Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Tue Sep 15, 2009 3:44 pm)

Drew

"Things have changed for me... The exterminationists may have got us on the Reinhardt "transit" camps"


Well then Drew, if that's what you really think, I have a little challenge for you.


There's supposed to be 33 mass graves at Belzec, 10 at Sobibor, 6 at Treblinka and 5 at Chelmno which, in total, allegedly contain the remains of over 2 million jews.

So here's my challenge to you Drew.

Prove to us that just one grave at each of these sites actually exists, then tell us how much human remains exist in each of your chosen grave, then prove it.

Now, if "The exterminationists have got us on the Reinhardt transit camps," this challenge should be done in no time.

I can't wait to see your proof Drew.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Tue Sep 15, 2009 3:52 pm)

viewtopic.php?p=38116&#p38116
I'm not trying to say Muehlenkamp has proven anything. My goal is to merely understand his posts. As for your question where are these pits to begin with, isn't that just another way of saying mass graves? If you say yes, then I bring it back to Kola's report and how his core samples showed where human remains were which jived with Bau-Reder. As my old bolded and red text showed earlier, when more than two people start agreeing on something, then a lawyer in a court of law would certainly start to think that prima face, there may be a case. But only prima face of course.

However it all comes back to why wasn't Kola's core samples documented with photo or video or scientific analysis to prove there were actually human remains. Since it wasn't, I don't see why Muehlenkamp can make the excuse that archaeologists aren't required to do that and Kola wasn't since apparently, they weren't there to find proof of an extermination, only to figure out where mass graves where so that digging to build a memorial wouldn't harm any corpses or remains. However Muelenkamp refused to accept that by documenting where bodies were, it was bound to happen that said evidence would be used by extermination theorists to boost their case. The proof is that they cite Kola at all. They for some reason don't want to accept that Kola, whatever his team's motivation seemed to help the exterminationist's view of things since they like to refer to Kola all the time. You can't complain, "Oh Kola never meant to document a holocaust. They even stopped drilling in some spots." You can't bite the hand that feeds you.

I was going over the old VNN thread and I believe I saw something to the effect of Muehlenkamp volunteering to go to Sobibor and ask to do scientific tests on mounds of ash to prove they are human remains or something. Funny how this was never done at Belzec. It must be pissing him off. Which is why he came at me with, "They weren't there to document a holocaust, only to find out where it was okay to dig to build a memorial. So you can't expect them to provide proof of something they weren't there to get proof of." Sorry but since not everyone does archaeology to build memorials around bodies, archaeologists typically photograph and videotape their evidence and also do lab tests to prove that whatever ash or remains they find are in fact of human bodies.

I would like to thank you for throwing that name Greg Gerdes out there. I googled some stuff and boy this guy is amazing. I guess that's part of why I started this thread. To let people know where I was on Belzec a month later. That way they could respond with some further resources. Which are much appreciated. I think they will only serve to show Muehlenkamp up. In fact, this afternoon has only shown me that Muehlenkamp was in fact spanked hard by Gerdes. So all I can say is thanks for your time and further reading material. It was what I was hoping to receive.

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:48 pm)

Drew

then I bring it back to Kola's report and how his core samples showed where human remains


His report didn't "show" any human remains.

All he did was make unsubstantiated claims.

Backed up by nothing.


Drew

However it all comes back to why wasn't Kola's core samples documented with photo or video or scientific analysis to prove there were actually human remains.


Because there were no actual human remains.

Just fraudulent claims to the effect. (That Mattogno graciously gives him credit for. Mattogno’s biggest fault is that he’s too nice of a guy to come right out and call Kola a fraud, which he most certainly is.)

However, O'Neil claims to have videos of the "excavations" at Belzec.

But he refuses to release them.

Why?


Drew

Kola never meant to document a holocaust



But the team from Hartford did (at Sobibor).

Why do they refuse to release the evidence of what they found?

Because they found no evidence.


We have O'Neil's videos for Belzec and the Hartford teams GPR results (and other tests) for Sobibor, and neither has been released.

Go figure.

Drew

thanks for your time and further reading material


You’re welcome.


Now I ask you one more time Drew

Can you prove that there exists in each of the camps so much as one grave that contains human remains?

Please answer the question.

