Simple challenge to bombsaway on alleged physical "evidence of a genocidal program"

[Lamprecht]

It's a topic he spends remarkably little time on, given its centrality to orthodox claims. I'm waiting for someone to show me more info but he confirms that some illustrations show up to 50% ash concentration, which is a lot. So it would seem sufficient quantities of ash are indicated, but I can't find a high resolution photos to look at.

Illustrations... are just drawings. And you're 100% correct that this is extremely central to the orthodox claims. Their entire "Holocaust" narrative is contingent upon these pits actually being there, filled with the remains of 100s of thousands. It's the most important piece of evidence that does not exist, but must exist.
The reality is: the pits just aren't there.

Such a study isn't sufficient to "prove" mass graves, yes because it doesn't seem like Kola was trying to. Here's the study: https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/holocau ... t1174.html

In the first page he outlines the scope of the dig. It was about commemoration and helping the museum, not about finally dispelling all doubts about the gravesites.

One could say of course that this is by design, because he was "in on it", and so illustrations were the best he could do, but this is speculation.

What a fantastic coincidence that Treblinka 2, Sobibor, and Belzec all had archaeological investigations that can be used to "prove" that the so-called "Holocaust" occurred -- by allegedly confirming the existence of huge mass graves, the most important line of evidence. Except none of the investigations at any of those 3 camps actually do that. Which is exactly what you'd expect if they weren't "extermination camps" or whatever.

You made another thread about expected evidence. Have you ever considered that we would expect at least one (01) massive pit full of burnt remains to have been excavated and photographed at any of the 3 sites? No DNA tests. No exhumation (removing the remains). Just taking the soil from above and exposing the remains, photographing. This is something that has been done for far less significant events many times over. Random mass graves from unknown periods in history. It's standard practice to excavate and photograph the remains, assuming you want anyone to believe it. Of course, the "Holocaust" is a very special event in that people can just be imprisoned for publicly disputing it.

And they will go through all this effort to arrest people for questioning it. Recently it was made illegal in Canada, earlier last year. Money is not the issue, it could be funded, a real investigation. But it's not allowed. If anyone tried to do it they would be quickly arrested.

Their behavior is extremely suspicious about this evidence which absolutely must exist if their story is true. Their refusal to allow investigation implies sinister motives. Regardless, one thing is clear: when you claimed there was evidence of "genocidal program" comprised of 100s of thousands dumped into pits at Treblinka, Sobibor, and/or Belzec - you were mistaken. There is none. None at all.
But if the conspiracy theory was true, that evidence could be provided in the span of a week and lay the matter to rest forever. But it's not, even though it's illegal to publicly question.
No wonder "Holocaust denial" is on the rise. What a transparent fraud.

[Otium]

Such a study isn't sufficient to "prove" mass graves, yes because it doesn't seem like Kola was trying to. Here's the study: https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/holocau ... t1174.html

In the first page he outlines the scope of the dig. It was about commemoration and helping the museum, not about finally dispelling all doubts about the gravesites.

Utterly trite nonsense, Muehlenkamp tried - and failed - to make the same argument, as Mattogno shows.

The fact is the dig didn't show what the exterminationists desired, and so they passed it off as unintentional claiming they weren't "trying" to discover remains. To this day people are still trying to pass Kola's nonsense off as significant in some sense, despite it proving nothing at all.

This post-hoc excuse for Kola's failed attempt to gather "proof" is, frankly, utterly unconvincing bullshit. The exterminationists bandied Kola's "findings" around and still do to this day. Either you admit it's insufficient and stop using it to squash criticism of people less knowledgable, or you keep using it when it's convenient for you and own it as a "real" but failed attempt at proving the exterminationist position. Don't sit there and tell me that revisionists are making a big deal over a study that "uhm akshually wasn't intended to prove mass graves", while you have media pundits from around the world singing your praises for "refuting" revisionists and providing "evidence" for mass graves at Belzec. And don't then publish an entire study on the topic which shows you have excavated all over the entire site, and outside it, in places which had nothing to do with the site for the memorial/museum.

