Callafangers' statements of fact / rebuttable presumptions about Belzec and Sobibor

[Stubble]

"No, bombsaway, you're a wiggly fellow but you don't get to wriggle your way out of this one."

"This is clear-cut."

"bombsaway, you are a crackhead. Stop smoking crack."

"How are you this terrible at reading comprehension? This is embarrassing."

on this page alone

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=602&start=45

So you had time to investigate the issues, evaluate my argument, and you persisted in a line of reasoning that was totally wrong, despite my explanations. This is why you're not worth talking to for me. Also note how members like Stubble went along with your reasoning. An example of groupthink on this forum.

WHOA! What a whopper of a deflection from the topic of the current thread and your embarrassing failings here. Do you really think pointing out how I hurt your feelings in a thread on Sobibor grave volume belongs in this current thread where you have been spanked regarding Sonthofen speeches?

As I said, my jibes toward you were more or less measured/appropriate. I offered a concession regarding the language of grave 5 specifically at that time but my overall assertions about the excavations were correct (as evident in the excavations of graves 1 and 2, which were excavated more or less at full depth, given near-zero corpse remains found throughout the majority of each).

This is deflection even from my casual point on grave volume (itself only peripherally relevant to the current thread): the overall grave volume, according to the best forensic evidence available, is not remotely near even an order of magnitude below what you claim there.

bombsaway, if you wish to challenge the issue of grave volume or any of my statements made in this regard (including the validity of any ridicule made against you), do so in the appropriate thread.

Back to Sonthofen speeches: these speeches say nothing of global Jewish policy -- a policy which we know was about deportation to the East, as evidenced in abundance by Himmler's language in may other speeches and circumstances (in front of SS leaders at Posen/Krakow, with Mussolini, etc.), bolstering evidence from other sources (Luther memo, Schlegelberger letter, Goebbels' diary, official Final Solution policy a la Wannsee, etc.).

Stay on topic.

Regarding grave 5, while the exploration was 'incomplete' the findings were still inconsistent with Kola's bore study Sir.

'Almost white sand' and 'layers of cremains' are different. The dig found tons of 'almost white sand', the bore study said 'layers of cremains'.

They are incongruent.

[Callafangers]

I'm definitely not claiming Grave 5 was anything other than mostly-sand, just like the other 'graves'. But I would say that Mazurek's language allows for relatively higher density here than at the other 'graves' where he is more specific about the contents (and reflecting majority-sand).