Sobibór: Kola-Mazurek Discrepancies and Implications

[Nessie]

...There was only a 6% hit rate (positive drills) per hectare, and only a 69% hit rate even within the "graves" drawn. Mazurek consistently shows sparse remains where Kola had indicated dense saturation, explicitly documenting findings as 'patchy', 'barren', 'thin layers', etc., across all major graves....

Interesting use of the word "only". I get only 6%, but not only 69%.

Yes, Nessie, that's how this works. Core-drilling a grid pattern is not a form of legitimate mapping (as is excavation) -- it is a form of reconnaissance. Kola went about sampling the Sobibor Camp III site on a per-hectare basis and of his drills per hectare, he is at about a 7% hit rate (correction from 6%; 128/1805 = ~7%). In other words, only 7% of the areas he chose to reconnoiter had drill positives -- his reconnaissance had a 7% success rate.

As I said, I get only 7%, as it is a low number.

As for his 69%, you are missing the point.

You are missing my point, 69% is a high number, so referring to it as only, is deceptive and inaccurate.

Kola drew his grave boundaries arbitrarily around perceived clusters

How do you know that? How arbitrary, is conducting bore hole samples in the area of the camp, witnesses stated the mass graves were located?

.. for which their total number of drills was 185. Given the spacing of 5m apart and the fact Kola biases the sampling/positive rate by conducting extra drills in positive areas, this is already a stretch (or violation) in terms of extrapolation to a certain grave density. But taking it a step further, Kola simply omits the fact that almost one-third (31%, or 57 drills) of his samples within those "graves" were completely negative!

Conducting extra drills in areas where remains were found, is reasonable, to more accurately determine the size of those areas. Were the 31% of negative drills, within areas of positive ones, or were they clustered?

How is 69% "only"? In any exam, 69% is a good pass.

Nessie, you know better than this: none of these claims from Mazurek are evidenced. The inferences he draws here are based on his assumptions of the orthodox history, having nothing to do with his findings.

Wrong, his assumptions are based on what he found. The Nazis dug a huge pit and then left little to nothing in it. Of course, you are not interested in what that is, or at least trying to evidence a chronological narrative that explains it. You are only interested in reinforcing your desired belief, that far fewer people were buried at the camp, than the evidence from eyewitnesses, documents and circumstances proves.

Only you would say that an empty pit is evidence of a full pit. Ridiculous. Even if one accepts your absurd logic (empty pit as evidence), you still need to explain where the emptied contents actually ended up, since they are not in the grave.

That is your invented logic, that you falsely attributed to me. Straw man. Now, deal with my actual point, of your claim that an empty pit is evidence few were buried at the camp, whilst failing to provid a history of that pit. Why was it dug? Was anything buried in it and then removed? Was it dug to take corpses, that were then cremated instead?

...No -- it is a fact that Kola uses the blanket description of Grave 2 as a "crematory grave" (direct quote), only for Mazurek to audit this via excavation and determine only scattered remains. There is no ambiguity here.

Is a crematory grave, one that cremains were buried in, or one when cremations took place?

Kola's full description of Grave 2:

Grave No. 2. Located in the western part of hectare XVII, south of the monument-mound. It was marked by 28 holes. Its horizontal grid is irregular, with an area of ​​at least 20 x 25 m – with the longer edge aligned north-west – and a depth of approximately 4.00 m. It is a cremation grave.

There are no reports of cremation pyres therein. He is describing it as being of human cremation contents.

There is nothing in the quote to support your conclusion.

'Disturbed ground' is hardly accounted for by anyone, since it proves nothing. It only matters to you, for some strange reason (?).

It also matters to Mazurek, as he suggests potential reasons why the Nazis dug large pits, that now have little to nothing in them. You are not interested in an open minded research into the purpose of and activity inside the camp, you are only interested in finding reasons to believe there are few remains there.

Nessie, this is more goofy nonsense. Mazurek can 'suggest' whatever he wants, you can too -- no one cares. We are studying the forensics, here. I am not "finding reasons to believe" anything other than what is described and documented in the forensic investigations. You are deflecting onto witness narratives and the like because you know the forensic case is failing you, 100%.

How is open minded research, that takes all evidence into account, to produce a chronological narrative of what took place, "goofy nonsense"? Your methodology, of looking only at the forensic evidence, and ignoring the rest of the evidence and then failing to explain what took place and why, is "goofy nonsense". It is unique to so-called revisionism, to conduct enquiries that fail to establish and prove what happened, and instead, produced a negative non-history. It is why you really are just a denier.

69% is not "only".

69% is definitely "only" when the graves are drawn in such a way that presents them as 100% -- which is exactly what Kola did. Anything less than 100% suggests incontiguity. Being far less than 100% (e.g. 69%) confirms sparseness/patchiness at most (completely invalidating the larger 'grave' drawing, especially given postwar mixing/dilution).

It depends on where the negative drills were, compared to the positive ones. If they are intermingled, then yes, the buried cremains are patchy. At 69% positive, they are not sparse.

If a grave full of corpses, has all the corpses removed and then cremated and the cremains are mixed with the earth that had been removed to make the pit and it is refilled, I would expect it to be patchy. I would expect some drills would be negative.

If the Nazis 'mixed cremains' then you are extra-screwed, since now you are admitting that all corpse remains throughout the area will be a volume that is only partly crematory remains, always diluted by other materials. Is this your final answer?

It is my final answer.

Okay, your final answer is that the Nazis mixed all cremains with sand. What percentage are you conceding, here? Did they do a 50/50 mix? If so, that is 50% of the grave volume gone, unavailable for 'grave' (corpse/ash) calculations -- *poof*.

I would expect it to be more like 70-80% earth and 20-30% cremains, to refill the grave pit. That would mean and explain why, some drills came back negative for cremains.

...How biased am I, Nessie? Care to quantify it? Actually, we can even visualize it: how many of the graves in the heat map should be red or orange instead of gray and blue/green? Please refer to the excavation reports and show how they support your assessment.

You are very biased, your aim is to minimise what has been found and pretend it is not significant, as you ignore the eyewitness, documentary and circumstantial evidence of mass murders. The excavation reports corroborate the witness claims that the Nazis dug a series of large pits (which you do not dispute), buried and then exhumed corpses (hence the pits with no corpses in them) and then cremated corpses (hence areas with 69% of boreholes finding traces of human remains). Mazurek's excavations did not find huge quantities, because it was avoiding digging areas where there were signs of huge quantities.

