Treblinka: Inside Channel 5's Propagandalagers

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).

Moderators: Budu Svanidze, Joe Future

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 23687
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 12:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Treblinka: Inside Channel 5's Propagandalagers

Post by Nessie » Wed Mar 26, 2014 1:58 pm

theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:
Nessie wrote:If you dug down into undisturbed ground you would expect to come to remains from 1943-5 before you come to fossilised sharks teeth. That such teeth are found above remains from 1943-5 tells us the sand above the remains came from somewhere else and was dumped on top. You cannot have a naturally occurring instance of older remains found ontop of newer such as found at TII.

Once again Nessie your attention to detail is found wanting.

The fossils were found in either Trench 4 or 5, the programme doesn't state precisely which, but in neither trench did the archaeologists find any evidence that the ground had been disturbed in millions of years.

(from 29:36)

As the team dig deeper in both trenches, they find no evidence of a solid structure like bricks or concrete. Then Ivar makes a startling find. It's not a good sign.

I - So we found a shark tooth, and I'm not joking. This appear to be some other fossil.

N - It looks like when the Nazis destroyed the gas chambers they dumped sand from the quarry at Treblinka 1 over the ruins.

C - We've just dug a little test pit down in hours, round the corner and it's just sand, continuous sand.

N - That sand contained tiny fossils from when this whole area was a sea bed, millions of years ago It's a major set-back for Caroline and the last thing the team were expecting.

C - We didn't find any more things apart from the fossil material.

I - More fossils

C - Hm!

N - The team continue to dig to 1.5 metres. There's no sign of any building materials. Just more sand and stones

C - yeah same as you

I - Yeah?

C - I think . . .

N - Caroline decides to stop believing that in this area of the camp the Nazi clean up appears to have been effective.
You claim "but in neither trench did the archaeologists find any evidence that the ground had been disturbed in millions of years." and then follow that with a quote "It looks like when the Nazis destroyed the gas chambers they dumped sand from the quarry at Treblinka 1 over the ruins." which contradicts it. Plus they dug down and found structural remains under 1 metre of rubble and sand.

http://blogs.staffs.ac.uk/archaeology/p ... tion-camp/

Charles Traynor thinks that could have happened naturally or by animals. Do you?
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 2643
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Treblinka: Inside Channel 5's Propagandalagers

Post by Charles Traynor » Wed Mar 26, 2014 2:49 pm

theblackrabbitofinlé wrote:
The Lidar is pointing her towards some startling new evidence. It suggests there could be unknown mass graves. To the south of Treblinka 1, ten minutes walk through the forest, the Lidar's revealed a number of previously unknown depressions. Caroline decides to dig two test trenches to investigate further. (@ 5:26)
QUESTION: What is ten minutes walk south of Treblinka 1?

ANSWER: A cemetery.

Dr. Sturdy Colls et al. are going to excavate in a cemetery. What do you suppose they might find?

Image

At no point during the entire programme do they admit this area was a cemetery. The only clue is the few seconds' arty shot of the cross above (@ 15:00).

The narrator claims that "there could be unknown mass graves" in this area, but of course they tell the audience nothing about the known "mass graves" in this precise area.
I knew this thread was going to be good but BRoI has completely destroyed any credibility CSC may have had left with this post alone.

I know Umeroffen isn’t going to like this reality check but I hope that even he will now begin to see through CSC’s mendacity. Let us not forget that this is the very place where Caroline had her emotional breakdown for the cameras.

What a horrible, evil and cold hearted liar Sturdy Colls has turned out to be.
Last edited by Charles Traynor on Wed Mar 26, 2014 3:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 2643
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Treblinka: Inside Channel 5's Propagandalagers

Post by Charles Traynor » Wed Mar 26, 2014 3:03 pm

Nessie wrote:
Charles Traynor wrote:....

