Archaeological Evidence of Mass Graves at Treblinka II

[Nessie]

/sigh

Nessie, reread the last dozen or so posts and reflect on them for a day or so.

You don't even understand what I'm saying, or you pretend not to. We aren't talking to one another, but rather at one another. You need to actually understand what I'm saying if we are going to meaningfully debate.

I understand what you are saying. You accept only the evidence of 4 pits at TII. The rest of the evidence you dismiss. That supports your desired belief, that there is not enough grave space at the camp to bury c850,000 corpses.

Let's not continue to clutter the thread.

The reason people 'pick cherries' when looking at these testimonies is because if you don't, there is no cohesion because they are all radically different.

Not they are not. They are entirely consistent that mass graves were located in the south-eastern part of the camp, and in the Lazarete. No eyewitness locates a mass grave anywhere else in the camp, or states there were no, or only a few graves.

cherry picking: noticing and commenting on physical and testimonial consistencies...

"AI Overview
The cherry picking fallacy, also known as the fallacy of incomplete evidence, involves selectively presenting only the evidence that supports a particular viewpoint while ignoring or suppressing contradictory evidence. This creates a biased and misleading argument, making it appear stronger than it truly is.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
What it is: Cherry picking is a type of informal fallacy where someone presents a one-sided argument by focusing on evidence that supports their claim while ignoring or downplaying evidence that contradicts it.
Why it's fallacious: The core issue with cherry picking is that it distorts the overall picture by presenting a biased and incomplete view of the situation. A genuine and persuasive argument should consider all relevant evidence, not just the parts that fit a pre-determined conclusion"

By cherry-picking only two plans and the GPR for only one part of the survey, you have distorted the overall picture and created an incomplete view of the situation.

[Nessie]

If was not already clear, from what I have evidenced, I am not claiming a specific number for the mass graves, since the evidence is not clear how many there were.

Your evidence is dogshit.

That is your opinion. Your evidence is non-existent. That is a fact. You have no eyewitnesses, no archaeology, no geophysics and no photos to support your claim of no mass graves that would fit hundreds of thousands of corpses.

[Stubble]

/sigh

Nessie, reread the last dozen or so posts and reflect on them for a day or so.

You don't even understand what I'm saying, or you pretend not to. We aren't talking to one another, but rather at one another. You need to actually understand what I'm saying if we are going to meaningfully debate.

I understand what you are saying. You accept only the evidence of 4 pits at TII. The rest of the evidence you dismiss. That supports your desired belief, that there is not enough grave space at the camp to bury c850,000 corpses.

No, Nessie, you don't understand what I'm saying Sir.

I've attempted to clearly and concisely articulate my points to you, but, you ignore and dismiss that which you can not reconcile.

For example, with your buddy Warnick, I point out that when he is in a room with other witnesses, there are exactly 4 pits, located in a spot roughly congruent with pits g51, g52, g53 and g54. When you look at his own maps and model however, that changes.

I'm pointing to witness consensus in 3 separate maps, which happen to be congruent with the GPR data. They also happen to be roughly contemporary to the event.

You call this 'cherry picking' and that's fair enough, I ask you, show me your cherries? What do you have in your bucket that is congruent from map to GPR data? Present me with your estimation of the grave space based off of both witness maps and GPR data. When you consider Warnick by himself, his estimation of the reality of the camp falls apart.

Looking through the various other later maps much the same plays out.

I have selected the 3 early, contemporary maps, created by a consensus of 3 witnesses in each case, and they say 4 pits and show them in an area consistent with 4 GPR returns from the Colls study.

I'm interested in more data, you are interested in broad and nebulous statements about how there 'could' have been sufficient grave space as you point in to the unknown. You are of course free to point into the unknown, such is your right. Don't expect me to 'believe' what isn't directly evidenced.

Furthermore, you shouldn't be surprised that I would expect actual physical direct evidence to support your claim of 'huge unfound mass graves'.

You are relying on testimonies that say the camp was 33% grave space when the GPR evidence does not in any way support that. Look closely at the various models, the various maps, and then at the Colls study. You can't reconcile that Nessie, they are not reflective of one another, they are inconsistent.


The Laponder Model


The Peters Model


The Sztajer model
Image unavailable
Edit: Found image, I understand why it has been scrubbed. It is 'holocaust atrocity art', not a model of Treblinka.

Of course, to be fair, in light of the GPR, the same could and rightly should be said for the rest of the models.

The Wiernik Model


There are of course also the maps;

http://www.deathcamps.org/treblinka/maps.html

Nessie, tell me, which of these maps/models do you think best reflects the findings of the Colls study? Which one of these 'proves' human remains in any of the proposed grave space? What exactly is your preferred evidence? What do you select to support your claim of grave space for >850,000 persons on that patch of dirt?

It also occurs to me this thread seems to have drifted from the title as in many pages we haven't talked about physical archeological evidence, but, rather hypothetical and theoretical mass graves, not proven to exist by, ironically, archeological evidence.

For clarity g51,g52,g53 and g54 are at least theoretical, any others are hypothetical.

[HansHill]

That is your opinion.

You've had 80 years to try cobble together a cohesive story and instead, you've spent those 80 years screwing the pooch, retracting half your claims, and locking up dissenters.

Embarrassing.

[TlsMS93]

Caroline didn't find anything similar to what the witnesses said about the immense mass graves. What she found were three much shallower depressions, which wouldn't convince the logic of holding 800,000 bodies. So she went to Treblinka I to investigate near the cemetery. After all, if it's a cemetery, it's evidence that they'll find human remains.

Nessie believes the idea of going to the Lazaret for some medical examination only to end up getting shot in the back of the head and falling into a huge grave.