Challenge to NFrNJ and Believers: Why can't you show us the alleged 900,000 Jew remains in this Treblinka "grave"?

[Hannover]

Nothing particularly difficult about this challenge considering that it's "historians" who claim that 900,000 Jew remains exist at Treblinka,

Below is the alleged mass grave at Treblinka.

It' seems rather obvious that two guys with shovels could send Revisionists packing simply by digging.

But the fact of the matter is that the corrupt "Holocaust" Industry" knows that these alleged remains do not exist and are not about to further expose their scam.



Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the ‘holocaust’ storyline is the message.

- Hannover

[Clay]

Below is the alleged mass grave at Treblinka.

Correction:

Below is [ONE OF] the [MANY] alleged mass grave[S / CREMATION PITS] at Treblinka II.



The very best website that helps one to understand the issue of the alleged "huge mass graves" at Treblinka is this site here:

http://www.thisisaboutscience.com/

and particularly this link here:

https://vnnforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=10150&stc=1&d=1524529600

which shows the following annotated photo:



The photo above is of the alleged "huge mass grave" G36 (as per CSC) / #15/100 (as per thisisaboutscience.com)

Please notice two things in said photo:

CSC herself refers to the "huge mass grave" as a "probable burial / cremation pit" and the stones do not actually cover alleged "huge mass grave" G36 / #15/100.

Edited to add:

It is extremely important to note that CSS, in a map that she made herself here:



in which she labeled all the "probable grave sites" - didn't even include G36 / #15/100 as one of the alleged "probable grave sites."

Also note that in these CSC photos:



CSC refers to "huge mass grave" G36 / #15/100 as a "probable pit identified though geophysical survey."

So, for those keeping track, CSC does not even mention "huge mass grave" G36 / #15/100 in her "probable grave site" map and refers to it as a "probable burial / cremation pit" in one instance and a "probable pit identified though geophysical survey" in another.

[Clay]

Hannover:

Challenge to NFrNJ and Believers: Why can't you show us the alleged 900,000 Jew remains in this Treblinka "grave"?

If I may, I would like to add to this challenge:

Can you prove that the stones in this photo:



Are covering so-much-as an iota of human remains?

(A simple yes or no will suffice.)

[NFrNJ]

I am unable to answer either of your questions because I do not know what they mean. What exactly do you mean by “show” and “prove”?

If you could give an example of what you think would be “proof”. I can then answer. Or an example of what you mean by “show”

This should be very simple for you to do.

But unless I know what these words are supposed to mean I cannot answer. This is not dodging, it is simply that you do not seem to use the words in a way that is normal and consistent with normal definitions. So they are not meaningful unless you can define them.

Examples of what you would accept as proof, or showing would also allow me to then provide proof, or to show you, in a way that would be difficult for you to simply dismiss, and change the goalposts.

So, define your terms, give examples of what you require, and then I will happily and fully answer the questions once I understand them.

[borjastick]

I am unable to answer either of your questions because I do not know what they mean. What exactly do you mean by “show” and “prove”?

If you could give an example of what you think would be “proof”. I can then answer. Or an example of what you mean by “show”

This should be very simple for you to do.

But unless I know what these words are supposed to mean I cannot answer. This is not dodging, it is simply that you do not seem to use the words in a way that is normal and consistent with normal definitions. So they are not meaningful unless you can define them.

Examples of what you would accept as proof, or showing would also allow me to then provide proof, or to show you, in a way that would be difficult for you to simply dismiss, and change the goalposts.

So, define your terms, give examples of what you require, and then I will happily and fully answer the questions once I understand them.

The world wriggling championship just got more wiggly.

[Breker]

Sir, you cannot be serious.
You really don't know the meaning of "show" or "prove"?

As has been requested, and you have avoided, photos of an excavation of the alleged 900,000 Jews would do nicely. Must we define the word 'photos'?

An excellent example would be the German excavation of thousands of Poles murdered & buried by the Soviets at the Katyn Forest area..
We do suggest that you view this:
Katyn facts: 'Amtliches Material zum Massenmord von Katyn'
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=758
a pdf is here:
https://codoh.com/media/files/documents ... atyn_v.pdf
As you can see there are numerous photos of the massive humans remains there, and information on the forensic study that occurred.

