View Single Post
Old September 21st, 2008 #1300
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Post #1298

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Retardo:

"What would you accept as proof that a certain minimum amount of bone fragments lies in the area?"

What part of the word - locate - do you not understand Roberta?

Are you retarded, or what?

What part of the phrase - prove the existence of - do you not understand?

Are you retarded, or what?
Gerdes, the miserable whimpering coward, keeps running away from specifying his proof requirements.

Answer my questions, coward:

1. What amount of bone fragments (not human remains of all kinds, just bone fragments) is supposed to have been "alleged" at either camp? If your calculations "derived from figures used by Arnulf Neumaier in The Treblinka Holocaust" are supposed to refer to bone fragments alone (to the exclusion of other types of remains mentioned in the following question), please show us how you did these calculations.

2. Why so particular about bone fragments, all of a sudden? What about other types of human remains, like ashes of bone or tissue, teeth, whole bones, and whole bodies in wax-fat transformation? Do they not count anymore? If so, why not?

3. What would you accept as proof that a certain minimum amount of bone fragments lies in the area? Will a substantiated calculation based on a crime site investigator's or an archaeologist's report about remains lying above or beneath the ground be sufficient? Or do you want a detailed physical quantification of excavated bone fragments, separated for this purpose from the soil, wood ash and human ashes surrounding them?

4. Why does the challenge refer to Treblinka and Sobibor alone and not to Belzec, although Belzec was also an extermination camp of the Aktion Reinhard(t) murder operation? What was the criterion – other than cowardly convenience – for leaving Belzec out of the challenge?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Can you show us just 1/10th of 1%? How about just one single pound?

Retardo:

"I can show a lot more than that rather easily... 44,092 fucking pounds at the very least."

Then what are you waiting for faggot?

Just how hard should that be to prove?
If you apply reasonable standards of proof, then proving that quantity of human remains at Treblinka is a piece of cake. All it takes is the following excerpt from the Polish site investigation report of 29 December 1945, which is part of exhibit A.3.1.4 in my post # 172 under http://206.41.117.128/showpost.php?p...&postcount=172 :

Quote:
In the northwestern section of the area, the surface is covered for about 2 hectares by a mixture of ashes and sand. In this mixture, one finds countless human bones, often still covered with tissue remains, which are in a condition of decomposition. During the inspection, which I made with the assistance of an expert in forensic medicine, it was determined that the ashes are without any doubt of human origin (remains of cremated human bones). The examination of human skulls could discover no trace of« wounding. At a distance of some 100 m, there is now an unpleasant odor of burning and decay.
If the layer of ashes and sand was only 2 centimeters high and half of that was human ashes – two rather conservative assumptions – we have 20,000 x 0,01 = 200 cubic meters of human ashes. 200 cubic meters of ashes, according to Mattogno (as quoted under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...belzec_30.html ) correspond to 100 tons of ashes. 100 tons of ashes, also according to Mattogno, correspond to a live weight of 2,000 tons or 2,000,000 kg. 2,000,000 kg, assuming a somewhat exaggerated average weight of 45 kg per person, as Mattogno does, correspond to well over 40,000 human beings. Even assuming a ridiculously unrealistic average of 60 kg per person, they would correspond to well over 30,000 dead bodies.

But let’s be even more generous and assume, contrary to what the above-quoted site investigation report tells us, that only 20 % of the ashes mixed with sand that covered the area were human ashes, the rest being wood ash. That would give us 40 cubic meters or 20 tons of ashes lying above the ground in this area. 20 tons of ashes = 400 tons or 400,000 kg of live weight. At a somewhat exaggerated 45 kg per person, that’s almost 8,900 people. Even at a ridiculously exaggerated 60 kg per person, it’s almost 6,700 people. And what you’re now calling for is 870 for Treblinka, 250 for Sobibor. Better think your bullshit over again.

Actually I can make my calculations even more conservative. Let’s say the layer of ashes mixed with sand was just 1 cm high, i.e. barely visible at best, and that human ashes made up no more than 5 % of that layer (as would correspond to the overall concentration of human cremation remains in the mass graves assuming 870,000 dead bodies and just 8 bodies per cubic meter when the bodies were buried prior to cremation, see my comments to your post # 1294 in post # 1297). We would thus have just 10 cubic meters or 5 tons of human cremation remains covering the ground in that area. 5 tons of human cremation remains correspond to 100 tons or 100,000 kg of live weight. At Mattogno’s somewhat exaggerated average of 45 kg per person (35 kg is more like reality, considering that most of the deportees were women, children and skinny old folks), this would mean 2,222 dead bodies. At a ridiculously unrealistic 60 kg per person (i.e. as if those malnourished ghetto Jews in 1942/43 had been well-fed adult Europeans or Americans in our time), we would have 1,667 dead bodies corresponding to the human cremation remains lying above ground. That’s well over the 870 that the challenge now requires, so you better start collecting your $100,000.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
And if you're still having problems with the definition of proof, I suggest that you ask Michael Shermer / "SKEPTIC" magazine about it. As you well know, you have to have your "proof" published in "SKEPTIC" magazine first. If they will accept your "assumptions based on estimates based on descriptions based on photo captions" as proof, we will of course consider it.

