The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Posted: **Fri Aug 21, 2026 10:04 am**

My friend just said this. He is talking about a black serial killer who is alleged to have killed 800,000 White people and burned them on wood pyres and buried the ash on his farm. He says he has corroborating witness statements for this, however i dont want to focus on the witness statements, i want to focus on the burial and ash logistics. Here is what he said, critically assess it for credibility:

==

The archaeology of what was left at the sites is complex. "Sparse" graves will be graves where the corpses were exhumed, but cremains were not dumped. "Low in volume" pits are likely where rubbish was buried. You have just chosen to regard what has been found, to be not enough. It is part of your reliance on incredulity. I get criticised for this, but I say an area with a volume the equivalent to 56 Olympic sized swimming pools, as identified by witnesses as being the location of the main mass graves, is enough space to fit c800,000 corpses. That is because those corpses were buried naked, they decomposed into a squashed mass and then, when exhumations and cremations started, the resulting ash and cremains mixed into the ground, there was a ton of space. I am always amazed at how much plant matter, weeds and cuttings I can fit into the compost bin. It fits because it breaks down into one mass, with no space in or around it. I think that the corpses, squashed under pressure, the decomposition producing heat, did the same thing as the compost bin. My friend described the result as a waxy fat mass, again with no space in and around it, as all the gasses and liquids are gone. The difference between us is that I can evidence hundreds of thousands being buried in mass graves and you cannot evidence any alternative, so you have to rely on your incredulity.

Spoiler

His argument has a **major physical/logistical weakness**. The 56-pool figure does not establish that 800,000 bodies could actually have been buried there, and his description of decomposition is not scientifically sound.

### 1. The 56 Olympic pools calculation

An Olympic pool is roughly 50 × 25 × 2 m = **2,500 m³**.

So 56 pools ≈ **140,000 m³**.

Even if we generously use 2.5 m depth, it is about **175,000 m³**.

That sounds enormous, but the relevant question isn't:

> "Could 800,000 human bodies theoretically occupy 175,000 m³?"

It's:

> **"Is there archaeological evidence that 800,000 bodies were actually deposited within that volume?"**

Those are very different claims.

For comparison, documented mass graves generally have substantial void space between bodies. One compilation of documented mass graves gives roughly **1–2.5 bodies per cubic metre**, although packing varies considerably by circumstances. ([encyclopedia.historiography-project.com][1])

At 2.5 bodies/m³, 800,000 bodies would require about **320,000 m³** of grave volume—already considerably more than even the 175,000 m³ estimate.

And that's before accounting for soil, separation between burial layers, excavation geometry, etc.

### 2. The "bodies become a waxy mass with no space" argument is the weakest part

His compost analogy is misleading.

A decomposing human body **does not simply collapse into a compact solid mass with essentially zero volume**.

Decomposition involves microbial breakdown, liquefaction, gas production, movement of fluids into surrounding soil, skeletal disarticulation and eventual loss of soft tissue. The resulting material becomes incorporated into the surrounding soil rather than remaining as a dense block of "human matter." Forensic studies specifically examine chemical changes in gravesoil resulting from those processes. ([PubMed][2])

In fact, decomposition products can remain detectable in soil for years. ([PubMed][3])

So:

> "They decomposed, therefore they became a compressed mass with no space"

is **an assertion, not a demonstrated taphonomic process**.

### 3. Cremation actually creates a very different volume problem

His claim becomes even more interesting once the bodies are supposedly **exhumed and cremated**.

A modern adult cremation typically produces around **2–3 kg of cremated skeletal remains**, occupying roughly **3–3.5 litres**. A forensic study of 91 adults found a mean cremains weight of 2.43 kg. ([PubMed][4])

For 800,000 people:

**800,000 × ~3 L = ~2.4 million litres = ~2,400 m³**

So the *human cremains themselves* aren't the principal volume problem.

The enormous problem is **everything required to produce those cremains**.

### 4. The wood requirement is absolutely enormous

This is where I'd press your friend hardest.

