Archaeological Evidence of Mass Graves at Treblinka II

[Nessie]

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.

No, I am counting what has been identified as most likely a grave, based on size and location, so G50-54 and G36.

[Stubble]

Nessie, do me a favor and show me on the 2 early collaborative maps where they placed 7 grave spaces?

If you can't, I ask you, did they, forget the 2 largest mass graves on their map Nessie? Is that what you are going with?

The grave space is wildly insufficient. When you compare the almost contemporary maps, that were collaborative efforts, with the study, you find the 4 pits indicated by witnesses, that doesn't mean you get to start saying any return in that area was grave space, the evidence doesn't support that.

I can't believe I have to explain evidencing to you Nessie, yet, here we are.

[Nessie]

Nessie, do me a favor and show me on the 2 early collaborative maps where they placed 7 grave spaces?

They didn't. On the Kudlik, Wiernik and Trautsolt map they indicate 4 mass graves and on the Kudlik, Laks and Platkiewicz map they also indicate 4.

If you can't, I ask you, did they, forget the 2 largest mass graves on their map Nessie? Is that what you are going with?

The maps are indicative of where things were in the camp. They are not to scale, or to be regarded as definitive.

The grave space is wildly insufficient.

So you have decided, without even knowing exactly how much grave space there was and what happens when naked corpses are thrown into graves, over a period of months.

When you compare the almost contemporary maps, that were collaborative efforts, with the study, you find the 4 pits indicated by witnesses, that doesn't mean you get to start saying any return in that area was grave space, the evidence doesn't support that.

I can't believe I have to explain evidencing to you Nessie, yet, here we are.

If an eyewitness draws a plan indicating mass graves were in a certain part of a camp and a GPR survey finds pits where the witnesses say the mass graves were, that is strong corroborating evidence for mass graves. That witnesses draw 4 pits on a plan, but GPR finds 5 in that location, is not an issue, as the plans are not to be taken as definitive and witnesses forget.

[Stubble]

Nessie, when the only two maps congruent with the survey are two of the oldest, made by collaboration of witnesses and reflect exactly 4 pits, then that's what is evidenced. You are making assumptions here.

The witnesses dropped their pits where they happen to be, and even the scale is congruent as is their placement. You ignore that and you just start inserting more grave space you can not evidence. You say it's ok to do that because they drew 4 pits, so, obviously any disturbance there is a mass grave now.

You are in a hole, and you should stop digging.

[Nessie]

Nessie, when the only two maps congruent with the survey are two of the oldest, made by collaboration of witnesses and reflect exactly 4 pits, then that's what is evidenced. You are making assumptions here.

The witnesses dropped their pits where they happen to be, and even the scale is congruent as is their placement. You ignore that and you just start inserting more grave space you can not evidence. You say it's ok to do that because they drew 4 pits, so, obviously any disturbance there is a mass grave now.

You are in a hole, and you should stop digging.

The different witnesses, in their statements, said different numbers of graves. They also drew different numbers of graves on any map or plan they had a hand in. That is because not everyone remembers the same details, especially when asked to recall events after many months, if not years later.

Fact is, all the eyewitnesses, in the plans, locate the main mass graves in the south east corner of the camp and some smaller ones in the south west corner. GPR has located pits in both of those areas. That corroborates the witnesses.

You have no evidence to counter that, so you resort to arguing I am making assumptions, when in fact I have looked at the evidence from eyewitnesses, their maps and what GPR found, and they corroborate. I am not ignoring that they do not match precisely, but I would not expect them to. People will not accurately remember details such as size, and exact placement.

[Stubble]

Nessie, do any other maps of Treblinka II match the survey the way those two maps do? Are any of the other maps based on more than 1 witness?

You are inserting doubt, making gaps and exploiting that to extrapolate grave space that isn't there.

I am certain that if, for example, the tank trap were examined, it would be found to be a tank trap and not a mass grave. In the broken property disposal pits, things like broken combs and toothbrushes are found.

The only teeth you are going to find in the other grave spaces that you allege are going to be sharks teeth.

How many of these gpr returns are from digging preformed by the commissions Nessie? You don't know, you can not say.

How many are evidenced by the witnesses and borne out by the study? 5. 4 in the 'extermination area' and 1 next to the camp hospital.

Those are your evidenced mass graves. You go dig in those, and you are going to find disarticulated bodies with soft tissue and ligaments attached, you are going to find hair, and you are going to find jaws, skulls, longbones and teeth, mixed with sand.