But we will of course define proof as - proven.

BTW, what part of the words prove / proof don't you understand dull one?

Are you retarded, or what?
Translation: «We will not define what we accept as proof until evidence has been submitted via SKEPTIC magazine. When evidence has been submitted, we will define what we accept as proof in such a way that the evidence that has been submitted, whatever it is, will not be covered by our definition. Then we’ll tell the applicant that the evidence he has submitted does not meet our proof requirements. If he should ask why not, we will give him the good old "what part of the words prove / proof don't you understand dull one" – speech.»

Thanks for again showing what a bunch of cowardly and mendacious charlatans you and (if existing) your fellow NAFCASH freaks are. Not that I was ever expecting anything else, of course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Retardo:

"If you apply reasonable standards of proof, then proving that quantity of human remains at Treblinka is a piece of cake."

Then what are you waiting for faggot?
Right now I’m waiting for self-projecting hysteric Gerdes to tell me whether or not he would accept my most conservative estimate of human cremation remains lying above the ground in the burial area of the "death camp" sector of Treblinka extermination camp, based on a crime site investigation report dated 29.12.1945 stating that «the surface is covered for about 2 hectares by a mixture of ashes and sand. In this mixture, one finds countless human bones, often still covered with tissue remains, which are in a condition of decomposition», as proof that at the time of this report human cremation remains corresponding to, at the very least, 1,667 human beings, were lying above the ground in the burial area of the "death camp" sector of Treblinka extermination camp.

I’m waiting for Gerdes to confirm that he would accept my most conservative estimate as proof meeting his challenge requirements or, if he would not accept it, to

a) Provide a consistent explanation why he would not accept it, and
b) A detailed description of what evidence he would accept as proof.

I’m waiting for Gerdes to overcome the cowardice that keeps him from answering this question or these questions rather than hiding behind his slimy "what part of the words prove / proof don't you understand dull one" – mantra.

And of course I’ll be waiting in vain, because Gerdes is too much a liar and a coward to come up with anything better than his slimy "what part of the words prove / proof don't you understand dull one" – mantra.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
What's wrong - is 1/10th of 1% too hard for you?
How easy or how hard it is depends on what exactly you would accept as proof, see above.

What part of this simple statement is too hard for your tiny brain to understand, or too dangerous for you hoaxing fraud and whimpering coward to respond to?

Post # 1299

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Gerdes View Post
Retardo:

"And if robbery digging counts as excavation."

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!

Hey retardo, is that Bigfoot in that middle photo?
That must be Gerdes’ response to the following part of my post # 1297:

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Not one single excavation has been proven to date.

NOT ONE!!!!
Actually I’ve been informed by the SAP that Prof. Kola not only drilled into the ground but also excavated in some places. And if robbery digging counts as excavation, these photos:







illustrate the fact that Prof. Kola was not exactly the first one to excavate in this area.
Maybe someone in the area should go to 1015 W SPRING ST APT #5, 59457-2800 LEWISTOWN, MT to check if Gerdes is not in too bad a state of mental health. I’m starting to get worried about the poor chimp – also and especially because I don’t want to lose him as my useful idiot.


Before I forget it, Mr. Gerdes: there are two new articles about your and the other clowns' cowardly CODOH chatter on the HC blog:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...llenge_20.html

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...llenge_21.html

I suggest you read them carefully. Especially the first one, from which the following quote is taken:

Quote:
"MrNobody" continues:

Quote:
Greg, the best part about your site is that it is a Debate Stopper, many times on blogs & youtube videos I have demolished the opposition by simply asking them to take up your NAFCASH Challenge, putting an end to denial & earning $100,000 to boot!

Needless to say, they never have a comeback.
Somehow I cannot picture this feeble-minded bigmouth venturing into open debate and shooting his bull outside the warm and cozy CODOH Führerbunker.

But if he does, he is cordially invited to try his "Debate Stopper" rhetoric on me, be it on VNN, on RODOH or on another forum of his choice. As I have no access to CODOH, Gerdes will be requested to extend my invitation to "MrNobody", as I have previously requested him to invite Jonni "Hannover" Hargis to VNN for a chat with me. Of course I don’t expect Gerdes, whose cowardice is only matched by that of Hargis, to ever comply with either request.

Last edited by Roberto Muehlenkamp; September 21st, 2008 at 10:25 AM.