Experimental research on open-air pyre cremation found that a **wood/body mass ratio above 9:1** was necessary even under ideal experimental conditions, and even then complete destruction of organic matter wasn't achieved. ([ScienceDirect][5])

Other documented conventional wood-pyre systems use approximately **300–500 kg of wood per adult corpse**. ([ScienceDirect][6])

Even using the *very conservative* 300 kg:

**800,000 × 300 kg = 240,000,000 kg**

= **240,000 tonnes of wood**.

At 500 kg:

**400,000 tonnes of wood.**

That's not a minor detail. A claim involving 800,000 open-air cremations requires an enormous, sustained industrial-scale supply of fuel.

And the archaeological signature of hundreds of thousands of wood cremations should be correspondingly substantial: charcoal, ash, thermally altered soil, burned bone, pyre debris, etc. Archaeologists actually use charcoal and other pyre remains to reconstruct cremation activity. ([ScienceDirect][7])

### 5. "Sparse graves = exhumed bodies" is circular reasoning

This is another serious problem.

He says:

> Sparse graves are graves where the corpses were exhumed.

But unless there is **independent evidence of exhumation**, that's not something archaeology can simply assume.

Likewise:

> Low-volume pits are probably rubbish.

might be true, but it doesn't demonstrate anything about 800,000 bodies.

He's effectively assigning an explanation to every inconvenient archaeological result:

* Empty → bodies were removed.
* Sparse → bodies were removed.
* Low-volume → rubbish.
* Lack of remains → cremation.
* Lack of cremation evidence → remains were dispersed.
* Large area → could have contained 800,000.

That makes the hypothesis extremely difficult to falsify.

### 6. His final argument is logically backwards

This is probably the most important point.

> "I can evidence hundreds of thousands being buried in mass graves and you cannot evidence any alternative."

He **hasn't demonstrated hundreds of thousands of burials merely by demonstrating that a volume of land could physically contain them**.

He's demonstrated:

**"There exists a volume of land large enough that, under some assumptions, 800,000 bodies might physically fit into it."**

That's a much weaker proposition.

To substantiate 800,000 bodies, you'd want mutually independent evidence such as:

* demonstrated grave volume and plausible packing density;
* human skeletal material consistent with the claimed number;
* gravesoil chemistry;
* excavation/deposition stratigraphy;
* evidence of mass exhumation;
* cremation deposits;
* large quantities of charcoal/pyre debris;
* thermally altered soil;
* chronology consistent with the alleged events;
* evidence that the necessary enormous quantity of fuel was actually available and consumed.

The absence of an "alternative explanation" isn't evidence for his particular explanation.

### Bottom line

**His 56-pool calculation is not inherently impossible, but it doesn't establish his claim.** The particularly weak claim is that 800,000 corpses would decompose into a nearly space-free "waxy fat mass." That isn't how decomposition should be modelled.

And if the story additionally requires **800,000 subsequent open-air cremations**, the wood, time, pyre and archaeological requirements become extraordinarily large. Experimental work gives us a way to quantify that rather than relying on intuition. ([ScienceDirect][5])

So if you're deliberately avoiding the witness testimony, I'd focus on **mass-grave packing density + taphonomy + cremation fuel requirements + expected archaeological signature**. Those are much stronger lines of criticism than simply saying "800,000 sounds like too many."

[1]: https://encyclopedia.historiography-pro ... hatgpt.com "Mass Graves | Holocaust Encyclopedia"
[2]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2040024 ... hatgpt.com "Moisture can be the dominant environmental parameter governing cadaver decomposition in soil - PubMed"
[3]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2886623 ... hatgpt.com "An evaluation of soil chemistry in human cadaver decomposition islands: Potential for estimating postmortem interval (PMI) - PubMed"
[4]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9144931 ... hatgpt.com "The anthropometry of contemporary commercial cremation - PubMed"
[5]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... hatgpt.com "Experimental study on the fuel requirements for the thermal degradation of bodies by means of open pyre cremation - ScienceDirect"
[6]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... hatgpt.com "Comparison and temporal analysis of environmental impacts from cremations in India - ScienceDirect"
[7]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... hatgpt.com "The power of the pyre – A holistic study of cremation focusing on charcoal remains - ScienceDirect"

Posted: **Fri Aug 21, 2026 10:06 am**

Nessie, ChatGPT thinks you are a muppet.