I asked you to quantify it. Please quantify just how inaccurate my estimates are. I provided the 'heat map' precisely to aid these sort of discussions. Which areas should be orange/red instead of gray/blue?

You are 100% biased as you are determined to conclude few corpses were were buried at Sobibor. You called an open minded, evidenced based chronology, "goofy". But that is how all criminal and historical investigations work, gathering evidence to find out what happened. You refer to 69% inaccurately as "only" and you do not bother to look for reasons and evidence as to why some drills are negative. It is evidenced that the Nazis dug big pits. It is evidenced many are empty or have little in them. It is evidenced they were exhuming and cremating corpses and mixing that back into the pits. You fail to say why that happened, and how many died there.

[Callafangers]

Interesting use of the word "only". I get only 6%, but not only 69%.

Yes, Nessie, that's how this works. Core-drilling a grid pattern is not a form of legitimate mapping (as is excavation) -- it is a form of reconnaissance. Kola went about sampling the Sobibor Camp III site on a per-hectare basis and of his drills per hectare, he is at about a 7% hit rate (correction from 6%; 128/1805 = ~7%). In other words, only 7% of the areas he chose to reconnoiter had drill positives -- his reconnaissance had a 7% success rate.

As I said, I get only 7%, as it is a low number.

As for his 69%, you are missing the point.

You are missing my point, 69% is a high number, so referring to it as only, is deceptive and inaccurate.

The word "high" is a relative term. What's it relative to in this case, Nessie?

It's relative to Kola's portrayal of 100%.

Are you going to pretend there is no difference between the following images?:

differ.jpg (42.86 KiB) Viewed 299 times

Kola drew his grave boundaries arbitrarily around perceived clusters

How do you know that? How arbitrary, is conducting bore hole samples in the area of the camp, witnesses stated the mass graves were located?

Witnesses have no place in the question of physical/forensic evidence (other than to point out where to start digging). Again, you keep leaning on witnesses because you know the forensic case has failed you.

Yet another cringe-worthy, embarrassing defeat for you.

Conducting extra drills in areas where remains were found, is reasonable, to more accurately determine the size of those areas. Were the 31% of negative drills, within areas of positive ones, or were they clustered?

Conducting extra drills in an area found "positive" inflates the number of total positives per hectare and per "grave". Kola did not map the negatives, which is a flaw in his study, further reinforcing the evidence of his incompetence or deceit. But yes, these 57 negative drills were within the areas of positive ones -- they were within the boundaries of his drawn "graves" (185 total drilled, just 128 positive therein).

Only you would say that an empty pit is evidence of a full pit. Ridiculous. Even if one accepts your absurd logic (empty pit as evidence), you still need to explain where the emptied contents actually ended up, since they are not in the grave.

That is your invented logic, that you falsely attributed to me. Straw man. Now, deal with my actual point, of your claim that an empty pit is evidence few were buried at the camp, whilst failing to provid a history of that pit. Why was it dug? Was anything buried in it and then removed? Was it dug to take corpses, that were then cremated instead?

It is not a straw man, Nessie -- you are insisting that a pit found empty still counts as evidence of a full pit. You are saying the fact that a pit exists is evidence it was filled with corpses, dismissing the issue that you are missing hundreds of thousands of corpses, crematory ash/charcoal, etc.

There is nothing to address here until you explain where the corpses are at.

Kola's full description of Grave 2:

Grave No. 2. Located in the western part of hectare XVII, south of the monument-mound. It was marked by 28 holes. Its horizontal grid is irregular, with an area of ​​at least 20 x 25 m – with the longer edge aligned north-west – and a depth of approximately 4.00 m. It is a cremation grave.

There are no reports of cremation pyres therein. He is describing it as being of human cremation contents.

There is nothing in the quote to support your conclusion.

Irrelevant, Nessie. Either way, we now know (and perhaps agree) that Grave 2 does not contain the remains of a 'Holocaust'. Next question.

Nessie, this is more goofy nonsense. Mazurek can 'suggest' whatever he wants, you can too -- no one cares. We are studying the forensics, here. I am not "finding reasons to believe" anything other than what is described and documented in the forensic investigations. You are deflecting onto witness narratives and the like because you know the forensic case is failing you, 100%.

How is open minded research, that takes all evidence into account, to produce a chronological narrative of what took place, "goofy nonsense"? Your methodology, of looking only at the forensic evidence, and ignoring the rest of the evidence and then failing to explain what took place and why, is "goofy nonsense". It is unique to so-called revisionism, to conduct enquiries that fail to establish and prove what happened, and instead, produced a negative non-history. It is why you really are just a denier.

You put 'chronological narrative' over physical evidence. If the bloody knife is in my hand as I kneel over the corpse of the person I swore I'd kill, does my "chronological narrative of what really happened" matter? No, because my holding the knife and standing over the corpse is superior evidence.

69% is definitely "only" when the graves are drawn in such a way that presents them as 100% -- which is exactly what Kola did. Anything less than 100% suggests incontiguity. Being far less than 100% (e.g. 69%) confirms sparseness/patchiness at most (completely invalidating the larger 'grave' drawing, especially given postwar mixing/dilution).

It depends on where the negative drills were, compared to the positive ones. If they are intermingled, then yes, the buried cremains are patchy. At 69% positive, they are not sparse.

They are sparse because it wasn't just that they are patchy by area (m2) -- they are also diffuse and sparse by depth/volume (m3) as well, as confirmed repeatedly by Mazurek and his findings relative to Kola.

If a grave full of corpses, has all the corpses removed and then cremated and the cremains are mixed with the earth that had been removed to make the pit and it is refilled, I would expect it to be patchy. I would expect some drills would be negative.

If you admit to patchiness or "mixing", then you are screwed on volume.

Okay, your final answer is that the Nazis mixed all cremains with sand. What percentage are you conceding, here? Did they do a 50/50 mix? If so, that is 50% of the grave volume gone, unavailable for 'grave' (corpse/ash) calculations -- *poof*.

I would expect it to be more like 70-80% earth and 20-30% cremains, to refill the grave pit. That would mean and explain why, some drills came back negative for cremains.

Then you are absolutely [even more] screwed on volume.

Nessie, this is basic 5th grade math. How are you not getting this? You need the 'graves' to be absolutely packed-full of Jewish cremains (bone chips), otherwise, you come nothing close to your 250,000 figure.