Clearly you were taken in by the propagandistic claims made about the significance of Kola's study, which is why you brought it up. Now, when you've come to realise its inherent worthlessness, you want to obscure the fact that it's been claimed to "prove" something it doesn't prove, hence why you thought it had any significance at all. If the exterminationists were consistent at all, you never would've been given the initial impression that Kola's study had anything worthy of mentioning in the first place because it was "never intended" to prove the existance of mass graves at Belzec. Yet this isn't the case.

[Hektor]

Yeah I'm aware Mattagno has done a lot of work on Kola, but as I said in my post the issue I am looking into is the alleged presence of cremains in the core samples. This was in response to your assertion that "Kola's samples prove the opposite of Holocaust orthodoxy claims".

You claimed there was "nothing" in volume 28 of the Holocaust Handbooks on Kola. ...

Kola's entire study disproves or at the very least severely contradicts the Holocaust orthodoxy;....

No, the alleged ashes haven't photographed as far as I know, so none of these mass graves have been proven to exist by the criteria you have set forth.

Brave (and perhaps even respectable) for you to admit this. Note that the criteria is entirely reasonable. This means that reasonable, physical evidence of Jewish extermination at these sites has not been shown to exist.

Muehlenkamp also admits that Kola's study is inadequate to prove Holocaust claims. But that hasn't stopped exterminationists - particularly laymen twitter types - from citing Kola as definitive "evidence".

It works like this:
1. Postulate that 100,000s were gassed there.
2. Find some human remains around there.
3. Insinuate that this proves that the postulate is true.

The most fantastic claims could be 'proven' that way. But saying that it does is actually a deception.

[bombsaway]

You made another thread about expected evidence. Have you ever considered that we would expect at least one (01) massive pit full of burnt remains to have been excavated and photographed at any of the 3 sites? No DNA tests. No exhumation (removing the remains). Just taking the soil from above and exposing the remains, photographing. This is something that has been done for far less significant events many times over. Random mass graves from unknown periods in history. It's standard practice to excavate and photograph the remains, assuming you want anyone to believe it. Of course, the "Holocaust" is a very special event in that people can just be imprisoned for publicly disputing it.

Typically with crimes are considered closed if the accused confesses and does not recant. By the time the USSR folded and these sites became available for excavation, hundreds of perpetrators had confessed across all the camps (west german trials) without a single recanted testimony, nor protest from their families. Nor did any 'smoking gun' type evidence surface contradicting the main claims (eg documents detailing mass resettlement).

So for me this is not surprising.

I think it's horrible to see people being imprisoned for their views, but this is not very good evidence of a conspiratorial group of Jews who know everything is fake keeping the lid on things. This could be true, but you are speculating. I might also speculate that Jews are defensive and grossly insensitive about this issue, but also quite powerful within media and activism groups so able to exert pressure on corporations and governments (this is overt and undeniable I think).

The fact is the dig didn't show what the exterminationists desired, and so they passed it off as unintentional claiming they weren't "trying" to discover remains. To this day people are still trying to pass Kola's nonsense off as significant in some sense, despite it proving nothing at all.

This post-hoc excuse for Kola's failed attempt to gather "proof" is, frankly, utterly unconvincing bullshit. The exterminationists bandied Kola's "findings" around and still do to this day. Either you admit it's insufficient and stop using it to squash criticism of people less knowledgable, or you keep using it when it's convenient for you and own it as a "real" but failed attempt at proving the exterminationist position. Don't sit there and tell me that revisionists are making a big deal over a study that "uhm akshually wasn't intended to prove mass graves", while you have media pundits from around the world singing your praises for "refuting" revisionists and providing "evidence" for mass graves at Belzec. And don't then publish an entire study on the topic which shows you have excavated all over the entire site, and outside it, in places which had nothing to do with the site for the memorial/museum.

Clearly you were taken in by the propagandistic claims made about the significance of Kola's study, which is why you brought it up. Now, when you've come to realise its inherent worthlessness, you want to obscure the fact that it's been claimed to "prove" something it doesn't prove, hence why you thought it had any significance at all. If the exterminationists were consistent at all, you never would've been given the initial impression that Kola's study had anything worthy of mentioning in the first place because it was "never intended" to prove the existance of mass graves at Belzec. Yet this isn't the case.