One would not expect to find the remains of a Roman fort planted on top of T2 but small items like sharks teeth could easily be placed their during natural occurrences like animal activity, flooding, storms, etc.
Please evidence that is what happened at TII.
As you already know I cannot produce hard evidence to support my thesis but Occam’s razor certainly favours my version of events over CSC’s version (and yours). You claim hundreds of thousands of tons of sand were transported from the T1 quarry to artificially raise the ground level at T2 by at least a metre. And in keeping with typical German thoroughness the SS somehow managed to disguise their work making it appear as though the ground at the location in question at T2 had not been disturbed for a million years. I say :lol: to that theory.

Have you forgotten the T2 site was investigated after the war? Have you forgotten graves robbers allegedly blasted massive pits here? Have you forgotten a memorial and an anti investigation barrier consisting of steel reinforced concrete was built at T2 which would have involved a detailed survey of the camp area beforehand (perhaps this work unearthed the fossils when workmen were levelling the ground?)? Have you also forgotten T2 was allegedly disguised as a farm when the Germans closed this particular transit camp. How many farms do you know of which are located on top of a giant mountain of sand?

Are you seriously suggesting nobody noticed the ground level of T2 had been artificially raised in all the decades since the war ended? I would have also thought Caroline’s Lidar images would have made this immediately obvious!
Last edited by Charles Traynor on Wed Mar 26, 2014 3:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 23687
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 12:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Treblinka: Inside Channel 5's Propagandalagers

Post by Nessie » Wed Mar 26, 2014 3:11 pm

When was the site outside TI marked with crosses? When was it made a cemetery?

At about 05.45 CS-C clearly states she regards the whole site, not just TII, not just the camps as worthy of study and as a place of death. There are no crosses marking the depressions at trenches 1 and 2. On the film from around 6 minutes where those digs are covered there are no crosses. These are previously unknown, unmarked graves.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 23687
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 12:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Treblinka: Inside Channel 5's Propagandalagers

Post by Nessie » Wed Mar 26, 2014 3:20 pm

Charles Traynor wrote:
Nessie wrote:
Charles Traynor wrote:....

One would not expect to find the remains of a Roman fort planted on top of T2 but small items like sharks teeth could easily be placed their during natural occurrences like animal activity, flooding, storms, etc.
Please evidence that is what happened at TII.
As you already know I cannot produce hard evidence to support my thesis but Occam’s razor certainly favours my version of events over CSC’s version (and yours). You claim hundreds of thousands of tons of sand were transported from the T1 quarry to artificially raise the ground level at T2 by at least a metre. And in keeping with typical German thoroughness the SS somehow managed to disguise their work making it appear as though the ground at the location in question at T2 had not been disturbed for a million years. I say :lol: to that theory.

Have you forgotten the T2 site was investigated after the war? Have you forgotten a memorial and an anti investigation barrier consisting of steel reinforced concrete was built at T2 which would have involved a detailed survey of the camp area beforehand (perhaps this work unearthed the fossils when workmen were levelling the ground?)? Have you also forgotten T2 was allegedly disguised as a farm when the Germans closed this particular transit camp. How many farms do you know of which are located on top of a giant mountain of sand?

Are you seriously suggesting nobody noticed the ground level of T2 had been artificially raised in all the decades since the war ended? I would have also thought Caroline’s Lidar images would have made this immediately obvious!
Occam's razor does not favour the site at TII having building remains found one metre under ground by natural causes and animals over human activity. There is no natural event or animal that has been at the TII site which could have ever caused such to happen.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 2643
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Treblinka: Inside Channel 5's Propagandalagers

Post by Charles Traynor » Wed Mar 26, 2014 4:00 pm

Nessie wrote:
Occam's razor does not favour the site at TII having building remains found one metre under ground by natural causes and animals over human activity. There is no natural event or animal that has been at the TII site which could have ever caused such to happen.
:?: :?
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 23687
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 12:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Treblinka: Inside Channel 5's Propagandalagers

