Sobibór: Kola-Mazurek Discrepancies and Implications

[Callafangers]

I realize the above can raise a lot of confusion. But to be clear: the vast majority of all "graves" have hardly any corpse remains. Mazurek acknowledges these areas as almost entirely barren (nothing but sand), over and over again, with sparse/patchy regions of non-dense corpse materials, in almost all of his descriptions. This is why you see so much unshaded area (representing corpse densities of less than 0.5% throughout, likely closer to 0.05% if we were to average out the entire "fill" regions). And even graves where there is some concentration of corpse material noted, it is almost always far from anything "dense"; hence the many patchy blue regions and only a handful of medium or higher density areas, often unburnt.

[Nessie]

Graves1-8.jpg

How do you know that the unshaded grave/fill areas are barren?

[Callafangers]

Graves1-8.jpg

How do you know that the unshaded grave/fill areas are barren?

It doesn't work that way (although Mazurek does explicitly describe many areas as barren). Here's what we know:

• Kola's own reports said almost nothing about proportions, leaving his readers to assume he's describing the overall character of his samples in his list of contents (e.g. "crematory grave with lime").
• Mazurek conclusively exposed that Mazurek's descriptions are in no way representative of the graves as Kola defined them -- for example, in Grave 1 (a massive volume of some 1,720m3), Kola simply calls it a "cremation grave". But Mazurek excavated this entire area and found it to be almost entirely barren. That's at least ~12,000 Jews' worth of 'findings' gone immediately, or far higher if we use more 'generous' math such as by excluding sand or wood ash completely.
• Similar misrepresentations are found in other graves (e.g. Grave 2, where Kola here also provides a phrasing/size illusion of it being a "cremation grave" yet Mazurek finds only scattered remnants).

The problem in the bullets above is that Kola is misrepresenting the contents of his "graves" and their depth. But on closer review, he does the same with regard to length+width!:

• His report explicitly states that within the graves, he had 128 corpse-positive drills
• Calculating the total drills conducted at all of these graves, however (185 total), means he had only a [128 / 185 =] 69.2% success (positive) rate even within the 'graves' he drew

This means he had negative drills scattered within and throughout his drawing of each 'grave', in addition to radically exaggerating the contents of each. Length x width x height; i.e. three-dimensions of exaggeration/fabrication.

But there are additional problems when we look at Kola's methodology and its application to begin with:

• Kola drilled in a grid with 5-meter spacing with 60cm boreholes
• With the omission of negatives, I have calculated that for his graves 1-6, this comes out to an average of [29.83 x 1.43% =] 42.7m2 being represented per drill.
• In other words, each 'positive' drill is representing a surface area about the size of a one-bedroom apartment.
• Accounting for depth as well, each drill is accounting for 108.3m3 (about the volume of a typical classroom).

It is safe to say, Kola has extrapolated his drills to an obscene and ridiculous extent, which would be bad enough. Add to it the fact that he as also grossly misrepresented them along all three dimensions.

While Mazurek did come aboard and "clean up" some of what Kola got egregiously wrong, he really didn't considerably redraw Kola's grave boundaries, just 'trimmed' them somewhat, while still noting the profound barrenness (or at least sparsity) of almost every grave examined.

To come up with the admittedly-speculative approximations used in the illustration (heat map) provided, I sought a balance between what is actually evidenced thus far and what could reasonably be extrapolated, accounting for all descriptions thus far provided between Kola and Mazurek (and obviously weighting Mazurek's descriptions far and above anything claimed by Kola, given his now-proven incompetence or deceit).

My overall methodology for placing colored shading on the map has basically been as simple as that. I have leaned heavily into AI in reviewing/assisting the placement, mainly to save myself time, but I have reviewed everything myself and can say I would more or less stand behind it.

Recap of key factors:

• Kola had only a 5-6% hit rate per hectare and even within his arbitrarily drawn "graves", more than 30% of his drills within each grave, on average, were apparently negative
• Kola gave only extremely broad-reaching 'incriminating' characterizations of these "graves" in his published report, repeatedly portraying vast areas of thousands of cubic meters as being of corpse material when, in fact, they were barren or patchy at most
• Mazurek gives more precise descriptions, highlighting a pattern such that barrenness is common throughout almost all grave areas, with sand as a vast majority of the contents even in obvious "grave" areas (though with some notably smaller/patchy segments having somewhat higher concentrations at times).
• Mazurek is limited by his inability to dig deeper into corpse remains when found in heavy concentrations, but general patterns between Mazurek's and Kola's [more invasive] findings allow for some informed speculation
• The combination of vast barrenness, sparse/patchy "graves", Kola's fragmented original grave layout, and the overall pattern of Mazurek "fact-checking" Kola and proving his extraordinary inflation altogether leads to the minimization of any potential maximum-per-grave overall (in terms of volume, density, etc.).
• The specific language used for each grave is considered in accordance with all of these factors, in an attempt to map out a plausible layout of corpse density, while still respecting the framework of these factors just listed (and any directional indicators, e.g. "along the southeast side...")

