Looking for answers to questions asked on the thisisaboutscience.com website

[Keen]

Callafangers, is the following photo of two excavated graves at Sobibor an example in which verified human remains have been tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology?



Callafangers

My answer is "yes" but I acknowledge this as my personal opinion.

Callafangers, would you say that there is a preponderance of evidence that the archeological excavations of these two graves was legitimate?

Callafangers

I would say so, yes.

Can you name one person who believes that these two graves were not tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology?

Callafangers

No, but that doesn't make it any less subjective.

Is the following statement of fact true or false:

It is alleged in orthodox historiography that, during WW II, hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of corpses were buried in numerous “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II.

Callafangers

True.

Callafangers, is the following statement of fact true or false:

It has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that mass graves have been discovered by archaeologists / forensic investigators at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II.

Callafangers

?

[Keen]

Callafangers

No, but that doesn't make it any less subjective. Someone could still argue...

Just because someone can always "argue" a point, doesn't mean that a point has not been or can not be proven.

I could "argue" that 2 + 2 doesn't equal 4, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't.

Callafangers, If I killed 50 people and buried them in one huge mass grave in my back yard, under one meter of soil, could the existence of that grave and those bodies be proven using modern scientific / forensic / archaeological methods?

"Proof" is not so simple. Someone will not necessarily accept your inferences (hence, your "proof") unless they agree with your premises (including the definitions of terms used therein). We only approach objective proof once there is some universal consensus on the terms used, such as in an equation like "2 + 2" (we all generally agree on what '2' is). The terms used are more subjective in things like, 'bona fide' and 'verifiably honest', etc., which is why debate can become extensive for things like AR camp burials, but not for equations like 2 + 2 = 4.

Callafangers, If I killed 50 people and buried them in one huge mass grave in my back yard, under one meter of soil, could the existence of that grave and those bodies be proven using modern scientific / forensic / archaeological methods?

I would think so, yes. But this is because I would likely have enough trust in the administrative/government authorities who have conducted the excavation, so that I could believe what they had done was legitimate. Someone with different experiences or insights with your local government/administration might have suspicions about that very same excavation.

You "would think so"?

This is pure nonsense.

The possibility of being able to prove the existence of a huge mass grave containing 50 bodies in one small area using modern scientific / forensic / archaeological methods does not hing on ones "trust in the administrative/government authorities who have conducted the excavation." (and where did I mention administrative/government authorities?)

Callafangers, is it true or false that after some people die, their remains are buried under a layer of soil?

[Callafangers]

I would think so, yes. But this is because I would likely have enough trust in the administrative/government authorities who have conducted the excavation, so that I could believe what they had done was legitimate. Someone with different experiences or insights with your local government/administration might have suspicions about that very same excavation.

You "would think so"?

This is pure nonsense.

The possibility of being able to prove the existence of a huge mass grave containing 50 bodies in one small area using modern scientific / forensic / archaeological methods does not hing on ones "trust in the administrative/government authorities who have conducted the excavation." (and where did I mention administrative/government authorities?)

Callafangers, is it true or false that after some people die, their remains are buried under a layer of soil?

I have already directly or implicitly answered your other questions, so I'll hold off on responding again to those. But for those quoted here, yes, I "would think so". Not only would the modern scientific / forensic / archaeological methods satisfy me on a methodological basis, I would also not likely find any cause for concern regarding conflicts of interest and the like. Overall, I would be heavily inclined toward accepting the findings of the investigation of the hypothetical 50 corpses in your backyard. The vast majority of people would likely agree with me. But perhaps fewer might say they are certain such an investigation was necessarily 'bona fide' and 'verifiably honest'. Again, these terms are subjective. Your approach is to simplify everything into "black and white" but there is necessarily a wide range of 'gray' which you seem to stubbornly refuse to acknowledge. This doesn't mean some clear consensus can't come about on a given question (as it undoubtedly should, regarding the problems of mass grave claims at AR camps); only that the truth on a given matter is often more subjective than you seem inclined to acknowledge.

As for your last question above, people are indeed sometimes buried under soil when they die. However the threshold at which 'proof' is qualified to demonstrate this after-the-fact is somewhat subjective, hence why the debate of AR camps persists. You have attempted to define 'proof' on less subjective terms, using qualifiers like "verifiably honest", etc., but this unfortunately does not eliminate the role of subjective interpretation entirely. There remains a range of possible interpretations, even with these qualifiers attached.

[Keen]

Callafangers, is it true or false that after some people die, their remains are buried under a layer of soil?

Callafangers

People are indeed sometimes buried under soil when they die.

Callafangers, have the remians of a dead person buried under a layer of soil ever been uncovered?

And for some reason this question remains unanswered:

Callafangers, is the following statement of fact true or false:

It has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that mass graves have been discovered by archaeologists / forensic investigators at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II.

[Keen]

Callafangers

Your approach is to simplify everything into "black and white" but there is necessarily a wide range of 'gray' which you seem to stubbornly refuse to acknowledge.

Really? Let's see how much "gray" we can find:

Is it - True. - or - False. - that; It has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that huge pits were dug and utilized as mass graves at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - ??

[Callafangers]

Callafangers

Your approach is to simplify everything into "black and white" but there is necessarily a wide range of 'gray' which you seem to stubbornly refuse to acknowledge.

Really? Let's see how much "gray" we can find:

Is it - True. - or - False. - that; It has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that huge pits were dug and utilized as mass graves at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - ??