It's a yes or no question, so there is no reason in the world why you can't answer it.

Either you can or you can't.

If you can, then the answer is yes.

If you can't, then the answer is no.

Is the answer yes or no Drew?

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Tue Sep 15, 2009 5:02 pm)

No, I can't. And I doubt others can either.

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:50 pm)

Pepper

So here's my challenge to you Drew.

Prove to us that just one grave at each of these sites actually exists, then tell us how much human remains exist in each of your chosen grave, then prove it.

Now I ask you one more time Drew

Can you prove that there exists in each of the camps so much as one grave that contains human remains?



Drew

No, I can't. And I doubt others can either.



Drew, is that not an admission that you find Kola's claims about locating mass graves at Belzec spurious and fraudulent?


Drew

So the mounds 1 to 6 that have no disturbed soils or human remains in them



And graves 7 - 33?

Real graves with real human remains, or a hoax?

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:08 am)

Yeah, it's an admission of problems with Belzec. As I have said, not only was Muehlenkamp in error for making the pathetic excuse, "Oh Kola wasn't trying to document atrocities. It was just finding out where bodies were so that digging to make a memorial wouldn't disturb remains." In other words, when you employ Kola's research after saying that, it's almost like biting the hand that feeds you. Secondly, I have already talked about the problem of that polish article about the theft of teeth and jew gold. You can photograph the perps but not the fruits of their crime while you're trying to document the existence of the things you accuse them of stealing? Obviously a disconnect. A disconnect that can be explained only in one way. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE. That is why the repeated demands for photographs wasn't a dodge as Muehlenkamp put it. It was a constant reminder to put up or shut up.

A post I just made in THINGS HAVE CHANGED FOR ME (MAYBE NOT) explains everything up to now.

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:10 am)

Drew

Kola may not have been lying about what he found



Drew, if Kola was lying about Belzec's graves 1-6, and he has been caught lying about EVERYTHING at Sobibor, then how can you believe anything that he said about Belzec was true? (And why has O'Neil refused to release the film of the "investigation?")

I think the key to understanding Belzec is to start with Sobibor.

Except for the total number of claimed graves and remains, Kola's Belzec and Sobibor stories are almost identical.

However, EVERYTHING he claimed about Sobibor is a lie.

A TOTAL fabrication.

And now you yourself have done some great research into Belzec's graves 1-6. (And I thank you very much for all your hard work on that matter.)

And you also admitted that nobody can prove that "graves" 7-33 contain any human remains.

Do you see a pattern here?


Why don't you challenge Muehlenkamp to answer those 101 Sobibor questions that he's running from?

Use that as your base for proving that Kola is a fraud.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 4:34 pm)

And now you yourself have done some great research into Belzec's graves 1-6. (And I thank you very much for all your hard work on that matter.)

There were parts of Muehlenkamp's response to me I haven't gotten to yet where he disagreed with some of my interpretations about Kola's figures and about how certain X shapes do exist in some samples (that represent human remains) which I had disputed. In other words, this is a dispute about the artistic depiction of Kola. This dispute rests on the assumption that there is actually proof of those graves having human remains. That an archaeological team took the time to photograph and videotape and scientifically test samples to prove they were human remains. Kola didn't do that because apparently, he wasn't there to document a holocaust, just to find out where bodies were so that digging to build a memorial wouldn't disturb any human remains. Well then don't cite him unless you believe he's telling the truth. But why would you believe it if in 1999 he refused to back up with photos or videos or lab analysis his core samples.

Muehlenkamp is expecting us to believe that since Kola was working not to document a holocaust, but to map out the area to build the memorial, he shouldn't be held to such a high standard of proof since Kola didn't willingly assume it since he didn't try to document a holocaust in the first place. But the logical person asks why wouldn't Kola realize the implications of what he was doing and said, "Let's hold off on this memorial. Before we build it. Let's document my core samples to refute the revisionists. Then we can build the memorial after we splash our revolutionary findings all over the papers." It's the same question I have with regard to the polish translation of that article. Why is it you can photograph grave robbers who took teeth and gold from the graves of dead Jews, but not the actual shit they stole when you had ample opportunity? In regards to these two questions, I ask the following, rhetorically but also seriously?

