The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Stubble wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 12:28 am Bombsaway, how would Kola have extracted a femur with his apparatus? It would have come up in his bore sample as a fragment, yes?

I don't think you can kick back on Kola here to say that the bones were fragmented, as his apparatus, by nature of operation, would have fragmented bone.

the quote above is from the 40s dig

Kola mentions bones in his study + bone fragments. I assume he would be able to do some determinations on whether the bones were destroyed by the drill or previous fragments.

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 1:25 am Kola mentions bones in his study + bone fragments. I assume he would be able to do some determinations on whether the bones were destroyed by the drill or previous fragments.

You would have to assume...

So far as post war reports, the photos and the Pravda articles are incongruent, as highlighted by Fangers...

Stubble wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 1:29 am

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 1:25 am Kola mentions bones in his study + bone fragments. I assume he would be able to do some determinations on whether the bones were destroyed by the drill or previous fragments.

You would have to assume...

So far as post war reports, the photos and the Pravda articles are incongruent, as highlighted by Fangers...

I don't understand how the photos disprove the existence of ash.

Subterfuge Bombsaway.

They don't.

Matter of fact, I'd expect ash.

Bone fragments, the product of processing in a ball mill, that's the issue.

Even the Pravda you linked doesn't refer to bone fragments, come to think of it...

You assume bone fragments where photographs and even early testimony shows, bones, and, apparently, 'rubber implants'.

Rubber implants and hair not burned during the 'self cremation' of the bodies at the Aktion Reinhardt camps Bombsaway...Think on that. Reflect on it...

I think this is just something you're telling yourself. Ash is primarily bone fragments.

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 2:15 am I think this is just something you're telling yourself. Ash is primarily bone fragments.

I'm sorry, what?

I, don't recall ever putting bodies in my fireplace, although, I do recall frequently having to remove ashes...I don't think ashes are 'mostly bones' Bombsaway, and I recommend laying off the hard drugs for a while.

Again, for clarity;

Callafangers wrote: ↑Sat Oct 11, 2025 11:37 pm And here is an apparent source for your initial quote, there:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -camp.html

Notice that Auerbach says:

They dig, they search, pulling out bones and body parts. Maybe something could still be found...maybe a golden tooth?

Hmm, that sounds like actual human bones rather than bone fragments, doesn't it? If so, this is totally at odds with the official narrative, and takes your possible death toll down by a factor of 100 or more (given volume constraints). But does "bones and body parts" mean bone fragments, perhaps?

Nope -- doesn't seem like it, since they included a photo as well!




article-1355086-0D178B31000005DC-624_634x434.jpg

Thank you for proving that only scattered bones and property were found at Treblinka, bombsaway.

Do, you, see, that?

Stubble wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 2:45 am

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 2:15 am I think this is just something you're telling yourself. Ash is primarily bone fragments.

I'm sorry, what?

I, don't recall ever putting bodies in my fireplace, although, I do recall frequently having to remove ashes...I don't think ashes are 'mostly bones' Bombsaway, and I recommend laying off the hard drugs for a while.

What is human ash composed of, if not bone fragments? Pray tell. Lol at you thinking wood ash and body ash are similar

LOL at you thinking those long bones are ashes...

Bombsaway, where pray tell is the wood ash from the cremations? And how exactly do you think the cremains were separated from it?

None of that addresses the hair and 'rubber implants' (I'm assuming that's a mistranslation of prosthetics) from the passage you shared, either, Bombsaway...

Look, you have tried to have this both ways before. If you are going to claim the bodies were obliterated, then you are going to have to come up with an explanation for how. The fuel requirement alone is massive. We are talking deforestation the likes of which the world has never seen in an 18 month window.

Even if you go with that, your alleged grave space, assuming every hole in the dirt is a mass grave, is wildly insufficient, at all of the camps.

We aren't even getting into the problems with testimony yet, we are only talking about physical reality.

At the end of the day, there are holes in the dirt that were dug for purposes other than consigning the dead, which is the point of this thread.