If you're saying there is ~75% sand/soil, you have disproven the 'Holocaust', full-stop.

I asked you to quantify it. Please quantify just how inaccurate my estimates are. I provided the 'heat map' precisely to aid these sort of discussions. Which areas should be orange/red instead of gray/blue?

You are 100% biased as you are determined to conclude few corpses were were buried at Sobibor. You called an open minded, evidenced based chronology, "goofy". But that is how all criminal and historical investigations work, gathering evidence to find out what happened. You refer to 69% inaccurately as "only" and you do not bother to look for reasons and evidence as to why some drills are negative. It is evidenced that the Nazis dug big pits. It is evidenced many are empty or have little in them. It is evidenced they were exhuming and cremating corpses and mixing that back into the pits. You fail to say why that happened, and how many died there.

Nessie, please quantify what you are saying.

This is easy work. The fact that you do not do it is transparent to anyone reading this thread. You are making the 'Holocaust' establishment look very weak and indefensible by your inability or unwillingness to even attempt to quantify, here.

[Nessie]

...

As for his 69%, you are missing the point.

You are missing my point, 69% is a high number, so referring to it as only, is deceptive and inaccurate.

The word "high" is a relative term. What's it relative to in this case, Nessie?

It's relative to Kola's portrayal of 100%.

No. Kola's alleged portrayal of 100%, of which you are yet to quote him claiming, is closer to 69% than your portrayal of it being low, like 7%.

Witnesses have no place in the question of physical/forensic evidence (other than to point out where to start digging). Again, you keep leaning on witnesses because you know the forensic case has failed you.

Yet another cringe-worthy, embarrassing defeat for you.

You have contradicted yourself. You say witnesses have no place, and then you explain the crucial role they play! If a witness says dig there and undisturbed ground is found, the witness is wrong. If witnesses say dig there and a series of large pits are found, the witness is corroborated. You want to exclude the witness evidence, because they all say there were mass graves.

Your contradiction and cherry-picking of evidence, is yet another embarrassing defeat for you.

Conducting extra drills in areas where remains were found, is reasonable, to more accurately determine the size of those areas. Were the 31% of negative drills, within areas of positive ones, or were they clustered?

Conducting extra drills in an area found "positive" inflates the number of total positives per hectare and per "grave". Kola did not map the negatives, which is a flaw in his study, further reinforcing the evidence of his incompetence or deceit. But yes, these 57 negative drills were within the areas of positive ones -- they were within the boundaries of his drawn "graves" (185 total drilled, just 128 positive therein).

That is explained by the refilling of the pits and the cremains were not evenly spread around.

Only you would say that an empty pit is evidence of a full pit. Ridiculous. Even if one accepts your absurd logic (empty pit as evidence), you still need to explain where the emptied contents actually ended up, since they are not in the grave.

That is your invented logic, that you falsely attributed to me. Straw man. Now, deal with my actual point, of your claim that an empty pit is evidence few were buried at the camp, whilst failing to provid a history of that pit. Why was it dug? Was anything buried in it and then removed? Was it dug to take corpses, that were then cremated instead?

It is not a straw man, Nessie -- you are insisting that a pit found empty still counts as evidence of a full pit. You are saying the fact that a pit exists is evidence it was filled with corpses, dismissing the issue that you are missing hundreds of thousands of corpses, crematory ash/charcoal, etc.

I quoted Mazurek and agree with him, that an empty pit could be due to it never having had any corpses buried in it, they were buried and exhumed, or it was used to cremate corpses. You are wrong to say I said it was evidence of a full pit. It is only evidence that the Nazis dug a big pit, something that you cannot fit into an evidenced chronological narrative.

There is nothing to address here until you explain where the corpses are at.

They are buried in the ground, primarily in the areas where Kola found a higher density of cremated remains with the bore holes and Mazurek avoided digging into, or areas that have not been surveyed at all, because of the trees.

There is now nothing for me to address, until you evidence c250,000 people leaving the camp.

Kola's full description of Grave 2:


There are no reports of cremation pyres therein. He is describing it as being of human cremation contents.

There is nothing in the quote to support your conclusion.

Irrelevant, Nessie. Either way, we now know (and perhaps agree) that Grave 2 does not contain the remains of a 'Holocaust'. Next question.

Why are you unable to evidence and explain why the Nazis dug so many pits in such a small area, some of which lie empty, or with a few cremated remains in them?

Nessie, this is more goofy nonsense. Mazurek can 'suggest' whatever he wants, you can too -- no one cares. We are studying the forensics, here. I am not "finding reasons to believe" anything other than what is described and documented in the forensic investigations. You are deflecting onto witness narratives and the like because you know the forensic case is failing you, 100%.

How is open minded research, that takes all evidence into account, to produce a chronological narrative of what took place, "goofy nonsense"? Your methodology, of looking only at the forensic evidence, and ignoring the rest of the evidence and then failing to explain what took place and why, is "goofy nonsense". It is unique to so-called revisionism, to conduct enquiries that fail to establish and prove what happened, and instead, produced a negative non-history. It is why you really are just a denier.

You put 'chronological narrative' over physical evidence. If the bloody knife is in my hand as I kneel over the corpse of the person I swore I'd kill, does my "chronological narrative of what really happened" matter? No, because my holding the knife and standing over the corpse is superior evidence.

Did you pick the knife up, after finding the corpse, or did you use the knife to murder, or was it self-defence? According to you, none of that matters! You would convict for murder, only on the basis of a tiny part of the evidence.

You are not a serious, genuine investigator. You want to exclude obviously important evidence and you are not interested in finding out what happened. That is yet another embarrassing defeat for you.

69% is definitely "only" when the graves are drawn in such a way that presents them as 100% -- which is exactly what Kola did. Anything less than 100% suggests incontiguity. Being far less than 100% (e.g. 69%) confirms sparseness/patchiness at most (completely invalidating the larger 'grave' drawing, especially given postwar mixing/dilution).

It depends on where the negative drills were, compared to the positive ones. If they are intermingled, then yes, the buried cremains are patchy. At 69% positive, they are not sparse.

They are sparse because it wasn't just that they are patchy by area (m2) -- they are also diffuse and sparse by depth/volume (m3) as well, as confirmed repeatedly by Mazurek and his findings relative to Kola.

So the fill is not even.