You already know my answer to this, and every other question you have asked so far. Yes, it is true this has been alleged. Few would deny that this has indeed been alleged, because whether an allegation has occurred at all is fairly black-and-white. Your follow-up questions are where things start to become less precise.

[Keen]

Is it - True. - or - False. - that; It has been alleged in orthodox historiography that, during WW II, hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of corpses were buried in numerous “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II.

Callafangers: True.

Is it - True. - or - False. - that; It has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that huge pits were dug and utilized as mass graves at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - ??

Callafangers: True.

Is it - True. - or - False. - that; It has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that mass graves have been discovered by archaeologists / forensic investigators at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II.

Callafangers: True.

Callafangers, can you provide credible and convincing evidence that it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that huge pits were dug and utilized as mass graves at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - Yes. - or - No. - ??

Callafangers, can you provide credible and convincing evidence that it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that mass graves have been discovered by archaeologists / forensic investigators at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - Yes. - or - No. - ??

[Keen]

Callafangers, is it true or false that after some people die, their remains are buried under a layer of soil?

Callafangers

People are indeed sometimes buried under soil when they die.

Callafangers, have the remians of a dead person buried under a layer of soil ever been uncovered?


Callafangers

whether an allegation has occurred at all is fairly black-and-white

Callafangers, can an allegation be substantiated?

[Callafangers]

Callafangers, is it true or false that after some people die, their remains are buried under a layer of soil?

Callafangers

People are indeed sometimes buried under soil when they die.

Callafangers, have the remians of a dead person buried under a layer of soil ever been uncovered?


Callafangers

whether an allegation has occurred at all is fairly black-and-white

Callafangers, can an allegation be substantiated?

I hope you understand that, while these games are very fun, people interested in debate will eventually want you to "get to the point". You can already easily predict my answers to any/all of these questions, so feel free to simulate what you believe I'll actually answer to each of them, and take us through what your point ultimately is.

[Keen]

Now why would Callafangers, after making this statement:

whether an allegation has occurred at all is fairly black-and-white

refuse to anser these questions:

Callafangers, can an allegation be substantiated?

Callafangers, can you provide credible and convincing evidence that it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that huge pits were dug and utilized as mass graves at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - Yes. - or - No. - ??

Callafangers, can you provide credible and convincing evidence that it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that mass graves have been discovered by archaeologists / forensic investigators at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - Yes. - or - No. - ??

Is he worried about where his answers will lead?

Me thinks so.

[Archie]

Keen, you might want to try to change up your marketing strategy.

[Nessie]

Keen, you might want to try to change up your marketing strategy.

Every so often, Greg Gerdes forensic challenge style posts would pop up on RODOH asking repeated questions about the mass graves. That person is not interested in debate or discussion, they just want others to do their bidding and answer repeated questions.

[Keen]

Keen, you might want to try to change up your marketing strategy.

Right, so let's get back to my original question, which was:

Is the following statement of fact true or false?

It is alleged in orthodox historiography that, during WW II, hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of corpses were buried in numerous “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II. However, despite all the deceptive allegations to the contrary, the truth is, the largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the one hundred graves / cremation pits that are fraudulently alleged to have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at these sites, in which verified human remains have been tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology, contained the remains of - ONLY FIVE PEOPLE.

So far, no one has proffered any credible and convincing evidence that the above statement of fact is false.

The following photo:

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/11 ... 391739.jpg

has been proffered as proof that graves containing verified human remains have been tangibly located (in at least one of these 5 sites) via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology.

So my next question is, of the remaining 98 alleged graves, how many are also alleged to have been proven to contain verified human remains via the same (or greater) level of proof?

[Nazgul]

Now why would Callafangers, after making this statement:

whether an allegation has occurred at all is fairly black-and-white

refuse to anser these questions:

Callafangers, can an allegation be substantiated?

Callafangers, can you provide credible and convincing evidence that it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that huge pits were dug and utilized as mass graves at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - Yes. - or - No. - ??

Callafangers, can you provide credible and convincing evidence that it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that mass graves have been discovered by archaeologists / forensic investigators at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - Yes. - or - No. - ??

Is he worried about where his answers will lead?

Me thinks so.

Keen a discussion involves discussing not saying yes or no, especially as some issues are contentious. Hi Greg.

[Keen]

Now why would Callafangers, after making this statement:

whether an allegation has occurred at all is fairly black-and-white

refuse to anser these questions:

Callafangers, can an allegation be substantiated?

Callafangers, can you provide credible and convincing evidence that it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that huge pits were dug and utilized as mass graves at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - Yes. - or - No. - ??

Callafangers, can you provide credible and convincing evidence that it has been alleged in orthodox historiography and/or the media that mass graves have been discovered by archaeologists / forensic investigators at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II - Yes. - or - No. - ??

Is he worried about where his answers will lead?

Me thinks so.

Keen a discussion involves discussing not saying yes or no, especially as some issues are contentious. Hi Greg.

Nazgul, I'm glad you appeared. I have been wondering if anyone could answer the following questions. Perhaps you can:

V - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; If 100 graves contained the bones and teeth of 2.1 million people - then each grave would contain, on average, the remains of 21,000 people - ??

Now if we know that one of the one hundred "huge mass graves" contained the remains of only one body, and another of the "huge mass graves" contained the remains of only 5 bodies, what would the average be for the remaining 98 graves?