How can you forget to document a holocaust that you and people like you would want to document if you could to refute revisionists once and for all?

It makes no sense unless you explain it away the only way you can. There was nothing to document and no good historian or scientist who wanted to prove something would forget to prove it. That's Occam's Razor I'm afraid.

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:01 pm)

Why don't you challenge Muehlenkamp to answer those 101 Sobibor questions that he's running from?

Use that as your base for proving that Kola is a fraud.



What do you about that think Drew?

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:06 pm)

check the THINGS HAVE CHANGED thread as I respond to it in there.

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:44 pm)

That stuff is old hat drew.

I'd like to know why Muehlenkamp refuses to answer all those Sobibor questions, as it is directly related to the Belzec "investigation" by way of Kola.

Like I said earlier; I think the key to understanding Belzec is to start with Sobibor.

Wouldn't you agree that if the Sobibor claims made by Kola are proven to be 100% fraudulent (which they have), that would utterly destroy any credibility for his claims about Belzec?

Remember, there is no "proof" what-so-ever that Kola's claims about Belzec are true, and there's much proof that they are fraudulent at Sobibor.

Kola's claims are as utterly devoid of any meaningful substantiation as Readers claims were.

Since you have some kind of dialogue already going with Muehlenkamp, why not challenge him to answer those questions?

I'd love to see how he responds.

Remember, those questions are as much about kola as they are about Sobibor.

Please keep us informed about all of Muehlenkamp's "interesting replies."


BTW drew, I get the feeling that you're reluctant to challenge Muehlenkamp with any kind of real difficult questions.

What do you have to lose?

What will it hurt to ask?

Can't you throw a hardball?

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:01 pm)

I'm very sorry folks, I guess Muehlenkamp actually did answer all those questions about Sobibor. Here are the questions with his answers:

BTW, "bobo" = Muehlenkamp

* Kola: "Grave no 1 was excavated by 27 drills. It measures 20 x 20 m and is up to 4.30 m deep. It was a body burning grave." (Translation: They found some ash in a pit that was - SURPRISE SUPRISE!! - never forensically analyzed to determine its genesis.)

1 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #1 contained so much as one single bone fragment?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

2 - In total, how many bone fragments were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

3 - Can you prove that "grave" #1 currently contains at least 1,000 pounds of bone fragments? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

4 - What is the total amount - in weight, of bone fragments alleged to currently exist in "grave" #1?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

5 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #1 that proves that so much as one single bone fragment was located / proven to exist in "grave" #1? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

6 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #1 contained so much as one single tooth?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

7 - In total, how many teeth were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

8 - Can you prove that "grave" #1 currently contains at least 8,000 of teeth? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.) YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

9 - What is the total amount - in number, of teeth alleged to currently exist in "grave" #1? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.)
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

10 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #1 that proves that so much as one single tooth was located / proven to exist in "grave" #1? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

11 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample of the alleged "charred human remains / burnt body remains" taken from "grave" #1, in which the contents of said core sample has been proven to be - via scientific analysis, actual human remains? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

12 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample containing human remains in a "wax-fat transformation" taken from "grave" #1 YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

13 - Can you provide a photo of Kola actually investigating "grave" #1? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO


* Kola: "Grave no 2 was excavated by 28 drills. It measures at least 20 x 25 m and is up to 4 m deep. It was a body burning grave." (Translation: They found some ash in a pit that was - SURPRISE SUPRISE!! - never forensically analyzed to determine its genesis.)

1 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #2 contained so much as one single bone fragment?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

2 - In total, how many bone fragments were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

3 - Can you prove that "grave" #2 currently contains at least 1,000 pounds of bone fragments? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

4 - What is the total amount - in weight, of bone fragments alleged to currently exist in "grave" #2?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

5 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #2 that proves that so much as one single bone fragment was located / proven to exist in "grave" #2? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

6 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #2 contained so much as one single tooth?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

7 - In total, how many teeth were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

8 - Can you prove that "grave" #2 currently contains at least 8,000 of teeth? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.) YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

9 - What is the total amount - in number, of teeth alleged to currently exist in "grave" #2? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.)
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

10 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #2 that proves that so much as one single tooth was located / proven to exist in "grave" #2? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