If a grave full of corpses, has all the corpses removed and then cremated and the cremains are mixed with the earth that had been removed to make the pit and it is refilled, I would expect it to be patchy. I would expect some drills would be negative.

If you admit to patchiness or "mixing", then you are screwed on volume.

There is the volume of ground originally dug by the Nazis and the volume of cremains. The former is easier to establish than the latter, especially since the latter is being disturbed as little as possible.

Okay, your final answer is that the Nazis mixed all cremains with sand. What percentage are you conceding, here? Did they do a 50/50 mix? If so, that is 50% of the grave volume gone, unavailable for 'grave' (corpse/ash) calculations -- *poof*.

I would expect it to be more like 70-80% earth and 20-30% cremains, to refill the grave pit. That would mean and explain why, some drills came back negative for cremains.

Then you are absolutely [even more] screwed on volume.

Nessie, this is basic 5th grade math. How are you not getting this? You need the 'graves' to be absolutely packed-full of Jewish cremains (bone chips), otherwise, you come nothing close to your 250,000 figure.

The Nazis dug more graves than they needed, as they switched to cremation earlier than otherwise thought, so many corpses were never buried in the graves and instead, the cremains were mixed unevenly with the earth dug out of the pits and thrown back in. That narrative is backed by witness evidence.

If you're saying there is ~75% sand/soil, you have disproven the 'Holocaust', full-stop.

No, since much of Sobibor has never been excavated, since as soon as cremains are found beyond small amounts, the excavations stop and because of the trees. You then cherry-pick that much of the excavating did not find much in the way of cremains and allege that applies across the entire rest of the site. You then fail to evidence what the pits were for.

I asked you to quantify it. Please quantify just how inaccurate my estimates are. I provided the 'heat map' precisely to aid these sort of discussions. Which areas should be orange/red instead of gray/blue?

You are 100% biased as you are determined to conclude few corpses were were buried at Sobibor. You called an open minded, evidenced based chronology, "goofy". But that is how all criminal and historical investigations work, gathering evidence to find out what happened. You refer to 69% inaccurately as "only" and you do not bother to look for reasons and evidence as to why some drills are negative. It is evidenced that the Nazis dug big pits. It is evidenced many are empty or have little in them. It is evidenced they were exhuming and cremating corpses and mixing that back into the pits. You fail to say why that happened, and how many died there.

Nessie, please quantify what you are saying.

This is easy work. The fact that you do not do it is transparent to anyone reading this thread. You are making the 'Holocaust' establishment look very weak and indefensible by your inability or unwillingness to even attempt to quantify, here.

I do not think it is possible to quantify how many buried corpses there are, from the physical evidence available. I say that was the Nazis intention, as they cremated and scattered cremains, to make a body count impossible. Please quantify how many corpse worth of remains you say have been found at the site and then evidence how they died and what happened to the rest?

[Callafangers]

No. Kola's alleged portrayal of 100%, of which you are yet to quote him claiming, is closer to 69% than your portrayal of it being low, like 7%.

Nessie, if I say, "the bowl consists of oatmeal" and mention nothing else per my official report on this bowl, should it not be interpreted that the bowl is mostly or entirely filled with oatmeal?

You miss the point: regardless of how specific Kola was, we now know that his graves were sparse/patchy (or sometimes totally empty), with vast barren areas, thanks to Mazurek.

Your evasion gets you nowhere.

I quoted Mazurek and agree with him, that an empty pit could be due to it never having had any corpses buried in it, they were buried and exhumed, or it was used to cremate corpses. You are wrong to say I said it was evidence of a full pit. It is only evidence that the Nazis dug a big pit [...]

For once, you are partly correct! It is only evidence that the Nazis dug a big pit or that a big pit was dug postwar. Every other inference you make from it is your own conjecture. The witnesses said corpses should be expected there, and we have confirmed corpses are not there.

That is explained by the refilling of the pits and the cremains were not evenly spread around.

[...]

They are buried in the ground, primarily in the areas where Kola found a higher density of cremated remains with the bore holes and Mazurek avoided digging into, or areas that have not been surveyed at all, because of the trees.

There is now nothing for me to address, until you evidence c250,000 people leaving the camp.

The entire area has been reconnoitered by Kola and all areas of witness testimony relevance have been excavated. It is purely your imagination that there must be other areas of mass burial. There is zero evidence of this.

I do not need to prove 250,000 people 'left the camp' -- you have not evidenced that even 10% of them actually off-boarded a train there. All of your narratives that they did set foot there require them being burned/buried underground, which we have confirmed they are not.

They are not underground, Nessie, based on the best available evidence. Do you think you are a more competent archaeologist and researcher than Mazurek? Do you think you're familiar with 'witnesses' and claims of specific burial locations which he is not?

There is the volume of ground originally dug by the Nazis and the volume of cremains. The former is easier to establish than the latter, especially since the latter is being disturbed as little as possible.
[...]
The Nazis dug more graves than they needed, as they switched to cremation earlier than otherwise thought, so many corpses were never buried in the graves and instead, the cremains were mixed unevenly with the earth dug out of the pits and thrown back in. That narrative is backed by witness evidence.

This makes no difference. You need to explain where the corpses are, Nessie. What was "originally dug" has nothing to do with you explaining where the volume of corpse remains actually are.

Why do you keep deflecting? You admit that its only a ~20% mixture of all crematory contents within the graves generally, so then where are the hundreds of thousands of KG of corpse ash and millions of KG of wood charcoal?

Did the Nazis send these materials to Siberia? Are they in Berlin? Did the Germans eat them with sauerkraut?

No, since much of Sobibor has never been excavated, since as soon as cremains are found beyond small amounts, the excavations stop and because of the trees. You then cherry-pick that much of the excavating did not find much in the way of cremains and allege that applies across the entire rest of the site. You then fail to evidence what the pits were for.

Nessie, why do you lie like a rug? Mazurek and his team consistently describe routine clearing of vegetation (including trees, shrubs, acacias, branches) as a standard preparatory step before or during excavations, and they explicitly note excavating in and through wooded/thicketed areas without interruption. They worked with forestry firm "Zakład Usług Leśnych Zbigniew Marciniak" to clear the forested areas before/throughout excavation (see Mazurek 2012/2013).

Even at face value, it is absurd to claim that Kola and Mazurek spent a decade excavating Sobibor, only to apparently ignore key areas where you feel there must be millions of KG of ash/cremains. Did they just ignore the witnesses, then, and ignore Kola's positive drills?