There's a lot to say here, but where did I claim Kola's study was strong evidence, or even bring it up unprovoked? You're putting words in my mouth, and perhaps associating me with Holocaust narrative "defenders" common on twitter who don't really know what they're talking about. I wouldn't ascribe to you the views of deniers on stormfront ranting about chimneys or masturbation machines (this came from a book written by a gentile btw). I simply investigated the claim that if taken at face value, Kola's report showed very little. Based on the response I've received here and the research I did, this doesn't appear to be the case. Substantial amounts of cremains are indicated in the core samples.

I also don't think the invective tone you're beginning to use is conducive to conversation on this very hot issue. You're obviously intelligent and well-researched and I think it's possible for us to dig through (ahem) these questions in a more measured and mutually respectful way.

[Lamprecht]

Typically with crimes are considered closed if the accused confesses and does not recant.

Name a single murder case where the alleged body was "confessed" to have been buried in a specific location but never dug up, the "confession" was more than adequate. They'll typically dig it up.

Also, most of the "confessions" were nothing of the sort. Also, they were very often obtained via torture, or other methods.
You're referencing known show trials as evidence now? Laughable.

You continue to dodge the OP questions. Is it true: 8 decades later and you cannot make a case fo the existence of even 1 pit with the remains of 150+ people at any of the 3 sites? Not even one pit?
I can't stress this enough: that evidence must exist if your story is true.

By the time the USSR folded and these sites became available for excavation, hundreds of perpetrators had confessed across all the camps (west german trials) without a single recanted testimony, nor protest from their families.

Most of the Germans denied the allegations of mass exterminations. Plenty disputed the claims.
Many important figures were unable to "testify" about this. Himmler, Globocnik, Hoefle, Hitler, Goebbels, etc..

Nor did any 'smoking gun' type evidence surface contradicting the main claims (eg documents detailing mass resettlement).

Except the documents describing the "Final Solution" contradict your position. In fact, it appears that all of them do. Oops.

At least you have been forced to admit that there is ZERO physical evidence that can be shown to exist, at any "extermination camp" that confirms your conspiracy theory.
However, this evidence must certainly exist if your conspiracy theory is true. In the form of millions of pounds of human remains.
But it simply doesn't exist.

You talk about a "smoking gun" yet you invert the hierarchy of evidence (see 2nd post in this thread) and ignore that which cannot be faked, in place of a bunch of easily-faked form of evidence. And then every actual investigation of these sites turns up short and you make excuses "oh, they weren't actually trying to find pits."
So they said they found them, but it was all for show.
This further weakens your argument. Again:

Falsifiability
Falsifiability means that for any hypothesis to have credence, it must be inherently disprovable.

In the case of
"These specific Jews who went to [specific location] 70+ years ago with [specific location 2] as an intermediate step"
it would be very difficult to prove if there are no relevant records and they were able to move around. But if that changes to
"They went to [specific location] and never left, and remain there to this day in some form"
it is now an easily testable theory. And that is precisely what is asserted by the "Holocaust" narrative. But the alleged pits are not shown to us. All we are given is pathetic excuses -- all the while those who speak out in Poland, Germany, France, etc are fined and imprisoned for it.

So when asked "Then where did they go?" it is perfectly valid to say "I do not know" - but it is invalid for someone to conclude "therefore, they are in these enormous pits, and no I don't have to show you the pits!"
First, they must show the alleged pits. Until then, they merely have a theory with an artificially contrived consensus based on legal [and social] penalties for those who publicly question it. It can be falsified in the same manner that it can be shown to be correct. They refuse to do such a thing despite having the resources and technology to do so. Therefore, their case is considerably weakened.

It can only be after these thorough archaeological excavations that the truth about these camps will be revealed, whether it is resettled "into mass graves" or "somewhere else." The image below is what we are told actually exists, today, under a layer of soil.



And if the investigations show that they did go "somewhere else" we can try to find out where. But we are unlikely to find new evidence 7+ decades after the fact (unless it was hidden rather than destroyed).
And in such a case, "Jews went wherever Jews are" still is not specific, but it would be perfectly accurate and valid. And I doubt many people would be interested in a more comprehensive answer after the "gassed and burned and dumped into huge pits" theory is completely discredited. Millions of pounds of physical evidence cannot vanish, unlike documents.