11 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample of the alleged "charred human remains / burnt body remains" taken from "grave" #2, in which the contents of said core sample has been proven to be - via scientific analysis, actual human remains? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

12 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample containing human remains in a "wax-fat transformation" taken from "grave" #2 YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

13 - Can you provide a photo of Kola actually investigating "grave" #2? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO


* Kola: "Grave no 3 was excavated by 17 drills. It measures around 20 x 12 m and is up to 5.80 m deep. In bottom layers, the grave is bony, with human remains in wax- fat transformation. The upper layers are a mixture of burnt body remains with layers of lime stone, sand and charcoal." (Translation: They found some ash in a pit and are claiming, without an ounce of evidence other than: BECAUSE KOLA SAID SO, that there are some bodies at the bottom of this pit.)

1 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #3 contained so much as one single bone fragment?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

2 - In total, how many bone fragments were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

3 - Can you prove that "grave" #3 currently contains at least 1,000 pounds of bone fragments? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

4 - What is the total amount - in weight, of bone fragments alleged to currently exist in "grave" #3?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

5 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #3 that proves that so much as one single bone fragment was located / proven to exist in "grave" #3? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

6 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #3 contained so much as one single tooth?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

7 - In total, how many teeth were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

8 - Can you prove that "grave" #3 currently contains at least 8,000 of teeth? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.) YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

9 - What is the total amount - in number, of teeth alleged to currently exist in "grave" #3? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.)
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

10 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #3 that proves that so much as one single tooth was located / proven to exist in "grave" #3? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

11 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample of the alleged "charred human remains / burnt body remains" taken from "grave" #3, in which the contents of said core sample has been proven to be - via scientific analysis, actual human remains? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

12 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample containing human remains in a "wax-fat transformation" taken from "grave" #3 YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

13 - Can you provide a photo of Kola actually investigating "grave" #3? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO


* Kola: "Grave no 4 was excavated by 78 drills. It measures 70 x 20-25 m with the depth of around 5 m. In bottom layers the grave is bony, with human remains in wax- fat transformation. The upper layers are a mixture of burnt body remains with layers of lime stone, sand and charcoal." (Translation: They found some ash in a pit and are claiming, without an ounce of evidence other than: BECAUSE KOLA SAID SO, that there are some bodies at the bottom of this pit.)

1 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #4 contained so much as one single bone fragment?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

2 - In total, how many bone fragments were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

3 - Can you prove that "grave" #4 currently contains at least 1,000 pounds of bone fragments? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

4 - What is the total amount - in weight, of bone fragments alleged to currently exist in "grave" #4?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

5 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #4 that proves that so much as one single bone fragment was located / proven to exist in "grave" #4? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

6 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #4 contained so much as one single tooth?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

7 - In total, how many teeth were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

8 - Can you prove that "grave" #4 currently contains at least 8,000 of teeth? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.) YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

9 - What is the total amount - in number, of teeth alleged to currently exist in "grave" #4? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.)
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

10 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #4 that proves that so much as one single tooth was located / proven to exist in "grave" #4? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

11 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample of the alleged "charred human remains / burnt body remains" taken from "grave" #4, in which the contents of said core sample has been proven to be - via scientific analysis, actual human remains? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

12 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample containing human remains in a "wax-fat transformation" taken from "grave" #4 YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

13 - Can you provide a photo of Kola actually investigating "grave" #4? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO


* Kola: "Grave no 5 was excavated by 7 drills. It measures at least 10 - 12 m and is up to 4.90 m deep. In its bottom layers the grave is bony, with human remains in wax-fat transformation. In the upper layers - burnt body remains." (Translation: They found some ash in a pit and are claiming, without an ounce of evidence other than: BECAUSE KOLA SAID SO, that there are some bodies at the bottom of this pit.)