Finally, we revisit your most predictable "whopper" of all:

I do not think it is possible to quantify how many buried corpses there are, from the physical evidence available. I say that was the Nazis intention, as they cremated and scattered cremains, to make a body count impossible. Please quantify how many corpse worth of remains you say have been found at the site and then evidence how they died and what happened to the rest?

You don't think it's possible to even attempt to quantify an approximate range? Of course you don't -- you have zero evidence to infer an "acceptable" range (i.e. one that fits your needed estimates at or near ~250,000). Any attempt to quantify a range would lead to supporting the revisionist position.

There is no other explanation for why you would not attempt to explain a plausible range. You are 100% transparent.

Even now that you are called-out directly, you still will not attempt this. Readers will notice.

[Stubble]

Perhaps if we put the problem in a form a child could understand that will help.

OH MY HEAVENS, I DON'T KNOW!

BY STUBBLE (with some assistance from everyone's favorite LLM)

Where’d they go? At Camp Concentration by the Bug River’s bend,
Where the wiggle-fish woggle and the breezy trees bend,
The counselors all counted, but the count didn’t flow
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

Where’d they go? We looked by the flip-dock where flip-boats flop,
And the Zibble-weed ziggles with a zop-ziggity zop.
We asked every flounder and floppy-tailed roe—
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

Where’d they go? We searched through the Stumpery, stumping each stump,
And rode a tall Hoppit who gave us a bump.
We followed its hoppity, poppity show
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

Where’d they go? We zipped into Toodle-Town, windy and wide,
Where the breezes blow backward and loop-de-loo glide.
We called for our campers through high and through low
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

Where’d they go? We paddled Bug River in a bubble-boat bright,
That bobbled and wobbled with wide-water fright.
We swirled in a whirl with a bubbly blow
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

Where’d they go? Through the Whirly-Wards spinning, we spun round and ‘round,
Where a Spinspout’s spinnery song could be found.
We twirled after echoes that shimmer and glow
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

Where’d they go? Up Clattercliff clatter we clambered with care,
With the wind in our pockets and leaves in our hair.
We called through the crags, “Are you above? Are you below?”
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

Where’d they go? Across Rumple-Ridge rumbling with rumblings galore,
Past Snapperbirds snapping from treetop to floor.
We searched for small footprints in zig-zaggy snow
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

Where’d they go? We peered in the Pebble-Pit, poked in each nook,
We opened tree doorways with each secret knock-knook.
We whispered and whistled a call soft and low
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

Where’d they go? Back to camp we returned with our hearts in a heap,
Too puzzled to ponder, too weary to sleep.
We wondered aloud, “Have they found a new show?”
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

Where’d they go? Then a giggle a wiggle a snicker so slight,
Came drifting and drifting from somewhere out of sight.
It rustled the treetops in a zig-zaggy flow
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

Where’d they go? If you spot silly campers with leaves in their hair,
With mud-splotches splattered just everywhere,
Please send them back gently, wherever they go
Oh my heavens, we don’t know!

[Nessie]

No. Kola's alleged portrayal of 100%, of which you are yet to quote him claiming, is closer to 69% than your portrayal of it being low, like 7%.

Nessie, if I say, "the bowl consists of oatmeal" and mention nothing else per my official report on this bowl, should it not be interpreted that the bowl is mostly or entirely filled with oatmeal?

You miss the point: regardless of how specific Kola was, we now know that his graves were sparse/patchy (or sometimes totally empty), with vast barren areas, thanks to Mazurek.

Your evasion gets you nowhere.

Your exaggeration of the difference, is blatantly obvious.

I quoted Mazurek and agree with him, that an empty pit could be due to it never having had any corpses buried in it, they were buried and exhumed, or it was used to cremate corpses. You are wrong to say I said it was evidence of a full pit. It is only evidence that the Nazis dug a big pit [...]

For once, you are partly correct! It is only evidence that the Nazis dug a big pit or that a big pit was dug postwar. Every other inference you make from it is your own conjecture. The witnesses said corpses should be expected there, and we have confirmed corpses are not there.

You were wrong, and now you are dodging, evidencing what the big pit was for. I can evidence what they were for, and why they ended up with no corpses.

That is explained by the refilling of the pits and the cremains were not evenly spread around.

[...]

They are buried in the ground, primarily in the areas where Kola found a higher density of cremated remains with the bore holes and Mazurek avoided digging into, or areas that have not been surveyed at all, because of the trees.

There is now nothing for me to address, until you evidence c250,000 people leaving the camp.

The entire area has been reconnoitered by Kola and all areas of witness testimony relevance have been excavated. It is purely your imagination that there must be other areas of mass burial. There is zero evidence of this.

Kola did the entire camp, within recognised boundaries, including where there are trees? Can you link to that?

I do not need to prove 250,000 people 'left the camp' -- you have not evidenced that even 10% of them actually off-boarded a train there. All of your narratives that they did set foot there require them being burned/buried underground, which we have confirmed they are not.

They are not underground, Nessie, based on the best available evidence. Do you think you are a more competent archaeologist and researcher than Mazurek? Do you think you're familiar with 'witnesses' and claims of specific burial locations which he is not?

You do need to evidence c250,000 left the camp, or the evidence of their murder, burial and cremation stands as what happened to them, irrespective of your opinion on how much of the remains have been traced.

There is the volume of ground originally dug by the Nazis and the volume of cremains. The former is easier to establish than the latter, especially since the latter is being disturbed as little as possible.
[...]
The Nazis dug more graves than they needed, as they switched to cremation earlier than otherwise thought, so many corpses were never buried in the graves and instead, the cremains were mixed unevenly with the earth dug out of the pits and thrown back in. That narrative is backed by witness evidence.

This makes no difference. You need to explain where the corpses are, Nessie. What was "originally dug" has nothing to do with you explaining where the volume of corpse remains actually are.

Why do you keep deflecting? You admit that its only a ~20% mixture of all crematory contents within the graves generally, so then where are the hundreds of thousands of KG of corpse ash and millions of KG of wood charcoal?

Did the Nazis send these materials to Siberia? Are they in Berlin? Did the Germans eat them with sauerkraut?

I have repeatedly answered that question....