You are going to find thousands of bodies in those pits, and that is horrifying enough. You aren't going to find anywhere near >850,000 of them though, so, I fully expect, if that ever does happen, for you to revert to the exterminationist dismissal card of 'they aktion 1005'd the bodies'.

I don't think we are going to progress the thread any further and I don't think there is much value in continuing to say the same things over and over. I understand your position, and I disagree. You seem to understand my position and you disagree. I'm not going to change your mind, and you aren't going to change mine.

Personally, I feel my position is far more tenable because it is borne out by the evidence. You, somehow think that blindly inserting grave space is fine because (insert some reason, then another, then another). Personally I think that's dishonest and I feel you are trying to manipulate the historical record and the studies to suit your preconceptions.

The mass graves there are full of 'ghetto fighters', and the war they waged on the German Army was absolute terrorism.

[Nessie]

Nessie, do any other maps of Treblinka II match the survey the way those two maps do? Are any of the other maps based on more than 1 witness?

Maps of the camp here;

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

The maps that make an effort to show locations inside the camp, all put the mass graves in the same area. Some maps are very rough sketches, so they are not clear.

You are inserting doubt, making gaps and exploiting that to extrapolate grave space that isn't there.

I am showing you that the witnesses locate the main mass graves in the same area that GPR found a series of pits, G50-54 and that it also located pits in the Lazarette.

I am certain that if, for example, the tank trap were examined, it would be found to be a tank trap and not a mass grave. In the broken property disposal pits, things like broken combs and toothbrushes are found.

The only teeth you are going to find in the other grave spaces that you allege are going to be sharks teeth.

How many of these gpr returns are from digging preformed by the commissions Nessie? You don't know, you can not say.

That is why the report states, probable graves, because the GPR survey did not dig into them. The 1945 Polish survey did excavate that part of the camp and they found cremated remains.

How many are evidenced by the witnesses and borne out by the study? 5. 4 in the 'extermination area' and 1 next to the camp hospital.

No, G36 and G50-54 are in the extermination area and there are pits in the Lazarette.

Those are your evidenced mass graves. You go dig in those, and you are going to find disarticulated bodies with soft tissue and ligaments attached, you are going to find hair, and you are going to find jaws, skulls, longbones and teeth, mixed with sand.

You are going to find thousands of bodies in those pits, and that is horrifying enough. You aren't going to find anywhere near >850,000 of them though, so, I fully expect, if that ever does happen, for you to revert to the exterminationist dismissal card of 'they aktion 1005'd the bodies'.

If the entire area was excavated and cremains separated from the earth and ashes, I say, based on what has been found, that there would be enough to prove c850,000 had been buried there.

I don't think we are going to progress the thread any further and I don't think there is much value in continuing to say the same things over and over. I understand your position, and I disagree. You seem to understand my position and you disagree. I'm not going to change your mind, and you aren't going to change mine.

Personally, I feel my position is far more tenable because it is borne out by the evidence. You, somehow think that blindly inserting grave space is fine because (insert some reason, then another, then another). Personally I think that's dishonest and I feel you are trying to manipulate the historical record and the studies to suit your preconceptions.

Your position is not evidenced. You have no eyewitnesses, documents, archaeology, forensics or circumstantial evidence, to prove that the ground at TII is largely undisturbed, and there are no mass graves.

I am not blindly inserting grave space. There is evidence, from eyewitnesses and archaeological surveys, to prove huge areas of disturbed ground containing cremated remains and a series of pits. They are supported by documentary and circumstantial evidence of mass arrivals and no corresponding mass departures.

It is you who is being dishonest, suggesting you have evidence, when you do not and that I am not just following the evidence.

[Stubble]

You see Nessie, we both think the other is being dishonest and we both believe we are best supported by the evidence.

Our exchange here has certainly run course.

For posterity, I do want to highlight something;

I said-

Those are your evidenced mass graves. You go dig in those, and you are going to find disarticulated bodies with soft tissue and ligaments attached, you are going to find hair, and you are going to find jaws, skulls, longbones and teeth, mixed with sand.

Nessie said-

Your position is not evidenced. You have no eyewitnesses, documents, archaeology, forensics or circumstantial evidence, to prove that the ground at TII is largely undisturbed, and there are no mass graves.

Notice, the strawman