Posted: **Fri Aug 21, 2026 11:27 am**

Callafangers wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 8:12 am
Nessie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 6:32 amI say an area with a volume the equivalent to 56 Olympic sized swimming pools
Yes, you certainly do say this. You're the only one who does. Nobody else says this.

Nobody else uses that equivalence, lots of people agree with me that there is evidence to prove mass graves and c800,000 killed at TII.

Posted: **Fri Aug 21, 2026 12:17 pm**

Re Chat GPT;

His argument has a **major physical/logistical weakness**. The 56-pool figure does not establish that 800,000 bodies could actually have been buried there, and his description of decomposition is not scientifically sound.

### 1. The 56 Olympic pools calculation

An Olympic pool is roughly 50 × 25 × 2 m = **2,500 m³**.

So 56 pools ≈ **140,000 m³**.

Even if we generously use 2.5 m depth, it is about **175,000 m³**.

That sounds enormous, but the relevant question isn't:

> "Could 800,000 human bodies theoretically occupy 175,000 m³?"

It's:

> **"Is there archaeological evidence that 800,000 bodies were actually deposited within that volume?"**

Those are very different claims.

The 56 Olympic pools calculation comes from the 1945 Polish site investigation, which reported an area of 2 hectares, which at one point was 7m deep, that contained cremated remains. 20,000m x 7m = 140,000m3, or enough for 56 2500m3 swimming pools. ChatGPT confirms my calculation.

The revisionist doubts are that they do not believe 800,000 human bodies could fit in such a volume and they do not believe the archaeological evidence. But, the evidence of 800,000 corpses comes more from documentary evidence than it does the archaeology, because the archaeology is inconclusive, due to Nazi destruction of the site.

I never used the 56 pool figure as evidence of mass graves and 800,000 buried, ChatGPT is confused and misunderstands. I use that figure to challenge evisionist claims there is not enough space.

For comparison, documented mass graves generally have substantial void space between bodies. One compilation of documented mass graves gives roughly **1–2.5 bodies per cubic metre**, although packing varies considerably by circumstances. ([encyclopedia.historiography-project.com][1])

At 2.5 bodies/m³, 800,000 bodies would require about **320,000 m³** of grave volume—already considerably more than even the 175,000 m³ estimate.

And that's before accounting for soil, separation between burial layers, excavation geometry, etc.

A comparison with a mass grave, where corpses are buried together in coffins, or in clothing, often with gaps between them, are not a direct comparison. ChatGPT is not comparing like with like.

### 2. The "bodies become a waxy mass with no space" argument is the weakest part

His compost analogy is misleading.

A decomposing human body **does not simply collapse into a compact solid mass with essentially zero volume**.

Decomposition involves microbial breakdown, liquefaction, gas production, movement of fluids into surrounding soil, skeletal disarticulation and eventual loss of soft tissue. The resulting material becomes incorporated into the surrounding soil rather than remaining as a dense block of "human matter." Forensic studies specifically examine chemical changes in gravesoil resulting from those processes. ([PubMed][2])

Agreed, and I said that gas and liquids "are gone" as in incorporated in to the surrounding soil, leaving the waxy fat mass that Kola reported at Belzec. The evidence of that is what I based my description on.

In fact, decomposition products can remain detectable in soil for years. ([PubMed][3])

So:

> "They decomposed, therefore they became a compressed mass with no space"

is **an assertion, not a demonstrated taphonomic process**.

The corpses decomposed into a "squashed mass", because of the pressure caused by the weight of corpses piled on top of each other. Corpses were being dropped onto existing corpses in what was a huge pile, contained by the pit. Only the corpse at the very top would have no pressure on them. Even the corpses immediately below the top corpses experienced pressure due to the weigh of the corpse above them. ChatGPT fails to take into account the pressure effect of piling corpses on top of each other.

### 3. Cremation actually creates a very different volume problem

His claim becomes even more interesting once the bodies are supposedly **exhumed and cremated**.