No, since much of Sobibor has never been excavated, since as soon as cremains are found beyond small amounts, the excavations stop and because of the trees. You then cherry-pick that much of the excavating did not find much in the way of cremains and allege that applies across the entire rest of the site. You then fail to evidence what the pits were for.

Nessie, why do you lie like a rug? Mazurek and his team consistently describe routine clearing of vegetation (including trees, shrubs, acacias, branches) as a standard preparatory step before or during excavations, and they explicitly note excavating in and through wooded/thicketed areas without interruption. They worked with forestry firm "Zakład Usług Leśnych Zbigniew Marciniak" to clear the forested areas before/throughout excavation (see Mazurek 2012/2013).

Even at face value, it is absurd to claim that Kola and Mazurek spent a decade excavating Sobibor, only to apparently ignore key areas where you feel there must be millions of KG of ash/cremains. Did they just ignore the witnesses, then, and ignore Kola's positive drills?

Photos show large areas where the trees remain and surface scraping around them. You ignore the photos of where excavations took place, that find small patches of remains and then areas were only the surface was removed and no more excavations took place, because a large area of remains had been found. Look at the size of the area and how much was not excavated.





Those areas alone, are easily large enough to contain the cremated remains of c250,000 people and they have not been excavated. They have been identified by surface scrapes.

Finally, we revisit your most predictable "whopper" of all:

I do not think it is possible to quantify how many buried corpses there are, from the physical evidence available. I say that was the Nazis intention, as they cremated and scattered cremains, to make a body count impossible. Please quantify how many corpse worth of remains you say have been found at the site and then evidence how they died and what happened to the rest?

You don't think it's possible to even attempt to quantify an approximate range? Of course you don't -- you have zero evidence to infer an "acceptable" range (i.e. one that fits your needed estimates at or near ~250,000). Any attempt to quantify a range would lead to supporting the revisionist position.

There is no other explanation for why you would not attempt to explain a plausible range. You are 100% transparent.

Even now that you are called-out directly, you still will not attempt this. Readers will notice.

To physically quantify the volume of cremated remains, would require the removal of dozens of trees and then a mass excavation and sifting of hundreds of tons of earth and cremains, in a major desecration of a mass grave. You have the cheek to criticise me, and then you refuse to quantify and evidence how many are buried there!

[Callafangers]

You were wrong, and now you are dodging, evidencing what the big pit was for. I can evidence what they were for, and why they ended up with no corpses.

The "big pit" is meaningless, since you have no evidence of a contiguous pit rather than scattered remnants, as evidenced by Kola's frequent negatives and by the many postwar excavations causing exaggerated borders/disturbances. This is such a miniscule point that it's barely worth addressing further. You can have infinity "pits" -- you are still missing corpses.

Kola did the entire camp, within recognised boundaries, including where there are trees? Can you link to that?

Nessie, Kola did a total of 1,805 drills and only 128 were positive. Where do you suppose the other ~1,700 negatives were conducted?

From Mazurek 2014, describing Kola's 2001 work:

The trial soundings (with hand drills) took place in the areas selected on the basis of the analysis of the clusters of greenery and in the neighbourhood of the mound - the grave. The most important result of this reconnaissance research was the discovery, on both sides of the mound, in its proximity, and so in places not studied from this point of view before, of mass graves whose range was at that time not yet determined. A number of boreholes, however, did not reveal any traces of human remains. Under the mound was so-called virgin soil, which implies that, most probably, there was no grave there. What is more, the earth of the mound does not come from the graves, but was brought in from outside. The main aim of that one-week preliminary research (9th-14th October 2000) was to identify the area later to be archaeologically excavated, to determine the hectare network of the situational-altitude map of this area, as well as to highlight those areas where there might, perhaps, be the mass graves or other structures connected with the operation of the camp between 1942-43, and to carry out exploratory drilling there.

The above quote also confirms that "a number of boreholes" across the mass graves surrounding the mound (i.e. Graves 1-6) "did not reveal any traces of human remains"; i.e. the 57 negative drills taken within the "grave" mappings.

Kola's mission was to map out the entire Camp III by hectare (four hectares total, 400 drills each, totaling 1,600 planned drills; he ended up doing 205 additional drills in positive areas). All areas with 'positive' drills then became a focus in subsequent excavations.

Did the Nazis send these materials to Siberia? Are they in Berlin? Did the Germans eat them with sauerkraut?

I have repeatedly answered that question....

No, you have not. They can only be within the graves, as the archaeologists made clear they were following every lead (e.g. witnesses) insofar as grave presence in their excavation planning. Subsequently, the archaeologists documented their findings and the patterns of corpse contents (or lack thereof) in each "grave". You need to explicitly state which of the graves contains corpse remains on an order of magnitude aligning with your needed estimate (~250,000). You have not even attempted this; you have repeatedly evaded it.

Photos show large areas where the trees remain and surface scraping around them. You ignore the photos of where excavations took place, that find small patches of remains and then areas were only the surface was removed and no more excavations took place, because a large area of remains had been found. Look at the size of the area and how much was not excavated.

Nessie, none of your photos are of the actual grave areas. The majority of what was found is objects/artifacts (the usual spoons, canisters, etc.), supporting a revisionist interpretation of Sobibor as an economic operation. Moreover, your second photo clearly shows that the trees were cut as-needed (both the trunks as well as roots, which appear to have been navigated around, in any case; notice the 'mound' monument in the background, showing that this is in the southern area well-below any mass grave locations):

treeroot.jpg (174.41 KiB) Viewed 96 times

Also, excavations were not only on the surface, wherever there was reason to dig further in order to establish the characteristics of the excavated area. For example, here is Mazurek digging deep into Grave 1:

grave1.jpg (148.57 KiB) Viewed 96 times

Mazurek explicitly notes only a small layer of a few centimeters of corpse remains (burnt) anywhere in Grave 1. He shows this miniscule layer here:

grave1fewcm.jpg (170.7 KiB) Viewed 96 times

And into Grave 2, where it is explicitly noted that the small elevated core/mound (estimated per Kola to extend overall to 15 x 15 x 4 meters dimensions) you see elevated at the center of the empty trench here (note: Kola originally included this trench as "grave area"; corrected by Mazurek) is the only area which contains corpse remains (burnt bone chips which are overwhelmed by a majority of sand, even within the trimmed mound area):

g2long.jpg (149.69 KiB) Viewed 96 times

Here is the proportions of bone chips vs. sand, shown up close, from a ceiling cutaway of the grave mound at the center of grave 2:

grave2ceilingsand.jpg (147.52 KiB) Viewed 96 times

Remember that we are expecting about a basketball-sized amount of bone chips per corpse for complete cremation. Some of the chips look rather large (as expected for outdoor cremations), suggesting a larger volume needed for each corpse. We see that the overwhelming majority of material is just sand (and charcoal/ash), with only some ~1-5% of this cutaway ceiling layer showing actual bone fragments.

