What is nessie's standard of proof?

[Keen]

nessie / roberto:

Claiming that multiple pits found by geophysics in the same part of the camp that witnesses state the main mass graves were dug, is not corroborating evidence to prove mass graves, is denial of reality.

What standard of proof are you alleging roberto?

[Keen]

nesserto:

Geophysics scientifically and conclusively proves that there are pits, G32, G29, G1, G44, G4, G38, G36, G50, G51, G52, G53, G54 and that they exist. But it does not prove that those pits contain human remains.

Also nesserto:

Claiming that multiple pits found by geophysics in the same part of the camp that witnesses state the main mass graves were dug, is not corroborating evidence to prove mass graves, is denial of reality.

Which one is it nesserto?

nesserto:

A mass grave is defined as a grave containing multiple human corpses, or the remains of multiple people.

Nesserto, of the 15 alleged Treblinka II graves / cremation pits in question - the one that you can conclusively prove currently contains the most human remains is number: _?_.

Nesserto's answer:

I don't know.

[Keen]

Nesserto:

My standard of proof is the same as historians or the courts use, whereby an event is proven when there is sufficient corroborating verified evidence to prove it.

nesserto:

A mass grave is defined as a grave containing multiple human corpses, or the remains of multiple people.

Nessie, how many actual mass graves did CSC actually prove actually exist within the boundary of the Treblinka II camp?

Nessie's answer:

12 - G32, G29, G1, G44, G4, G38, G36, G50, G51, G52, G53, G54.

nesserto:

You doubt and deny the evidence I produce.

The evidence TII was a death camp, far exceeds the evidence it had a different function. Only a determined denier, who has lost grip on reality, will pretend that the corroborating evidence from multiple witnesses who describe mass graves, the aerial photo that shows disturbed ground and rectangular outlines and the site surveys that identified disturbed ground and pits in the areas of the camp that the witnesses said contained the mass graves, is not evidence to prove mass graves.

I am both a trained historian and police officer.

The Nazis were not trying to magically disappear the corpses and the graves.

All the mass graves dug by the Nazis, and the corpses they cremated, are still at the AR camps.

Mass graves are proven. By all normal standards of evidencing, they are proven.

Proof, from multiple sources of corroborating evidence, has been produced.

You ignore corroboration. You deny the gathered evidence.

Claiming that multiple pits found by geophysics in the same part of the camp that witnesses state the main mass graves were dug, is not corroborating evidence to prove mass graves, is denial of reality.

I can point to them in the ground.

I have never had any issue with accepting the burden of proof.

Two questions for the mentally ill pathological liar:

#1: When you use the word "corroboration", do you mean "confirm" or "support"?

#2: When you use the word "prove" in alleging that 12 actual "huge mass graves" have actually been proven to actually exist within the boundary of the Treblinka II camp (G32, G29, G1, G44, G4, G38, G36, G50, G51, G52, G53, G54), which of the following standards of proof are you alleging:

Arranged from lowest to highest, the standards of proof in American law follow a rough hierarchy:

Reasonable suspicion: Enough specific facts to justify a brief police stop, but well short of what’s needed for an arrest or a search warrant.

Probable cause: A fair probability that a crime occurred or evidence will be found, sufficient for an arrest or warrant.

Substantial evidence: Enough that a reasonable person could accept it as adequate, used when courts review agency decisions.

Preponderance of the evidence: More likely than not, the default for most civil lawsuits.

Clear and convincing evidence: Highly probable, reserved for civil matters with serious consequences like fraud claims or termination of parental rights.

Beyond a reasonable doubt: Firm conviction of guilt, required for all criminal convictions.

Oh, let's not forget:

Nessie, is it - True. - or - False. - that; Non-nefarious diggings for such things as garbage pits, cellars, wells, latrines, septic pits, etc. - were dug at Treblinka II - ??

Nessie's answer:

True

Nessie:

Geophysics scientifically and conclusively proves that there are pits, G32, G29, G1, G44, G4, G38, G36, G50, G51, G52, G53, G54 and that they exist. But it does not prove that those pits contain human remains.

CSC:

Without intrusive activity it is not possible to conclusively determine the nature of these pits.

And we will get to this later:

Nessie:

You suggest that Wiernik lied... because you just do not want to believe his evidence about mass murder.

[Keen]

I notice that the mentally ill pathological liar continues to use a word with a double meaning (corroboration) while cravenly refusing to reveal which of the two meanings it is referring to. And it continues to allege proof of numerous things while cravenly refusing to clarify which standard of proof it is referring to.

