your satisfaction, how so many corpses could have been buried (and then cremated) at the AR camps, therefore, there were no mass graves containing c850,000 corpses at TII. The reason why you are resorting to that argument, is because you lack evidence.

You have zero eyewitnesses, who worked inside TII, who speak to there being no mass graves. Instead, 100% of them state mass graves existed and they all locate those graves in the same part of the camp. There are also witnesses, from outside the camp, who speak to seeing excavators working inside the camp.

You have zero archaeological evidence that large parts of the camp, were never dug into and corpses buried there. The one attempt to gather such evidence, the Richard Krege survey, resulted in one GPR image and no report. Instead, there have been two main surveys, by the Poles in 1945 and the British in 2011, both of which identified and proved large areas of disturbed ground, in the area of the camp identified by witnesses as where mass graves were located, containing human cremains.

You have zero photographic evidence to show the ground was undisturbed and never excavated. Instead, the Kurt Franz photos show excavators at work inside the camp and the 1944 aerial photo shows disturbed ground and rectangular outlines, in the areas of the camp where witnesses state mass graves were located.

You have zero circumstantial evidence about the operation of the camp. When so-called revisionists try to revise the history, they fall apart into disagreement, claiming it was a transit camp, a train stop for the different gauge railways, a hygiene station and a property sorting centre. Instead, AR evidences the clearance of the ghettos, mass transports to the camp, the mass theft of property and no evidence of mass transports of people back out. It is those transport records, that provide the evidence to prove how many were buried at the camp, since the Nazis did as much as they could to stop a body count.

[Nessie]

....
This overlay of the pits (yellow) found by GPR around the memorial, on the 1944 aerial photo, shows that G50-54 are at the edge of the disturbed ground in the area of the camp identified as the main grave area. That area was recorded by the 1945 survey as 2 hectares, with an excavation that was 7m deep before undisturbed ground was found.



That main grave area is now mostly covered by the larger memorial. The pits at the other side, are in the Lazarette area, which was also shown by witnesses to have mass graves. Part of that is covered by the smaller memorial. The pits around the gas chambers (blue) are potential graves, but they may be for waste. It is all in the report, if you bothered to read it.

That means the witnesses are corroborated by the photographic evidence of disturbed ground and the archaeological evidence of large pits in an area of disturbed ground containing cremated human remains. That volume of evidence proves mass graves.

Since we have witness estimations of the grave sizes and the memorial prevents a full site survey, we cannot say, precisely, how large the original mass graves were.

My gosh! That's 56 Olympic swimming pools Nessie!

Have we, been over this before?

Yes, the area bordered by pits G50-54, the inner boundary of the camp and the gas chambers, is the 2 hectare area, with a volume of 56 Olympic sized pools, within which the mass graves were dug. (The yellow line is the outer boundary) You can see from the GPR and pits G50-54, how close together the graves were, so that they took up a large part of that total volume.

You can also see that it was not the only part of the camp to contain mass graves, as more are located in the lazarette. Between them, those areas of the camp, are easily large enough to have contained mass graves described by all the eyewitnesses.

Also, I don't think you are qualified to examine an aerial photograph, are you? I seem to recall you berating people for looking at aerial photographs in the babi yar thread...

I was arguing about Babi Yar, that the photo was taken from so high up, that it would be impossible to see corpses on the ground, or if something was being burned, what it was. The TII aerial photo clearly shows where the ground has been disturbed, compared to the ploughed fields around it and the occupied parts of the camp, where buildings had been located, and the ground is much lighter.

The aerial photo, the GPR survey and the eyewitnesses all evidence large areas of disturbed ground in the same part of the camp, that is large enough to have contained mass graves.

[Stubble]

Nessie, the witnesses put four large mass graves where the 4 returns are at the 'top' of the camp.

They don't put mass graves in the woods, they don't put mass graves hidden under a rock, they don't put mass graves on a boat, on a float, on a train, in the rain. They do not put them there Nessie no, that is not where the mass graves go.

If you have a problem with the map I prefer, here is another collaborative early map for you.



Notice the congruence with the other map and with the GPR/LIDAR, also notice it is slightly more fleshed out and now includes the pit at the camp hospital.

Now, in the sorting area, it doesn't show the pits on the GPR/LIDAR from Colls. There still aren't any graves in the damn trees.

Now, Nessie, you are again trying to sell me 2 hectares with 56 Olympic swimming pools of grave space, and I still ain't buying it.

What, the other darker fields near by, they are grave space too? You can tell grave space by color? On a black and white photograph? No, Nessie, you can't.