Similar 'trimming' of graves 3/4 were initially planned however this was cancelled once it was noticed that these graves had no clear edge and contained numerous unburnt body parts, hair, etc. without anatomical order and mixed with sand, suggesting considerable mixing and postwar excavation/damage, most prominent along the southern portion of grave 4 but noted throughout:

Probably in the course of [the Nazis] pulling already partly putrefied corpses out by an excavator disintegration of the corpses occurred effects of which, can be seen on the edges of the mass graves no. 3 and 4. Further fragmentation of corpses occurred probably during postwar cleaning works accompanying the first commemoration ceremony in 1965), and mainly during the searches of artifacts by means of excavator (conducted in the mid 90’s of the 20th century) by the Łęczyńsko-Włodawskie Lakeland Museum in Włodawa. The traces after the excavations are characterized by a sharp edge and distinctive backfill of light gray or mixed with ash gray of negative’s filling after an excavator bucket [...] The scale of those exploratory works must have been significant as evident traces of these works destroyed almost entirely the southern range of the biggest mass grave no.4 (Fig. 4). The number of these exploration excavations is probably much higher and they include probably the entire south-western part of mass grave no. 4.
[...]
In the above mentioned grave [no. 4], at the depth of about 160 cm, numerous unburned dark tawny human bones without anatomical order have been encountered. They were buried with the spotted grey reddish brown sand, in which no burned human remains have been found.

Here's another example of a deeper dig (for graves 12/13; just a few corpses total):

grave12-13.jpg (163.41 KiB) Viewed 96 times

Overall, while the excavations were non-invasive at times, they document and confirm the extensive backfill/sand mixture and the chaotic nature and sparsity of corpse remains, which can be cross-referenced with Kola's work (particularly his ~31% negative throughout drawn areas and his notes on mixed contents) in establishing a meaningful assessment of what each grave actually contains and its plausible proportions.

Those areas alone, are easily large enough to contain the cremated remains of c250,000 people and they have not been excavated. They have been identified by surface scrapes.

As already mentioned, you showed forested areas for which there is zero evidence of their use in corpse disposal, neither by witnesses nor by drills/reconnaissance. You merely assume there are corpses here, whereas nobody else does. These areas shown have been drilled (negative) and dug to a moderate depth, looking for any signs of corpse remains or other artifacts. Only isolated artifacts are reported in the areas shown in your photos provided -- no corpse remains.

To physically quantify the volume of cremated remains, would require the removal of dozens of trees and then a mass excavation and sifting of hundreds of tons of earth and cremains, in a major desecration of a mass grave. You have the cheek to criticise me, and then you refuse to quantify and evidence how many are buried there!

No, it would not -- it would require, for starters, some reason to believe there are corpses underneath any particular location. Kola and Mazurek started with the witnesses, then did reconnaissance, then did excavations across any areas of presumed significance. Any areas where corpses could be suspected were of course included. You simply believe that there must be other burial locations, whereas not even Kola, Mazurek, Haimi, etc. believe this. It isn't in their reports.

If you believe the "hidden hundreds of thousands" are buried in the southern part of Camp III or perhaps in Camp II, etc., why not believe they are in neighboring towns or cities? You simply invent the notion that they are buried in these locations. Absolutely no evidence supports it -- literally none.

[Nessie]

Callafangers, you cherry-pick where excavations found little in the way of cremated remains and then fail to evidence how those remains ended up buried there.

You ignore where Mazurek stopped digging, such as the photos with the trees, because he had found larger areas of more continuous cremated remains and how large those areas are.

You fail to produce an evidenced chronological narrative of events at the camp and where the Jews you claim were not killed at the camp, ended up. You cannot even evidence them leaving the camp.

The result is, from you and inconclusive narrative, unevidenced, based on your biased opinion. I and most people, will reject that.

I am not surprised that you ignored this photo, which shows the extent of excavations in the area planted over, as the Nazis tried to hide the extent of their crimes. It is easily enough area to contain the buried cremated remains of c250,000 corpses.

[Callafangers]

Callafangers, you cherry-pick where excavations found little in the way of cremated remains and then fail to evidence how those remains ended up buried there.

You ignore where Mazurek stopped digging, such as the photos with the trees, because he had found larger areas of more continuous cremated remains and how large those areas are.

You fail to produce an evidenced chronological narrative of events at the camp and where the Jews you claim were not killed at the camp, ended up. You cannot even evidence them leaving the camp.

The result is, from you and inconclusive narrative, unevidenced, based on your biased opinion. I and most people, will reject that.

The remains are buried there because there were ghettos being cleared and corpses in the ghettos, many lice/typhus-ridden, and:

• Border stations were being setup for typhus control
• Border stations were also needed and in-use for the dispossession (or reclamation) of Jewish property per the documented Aktion Reinhardt operation

Everyone knows that Germany was cremating corpses as their standard practice throughout Europe during WW2, just like everyone knows there was always a few thousand corpses to go around, especially en route out of ghettos.

You're the only person in the world who rambles on about the need for "chronological narrative", as though this defines whether any particular claim is true or false. Liars come up with chronological narratives all the time, and the truth is often buried enough to make constructing a chronology impossible.

You are a sloganeer, Nessie. You don't even discuss evidence, let alone respect it.

[Callafangers]

I am not surprised that you ignored this photo, which shows the extent of excavations in the area planted over, as the Nazis tried to hide the extent of their crimes. It is easily enough area to contain the buried cremated remains of c250,000 corpses.

EARTH TO NESSIE:
I responded directly to that photo and the other one you posted -- that photo is not showing a grave area.

[Nessie]

I am not surprised that you ignored this photo, which shows the extent of excavations in the area planted over, as the Nazis tried to hide the extent of their crimes. It is easily enough area to contain the buried cremated remains of c250,000 corpses.

EARTH TO NESSIE:
I responded directly to that photo and the other one you posted -- that photo is not showing a grave area.