Post by Nessie » Wed Mar 26, 2014 4:22 pm

Charles Traynor wrote:
Nessie wrote:
Occam's razor does not favour the site at TII having building remains found one metre under ground by natural causes and animals over human activity. There is no natural event or animal that has been at the TII site which could have ever caused such to happen.
:?: :?
Show a natural event at the site of TII which could have resulted in building remains buried one meter down. Name an animal which could have caused such. You cannot. The Nazis did it as they wanted to try and hide the remains of TII as it was a death camp.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Duke Umeroffen
Posts: 5773
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:11 am
Contact:

Re: Treblinka: Inside Channel 5's Propagandalagers

Post by Duke Umeroffen » Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:49 pm

I don't imagine it would have taken that much. Dump a load of sand over the site, which raises its levels, bring in a few truckloads of good soil and make some raised beds and a field. All they have to then is quickly knock up a farm house out of 4be2be2be2....It only has to "look" like a farm. Its really a Potemkin farm as it were.

It's surprising given how much activity occurred upon the site that much is undisturbed. Some of the finds including tiles were found at a very shallow depth. Those puzzling signs of human activity, bricks, concrete, corbie or cobbled stones etc certainly did indicate some depth. This is seen in my screen grab. And with treasure hunters at work and Soviets bringing in ordnance- if you recall Roberto's post - then they may well have thrown up spoil piles willy nilly (all over the place) in their haste to find the personal effects of the innocents. Thus in so doing burying even deeper these undisturbed layers beneath the camp but also bringing to the surface random buried material too. The stratigraphy looks all over the place to me. Some of it is showing little to no sign of human activity. Other bits, well. It's consistent with the history of the site. I reject Fish's "anti investigation barriers" term as another Revisionist slogan, designed to impress the gullible. the AABs are memorials. Anyway he filched it from its coiner, the inventive and monomanaical Greg "tfsfcsupporter" Gerdes.
Viking; North Utsire; South Utsire; Forties; Cromarty; ; Firth; Tyne; Dogger. Fisher; German Bight; Humber; Thames *; Dover;

User avatar
theblackrabbitofinlé
Posts: 2045
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:33 am
Contact:

Re: Treblinka: Inside Channel 5's Propagandalagers

Post by theblackrabbitofinlé » Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:01 pm

In regard to the sand from the quarry was dumped on T2 to disguise the graves and gas chambers claim.

This is of course new. I'm not aware of anyone having made such a claim prior to this documentary. Some might quote what Rachel Auerbach wrote following her visit to the site in November 1945, although it would be self-contradictory:
We were now standing where the gas chambers had been, the huge mass graves and the pyres. In some places, the smell of death was still mingled with the odor of fire. Indeed, here and there we could see little piles of white ashes along with blackened bones, heaps of soot. All this had been buried several meters deep in the soil, mixed with sand and covered with more sand, but the explosions had brought it to the surface again. In one place the simultaneous explosion of several bombs had created a huge crater. Deep down in the hole, some outlines could be dimly seen through the fog.

http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/t/4.html
Just how large an area, and to what depth, Caroline Sturdy Colls believes the Germans covered T2 with sand from the quarry is anyone's guess. But it's worth choosing an area and examining what would have been involved in such a task.

Below is a photo of the T2 memorial viewed from the path which ran along the former location of the German-built Ukrainian farmhouse (according to Sturdy Colls). You can clearly see in this photo an increase in elevation.

Image

Image

I've proceeded on the basis that the Germans covered with sand the area indicated on the Google Earth image above, a total of 81,267 M2, to a depth of 1 metre, which isn't particularly deep.

This would have required 81,267 M3 of sand, which, assuming 1 M3 = 1,500 kilograms (1.5 metric tons), would have involved just shy of 122,000 metric tons of the stuff.

Mattogno et al. (2013:1139) show that a shipment of 20 wagons from the Treblinka quarry contained 213.87 M3, therefore 1 wagon load = 10.7 M3 (x 1,500 kg = 16 metric tons). So to supply the required 81,267 M3 of sand, the Germans would have had to deliver 7,595 wagon loads to the site.

Again Mattogno et al. (2013:1117) show that the largest clamshell buckets which could be used by the Menck & Hambrock excavators pictured (somewhere) at Treblinka, had a volume of 1.6 M3, which would have taken 6-7 scoops to fill each wagon, each scoop containg approx. 2.4 metric tons of average-weight-sand.