So if anyone has the right to ask the question "where did they go then?" it is the revisionists. The exterminationists claim to know where the 1.5+ million Treblinka 2, Sobibor, and Belzec victims went. Ask them to show you and they might provide a map with shapes on it they call "mass graves". Perfect, so they know exactly where they went down to the meter? Then they can show us a pit full of burnt human remains. If they can't do that, why believe them?

If 100s of thousands were dumped into massive pits, these pits would absolutely exist. There is no getting around that. Millions of pounds of physical evidence cannot magically disappear. This violates natural law.
For 100s of thousands to move from one place to another, and then never discuss it in a way that is recorded and documented so that this record exists in the present day for us to see it, that is certainly possible. I am saying, it does not violate natural law. Perhaps you could calculate a statistical likelihood that such a thing could actually take place in this manner. I do think that would be difficult. However, we all do things in daily life in the current year that nobody else could ever possibly know about.

The ball is in the exterminationists' court. It has been for decades. And they still cling to the most easy-to-fake forms of "evidence" when they claim there's massive pits full of human remains in exactly known locations.
But there simply aren't.
Because it didn't happen as they claim.
No wonder even the documents describing executions of Jews - even mass executions of civilians - turn out to support the revisionist position.

As for:

I think it's horrible to see people being imprisoned for their views, but this is not very good evidence of a conspiratorial group of Jews who know everything is fake keeping the lid on things. This could be true, but you are speculating. I might also speculate that Jews are defensive and grossly insensitive about this issue, but also quite powerful within media and activism groups so able to exert pressure on corporations and governments (this is overt and undeniable I think).

Actually the fact that archaeological investigation is not allowed at these sites is confirmation of a conspiracy to keep the lid on it. Truth does not fear investigation. It's not speculation at all. Investigation is not allowed. They get very upset when anyone goes digging around these specific sites (the alleged "pure extermination camps") to see what's buried there.

And what can it possibly be besides a conspiracy that explains why Canada just banned "Holocaust denial" last year? Why now? It's extremely unlikely that most Jews don't believe their "Holocaust" fantasies. Whoever is in charge of managing these camps surely has the data from GPR surveys showing no such massive pits, which is why they refuse to allow proper investigations.

If the stories were true, the pits would be absolutely enormous and unmistakable.

[bombsaway]

Typically with crimes are considered closed if the accused confesses and does not recant.

Name a single murder case where the alleged body was "confessed" to have been buried in a specific location but never dug up, the "confession" was more than adequate. They'll typically dig it up.

Also, most of the "confessions" were nothing of the sort. Also, they were very often obtained via torture, or other methods.
You're referencing known show trials as evidence now? Laughable.

I think a better comparison might be declared mass graves being dug up. If I can find an example of a non-holocaust mass grave (say of 5,000) people plus being declared but not dug up, would this suffice?

I've seen no evidence the west german trials i referenced (Belzec, Sobibor, and Chelmno would be the relevant ones) were show trials or that any witnesses in those trials denied the events in question or later recanted.

At least you have been forced to admit that there is ZERO physical evidence that can be shown to exist, at any "extermination camp" that confirms your conspiracy theory.

To be clear, I believe zero evidence has been shown by your standards, but I am confident it could be if the archeologists were sufficiently motivated. And I believe a case can be made for the existence of mass graves at these camps based on documents and witness statements.

[Lamprecht]

I think a better comparison might be declared mass graves being dug up. If I can find an example of a non-holocaust mass grave (say of 5,000) people plus being declared but not dug up, would this suffice?

Suffice for?
This pit was not declared by the people that produced it, correct? Name this alleged pit full of 5,000

I've seen no evidence the west german trials i referenced (Belzec, Sobibor, and Chelmno would be the relevant ones) were show trials or that any witnesses in those trials denied the events in question or later recanted.

Testimony is completely irrelevant here. Go make a new thread about it if you think coerced "confessions" should be considered adequate to establish human remains in a specific place.