A modern adult cremation typically produces around **2–3 kg of cremated skeletal remains**, occupying roughly **3–3.5 litres**. A forensic study of 91 adults found a mean cremains weight of 2.43 kg. ([PubMed][4])

For 800,000 people:

**800,000 × ~3 L = ~2.4 million litres = ~2,400 m³**

So the *human cremains themselves* aren't the principal volume problem.

The enormous problem is **everything required to produce those cremains**.

My point about how the volume issue is just not there when the corpses are cremated, is confirmed by ChatGPT

### 4. The wood requirement is absolutely enormous

This is where I'd press your friend hardest.

Experimental research on open-air pyre cremation found that a **wood/body mass ratio above 9:1** was necessary even under ideal experimental conditions, and even then complete destruction of organic matter wasn't achieved. ([ScienceDirect][5])

Other documented conventional wood-pyre systems use approximately **300–500 kg of wood per adult corpse**. ([ScienceDirect][6])

Even using the *very conservative* 300 kg:

**800,000 × 300 kg = 240,000,000 kg**

= **240,000 tonnes of wood**.

At 500 kg:

**400,000 tonnes of wood.**

That's not a minor detail. A claim involving 800,000 open-air cremations requires an enormous, sustained industrial-scale supply of fuel.

And the archaeological signature of hundreds of thousands of wood cremations should be correspondingly substantial: charcoal, ash, thermally altered soil, burned bone, pyre debris, etc. Archaeologists actually use charcoal and other pyre remains to reconstruct cremation activity. ([ScienceDirect][7])

ChatGPT is calculating how much wood is required for 800,000 individual cremations to ashes. That is not the same as mass cremations, not to ashes. Obviously ChatGPT has not been asked about the wood requirements for mass cremations of 1000 corpses at a time, or asked about how much wood was needed for the mass cremation pyres at Dresden or Ohrdruf.

### 5. "Sparse graves = exhumed bodies" is circular reasoning

This is another serious problem.

He says:

> Sparse graves are graves where the corpses were exhumed.

But unless there is **independent evidence of exhumation**, that's not something archaeology can simply assume.

Likewise:

> Low-volume pits are probably rubbish.

might be true, but it doesn't demonstrate anything about 800,000 bodies.

He's effectively assigning an explanation to every inconvenient archaeological result:

* Empty → bodies were removed.
* Sparse → bodies were removed.
* Low-volume → rubbish.
* Lack of remains → cremation.
* Lack of cremation evidence → remains were dispersed.
* Large area → could have contained 800,000.

That makes the hypothesis extremely difficult to falsify.

When archaeologists excavated Sobibor, they found pits (as in ground that showed signs it had been dug into) that contained no corpses. Either those pits never contained corpses, or the corpses were removed. There is evidence of exhumation, from the witnesses who worked at the camp, hence the conclusion that those pits had the corpses removed. Smaller pits that have been excavated, have been found to contain property that had been thrown away, both at Sobibor and TII.

That could be falsified, with archaeological evidence that ground claimed to have been used for mass graves, or rubbish pits, is in fact undisturbed and had never been dug into.

### 6. His final argument is logically backwards

This is probably the most important point.

> "I can evidence hundreds of thousands being buried in mass graves and you cannot evidence any alternative."

He **hasn't demonstrated hundreds of thousands of burials merely by demonstrating that a volume of land could physically contain them**.

That was never my argument. I used the volume of the land to counter revisionist claims that there was not enough space.

He's demonstrated:

**"There exists a volume of land large enough that, under some assumptions, 800,000 bodies might physically fit into it."**

That's a much weaker proposition.

To substantiate 800,000 bodies, you'd want mutually independent evidence such as:

* demonstrated grave volume and plausible packing density;
* human skeletal material consistent with the claimed number;
* gravesoil chemistry;
* excavation/deposition stratigraphy;
* evidence of mass exhumation;
* cremation deposits;
* large quantities of charcoal/pyre debris;
* thermally altered soil;
* chronology consistent with the alleged events;
* evidence that the necessary enormous quantity of fuel was actually available and consumed.