If the Germans had delivered 60 wagon of sand (642 M3 = 963 metric tons) to T2 every day, it would have taken 127 days to ship in the required 122,000 tons. But if it takes 6.5 scoops to load a single wagon and we have a quota of 60 daily, that is less than four minutes per scoop, or eight minutes per scoop on average with two machines; twelve minutes with three machines available, and so on. That seems unrealistic by an order of magnitude. This is all obviously based on the excavators working 24/7, under floodlights at night. Both of which seem very implausible.

Arad (BST, p. 373) provides details of the dismantling of T2 under Kurt Franz in September to November 1943, with initially about 100 Jewish prisoners, but from October 20 only about 30 remained—the others were sent to dismantle Sobibor. Arad says not a word about sand being brought to the site in truly enormous quantities.

C. Sturdy Colls might insist the area of T2 covered by sand was smaller, but it seems she does believe the layer of sand was deeper than the one metre I've used in the calculations above:
(from 59:03)

N - Caroline thinks the Nazis dumped sand on top of the gas chambers to hide the evidence of their crimes.

C - The ground level of the camp would have been much lower than it is now. All this other activity has simply built up the land, rather than interfered with that evidence that's buried deeper.

K - That's what we have excavated through, that material, to come down onto the proper level of the camp. So this would have been somewhere close to where the individuals would have been walking on. [Image 41]

C - That completely changes your perspective of this landscape and how the camp looked, when you know that the ground level would have been much, much deeper.
This aerial photograph of the memorial at T2 dating from c.1970—before many of the trees now on the site were planted—shows no obvious localised elevation in the area in which the gas chambers are claimed to have been situated. So either the Germans raised up the entire area, requiring far more than the 122,000 tons I mention above, or the whole story is a fantasy.

Image
We just wish to point out to the court that is not a signed sworn statement of Dr. Bender but merely a translation of an alleged or purported statement of Dr. Bender, the original of which, like many other things, is not to be found today.
- Defence counsellor, Dachau trial, 7 August 1947

User avatar
theblackrabbitofinlé
Posts: 2045
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:33 am
Contact:

Re: Treblinka: Inside Channel 5's Propagandalagers

Post by theblackrabbitofinlé » Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:28 pm

Charles Traynor wrote:
Nessie wrote:
Charles Traynor wrote:....

One would not expect to find the remains of a Roman fort planted on top of T2 but small items like sharks teeth could easily be placed their during natural occurrences like animal activity, flooding, storms, etc.
Please evidence that is what happened at TII.
As you already know I cannot produce hard evidence to support my thesis but Occam’s razor certainly favours my version of events over CSC’s version (and yours). You claim hundreds of thousands of tons of sand were transported from the T1 quarry to artificially raise the ground level at T2 by at least a metre. And in keeping with typical German thoroughness the SS somehow managed to disguise their work making it appear as though the ground at the location in question at T2 had not been disturbed for a million years. I say :lol: to that theory.

Have you forgotten the T2 site was investigated after the war? Have you forgotten graves robbers allegedly blasted massive pits here? Have you forgotten a memorial and an anti investigation barrier consisting of steel reinforced concrete was built at T2 which would have involved a detailed survey of the camp area beforehand (perhaps this work unearthed the fossils when workmen were levelling the ground?)? Have you also forgotten T2 was allegedly disguised as a farm when the Germans closed this particular transit camp. How many farms do you know of which are located on top of a giant mountain of sand?

Are you seriously suggesting nobody noticed the ground level of T2 had been artificially raised in all the decades since the war ended? I would have also thought Caroline’s Lidar images would have made this immediately obvious!
Good points well made Charles. Your guessimate at the amount of sand required was a good one.
We just wish to point out to the court that is not a signed sworn statement of Dr. Bender but merely a translation of an alleged or purported statement of Dr. Bender, the original of which, like many other things, is not to be found today.
- Defence counsellor, Dachau trial, 7 August 1947

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 14 guests