1 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #5 contained so much as one single bone fragment?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

2 - In total, how many bone fragments were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

3 - Can you prove that "grave" #5 currently contains at least 1,000 pounds of bone fragments? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

4 - What is the total amount - in weight, of bone fragments alleged to currently exist in "grave" #5?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

5 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #5 that proves that so much as one single bone fragment was located / proven to exist in "grave" #5? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

6 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #5 contained so much as one single tooth?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

7 - In total, how many teeth were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

8 - Can you prove that "grave" #5 currently contains at least 8,000 of teeth? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.) YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

9 - What is the total amount - in number, of teeth alleged to currently exist in "grave" #5? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.)
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

10 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #5 that proves that so much as one single tooth was located / proven to exist in "grave" #5? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

11 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample of the alleged "charred human remains / burnt body remains" taken from "grave" #5, in which the contents of said core sample has been proven to be - via scientific analysis, actual human remains? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

12 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample containing human remains in a "wax-fat transformation" taken from "grave" #5 YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

13 - Can you provide a photo of Kola actually investigating "grave" #5? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO


* Kola: "Grave no 6 was excavated by 22 drills. It measures at least 15 x 25 m and is up to 3.05 m deep. In its bottom layers the grave is bony, with human remains in wax-fat transformation. The upper layers - burnt body remains." (Translation: They found some ash in a pit and are claiming, without an ounce of evidence other than: BECAUSE KOLA SAID SO, that there are some bodies at the bottom of this pit.)

1 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #6 contained so much as one single bone fragment?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

2 - In total, how many bone fragments were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

3 - Can you prove that "grave" #6 currently contains at least 1,000 pounds of bone fragments? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

4 - What is the total amount - in weight, of bone fragments alleged to currently exist in "grave" #6?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

5 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #6 that proves that so much as one single bone fragment was located / proven to exist in "grave" #6? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

6 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #6 contained so much as one single tooth?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

7 - In total, how many teeth were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

8 - Can you prove that "grave" #6 currently contains at least 8,000 of teeth? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.) YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

9 - What is the total amount - in number, of teeth alleged to currently exist in "grave" #6? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.)
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

10 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #6 that proves that so much as one single tooth was located / proven to exist in "grave" #6? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

11 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample of the alleged "charred human remains / burnt body remains" taken from "grave" #6, in which the contents of said core sample has been proven to be - via scientific analysis, actual human remains? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

12 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample containing human remains in a "wax-fat transformation" taken from "grave" #6 YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

13 - Can you provide a photo of Kola actually investigating "grave" #6? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO


* Kola: "Grave no 7 measured at least 10 x 3 m and is up to 0.90 m deep. The vast majority of burnt body remains were found in 6 drills. (Translation: They found some ash in a pit that was - SURPRISE SUPRISE!! - never forensically analyzed to determine its genesis.)

1 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #7 contained so much as one single bone fragment?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

2 - In total, how many bone fragments were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

3 - Can you prove that "grave" #7 currently contains at least 1,000 pounds of bone fragments? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

4 - What is the total amount - in weight, of bone fragments alleged to currently exist in "grave" #7?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

5 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #7 that proves that so much as one single bone fragment was located / proven to exist in "grave" #7? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

6 - How many of the core samples allegedly taken from "grave" #7 contained so much as one single tooth?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

7 - In total, how many teeth were allegedly found in all those core samples combined?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

8 - Can you prove that "grave" #7 currently contains at least 8,000 of teeth? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.) YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

9 - What is the total amount - in number, of teeth alleged to currently exist in "grave" #7? (This of course means teeth that are alleged to be mixed in with the alleged cremation remains.)
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: ZERO)

10 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample taken from "grave" #7 that proves that so much as one single tooth was located / proven to exist in "grave" #7? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

11 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample of the alleged "charred human remains / burnt body remains" taken from "grave" #7, in which the contents of said core sample has been proven to be - via scientific analysis, actual human remains? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

12 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample containing human remains in a "wax-fat transformation" taken from "grave" #7 YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO

13 - Can you provide a photo of Kola actually investigating "grave" #7? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: NO


* Bobo: "What I currently know is that the mound was built in the 1960s, and that it was made with soil collected from above the ground, which due to robbery-digging included human ashes and bone fragments... As to checking the contents of that mound and demonstrating that they are what all known evidence suggests they are - human ashes... if you're arguing against all evidence and all probability that these are not human ashes, it's up to you to prove your allegation... it is unreasonable, according to the standards of evidence that apply in historical research, to require proof of what becomes apparent from a photo source's caption and from all known evidence about what happened at the place where the photo was taken, in this case that the "mound of the remains of victims of the Sobibor extermination camp" is actually a mound of human remains... All available proof shows that these remains are human remains while there's no proof suggesting that they are anything other than human remains... The conclusion that the mound in question is comprised of human ash is thus the conclusion that is borne out by all known evidence and belied by none. It is also the conclusion towards which various sources of evidence independent of each other converge. This convergence of various sources of evidence independent of each other, alone or together with the absence of any evidence to the contrary, is proof that the mound in question is comprised of human ash."