The absence of an "alternative explanation" isn't evidence for his particular explanation.

The burial of c800,000 corpses is evidenced by documents proving that number of people arrived at TII, along with witness descriptions of mass arrivals. The witness descriptions of mass graves, exhumations and pyres are corroborated by the archaeological finds of human skeltal material, cremation deposits and ash, buried over an area of 2 hectares, up to 7m deep.

The chronology of the site is consistent with mass arrivals,mass killing and burial and cremation to destroy evidence. ChatGPT mistakenly calculates how much wood is needed for 800,000 individual cremations.

### Bottom line

**His 56-pool calculation is not inherently impossible, but it doesn't establish his claim.**

ChatGPT has been confused, as I do not use the 56 pool calculation as evidence of mass graves.

The particularly weak claim is that 800,000 corpses would decompose into a nearly space-free "waxy fat mass." That isn't how decomposition should be modelled.

I base the waxy fat mass on what Kola found at Belzec and ChatGPT agrees with me about the leaching of gas and liquids into the surropunding soil.

And if the story additionally requires **800,000 subsequent open-air cremations**, the wood, time, pyre and archaeological requirements become extraordinarily large. Experimental work gives us a way to quantify that rather than relying on intuition. ([ScienceDirect][5])

ChatGPT should be asked to compared witness descriptions of the TII pyres, with the evidence from photos and witnesses to the Dresden and Ohrdruf pyres.

So if you're deliberately avoiding the witness testimony, I'd focus on **mass-grave packing density + taphonomy + cremation fuel requirements + expected archaeological signature**. Those are much stronger lines of criticism than simply saying "800,000 sounds like too many."

ChatGPT needs to show it understands the effect pressure has on the piled up corpses, with regards to density and decomposition, and it has made a mistake about the cremations and fuel requirements. It recognises that revisionists have to ignore evidence and it shows that it does not fully understand, based on revisionist misunderstanding, of how historians evidence and prove mass graves of hundreds of thousands at TII.

It is of no surprise, that when a so-called revisionist feeds ChatGPT, it makes the same mistakes he does!

Posted: **Fri Aug 21, 2026 12:25 pm**

I asked ChatGPT;

"What would happen to the corpses inside a mass grave, where the corpses were all naked, there were no coffins or clothing and the corpses were piled on top of each other?"

The answer was (my bold);

"If you mean what happens physically to the bodies after burial, the main processes would be decomposition, movement/settling of the bodies, and eventual skeletalisation. Being naked and piled together would affect the process somewhat, but it wouldn't stop normal decomposition.

Early stage: Bacteria already present in the body begin breaking tissues down. The bodies would initially retain their overall form, then become swollen as gases accumulate.
As decomposition progresses: Soft tissues break down and fluids are released into the surrounding soil. Because the bodies are in direct contact with one another, moisture and microorganisms can move between adjacent bodies.
The pile compresses: As soft tissues disappear, the bodies lose volume and the layers above settle downward. Bones can shift considerably from their original positions.
Eventually: Most soft tissue disappears, leaving primarily bones and teeth. Hair and some other resistant materials may persist longer.
The soil matters enormously: Temperature, moisture, oxygen availability, soil chemistry, drainage, burial depth, and whether the grave is sealed or waterlogged can make decomposition much faster or slower.
No clothing/coffins: Naked bodies have more direct contact with the surrounding soil and other bodies. A coffin can sometimes alter moisture, oxygen, insect access, and the physical position of remains, so its absence can change the decomposition environment.
Multiple bodies together: A tightly packed mass grave doesn't simply produce one indistinguishable mass. Individual remains can remain identifiable for quite a long time, although prolonged decomposition and movement can eventually cause extensive commingling of bones."

That is what Kola found at Belzec. The waxy fat mass was the result of the compressed, tightly packed corpses, that had leached soft tissue, fluids and gas into the soil, leaving extensive commingling of the remains.

Posted: **Fri Aug 21, 2026 3:18 pm**

Nessie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 11:27 am lots of people agree with me that there is evidence to prove mass graves and c800,000 killed at TII.

