Roberto wrote: I remember having argued that the area covered by human remains is an indication of the burial area's size, which is appropriate in this case if one considers that the human remains found on this area were the result of robbery digging. Things would be different if remains had been systematically scattered by the perpetrators over a larger area in an effort to better conceal the crime.
But if you accept that at Yanov the area containing human remains need not equal the area of the graves, then you have no reason to suppose they were equal at Treblinka. Hence your argument on this point collapses.
FJ hasn't been paying attention. The Yanov area containing human remains obviously resulted from a systematic attempt to scatter such remains over an area as large as possible, hence allowing no inferences about the size of the burial area. The Treblinka area covered by human remains resulted from robbery digging underneath that area, which is why the size of an area is an indication of the size of the camp's burial area.
RM wrote:Unless FJ can demonstrate that the corpses of 700,000+ people couldn't have been buried in an area of 1.8 hectares,
Enjoy some more info on Throckmorton
and Birkshaw forest
Where do I find the part demonstrating that it would have been physically or technically impossible to bury the corpses of 700,000+ human beings in an area of 1.8 hectares? Quote it, please.
I enjoyed this footnote, by the way:
(*) If anti-revisionists want to argue that the soil removed from the graves was trucked away, they then need to answer the question of how the soil was levelled again. If 100,000 cubic meters of soil were trucked away from Treblinka, that would have left a 1 hectare pit 10 meters deep, or a 5 hectare pit 2 meters deep, and so on. The ashes from the cremation would have filled only a fraction of this. An explanation of why the Russians didn’t find such an enormous pit when they captured Treblinka is required. Presumably anti-revisionists would assert that new sand was trucked in – but from where? Is there any evidence for this large scale operation? Did none of the witnesses notice the tens of thousands of truckloads of soil that would have had to come in over the course of a few months? If anti-revisionists hope to claim that the pits were filled in after the Treblinka revolt, so that the witnesses would not have noticed, they will have to explain why witnesses claimed that the pits were completely smoothed over before the revolt. Moreover, soil trucked in from elsewhere should be identifiable with soil tests, or even by a casual inspection of the site, but I am unaware of any evidence of this nature for such an enormous amount of delivered soil.
First of all, it's not for "anti-revisionists" to provide "evidence for this large scale operation". With all known evidence pointing to the "anti-revisionist" scenario of systematic mass murder and none pointing to the "Revisionist" scenario of transit and resettlement, it's for "Revisionists" to demonstrate that "this large scale operation" couldn't have taken place.
Second, what eyewitnesses described or did not describe is of no relevance in this context. SS eyewitnesses didn't provide many details, and the few inmate eyewitnesses were more concerned with the horror of what they had witnessed than with technical details and logistics. So one should expect much of Treblinka's logistics to be missing in eyewitness descriptions.
Third, much of the sand was left inside the camp area, as mentioned here
Fourth, assuming maximum dilation and that half the sand was moved out of the camp area and had to be brought back in from somewhere else, e.g. the Treblinka gravel yard, we would have roughly 37,600 cubic meters of sand. The specific weight of sand being 1.8 tons per cubic meter, according to this page
, that would be 67,680 tons of sand, or 13,536 five-ton truckloads. If we assume that the covering up took place in August, September and October 1943, that would be 147 truckloads per day. 3 trucks making 10 trips per day each from a nearby place (e.g. the Treblinka gravel yard), why not? Or 6 trucks making 5 trips per day each. And if smoothing over took place before the revolt, that would mean 3 additional months to take the sand into the camp. What witnesses claimed that that "the pits were completely smoothed over before the revolt", by the way?
Fifth, how do you tell "soil trucked in from elsewhere" by a "casual inspection of the site", especially if it's soil that had originally been in the place to where it was returned?
Sixth, who has been seeking evidence for "such an enormous amount of delivered soil" (actually smaller than the amount extracted at, say this 1.4 ha construction site
)? If no one has been looking for such evidence, it's hardly surprising that no such evidence has been reported.
I wouldn't misspell "Jews" as "jews" if I were you, by the way. Unless, of course, you don't mind making your agenda obvious for the casual lurker, or are aware that your audience (occasional visits by myself aside) consists of "Revisionists" anyway.