The heat map provided is definitely an attempt to illustrate informed speculation rather than any sort of hard science, but given that Kola's suggested quantities were outright false and Mazurek's excavations were less invasive, informed speculation is the only tool we have available, for the time being.

All of this said, as I was revisiting each of the graves, I realized that some of the statements from the final report had been left out. I revised some of the density mapping accordingly. Main changes include increasing the density in graves 3/4, slight reductions to graves 5 and 6, and total elimination of corpse density in grave 7, which was confirmed to have only been a pyre location (no corpses there). I made the corrections in my post on the previous page but here it is as well:

Graves1-8d.jpg (349.15 KiB) Viewed 18 times

Just so everyone is clear on what the above map shows, let's consider for a moment if ALL of the grave areas were actually red in color. Even if this were the case, we'd have ~13,000m3 of volume there. Since red shading refers to at least 60% density, that leaves us:

13,000 x 0.6 = 7,800m3

In an earlier post on this thread (based on Mattogno's work in outdoor pyres, fuel requirements, volume of wood ash vs. corpse ash, etc.), I estimated about seven corpses able to fit per cubic meter. This gives us:

7,800 x 7 = 54,600 corpses

In other words, if this ENTIRE map were red, we'd still only have room there for ~54,600 corpses.

That is how rough the situation is for exterminationists, currently.

Again, this map is speculative -- others are welcomed and encouraged to revise it. Consider it a first draft. Do your best to create a more accurate version. I do not believe someone can reasonably argue that most areas should be even yellow-green, let alone yellow, orange, or red. If you wish to attempt this, you need to explain it alongside the excerpts from Mazurek (and Kola) which I've provided.

[EDIT: I just realized Nessie may have been asking specifically about the comment in the map/image, regarding "93% barren among unshaded areas". This, like the rest of the map, uses a reasonable overall estimate of corpse remains density per grave and simply accounts for what the remainder (non-color-shaded) areas must be, given the higher percentages of the color-shaded areas. The key metric or question for each grave is, "what is the most reasonable estimation of corpse density % for this grave, overall?". Everything else stems from this and becomes more creative/speculative from that point (including the estimated contents of lower-density areas). But the general pattern of varying density and sand-dominant or barren regions aligns with the patchy-sparse layouts as described by Mazurek and Kola's inconsistent drills.]

[Nessie]

Graves1-8.jpg

How do you know that the unshaded grave/fill areas are barren?

It doesn't work that way (although Mazurek does explicitly describe many areas as barren).

It does. Unless those areas are excavated, you do not know what, if anything, is buried there.

Here's what we know:

• Kola's own reports said almost nothing about proportions, leaving his readers to assume he's describing the overall character of his samples in his list of contents (e.g. "crematory grave with lime").
• Mazurek conclusively exposed that Mazurek's descriptions are in no way representative of the graves as Kola defined them -- for example, in Grave 1 (a massive volume of some 1,720m3), Kola simply calls it a "cremation grave". But Mazurek excavated this entire area and found it to be almost entirely barren. That's at least ~12,000 Jews' worth of 'findings' gone immediately, or far higher if we use more 'generous' math such as by excluding sand or wood ash completely.

Mazurek gave various reasons, it was a grave used for cremations, it was emptied of corpses, or it was dug but never used.

[*] Similar misrepresentations are found in other graves (e.g. Grave 2, where Kola here also provides a phrasing/size illusion of it being a "cremation grave" yet Mazurek finds only scattered remnants). [/list]

The problem in the bullets above is that Kola is misrepresenting the contents of his "graves" and their depth.

I think that is just your way of interpreting Kola, as you finds ways to discret what he found.

But on closer review, he does the same with regard to length+width!:

• His report explicitly states that within the graves, he had 128 corpse-positive drills
• Calculating the total drills conducted at all of these graves, however (185 total), means he had only a [128 / 185 =] 69.2% success (positive) rate even within the 'graves' he drew

This means he had negative drills scattered within and throughout his drawing of each 'grave', in addition to radically exaggerating the contents of each. Length x width x height; i.e. three-dimensions of exaggeration/fabrication.

You would need to show which drills are which and that he has corpse negative drills in one section, which should not be counted as part of the grave, or the drill was corpse negative and it does not show disturbed ground. If it showed disturbed ground, with no corpses, that is still part of where the Nazis dug a grave, that no longer, or never had, corpses in it.

But there are additional problems when we look at Kola's methodology and its application to begin with:

• Kola drilled in a grid with 5-meter spacing with 60cm boreholes
• With the omission of negatives, I have calculated that for his graves 1-6, this comes out to an average of [29.83 x 1.43% =] 42.7m2 being represented per drill.
• In other words, each 'positive' drill is representing a surface area about the size of a one-bedroom apartment.
• Accounting for depth as well, each drill is accounting for 108.3m3 (about the volume of a typical classroom).

It is safe to say, Kola has extrapolated his drills to an obscene and ridiculous extent, which would be bad enough. Add to it the fact that he as also grossly misrepresented them along all three dimensions.

