The Kola Study - An Own Goal by Team Holocaust

[Nessie]

The compression of corpses is proven at Belzec. It is the trans waxy fat residues reported from the core samples. As the naked corpses decompose under pressure, and initially heat, liquids leach out and the decomposing corpses squeeze together leaving a fatty mass, with no gaps. Only estimated calculation as to the volume of corpses per m3 can be made, but it will be the highest corpse density possible in a mass grave, where there is no cremation. Cremation makes that higher still.

What with 21,000m3 of disturbed ground, which alone makes Belzec one of the world's largest ever mass graves in terms of grave space, along with corroborating evidence of mass murders, exhumations and cremations, revisionists are resorting to creative thinking and arguments from incredulity, to try and wriggle out of the volume of evidence for Belzec as a death camp. They, of course, cannot evidence Belzec as a transit camp, or what ever other theory they come up with.

[bombsaway]

You wildly misframe or completely misunderstand.

The grave space is sufficient for 10% of the claimed tally of dead. Not 10% of the grave space claimed by the study.

I don't intend to drag this case off course on this particular however, and recommend your rebuttal go into an appropriate thread. I will edit this post to add a link to such.

Yes, respond in that thread and justify why 20,000 cubic meters is only enough grave space to contain 10% of the claimed 430k bodies.

A 35 kg body is around 30 or 40 liters btw. Your math is insane.

It's already addressed in the first post in the thread linked.

I'm simply being less forgiving than Mattogno with grave density assuming 2or3/m^3. If you want to call that 'downplaying the grave capacity' as SanityCheck (Dr Nick) has done, so be it. Even if you take that point of view, you can't justify the claim given the space. It's not physically possible for the bodies to have been buried in the holes such as they were/are.

The 'Aktion 1005' at my homework excuse for the lack of physical evidence isn't going to cut it anymore Bombsaway, as you yourself have stated, you can't erase the grave space. It is extant.

lol 2 or 3 bodies per cubic meter is a ridiculous threshold to set. The thread also assumed 600k were buried, volume wasn't lost due to the evidenced burning, decomposition, there was no compression as bodies burst and leaked downward. Your supposition 'impossible' is built on the flimsiest assumptions.

If 400k were buried there, that would necessitate around 20 bodies per cubic meter, around 80% packing density, not factoring in all these other variables in bold which would further reduce volume demands.

My thinking is that with limited grave space available bodies were packed about as well as reasonably possible. It wouldn;t make sense for them not to fill graves to capacity. So it is going to be close. At Chelmno, where grave space was less of an issue you see about double the amount of space to accommodate the bodies.

[Stubble]

SOP states that in a mass grave you are to layer a row of bodies, cover them with quick lime (to control odor) and then to deposit 4-6" of sand over top. That's SOP.

SOP is not to blend the dead into a slurry and pour them in as a damn liquid...

2-3/m^3 is still forgiving given what the Russians found at Treblinka, as covered in the first post. It just isn't as forgiving as Mattogno at 8/m^3.

Some advice, read the first post. Actually read it, and the wiki.

[bombsaway]

SOP states that in a mass grave you are to layer a row of bodies, cover them with quick lime (to control odor) and then to deposit 4-6" of sand over top. That's SOP.

SOP is not to blend the dead into a slurry and pour them in as a damn liquid...

2-3/m^3 is still forgiving given what the Russians found at Treblinka, as covered in the first post. It just isn't as forgiving as Mattogno at 8/m^3.

Some advice, read the first post. Actually read it, and the wiki.

The witnesses report the graves being filled to the brim with such a thin layer of sand over it that body parts were visible. Your SOP is another one of your flimsy assumptions. You can't just appeal to authority w the "first post", which I did read, you have to make actual arguments, eg why was SOP necessarily followed?

[Stubble]

It's not an 'appeal to authority', it is recognizing that Archie did an EXCELLENT job in the OP.

Regarding the density, read the wiki. What the Soviet Polish Commission found at Treblinka is lower that the number I'm rolling with. Mattogno was more forgiving at 8 per meter.

Regardless, the dead were not a liquid and were not poured into the grave space, which is already the theoretical maximum and is not actually definitively defined. It could be smaller, but, not larger.

Regarding the witnesses, some easy listening;

https://odysee.com/@UncleSvenAgain:3/BelzecCase:9

I'm going to go back to winnowing German wartime documents looking for your missing jews that were not mixed into a slurry and poured into the grave space.

[bombsaway]

It's not an 'appeal to authority', it is recognizing that Archie did an EXCELLENT job in the OP.

Regarding the density, read the wiki. What the Soviet Polish Commission found at Treblinka is lower that the number I'm rolling with. Mattogno was more forgiving at 8 per meter.

Regardless, the dead were not a liquid and were not poured into the grave space, which is already the theoretical maximum and is not actually definitively defined. It could be smaller, but, not larger.

Regarding the witnesses, some easy listening;

https://odysee.com/@UncleSvenAgain:3/BelzecCase:9

I'm going to go back to winnowing German wartime documents looking for your missing jews that were not mixed into a slurry and poured into the grave space.

What makes you think these numbers are necessarily maximums? Again your theory hinges on these maximums being set in stone, so to speak. This is an assumption. The bodies, if liquified, would handily fit into the graves. There would be space left over, 20%, according to my math. That is assuming no burning or decomposition.

[Stubble]

Read Kola's study.

Further reading, HH #28.

Also, reading this thread might help.

[bombsaway]

Read Kola's study.

Further reading, HH #28.

Also, reading this thread might help.

And I could give you back the same exact response, ya know.

Read Kola. Read Holocaustcontroversies blog where they talk about various things like body compression.