1 - The remains of how many jews are claimed to currently exist in Sobibor's monument / "grave" #8?
Bobo's answer: I have no idea (Translation: Zero)

2 - Can you prove that "grave" #8 currently contains at least 1,000 pounds of bone fragments? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: No

3 - What is the total amount - in weight, of bone fragments alleged to currently exist in "grave" #8?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: Zero)

4 - Can you provide a photo that proves that so much as one single bone fragment was ever put into "grave" #8? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer:
Yes, see the blog Mass Graves at Sobibor - 3rd Update .
Classic! Oh thank you stupid, I was hoping you would do that. What a predictable, dimwitted little bonobobo you are!
Priceless!

5 - Can you prove that "grave" #8 currently contains at least 8,000 of teeth? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: No

6 - What is the total amount - in number, of teeth alleged to currently exist in "grave" #8?
Bobo's answer: I don't know (Translation: Zero)

7 - Can you provide a photo that proves that so much as one single tooth was ever put into "grave" #8? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: No

8 - Can you provide a photo of a core sample of the alleged "charred human remains / burnt body remains" taken from "grave" #8, in which the contents of said core sample has been proven to be - via scientific analysis, actual human remains? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: No

9 - Can you provide a photo that proves that so much as one single jew in a "wax-fat transformation" was ever put into "grave" #8? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: No

10 - Can you provide a photo of the construction of the monument / "grave" #8? YES or NO?
Bobo's answer: No


One year after accepting The Final Soloution Forensic Challenge and bobo is - 0 for 101 on Sobibor.
Last edited by Pepper on Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:03 pm)

OH-FER 101!

Who's got who drew?

BTW, from what I've just learned, there is no proof what-so-ever that Kola ever stepped foot in Sobibor.

So why should we believe anything that Kola said about Belzec drew?

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:18 pm)

viewtopic.php?p=38098&sid=0960725558e56e9e77b89dbf46df92c1#p38098
In this post, we see me showing how Muehlenkamp took some photos of Sobibor core samples and he basically says look at those different colours. What the hell else could they be if they are not human remains? Funny thing is, that's not how the burden of proof works. He and Kola, et all, have to prove they are. Otherwise, we are justified in our agnosticism about the issue. Saying, "if they're not X then what are they?" can't be used to prove your case. That's an argument from ignorance and it just leaves a person dangling in the wind without any concrete answer.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Belzec: a fraudulent excavation

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:23 pm)

I get the feeling that you're reluctant to challenge Muehlenkamp with any kind of real difficult questions.

What do you have to lose?

What will it hurt to ask?

Can't you throw a hardball?

I can. I have thrown a few his way as you can see earlier in the topic although he has managed to hit a few on mere logical interpretive points. But as I said, those all rest on the assumption that Kola's 1999 artistic depictions of Belzec can be backed up and proven and they can't. So even though Muehlenkamp for example busted Mattogno when he showed how Mattogno had no justification for saying that the 137 samples were the most significant since not all of them contained human remains and that none of them came from all graves, it was further foolish of Mattogno to come and say, "Hey out of these most significant samples we only had this few human remains as depicted by Kola." In other words, he was leaving out other depictions of human remains by Kola and Muehlenkamp won that little victory. But as I said again...LITTLE victory. Mattogno had a small mis-interpretation. But as I said, he is likely correct about Belzec not being the site of a mass extermination, but he has a couple incorrect reasons mixed in with some correct ones. That is all my red texting was ever about. If Mattogo would take my red texts into consideration and update the Belzec situation about the actual lack of proof for not only those core samples contents, he could have a much better book on Belzec. One that would be much tougher to argue with.

Muelhenkamp has already had some hardballs thrown at him. I can't come up with any. The revisionist side has already put the screws to him.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest