Sobibór: Kola-Mazurek Discrepancies and Implications

[Nessie]

Not only is this an extraordinary "cope", it's your saddest take yet.

You're now so down as to concede that the graves identified by Mazurek/Kola are "cleared of corpses" but you (and ONLY you) insist that the ~250,000 Jews are somehow, someway buried at Camp III regardless.

Nessie, this is stupid. It's just sad at this point.

This is similar to the debate about the origin of life. For a long time, the best answer was that it originated in Earth's primitive ocean, but it was found that this water is practically poison for any living cell to thrive, meaning it can no longer be in seawater.

The same is true with Nessie; if they aren't in the trenches they unearthed, they're somewhere, and we'll find them. It's a matter of time, just like Darwin with transitional fossils.

There are multiple photos of the excavations throughout the thread. They show how often excavating stopped because clumps of remains were found, creating an often very irregular excavation. They show areas within the trees, where cremains are interspersed with the ground. That proves the Nazis made sure the cremains were well and truly mixed into the ground and they were not just dumped back into the graves. The excavating shows that virtually no matter where they dug in Lager III, they would find at least a small quantity of cremains.

[Callafangers]

Mazurek said "In the case of grave no. 1... Third... suggest that that grave no. 1 originally had been completely or in large part filled with cremated human remains and emptied due to the Sonderaktion 1005." Neither he nor Kola suggest anything other than the corpses are buried at the camp. I agree with them.

I showed you an excavation photo, that specifically shows buried cremains dotted all over the place.

Well, there's no stopping you, it seems. You will continue a cringe-embarrassing line of argument forever. Impressive but still sad.

You again bring up the fact that Grave 1 was empty, despite Kola originally saying it was full. I don't know why you keep doing this, perhaps it is a sadomasochistic thing. Very cringe.

Your excavation photos showed what appears to be darker soil that may have been saturated with ashes/charcoal or perhaps there were simply cremations which took place on the ground there (I notice this darker material is near surface-level). This was exactly the case at Grave 7, which Kola/Mazurek initially thought was another grave, but Mazurek concluded there were zero actual corpses there, despite the ground and soil looking exactly like the photo you just provided.

It doesn't help that you didn't cite which report this photo was from or even which grave. In any case, neither of your photos show any evidence of even one single corpse. Notice that in your photo with the dark/charred soil, there is a rusted artifact sitting clearly atop the surface. There were numerous massive fires at these camps which burned various junk and undesired Jewish property. Finding an artifact in this burnt/charred zone suggests this is a fire pit that may not have dealt with corpses at all. If you're going to claim this was a cremation pit, then you need to explain where the rubbish pyres were at.

Altogether, you're still at square zero.

[Nessie]

Mazurek said "In the case of grave no. 1... Third... suggest that that grave no. 1 originally had been completely or in large part filled with cremated human remains and emptied due to the Sonderaktion 1005." Neither he nor Kola suggest anything other than the corpses are buried at the camp. I agree with them.

I showed you an excavation photo, that specifically shows buried cremains dotted all over the place.

Well, there's no stopping you, it seems. You will continue a cringe-embarrassing line of argument forever. Impressive but still sad.

You again bring up the fact that Grave 1 was empty, despite Kola originally saying it was full. I don't know why you keep doing this, perhaps it is a sadomasochistic thing. Very cringe.

Link to and quote Kola saying it was full. Be VERY specific.

You have said about Grave 1 "Kola Data: 20x20m x 4.3m deep = 1,720 m³. 27 positive hits (~7% hit rate).". How is that Kola saying it was full?

What the HC link you used said;

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... camps.html

"These photos show just three out of the many drills whereby Prof. Kola established the location, size and contents of the mass graves surrounding the Sobibor memorial, which he described as follows in a report about his archaeological research[26]:
Grave no 1 is located in the north - eastern part of hectare 17, just west from the memorial to victims. The site was excavated by 27 drills. Horizontally, it measures 20 x 20 m and is up to 4.30 m deep. It was a body burning grave."

That is the opposite of being full, so you have some explaining to do.

Your excavation photos showed what appears to be darker soil that may have been saturated with ashes/charcoal or perhaps there were simply cremations which took place on the ground there (I notice this darker material is near surface-level). This was exactly the case at Grave 7, which Kola/Mazurek initially thought was another grave, but Mazurek concluded there were zero actual corpses there, despite the ground and soil looking exactly like the photo you just provided.

It doesn't help that you didn't cite which report this photo was from or even which grave. In any case, neither of your photos show any evidence of even one single corpse. Notice that in your photo with the dark/charred soil, there is a rusted artifact sitting clearly atop the surface. There were numerous massive fires at these camps which burned various junk and undesired Jewish property. Finding an artifact in this burnt/charred zone suggests this is a fire pit that may not have dealt with corpses at all. If you're going to claim this was a cremation pit, then you need to explain where the rubbish pyres were at.

Altogether, you're still at square zero.

I like the way you try to attribute me with taking the photos and the claims about what pits were used for. Now, you claimed Kola said grave 1 was "full". Show me.

[Callafangers]

How is that Kola saying it was full? [...]\

What the HC link you used said;

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... camps.html

"These photos show just three out of the many drills whereby Prof. Kola established the location, size and contents of the mass graves surrounding the Sobibor memorial, which he described as follows in a report about his archaeological research[26]:
Grave no 1 is located in the north - eastern part of hectare 17, just west from the memorial to victims. The site was excavated by 27 drills. Horizontally, it measures 20 x 20 m and is up to 4.30 m deep. It was a body burning grave."

That is the opposite of being full, so you have some explaining to do.

You have provided Kola's full grave description -- that's the entire description he provided of grave 1. He gave the dimensions (20 x 20 x 4.3m) and called these dimensions a "body burning grave".

But guess what? There were no bodies within the 20 x 20 x 4.3m dimensions. *poof* All gone.

I like the way you try to attribute me with taking the photos and the claims about what pits were used for.

I'm not sure how this addresses my challenge to you providing photos that you claimed showed evidence of corpses but did not. Do the photos show corpses, or don't they?

[Nessie]

How is that Kola saying it was full? [...]\

What the HC link you used said;

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... camps.html

"These photos show just three out of the many drills whereby Prof. Kola established the location, size and contents of the mass graves surrounding the Sobibor memorial, which he described as follows in a report about his archaeological research[26]:
Grave no 1 is located in the north - eastern part of hectare 17, just west from the memorial to victims. The site was excavated by 27 drills. Horizontally, it measures 20 x 20 m and is up to 4.30 m deep. It was a body burning grave."

That is the opposite of being full, so you have some explaining to do.

You have provided Kola's full grave description -- that's the entire description he provided of grave 1. He gave the dimensions (20 x 20 x 4.3m) and called these dimensions a "body burning grave".

But guess what? There were no bodies within the 20 x 20 x 4.3m dimensions. *poof* All gone.

You lied when you said Kola said it was full. As to why "poof all gone" Mazurek provided three reasons, it was never used, it was emptied or it "...was used as crematorium similar to those used in the camp in Chełmno...". Kola thinks that.

I like the way you try to attribute me with taking the photos and the claims about what pits were used for.

I'm not sure how this addresses my challenge to you providing photos that you claimed showed evidence of corpses but did not. Do the photos show corpses, or don't they?

The photos of the excavations show cremated remains and ash, that are dense enough for the excavations to stop. Hence, the irregular cuts into the ground, which is clear in this photo;



For you to pretend that nothing untoward was happening inside Sobibor, with all the evidence it was used as a death camp and the way the Nazis cremated and randomly buried remains around Lager III, is why you are a so-called revisionist and really you are a denier.

[Callafangers]

You lied when you said Kola said it was full. As to why "poof all gone" Mazurek provided three reasons, it was never used, it was emptied or it "...was used as crematorium similar to those used in the camp in Chełmno...". Kola thinks that.

Nessie, this is stupid. Did Kola say it was empty? Partly empty? He called it a "body burning grave" in the context of the Holocaust at Sobibor.

You are arguing like a 12-year-old child. Kola indicated this massive volume of 1,720m3 was a grave but it was not. This only supports revisionism, yet you are grasping straws desperately.

The photos of the excavations show cremated remains and ash, that are dense enough for the excavations to stop. Hence, the irregular cuts into the ground, which is clear in this photo;

This is the second time you have shown that photo. Last time you showed it, I asked you to name which Grave this reportedly was, per Mazurek. You still have not done this. There are no corpse remains in this photograph. And it visually appears to be "Grave 7" where Mazurek firmly concludes there were zero corpses present.

Stop obfuscating, Nessie. Which grave is this in the photograph you provided?

[Nessie]

You lied when you said Kola said it was full. As to why "poof all gone" Mazurek provided three reasons, it was never used, it was emptied or it "...was used as crematorium similar to those used in the camp in Chełmno...". Kola thinks that.

Nessie, this is stupid. Did Kola say it was empty? Partly empty? He called it a "body burning grave" in the context of the Holocaust at Sobibor.

You are arguing like a 12-year-old child. Kola indicated this massive volume of 1,720m3 was a grave but it was not. This only supports revisionism, yet you are grasping straws desperately.

You have been caught lying that Kola said it was "full". He did not say that and you knew he did not say that. He said it was a body burning grave, meaning, as Mazurek hypothesised, it was used to burn the corpses. There is witness testimony about burning corpses inside the graves, such as Stangl, as part of the first attempts to cremate. It may be that the limited cremains and ash was from an attempt to cremate the corpses, which failed, so they were removed and put onto the pyres that witnesses describe as being spectacularly successful.

The photos of the excavations show cremated remains and ash, that are dense enough for the excavations to stop. Hence, the irregular cuts into the ground, which is clear in this photo;

This is the second time you have shown that photo. Last time you showed it, I asked you to name which Grave this reportedly was, per Mazurek. You still have not done this. There are no corpse remains in this photograph. And it visually appears to be "Grave 7" where Mazurek firmly concludes there were zero corpses present.

Stop obfuscating, Nessie. Which grave is this in the photograph you provided?

I do not know what grave it is, or how Mazurek describes it. What it shows, is how ash and cremains were buried, often in small pits and not just dumped back into the mass graves. I have also explained a reason why that happened.

Bear in mind you said Sobbor had a forestry office inside it, you cannot produce a single person who worked there who you believe and you cannot evidence of explain what the Nazis were doing, that meant burying ash and cremated remains and that caused a terrible smell to linger for months on end. I can produce an evidenced chronology for the camp.