To be clear, I believe zero evidence has been shown by your standards, but I am confident it could be if the archeologists were sufficiently motivated.

If they were confident, we would have seen them by now.
Huge mass graves are not easy to fake, unlike documents and testimony.
Also, they are not my standards I posted multiple archaeology books explaining how mass graves are to be documented. None of them said that if there's enough documentation or "eyewitness testimony" then digging up the remains is not necessary. That's just absurd.

And I believe a case can be made for the existence of mass graves at these camps based on documents and witness statements.

Go make a thread arguing in favor of the alleged pits based on these less definitive, weaker forms of evidence that, again, can be easily faked.

[Butterfangers]

I've actually been trying to understand the revisionist narrative about what happened. Based on my reading of Mattogno and Kues, I assumed you all believed that millions of Jews were resettled and interned in Russia, but what I've been hearing is that they may never have made it there, but no one knows for sure.

Mattogno and Kues were among the pioneers that really dove into the question of whether AR camps were transit camps, what evidence exists for this, etc. I don't think they ever claimed to have proven where all Jews went. It was establishment historians who claimed they knew where Jews went, Mattogno (like most Revisionists) set out to show that, no, they didn't---these "historians" hadn't a clue. One gigantic gaping hole in their theory was the fact that the Soviet Union was literally right next door to where Jews allegedly disappeared. There is lots of evidence of Jews being sent over that border, of dispersing further from there, ending up dead, in Siberia, or in one of 60+ countries within the years to come. The gigantic tome from Mattogno, Graf and Kues (2013, IIRC) spent a lot of time drawing this out, responding to the individual points made by disgraced establishment historians Nick Terry et al. In the more recent work from Mattogno on the AR camps (https://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?page_id=28) he brings the focus back to center and makes it clear that this question of "where did they go?" is of only secondary, perhaps marginal importance relative to the questions of:

1. Is there evidence of an organized "black propaganda" campaign from which these claims of 'gassing' are apparently derived?
2. What sort of physical evidence are we working with (re: measured or archaeological evidence of gassing, corpses, mass cremation and the requisite fuel, etc.)?
3. Does the physical evidence in any way align with the claims that were made? Does it even leave room for the claims to be accepted by an honest, informed, reasonable person?

The question of "where did they go?" is such a gigantic question once you realize the vast network and frequency of transit, emigration, etc., that it's very easy for those within the establishment to portray the debate to a layman as though it is in their favor because, after all:

"...just look at all the missing Jews...".

"Mr. Bergstein lost his whole family in the Holocaust!"

Of course, when you pull up a map of just a fraction of the 40,000 or so different locations across Europe in which Jews were separated from one another and then scattered into the winds (then subsequently buying into the same genocidal narrative(s) the rest of us did), it is neither surprising that Jews are "missing" nor that Mr. Bergstein never found his family. Odds are, he didn't know where to look. And how could he?

We get that far without even factoring in the extent of deception that we know was, in fact, implemented. There are hundreds or thousands of extraordinary, even outrageous examples of Jewish testimony that ranges from tragic and believable... to spurious... to hilarious... to downright second-hand embarrassment... to "oh my God, this poor, senile, bastard, someone take him off the stage.":

Stephen Ross, Jewish survivor in his Holocaust pajamas.
Video: https://archive.org/details/steve-ross- ... iss_202011

In other cases, the lies are more overtly malicious (anti-German) and disgusting, some sanctioned by Allied governments. But you get the point. They're all useful for the narrative and any political motives riding along with it.

Imagine if high schools and colleges taught both sides of this story. Imagine if, "The Last Days of the Big Lie" were watched right alongside Schindler's List, or if Mattogno was required reading, right alongside Browning in an "Introduction to Holocaust History" course. Do you think the establishment view and its monopoly would survive, after a generation or two? If not, what does that tell you?