Notice how the lying POS uses the word "evidence" and not "proof."

Nobody denies that there is "evidence" for the orthodox story at T II.

But the so-called "evidence" has no evidentiary value.

NONE.

The evidence for no mass graves (and thus, no mass murder, and thus, no "gas chambers") is overwhelming:

If the physical evidence for an alleged crime that - HAS TO EXIST - for the crime to have

actually happened - DOES NOT EXIST - then the alleged crime obviously - DID NOT HAPPEN.

Ergo: The orthodox “pure extermination center” story is - A PROVEN, NONSENSICAL BIG-LIE.

Posted: **Fri Aug 21, 2026 3:22 pm**

Nessie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 6:32 am The archaeology of what was left at the sites is complex.

Nessie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 6:32 am I can evidence hundreds of thousands being buried in mass graves and you cannot evidence any alternative

LIAR.

OPENING / FUNDAMENTAL STATEMENT OF FACT: It is alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, the bodies and burnt remains of hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of Jews were buried in numerous “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II. However, despite all the deceptive, unsubstantiated allegations to the contrary, the truth is, the largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the 100 graves in question that are fraudulently alleged to have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at these five sites, in which verified human remains have been uncovered / tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology, contained the remains of - ONLY SIX PEOPLE.

Note: Using the information presented on this website and applying legal standards used in U.S. courts, the above opening / fundamental statement of fact, which is written as, and can be defined as - a rebuttable presumption - can be - LEGALLY - ACCEPTED - AS - TRUE - in a U.S. court.

https://thisisaboutscience.com/

The lying POS alleges that a legitimate rebuttable presumption that can be legally accepted as true in a U.S. court is not evidence is possibly the biggest lie that this mentally ill pathological liar has ever told.

Posted: **Fri Aug 21, 2026 3:53 pm**

Nessie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 12:17 pm The 56 Olympic pools calculation comes from the 1945 Polish site investigation, which reported an area of 2 hectares, which at one point was 7m deep, that contained cremated remains. 20,000m x 7m = 140,000m3, or enough for 56 2500m3 swimming pools.

That is an unsubstantiated allegation that has ZERO evidentiary value.

Nessie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 12:17 pm ChatGPT confirms my calculation.

Nessie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 12:17 pm The burial of c800,000 corpses is evidenced

Notice how the mentally ill lying POS isn't using the word "proven" like it has in the past. Why is that, when it has repeatedly used the word "proven" in the past? Of course, that is a rhetorical question that everyone here knows the answer to.

Posted: **Fri Aug 21, 2026 3:57 pm**

Nessie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 21, 2026 12:25 pm That is what Kola found at Belzec.

OPENING / FUNDAMENTAL STATEMENT OF FACT: It is alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, the bodies and burnt remains of hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of Jews were buried in numerous “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II. However, despite all the deceptive, unsubstantiated allegations to the contrary, the truth is, the largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the 100 graves in question that are fraudulently alleged to have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at these five sites, in which verified human remains have been uncovered / tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology, contained the remains of - ONLY SIX PEOPLE.

Note: Using the information presented on this website and applying legal standards used in U.S. courts, the above opening / fundamental statement of fact, which is written as, and can be defined as - a rebuttable presumption - can be - LEGALLY - ACCEPTED - AS - TRUE - in a U.S. court.

...

A - $100.00 reward - is being offered for each one of the 100 alleged “scientifically proven” mass graves / cremation pits in question [33 of them at Belzec] that is proven - with the same standard of proof applied in U. S. civil courts - to actually exist and to currently contain the remains of - at least 2 people. (That is less than one tenth of one one thousandth of one percent of the alleged mass murder.)

https://thisisaboutscience.com/

What are you waiting for nessie?

What are you so afraid of?

The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Comments on other threads.

Re: Comments on other threads.

Re: Comments on other threads.

Re: Comments on other threads.

Re: Comments on other threads.

Re: Comments on other threads.

Re: Comments on other threads.

Re: Comments on other threads.

Re: Comments on other threads.

Re: Comments on other threads.