It is quite reasonable, if an area of 60cm boreholes, 5m apart are all found to contain remains, to extrapolate the ground in between also has remains. The consistency within the bore holes samples, is not the same, showing that the consistency between them, is also likely not be consistent. That shows the extent that the Nazis mixed the cremains into the ground, which is consistent with witness descriptions of the reburial of the cremains.

While Mazurek did come aboard and "clean up" some of what Kola got egregiously wrong, he really didn't considerably redraw Kola's grave boundaries, just 'trimmed' them somewhat, while still noting the profound barrenness (or at least sparsity) of almost every grave examined.

An excavation is going to reveal more detail than a bore hole survey.

To come up with the admittedly-speculative approximations used in the illustration (heat map) provided, I sought a balance between what is actually evidenced thus far and what could reasonably be extrapolated, accounting for all descriptions thus far provided between Kola and Mazurek (and obviously weighting Mazurek's descriptions far and above anything claimed by Kola, given his now-proven incompetence or deceit).

My overall methodology for placing colored shading on the map has basically been as simple as that. I have leaned heavily into AI in reviewing/assisting the placement, mainly to save myself time, but I have reviewed everything myself and can say I would more or less stand behind it.

Recap of key factors:

• Kola had only a 5-6% hit rate per hectare and even within his arbitrarily drawn "graves", more than 30% of his drills within each grave, on average, were apparently negative
• Kola gave only extremely broad-reaching 'incriminating' characterizations of these "graves" in his published report, repeatedly portraying vast areas of thousands of cubic meters as being of corpse material when, in fact, they were barren or patchy at most
• Mazurek gives more precise descriptions, highlighting a pattern such that barrenness is common throughout almost all grave areas, with sand as a vast majority of the contents even in obvious "grave" areas (though with some notably smaller/patchy segments having somewhat higher concentrations at times).
• Mazurek is limited by his inability to dig deeper into corpse remains when found in heavy concentrations, but general patterns between Mazurek's and Kola's [more invasive] findings allow for some informed speculation
• The combination of vast barrenness, sparse/patchy "graves", Kola's fragmented original grave layout, and the overall pattern of Mazurek "fact-checking" Kola and proving his extraordinary inflation altogether leads to the minimization of any potential maximum-per-grave overall (in terms of volume, density, etc.).
• The specific language used for each grave is considered in accordance with all of these factors, in an attempt to map out a plausible layout of corpse density, while still respecting the framework of these factors just listed (and any directional indicators, e.g. "along the southeast side...")

The heat map provided is definitely an attempt to illustrate informed speculation rather than any sort of hard science, but given that Kola's suggested quantities were outright false and Mazurek's excavations were less invasive, informed speculation is the only tool we have available, for the time being.

All of this said, as I was revisiting each of the graves, I realized that some of the statements from the final report had been left out. I revised some of the density mapping accordingly. Main changes include increasing the density in graves 3/4, slight reductions to graves 5 and 6, and total elimination of corpse density in grave 7, which was confirmed to have only been a pyre location (no corpses there). I made the corrections in my post on the previous page but here it is as well:


Graves1-8d.jpg


Just so everyone is clear on what the above map shows, let's consider for a moment if ALL of the grave areas were actually red in color. Even if this were the case, we'd have ~13,000m3 of volume there. Since red shading refers to at least 60% density, that leaves us:

13,000 x 0.6 = 7,800m3

In an earlier post on this thread (based on Mattogno's work in outdoor pyres, fuel requirements, volume of wood ash vs. corpse ash, etc.), I estimated about seven corpses able to fit per cubic meter. This gives us:

7,800 x 7 = 54,600 corpses

In other words, if this ENTIRE map were red, we'd still only have room there for ~54,600 corpses.

That is how rough the situation is for exterminationists, currently.

Again, this map is speculative -- others are welcomed and encouraged to revise it. Consider it a first draft. Do your best to create a more accurate version. I do not believe someone can reasonably argue that most areas should be even yellow-green, let alone yellow, orange, or red. If you wish to attempt this, you need to explain it alongside the excerpts from Mazurek (and Kola) which I've provided.

[EDIT: I just realized Nessie may have been asking specifically about the comment in the map/image, regarding "93% barren among unshaded areas". This, like the rest of the map, uses a reasonable overall estimate of corpse remains density per grave and simply accounts for what the remainder (non-color-shaded) areas must be, given the higher percentages of the color-shaded areas. The key metric or question for each grave is, "what is the most reasonable estimation of corpse density % for this grave, overall?". Everything else stems from this and becomes more creative/speculative from that point (including the estimated contents of lower-density areas). But the general pattern of varying density and sand-dominant or barren regions aligns with the patchy-sparse layouts as described by Mazurek and Kola's inconsistent drills.]

I just see your assessment as the biased work of someone desperately trying to diminish the amount of ground the Nazis excavated at Belzec and the quantity of cremated remains found. A large part of the camp has not been excavated, since Mazurek did not want to disturb remains, as much as possible, yet he kept on finding them, all over the place.