Clark wrote:Look at the coward run from the simple quesitons:
"How many of the 11 fraudulently alleged “graves” of Sobibor can you prove contain the remains of at least 19 bodies?"
RM / mentally ill one:
Well then RM / mentally ill one, fill in the 5 blanks:
To date, I have submitted __?__ Sobibor “mass graves / buried remains” - “proofs” to Michael Shermer on The Skeptics Society’s forum for his endorsement. And, to date, __?__ of those submittals have been deemed ineligible for a reward by the N.A.F.H. due to my noncompliance with their posting rules. Regardless of my eligibility status for a $1,000.00 reward, __?__ of my Sobibor submittals have been endorsed by Michael Shermer as meeting his own, Skeptic Magazine’s and The Skeptics Society’s expressed and implied standards of proof. Also, to date, the total combined number of skeptical organization members, professional forensic anthropologists, employees of Archaeology Magazine, PHD professors currently teaching forensic anthropology and/or archaeology classes at a university in the United States and members of The American Academy of Forensic Sciences who have publicly and explicitly endorsed my alleged - “proven with 100 % certainty” - Sobibor - “mass graves / buried remains” - “proofs” submitted on The Skeptics Society’s forum is - __?__. Also, to date, the total number of those same alleged - “proven with 100 % certainty” - Sobibor - “mass graves / buried remains” - “proofs” that I submitted for Shermers endorsement that I have been able to get published in Archaeology Magazine is - __?__.
The answers to the deplorable creature's first question can be found in my blog Human remains inside the mass graves at Chełmno, Bełżec and Sobibór
, as the deplorable creature well knows.
The answers to the deplorable creature's lengthy and particularly idiotic second question (the one with the "5 blanks") may have been provided on a thread that was later deleted, so here I go again:
I posted 14 submissions on the Skeptics Society Forum, the links to which can be found here
In these 14 submissions, I deliberately did not fully comply with the creature's imbecilic wording rules because I considered them unacceptable for Mr. Shermer and thus a hindrance to Shermer's endorsement of my submissions.
After I realized that Shermer wouldn't care to respond to my submissions regardless of how they were worded (for the simple reasons that a) the creature never asked him if he wanted to arbiter the creature's imbecilic "challenge", and b) someone of Shermer's standing understandably doesn't want any to have anything to do with something like this
), I posted the following four submissions:
in which I tried to comply with the creature's imbecilic wording rules (except, IIRC, on one occasion when the creature refused to send me the latest version because I called it a chimp, or something like that).
Apparently I didn't succeed in complying with the creature's imbecilic wording rules, or so the creature claims.
No sweat. All the creature has to do is send the latest version of its wording rules to my e-mail address (which it knows), and I will do my best to post in accordance with this latest version when posting my next proof submission on 15 September 2012. Hopefully I will succeed this time in meeting the creature's formal demands, but if not, what the heck. Shermer doesn't care anyway, and I will anyway have provided more information showing that the creature's imbecilic "challenge" can be rather easily met, which is the purpose of this exercise.
As to the "5 blanks", I trust that even the creature has enough gray matter to fill them in itself based on the information provided above. If that should not be so, I'll be glad to help it. All it will have to do is expressly admit that it is to dumb to fill in its "5 blanks" based on the aforementioned information.
If the creature were serious about its "challenge", it would not demand endorsement of proof submissions by Michael Shermer, who (as the creature knows very well) does not and never will care for whatever the creature does. It would find a neutral arbiter who has previously agreed to being an arbiter
. But of course the creature is too much a liar and too much a coward for that.
The creature should also know better than to accuse me of running away from questions on account of the demonstrable fact (I kept all the screenshots) that it has run away from several hundred
questions I have asked it in previous discussions on another forum.
The creature's running away from questions is not the only reason why the creature is the last (well ...) person who should call anyone a coward. Another reason is the creature's having run away from our appointment at Sobibór on 15.10.2008, as documented here
. A film shot on the day before that appointment can be watched here
That said, the creature is back on ignore until it learns to behave itself like a human being, and not like the scum its mug