I don't care how the story evolved over time, these collaborative maps are early, they were drawn using multiple sources and they are congruent, not just with one another, but also with the GPR/LIDAR data from the Colls study. Now, that's one hell of a coincidence if you are going to try to palm this off like that. That's evidencing...

[Nessie]

Nessie, the witnesses put four large mass graves where the 4 returns are at the 'top' of the camp.

They don't put mass graves in the woods, they don't put mass graves hidden under a rock, they don't put mass graves on a boat, on a float, on a train, in the rain. They do not put them there Nessie no, that is not where the mass graves go.

If you have a problem with the map I prefer, here is another collaborative early map for you.

That is another map that has north to the left. The aerial photos have north to the top. The map above, again, locates the main mass graves in the south-eastern corner of the camp, inside the inner boundary, again, consistent with G50-54.

I have noticed that the map here;

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=12032#p12032

has a mistake, as it indicates north, where it is east. In all three cases, get the same orientation, with the spur line railway to the west of the camp, the lazarette is south west and the main grave area is south east.

Notice the congruence with the other map and with the GPR/LIDAR, also notice it is slightly more fleshed out and now includes the pit at the camp hospital.

Now, in the sorting area, it doesn't show the pits on the GPR/LIDAR from Colls. There still aren't any graves in the damn trees.

Now, Nessie, you are again trying to sell me 2 hectares with 56 Olympic swimming pools of grave space, and I still ain't buying it.

What, the other darker fields near by, they are grave space too? You can tell grave space by color? On a black and white photograph? No, Nessie, you can't.

I don't care how the story evolved over time, these collaborative maps are early, they were drawn using multiple sources and they are congruent, not just with one another, but also with the GPR/LIDAR data from the Colls study. Now, that's one hell of a coincidence if you are going to try to palm this off like that. That's evidencing...

The eyewitnesses, their maps, the 1945 survey, the GPR, and the aerial photo, all locate the main mass grave area as being in the south east of the camp, with more graves in the lazarette in the south west. That area of the camp is about a third of the camp, or 5-6 hectares. That is easily enough space for the 2 hectares described in the 1945 survey.

What you try to dismiss as a coincidence, is in fact corroboration. Multiple sources of evidence, eyewitnesses, photos and archaeology, all find the same thing. That corroboration proves mass graves.

[Stubble]

Nessie, that's quite the inversion of reality there. I think you need to reread my earlier post.

Also, the returns in the sorting area are not mass graves, they are property disposal for broken shit. That's why you find busted combs and toothbrushes and worn out shoes and shit, not any of the 48,000,000 teeth there...

You have 4 mass graves, and possibly a mass grave at the camp hospital, although, when you crack that one open, I don't expect you to find a metric f ton of bodies.

[Nessie]

Nessie, that's quite the inversion of reality there. I think you need to reread my earlier post.

Also, the returns in the sorting area are not mass graves, they are property disposal for broken shit. That's why you find busted combs and toothbrushes and worn out shoes and shit, not any of the 48,000,000 teeth there...

The aerial photo with the overlay of the yellow mass graves found by GPR, the blue gas chambers and the orange barracks, fits with the witness descriptions of where they were located.

You have 4 mass graves, and possibly a mass grave at the camp hospital, although, when you crack that one open, I don't expect you to find a metric f ton of bodies.

G50-54 are five mass graves and at least another at the lazarette. G36 is also next to the main memorial, so that makes at least 7. The area that can be surveyed is clearly limited by the memorial and trees.

That area is in total, 5 to 6 hectares, out of the total of 17 for the camp. It is easily enough space to contain the mass graves as described by all of the eyewitnesses, just do not take their estimations of how long and wide the graves were, or the total number of graves literally, as estimation and memory means they cannot give accurate and precise details.

[Stubble]

Nessie, are you counting the box trench latrine as a mass grave? That's low. So is counting the broken property pits, but, counting the latrine is literally a shitty thing to do.

[TlsMS93]

Straying a bit from the topic, but not so much regarding the use of AI for future discussions on this topic.

Recently, Musk's AI in X was embroiled in controversy regarding Hitler and questions about the persecution of white people, which have already been promptly removed and are being updated to prevent this from happening in the future. Jewish organizations are already pushing for the tool to behave in a certain way, distorting what would be known as artificial intelligence. So it's to be expected that something like this will also happen in other AIs, even due to Jewish figures involved in future projects. Therefore, trusting AI to evaluate the Holocaust narrative may no longer be neutral and may be fraught with more bias depending on which orthodoxy feeds the results.