Allow me to dramatize your claim by borrowing a photo and a bit of summarized text that has been posted before.

The Los Angeles Coliseum holds ca. 90,000. The claim about Treblinka equals 10 times the Los Angeles Coliseum capacity shown here:

And you cannot show us the alleged human remains of 900,000? Your position is simply not tenable.
We really think you are highly frustrated in your failed efforts to perpetuate what has been proven to be propaganda, aka: a lie.
B.

[Otium]

Examples of what you would accept as proof, or showing would also allow me to then provide proof, or to show you, in a way that would be difficult for you to simply dismiss, and change the goalposts.

Lamprecht has done this multiple times and Clay has asked you a series of detailed yes/no questions. All the information given to you, and the questions that result, have been ignored so you can complain about semantics, directing the discussion away from the questions to some personal grievance you have. This absolutely insane reply from you here, where you feign ignorance as to the definition, and colloquial use of words in the English language is no different.

You are not interested in what revisionists would accept as proof, as in other threads you have whined about how you cannot meet even the most basic standards of evidence. You've said that revisionists are too specific and "unreasonable" in what kind of evidence we would accept. This, all over the fact that you couldn't even show us a single photograph of the claims you made, which if your claims that all these remains existed were true, should exist. Because photographing the archaeological evidence is a key part in the process of documenting the archaeological discovery in question. This can be seen by what Breker posted in regards to Katyn.

Surely you already have proof without Clay needing to provide an example of what "proof" even is? You came to your definitive conclusions about the historical veracity of the Holocaust prior to coming to CODOH, hence the reason you're here - to prove to us "deniers" that your fiction about Jewish extermination during the Second World War is true. You have been given centre stage to provide whatever evidence you want that proves the Holocaust, as long as you keep to the forum rules. The Moderator has even expressed that he would be lenient with you. So why not show it?

You have been asked to provide whatever proof it is you have and this you still have not done, unless you're admitting in this comment that you actually have no proof at all, and you just believe the Holocaust occurred out of blind faith - this doesn't seem to be far off the mark. It appears to be an issue which is pathological for you, devoid of rationality. All definitions become unintelligible, even the English language itself becomes hard to interpret whenever you're asked about providing proof of extermination.

[Lamprecht]

An excellent example would be the German excavation of thousands of Poles murdered & buried by the Soviets at the Katyn Forest area..
We do suggest that you view this:
Katyn facts: 'Amtliches Material zum Massenmord von Katyn'
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=758
a pdf is here:
https://codoh.com/media/files/documents ... atyn_v.pdf
As we can see there are numerous photos of the massive humans remains there, and information on the forensic study that occurred.

It's amazing that even though the Germans actually photographed this in the 1940s, in the present day when everyone has a smartphone with a digital camera these sites are "investigated" yet no photographs of the alleged mass graves are provided. Taking a photograph is the easiest thing in the world. It's also the most obvious thing you would do here. As pointed out in:

Mass grave excavation guidelines / The "Mass grave excavations don't produce photographed bodies" lie
viewtopic.php?t=12889

[david2923]

My question would also be the logistics of the wood fuel to burn all those bodies
Must consider:
what type of wood?
Was it green wood?
where did it come from?
How much wood did it take per body?
How did they get it up "The Tube"? No other access into the area except The Tube
During the period of time in question, how many days did it rain or snow or present conditions where you could not burn?
did they have chain saws for all this wood fuel or cut by hand
How much setup time required to set up each burn?
See attachment for 15 school age girls in India being cremated in open air

[Wachtman]

Wouldn't the witnesses also have seen hundreds, perhaps thousands of persons filling the roles of the woodsmen, loggers, loaders, diggers, tool-smiths, foundry workers, guards and these people would need the services of carpenters, plumbers, cooks, servers, electricians, tailors, laundry workers, cobblers, boot smiths, delivery drivers, cantina workers, commissary workers, trash haulers, etc....

[Clay]

I am unable to answer either of your questions because I do not know what they mean... I will happily and fully answer the questions once I understand them.