Even if granted, out of hand however, that every hole in the requisite area is a 'mass grave' they are woefully insufficient for purpose.

Look at the picture of 'grave 5' at sobibor I linked on page 1. You think that roughly shoebox sized bit of ash with the pony tails in it is 'bone ash'?



That's your claim?

Fine, then you have a few inches of ash in grave 5 Bombsaway, where's the rest?...

Stubble wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 4:45 am LOL at you thinking those long bones are ashes...

I didn't say they were ashes. I said they didn't preclude there being ashes, or that ashes were there but not clearly distinguishable in the photo.

You are now totally OT from the thread topic. I've answered most the listed concerns, eg viewtopic.php?p=15706&hilit=Haimi#p15706 " [Haimi] wasn't looking for mass graves except to determine their boundaries so as to not dig there." You still haven't found a shred of direct evidence indicating even a small number of Jews were resettled and maintained in USSR right? Still looking?

I think you mean resettled in the RKO, RKU and OST.

I've found jews, here and there, I'm still compiling and winnowing. I'm nowhere near ready to publish.

To be honest, it's slow going and the translation of documents has been less automated and plug and play than I expected.

To return to topic, not every hole in, at or around the Bug is a 'Huge Mass Grave', and ultimately, you have a responsibility to show where they goed Bombsaway.

The missing are not in the dirt at the Bug River camps, that much is obvious. They went somewhere. Oddly, exterminationists don't seem even slightly concerned about where...I seem to be one of maybe half a dozen people globally looking for your missing jews, in my spare time, when I'm not arguing with you about the difference between bone and ash.

You did manage quite a pivot away from addressing, anything, though, so, you've got that going for you.

Stubble wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 5:37 am

The missing are not in the dirt at the Bug River camps, that much is obvious.

Well the issue is there's much more evidence for that than your supposed resettlement. Even revisionists like Archie and Mattogno believe thousands were killed and buried there.

Again, for your theory, there is no direct evidence. Not a shred. Zippo. Resettled Jews were not maintained in yes RKO, RKU and OST, and the military occupied zone further east.

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 5:39 am much more evidence for that

Not really. Remember, what you need is grave space & remains in the order of millions across the AR camps. Finding significantly less than that doesn't add up linearly to proving your magic number. The opposite is true in that it supports why an alternative hypothesis is needed to explain why you have basically nothing.

Anybody care to guess how many yards of clean fill that is in grave 5?

It's, mostly clean fill.

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to find it was simple, non nefarious, refuse pit, filled with busted eyeglasses, bulk hair, and non repairable shoes...

All unironically items claimed to be proof of 'mass genocide'.

HansHill wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 1:28 pm

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 5:39 am much more evidence for that

Not really. Remember, what you need is grave space & remains in the order of millions across the AR camps. Finding significantly less than that doesn't add up linearly to proving your magic number. The opposite is true in that it supports why an alternative hypothesis is needed to explain why you have basically nothing.

You don't need that necessarily, it hasn't been proven - that the grave space wouldn't allow for that many to be buried.

Similarly it hasn't been proven that the Soviets/Europe/US/Israel wouldn't be able to suppress all witness and documentary evidence pertaining to this resettlement (you argue that it's feasible, I think this is a much greater stretch than the grave issue).

The big difference between us is you have no evidence supporting your claims, you just believe it happened because you deem it possible. I've told you guys this again and again, but history isn't written this way - see this embarrassment of a thread viewtopic.php?t=268

You've invented a new academic discipline if you want to call it that, but it's not history.

They claim there was more than enough space to accommodate the number of people they claim were buried there.

The question is, did the Nazis dig only as much as they thought would fit, or did they not care and dig beyond what they needed? They allegedly built oversized gas chambers, meaning they weren't particularly concerned with dimensioning things. In other words, even if the true size of this disturbed soil is proven or we calculate with maximum efficiency how many bodies could fit per cubic meter, the question is irrelevant compared to the challenges of destroying bodies, which were beyond their capabilities.