[bombsaway]

This pit was not declared by the people that produced it, correct? Name this alleged pit full of 5,000

It didn't take me long and I found several mass graves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butovo_firing_range (20,000 dead) no excavations whatsoever seemingly

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kommunark ... ing_ground (6000 + dead) this one was investigated using entirely non-invasive techniques https://en.mapofmemory.org/77-14

[Lamprecht]

This pit was not declared by the people that produced it, correct? Name this alleged pit full of 5,000

It didn't take me long and I found several mass graves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butovo_firing_range (20,000 dead) no excavations whatsoever seemingly

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kommunark ... ing_ground (6000 + dead) this one was investigated using entirely non-invasive techniques https://en.mapofmemory.org/77-14

Questions:
1. How many pits at Treblinka 2 do you believe exist?
2. The remains of at least how many people are contained in these [Treblinka 2] pits?
3. How many pits at Sobibor do you believe exist?
4. The remains of at least how many people are contained in these [Sobibor] pits?
5. How many pits at Belzec do you believe exist?
6. The remains of at least how many people are contained in these [Belzec] pits?

None of these are comparable because they do not have a history of archaeological excavations taking place at the sites that turned out to completely fail to corroborate absurd claims made about these sites.
Your position is that over 1.5 million are buried at 3 sites. You apparently can't show even 1 pit with 0.01% of the alleged remains.
Because this 1.5m is a complete farce. Providing examples of claimed pits that were not excavated does not change this reality. The fact of the matter is that the conspiracy theory of 1.5m+ in massive pits is based solely on party testimony and a misreading of just a few documents. In fact, it's completely contradicted by the great mass of documents that describe the purpose of the camps as something else. Now you are stuck in a strategy of making excuses for why the evidence doesn't need to exist, and why we should just pretend as if it does... All the while complaining that there supposedly is not enough evidence for resettlement when, in fact, the lack of enormous pits at these sites confirms this position. It's also consistent with what the documents describe the "Final Solution" as. Further, as has been pointed out, mass resettlement does not necessarily result in documentary evidence. It was previously pointed out that the train records for Belzec were all destroyed with a bomb. We even have records of people being sent to other camps from these sites, but no accompanying record of them leaving the site. So quite obviously the records are incomplete.

Because your conspiracy theory has no physical evidence to support it - despite efforts to produce such evidence - and because it contradicts the documentary evidence, it only makes sense to reject it. Notably you still refuse to answer any of the questions posted in the OP. I wonder why?

[bombsaway]

None of these are comparable because they do not have a history of archaeological excavations taking place at the sites that turned out to completely fail to corroborate absurd claims made about these sites.

What about the hierarchy of evidence? Does it not apply because of this?

[Lamprecht]

None of these are comparable because they do not have a history of archaeological excavations taking place at the sites that turned out to completely fail to corroborate absurd claims made about these sites.

What about the hierarchy of evidence? Does it not apply because of this?

Of course it applies. It always applies. I did not argue for or against the existence of these pits you brought up.
You continue to dodge questions and then expect me to answer your silly questions.
Why don't you make an attempt to answer the questions relevant to the thread?

[bombsaway]

Ok I'll play ball, and answer your questions as directly as I can

1 – Which of the 15 alleged Treblinka II mass graves can you forensically* prove contain the remains of at least 150 human beings (OR 750 lbs / 340 kg of remains): 0__
2 – Which of the 24 alleged Sobibor mass graves can you forensically* prove contain the remains of at least 150 human beings (OR 750 lbs / 340 kg of remains): 0__
3 – Which of the 33 alleged Belzec mass graves can you forensically* prove contain the remains of at least 150 human beings (OR 750 lbs / 340 kg of remains): 0__
4-6 – Same as 1-3 but instead 1,500 human beings (OR 7,500 lbs / 3,400 kg of remains): 0__
7-9 – Same as 1-3 but instead 15,000 human beings (OR 75,000 lbs / 34,000 kg of remains): 0__
10 – How many of the 72 alleged graves at T2+S+B can you forensically* prove contain at least one milligram of human remains: 0__

[Lamprecht]

10 – How many of the 72 alleged graves at T2+S+B can you forensically* prove contain at least one milligram of human remains: 0__

Huh? Do you think they made them all up then?
This is a really bad look.

[bombsaway]

No I think they just didn't take photos of the cremains they analyzed, nor proceed with their investigation in a way that would be appropriate for a criminal case.