No wonder it is so terrified of debating Mr. Gerdes.

Of course, none of the mentally ill HC cult members have the intelligence, courage, integrity or character to do so either.

[Keen]

Time to consolidate more of nesserto's lies:

Nesserto:

My standard of proof is the same as historians or the courts use, whereby an event is proven when there is sufficient corroborating verified evidence to prove it.

A mass grave is defined as a grave containing multiple human corpses, or the remains of multiple people.

Nessie, how many actual mass graves did CSC actually prove actually exist within the boundary of the Treblinka II camp?

Nessie's answer:

12 - G32, G29, G1, G44, G4, G38, G36, G50, G51, G52, G53, G54.

Only a determined denier, who has lost grip on reality, will pretend that the corroborating evidence from multiple witnesses who describe mass graves, the aerial photo that shows disturbed ground and rectangular outlines and the site surveys that identified disturbed ground and pits in the areas of the camp that the witnesses said contained the mass graves, is not evidence to prove mass graves.

You doubt and deny the evidence I produce.

I am both a trained historian and police officer.

The Nazis were not trying to magically disappear the corpses and the graves.

ALL the mass graves dug by the Nazis, AND the corpses they cremated, are still at the AR camps.

Mass graves are proven. By all normal standards of evidencing, they are proven.

Proof, from multiple sources of corroborating evidence, has been produced.

You ignore corroboration. You deny the gathered evidence.

Claiming that multiple pits found by geophysics in the same part of the camp that witnesses state the main mass graves were dug, is not corroborating evidence to prove mass graves, is denial of reality.

I can point to them in the ground.

I do not avoid discussing the empirical evidence.

I have never had any issue with accepting the burden of proof.

Two simple foundational questioins for the mentally ill pathological liar:

cor·rob·or·ation

evidence which confirms or supports a statement or theory

#1: When you use the word "corroboration", do you mean "confirm" or "support"?

#2: When you use the word "prove" in alleging that 12 actual "huge mass graves" have actually been proven to actually exist within the boundary of the Treblinka II camp (G32, G29, G1, G44, G4, G38, G36, G50, G51, G52, G53, G54), which of the following standards of proof are you alleging:

Arranged from lowest to highest, the standards of proof in American law follow a rough hierarchy:

Reasonable suspicion: Enough specific facts to justify a brief police stop, but well short of what’s needed for an arrest or a search warrant.

Probable cause: A fair probability that a crime occurred or evidence will be found, sufficient for an arrest or warrant.

Substantial evidence: Enough that a reasonable person could accept it as adequate, used when courts review agency decisions.

Preponderance of the evidence: More likely than not, the default for most civil lawsuits.

Clear and convincing evidence: Highly probable, reserved for civil matters with serious consequences like fraud claims or termination of parental rights.

Beyond a reasonable doubt: Firm conviction of guilt, required for all criminal convictions.

Absolute certainty: A state of knowledge or proof so complete that there is no possibility of doubt or uncertainty

[Keen]

We have to keep this one front and center:

They have been evidenced to not exist, by a failure to find evidence of their existence

If the physical evidence for an alleged crime that - HAS TO EXIST - for the crime to have

actually happened - DOES NOT EXIST - then the alleged crime obviously - DID NOT HAPPEN.

Ergo: The orthodox “pure extermination center” story is - A PROVEN, NONSENSICAL BIG-LIE.

[Keen]

Time for another update:

Nessie:

Geophysics scientifically and conclusively proves that there are pits, G32, G29, G1, G44, G4, G38, G36, G50, G51, G52, G53, G54 and that they exist. But it does not prove that those pits contain human remains.

The only time the actual graves have not been excavated or otherwise dug into, was the 2011 Staffs Uni survey at TII.

Every other site survey has dug into the graves and disturbed remains.

Caroline Sturdy Colls:

Without intrusive activity it is not possible to conclusively determine the nature of these pits.

[Keen]

nessie:

There has been no change from me, from the standard burden of proof being on the claimant.

The remains of what they destroyed are still at the AR camps,

Well then:

A - $100.00 reward - is being offered for each one of the 100 alleged “scientifically proven” mass graves / cremation pits in question that is proven - with the same standard of proof applied in U. S. civil courts - to actually exist and to currently contain the remains of - at least 2 people. (That is less than one tenth of one one thousandth of one percent of the alleged mass murder.)

http://thisisaboutscience.com/

What is the liar waiting for?