But this is a discussion forum. You are violating one of the guidelines here

If you share outside content like news stories, videos, or articles, please provide some commentary and analysis along with the link.

No analysis whatsoever, no rebuttals to my points or attempt to engage, just a check out these links, nuff said.

I participated in this thread so I've read it , or most of it. None of the impossibility arguments are convincing.

[Keen]

The witnesses report the graves being filled to the brim with such a thin layer of sand over it that body parts were visible.

bombsaway, do you have the intelligence, courage and character to defend your above unsubstantiated allegation - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then; do you have the intelligence, courage and character to answer a few true or false questions?

#1 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The USHMM alleges that 600,000 jews were killed in Belzec - ??

#2 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; It is alleged in orthodox histriography that the remains of the jews who were killed in Belzec currently lie in 33 mass graves within the boundary of the camp - ??

#3 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the 33 alleged mass graves in question, contains the remains of less than 5 people - ??

#4 - If your answer to question #3 was - False. - then; list all of the graves that have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at Belzec, in which verified human remains have been uncovered / tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology - that contains the remains of more than 5 people.

[Keen]

No analysis whatsoever, no rebuttals to my points or attempt to engage

Let's see how bombsaway responds to my attempts to engage. (See above post.)

In the past, his response has been to cravenly run away, indicating a severe lack of courage, integrity and character.

My guess is he will do the same this time.

[Keen]

When Kola speaks of layers he speaks of uniform findings across different drills at consistent depths.

That would be alleged findings bombsaway.

Kola's so-called "findings" are unsubstantiated allegations.

Unsubstantiated allegations cannot even be called evidence, any more than my allegation that I saw a Bigfoot last night could be considered "evidence" that Bigfoot exists.

There is no credible evidence that even one mass grave exists at Belzec.

NOT ONE.

[bombsaway]

The witnesses report the graves being filled to the brim with such a thin layer of sand over it that body parts were visible.

bombsaway, do you have the intelligence, courage and character to defend your above unsubstantiated allegation - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then; do you have the intelligence, courage and character to answer a few true or false questions?

#1 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The USHMM alleges that 600,000 jews were killed in Belzec - ??

#2 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; It is alleged in orthodox histriography that the remains of the jews who were killed in Belzec currently lie in 33 mass graves within the boundary of the camp - ??

#3 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the 33 alleged mass graves in question, contains the remains of less than 5 people - ??

#4 - If your answer to question #3 was - False. - then; list all of the graves that have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at Belzec, in which verified human remains have been uncovered / tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology - that contains the remains of more than 5 people.

What is the substantiated allegation? Witness account saying that the corpses could be seen sticking out of the sand?

Gertsein:

The naked corpses were carried on wooden stretchers to pits only a few meters away, measuring 100 x 20 x 12 meters. After a few days the corpses welled up and a short time later they collapsed, so that one could throw a new layer of bodies upon them. Then ten centimeters of sand were spread over the pit, so that only a few heads and arms still rose from it here and there. [110]

You're not going to stick to this, my assertion about burial impossibility, so I probably won't respond further,

[Stubble]

Gerstein misses the quick lime, but, he does get the 4" of sand right. That's, SOP. Here you were claiming that that didn't exist, and now you dumbly quote it to Keen.

Which is it Bombsaway?

Don't get me wrong, Gerstein's testimony is garbage and his grave estimate in no way reflects reality, but, he did know the SOP, sort of.

[Keen]

The witnesses report the graves being filled to the brim with such a thin layer of sand over it that body parts were visible.

bombsaway, do you have the intelligence, courage and character to defend your above unsubstantiated allegation - Yes. - or - No. - ??

If your answer is - Yes. - then; do you have the intelligence, courage and character to answer a few true or false questions?

#1 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The USHMM alleges that 600,000 jews were killed in Belzec - ??

#2 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; It is alleged in orthodox histriography that the remains of the jews who were killed in Belzec currently lie in 33 mass graves within the boundary of the camp - ??

#3 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the 33 alleged mass graves in question, contains the remains of less than 5 people - ??

#4 - If your answer to question #3 was - False. - then; list all of the graves that have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at Belzec, in which verified human remains have been uncovered / tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology - that contains the remains of more than 5 people.

What is the substantiated allegation? Witness account saying that the corpses could be seen sticking out of the sand?

Gertsein:

The naked corpses were carried on wooden stretchers to pits only a few meters away, measuring 100 x 20 x 12 meters. After a few days the corpses welled up and a short time later they collapsed, so that one could throw a new layer of bodies upon them. Then ten centimeters of sand were spread over the pit, so that only a few heads and arms still rose from it here and there. [110]

You're not going to stick to this, my assertion about burial impossibility, so I probably won't respond further,

No, you "probably won't respond further" because you're a lying, low IQ coward. But I"ll ask again anyway:

bombsaway,

#1 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The USHMM alleges that 600,000 jews were killed in Belzec - ??

#2 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; It is alleged in orthodox histriography that the remains of the jews who were killed in Belzec currently lie in 33 mass graves within the boundary of the camp - ??

#3 - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the 33 alleged mass graves in question, contains the remains of less than 5 people - ??

#4 - If your answer to question #3 was - False. - then; list all of the graves that have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at Belzec, in which verified human remains have been uncovered / tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology - that contains the remains of more than 5 people.

[bombsaway]

Gerstein misses the quick lime, but, he does get the 4" of sand right. That's, SOP. Here you were claiming that that didn't exist, and now you dumbly quote it to Keen.

Which is it Bombsaway?

Don't get me wrong, Gerstein's testimony is garbage and his grave estimate in no way reflects reality, but, he did know the SOP, sort of.

ah I misread you there, thought you meant feet, my mistake. 10 centimeters of sand isn't a lot.