NFrNJ, since you cannot understand the meaning of simple words that an average child understands, I'll ask you a couple questions that do not include those words:

A: Is it - True. - or - False. - that; it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that huge pits were dug and utilized as mass graves at Treblinka II - _?_

C: Is it - True. - or - False. - that; it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that mass graves have been discovered by archaeologists / forensic investigators at Treblinka II - _?_

[Clay]

I am unable to answer either of your questions because I do not know what they mean. What exactly do you mean by “show” and “prove”?

If you could give an example of what you think would be “proof”. I can then answer. Or an example of what you mean by “show”

This should be very simple for you to do.

But unless I know what these words are supposed to mean I cannot answer. This is not dodging, it is simply that you do not seem to use the words in a way that is normal and consistent with normal definitions. So they are not meaningful unless you can define them.

Examples of what you would accept as proof, or showing would also allow me to then provide proof, or to show you, in a way that would be difficult for you to simply dismiss, and change the goalposts.

So, define your terms, give examples of what you require, and then I will happily and fully answer the questions once I understand them.

NFrNJ, you seem to understand what these words mean in this post here:

You took a slide out of context, not knowing what it showed. He told you what it showed...

https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13050&start=15#p100004

Now back to the simple questions that you refuse to answer:

A: Is it - True. - or - False. - that; it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that huge pits were dug and utilized as mass graves at Treblinka II - _?_

C: Is it - True. - or - False. - that; it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that mass graves have been discovered by archaeologists / forensic investigators at Treblinka II - _?_

[Clay]

I am unable to answer either of your questions because I do not know what they mean. What exactly do you mean by “show” and “prove”?

If you could give an example of what you think would be “proof”. I can then answer. Or an example of what you mean by “show”

This should be very simple for you to do.

But unless I know what these words are supposed to mean I cannot answer. This is not dodging, it is simply that you do not seem to use the words in a way that is normal and consistent with normal definitions. So they are not meaningful unless you can define them.

Examples of what you would accept as proof, or showing would also allow me to then provide proof, or to show you, in a way that would be difficult for you to simply dismiss, and change the goalposts.

So, define your terms, give examples of what you require, and then I will happily and fully answer the questions once I understand them.

NFrNJ, what exactly did you mean when you used the word "show" in this post:

https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3763&p=95561#p95561

???

[Clay]

I am unable to answer either of your questions because I do not know what they mean. What exactly do you mean by “show” and “prove”?

If you could give an example of what you think would be “proof”. I can then answer. Or an example of what you mean by “show”

This should be very simple for you to do.

But unless I know what these words are supposed to mean I cannot answer. This is not dodging, it is simply that you do not seem to use the words in a way that is normal and consistent with normal definitions. So they are not meaningful unless you can define them.

Examples of what you would accept as proof, or showing would also allow me to then provide proof, or to show you, in a way that would be difficult for you to simply dismiss, and change the goalposts.

So, define your terms, give examples of what you require, and then I will happily and fully answer the questions once I understand them.

NFrNJ, my definitions of "prove" and "show" are the same as those used by Hannover, which you fully understood in this post here:

https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13095&p=95621#p95621

You also used the words yourself in your posts, did you not?

"I dare you to let this post go up. Prove this is not just a forum for a coterie of information bubble self congratulating bullies who cannot debate a topic without having to slide the thread and dodge and straw man and call in their pals to stop anyone who can actually argue from talking."

I'm ready to debate NFrNJ. Now back to the simple questions that you are afraid to answer:

A: Is it - True. - or - False. - that; it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that huge pits were dug and utilized as mass graves at Treblinka II - _?_

C: Is it - True. - or - False. - that; it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that mass graves have been discovered by archaeologists / forensic investigators at Treblinka II - _?_

(Perhaps the simple yes or no questions asked above are too hard for you to understand?)

[NFrNJ]

To Clay. I have attempted to answer your questions several times. The Moderator won’t post my answers. I attempted to start a new thread to specifically discuss them, and it was supposedly approved but has not appeared on the board. I have not been dodging your questions and would love to have a discussion. However the moderator will not allow me to answer or discuss the questions.

À and C are of course answered as being true. But please do not now ask me to prove that with 100% confidence as I do not believe that such a level of confidence is possible in any subject other than mathematics (and even then I have my doubts).

Please do not ask me to show you reams of evidence to back up my claim that those answers are “true”. As we are after all grown ups and we all know that those claims have been made.