I can see discoloured earth, darker than the sandy soil, also seen where you accept there are buried cremains. I can see excavations that have stopped, which happens when larger areas of cremains are encountered. The Nazis planted over the main graves, to make them harder to find and I can see lots of trees of the same size, so they were planted at the same time, in that area. I can also see an area large enough to contain hundreds of thousands of cremated remains.

Can you link to Mazurek's report, where he states surface scrapes amongst those trees found no cremains?

[Nessie]

Callafangers, you cherry-pick where excavations found little in the way of cremated remains and then fail to evidence how those remains ended up buried there.

You ignore where Mazurek stopped digging, such as the photos with the trees, because he had found larger areas of more continuous cremated remains and how large those areas are.

You fail to produce an evidenced chronological narrative of events at the camp and where the Jews you claim were not killed at the camp, ended up. You cannot even evidence them leaving the camp.

The result is, from you and inconclusive narrative, unevidenced, based on your biased opinion. I and most people, will reject that.

The remains are buried there because there were ghettos being cleared and corpses in the ghettos, many lice/typhus-ridden, and:

• Border stations were being setup for typhus control
• Border stations were also needed and in-use for the dispossession (or reclamation) of Jewish property per the documented Aktion Reinhardt operation

Everyone knows that Germany was cremating corpses as their standard practice throughout Europe during WW2, just like everyone knows there was always a few thousand corpses to go around, especially en route out of ghettos.

You're the only person in the world who rambles on about the need for "chronological narrative", as though this defines whether any particular claim is true or false. Liars come up with chronological narratives all the time, and the truth is often buried enough to make constructing a chronology impossible.

You are a sloganeer, Nessie. You don't even discuss evidence, let alone respect it.

You cannot produce a single worker eyewitness from the camp to support your narrative, or evidence c250,000 who arrived, then left, with documents or any other evidence. History is a chronological narrative and to suggest I am the only person in the world who thinks there is a need for a history for places and events, is utterly ridiculous!

[Callafangers]

I can see discoloured earth, darker than the sandy soil, also seen where you accept there are buried cremains. I can see excavations that have stopped, which happens when larger areas of cremains are encountered. The Nazis planted over the main graves, to make them harder to find and I can see lots of trees of the same size, so they were planted at the same time, in that area. I can also see an area large enough to contain hundreds of thousands of cremated remains.

Can you link to Mazurek's report, where he states surface scrapes amongst those trees found no cremains?

All of the reports are linked at the bottom of the page, here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20141010072 ... ge_id=1248

Everywhere with human corpse remains of any kind has been documented as this was the entire point of the excavation (even graves with a single corpse have been documented, e.g. grave 13).

The soil naturally varies; this has nothing to do with corpses/cremains unless documented so.

Trees used to cover the open areas near the monument as well (where the graves are) and were removed. Just after the monument was built (circa 1965), this is how the area of the monument looked (the trees along the road toward the monument have since been removed):

1965.jpg (94.93 KiB) Viewed 43 times

This is another aspect which highlights how graves have been disturbed, making their borders wider than they were originally. Any such disturbance works against you by inflating the "grave" volume (e.g. many more 'positive' drills per Kola).

[Callafangers]

You cannot produce a single worker eyewitness from the camp to support your narrative, or evidence c250,000 who arrived, then left, with documents or any other evidence. History is a chronological narrative and to suggest I am the only person in the world who thinks there is a need for a history for places and events, is utterly ridiculous!

No. In a cover-up, the first orders of business of the perpetrators doing the cover-up are to promote their narrative and to eliminate access to counter-narratives. If you assume hypothetically that revisionists are correct and the Holocaust did not happen, a lack of precise chronology is exactly what would be expected. The victorious powers would not leave so many 'loose ends' as to allow their opposition to construct a complete narrative opposing theirs. They would use their power to minimize any opportunity of contradictory reports. It is well-known that information control was in the interest of all victorious powers, and their Jews. This is easy to prove.

This is common-sense, Nessie, which is why no other anti-revisionists have taken onto your style of repetitive arguments, despite you having shilled them for the last 20 years.

[Nessie]

I can see discoloured earth, darker than the sandy soil, also seen where you accept there are buried cremains. I can see excavations that have stopped, which happens when larger areas of cremains are encountered. The Nazis planted over the main graves, to make them harder to find and I can see lots of trees of the same size, so they were planted at the same time, in that area. I can also see an area large enough to contain hundreds of thousands of cremated remains.

Can you link to Mazurek's report, where he states surface scrapes amongst those trees found no cremains?

All of the reports are linked at the bottom of the page, here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20141010072 ... ge_id=1248

Everywhere with human corpse remains of any kind has been documented as this was the entire point of the excavation (even graves with a single corpse have been documented, e.g. grave 13).

The soil naturally varies; this has nothing to do with corpses/cremains unless documented so.

Trees used to cover the open areas near the monument as well (where the graves are) and were removed. Just after the monument was built (circa 1965), this is how the area of the monument looked (the trees along the road toward the monument have since been removed):

1965.jpg

This is another aspect which highlights how graves have been disturbed, making their borders wider than they were originally. Any such disturbance works against you by inflating the "grave" volume (e.g. many more 'positive' drills per Kola).

The bulk of the cremains are where the trees are now. From the 1945 site examination;

https://web.archive.org/web/20141019203 ... k-ANG..pdf

"In the middle part of the camp, probably in the places meant to hide the ashes, there is a young two-year-
old pine forest which occupies about 1200 square metres. Trial diggings have proved that under the layer of sand, there is a one-and-a-half-metre deep layer of ashes and the remains of human bones mixed with sand. Not far from the eastern border
of the camp, there was found a pit, 20 x 15 metres, which had formerly contained chloride. One can come across human bones over the whole area of the camp. The results of the expert evaluation also point towards the real function of the camp. Thus, the Institute of Forensic Medicine at Jagiellonian University ruling states that the examined bones are human bones."

As excavations continued, more has been found. From 2011;

"South of grave No 7, in the trenches and by means of the boreholes that
were drilled, the excavators discovered and identified the range of another mass
grave. It is rectangular, about 25 m by 5 m in size. Its longer axis lies west-east.
The object is about 190 - 210 cm deep. In its foot-wall, the excavators found
3 layers of burnt bones, with the bone thickness of 10-15 cm, interlaced with
layers of clear, light grey sand.