What is it so afraid of?

[Keen]

There is no circumstance in which I reverse the burden of proof. If you make a claim, it is up to you to prove it.

If I make one, it is up to me.

[Keen]

Time to update nessie's list of lies.

Caroline Sturdy Colls BEFORE her fraudulent "investigation" of Treblinka II:

CSC:

One of the main aims of this research is to demonstrate the survivability of the remains.

This research will focus upon the search for the physical remains, thus the remains will be identified, recorded.

Caroline Sturdy Colls AFTER her fraudulent "investigation" of Treblinka II:

CSC:

Without intrusive activity, it is not possible to conclusively determine the nature of these pits.

And what does nessie have to say about this?

Nessie, is it - True. - or - False. - that; Non-nefarious diggings for such things as garbage pits, cellars, wells, latrines, septic pits, etc. - were dug at Treblinka II - ??

nessie's answer:

True.

nessie, of the 15 alleged Treblinka II graves / cremation pits in question - the one that you can conclusively prove currently contains the most human remains is number: _?_.

nessie's answer:

I don't know.

nessie:

I cannot physically show you mass graves.

Geophysics scientifically and conclusively proves that there are pits and that they exist. But it does not prove that those pits contain human remains.

And what does nessie have to say about Bigfoot and aliens and such:

nessie:

They have been evidenced to not exist, by a failure to find evidence of their existence

* * * * *

nessie:

A mass grave is defined as a grave containing multiple human corpses, or the remains of multiple people.

nessie, how many actual mass graves did CSC actually prove actually exist within the boundary of the Treblinka II camp?

nessie's answer:

12 - G32, G29, G1, G44, G4, G38, G36, G50, G51, G52, G53, G54.

nessie:

You doubt and deny the evidence I produce.

Impossible claims and verifiably false details do not prove lying.

The evidence TII was a death camp, far exceeds the evidence it had a different function. Only a determined denier, who has lost grip on reality, will pretend that the corroborating evidence from multiple witnesses who describe mass graves, the aerial photo that shows disturbed ground and rectangular outlines and the site surveys that identified disturbed ground and pits in the areas of the camp that the witnesses said contained the mass graves, is not evidence to prove mass graves.

I am both a trained historian and police officer.

The Nazis were not trying to magically disappear the corpses and the graves.

All the mass graves dug by the Nazis, and the corpses they cremated, are still at the AR camps.

They were not full cremations to ashes at the AR camps either.

Proof, from multiple sources of corroborating evidence, has been produced.

You ignore corroboration. You deny the gathered evidence.

Claiming that multiple pits found by geophysics in the same part of the camp that witnesses state the main mass graves were dug, is not corroborating evidence to prove mass graves, is denial of reality.

The mass graves have not disappeared.

They are still there. I can point to them in the ground.

No matter what the claim is, the burden of proof is on the claimant.

I have never had any issue with accepting the burden of proof.

There is no circumstance in which I reverse the burden of proof.

If you make a claim, it is up to you to prove it. If I make one, it is up to me.

Mass graves are proven. By all normal standards of evidencing, they are proven.

* * * * *

Two simple foundational questioins for the mentally ill pathological liar:


#1: When you disingenuously use the word "corroboration", do you mean "confirm" or "support"?

#2: When you disingenuously use the word "prove" in alleging that 12 actual "huge mass graves" have actually been proven to actually exist within the boundary of the Treblinka II camp (G32, G29, G1, G44, G4, G38, G36, G50, G51, G52, G53, G54), which of the following standards of proof are you alleging:

Arranged from lowest to highest, the standards of proof in American law follow a rough hierarchy:

Reasonable suspicion: Enough specific facts to justify a brief police stop, but well short of what’s needed for an arrest or a search warrant.

Probable cause: A fair probability that a crime occurred or evidence will be found, sufficient for an arrest or warrant.

Substantial evidence: Enough that a reasonable person could accept it as adequate, used when courts review agency decisions.

Preponderance of the evidence: More likely than not, the default for most civil lawsuits.

Clear and convincing evidence: Highly probable, reserved for civil matters with serious consequences like fraud claims or termination of parental rights.

Beyond a reasonable doubt: Firm conviction of guilt, required for all criminal convictions.

Absolute certainty: A state of knowledge or proof so complete that there is no possibility of doubt or uncertainty