Turnagain
âď¸
đđźđťđźđżđŽđđđ
Posts: 2,302
|
Post by Turnagain on Jun 10, 2022 8:55:51 GMT
Nessie wrote:
Without auxiliary equipment? I call bullsh!t.
If the Germans moved the ex from the camp, how did they do it? Where did they take it and how was it stored? Remember, the ex had to be replaced after the cadavers were supposedly exhumed and cremated. By all means let's hear more of your fantasies, Nessie.
|
|
mrolonzo
âď¸
đđđđŤđ˘đđ˘đđ§
Posts: 869
|
Post by mrolonzo on Jun 10, 2022 11:40:16 GMT
Who said you can work it out? Where is your technical study? What is complicated about working out how to drop Zyklon B into a secured room? Or digging large pits with excavators? Or pumping exhaust fumes into a secured room? Or burning bodies on pyres? Only revisionists cannot work out how it was done. It's pretty complicated. You have to make sure all these people are dead over and over then disappear them. In fact it's so complicated even for the actual normal operation in Auschwitz such that they had various specialists involved. So no. That point is refuted. |
|
mrolonzo
âď¸
đđđđŤđ˘đđ˘đđ§
Posts: 869
|
Post by mrolonzo on Jun 10, 2022 12:36:49 GMT
Ulios wrote: Nessie has no, zip, zero, nada interest in what was physically possible or impossible. Anything that supports the holyhoax is gospel and anything that refutes it is an "argument from incredulity". Just because you cannot work out how it was done, does not mean no one can. Your claims are super arrogant, as you think only you have the intelligence to work out how to dig a large pit and no one else can. You also labour under the false notion that if a witnesses sees something working, they are only telling the truth if they can describe how it worked to your satisfaction. Nope that's wrong. These gassings and disappearances are unique in history and represent an unparalleled killing process and technology. Therefore extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Lurid tales are not that. Nor are proclamations of criminal traces. |
|
Nessie
đŚ
đđđ§đđŤđđđ˘đĽđ˘đŹ đŽđąđˇđđąđśđ°đŽđđźđż (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,517
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 10, 2022 14:24:11 GMT
Nessie wrote: Without auxiliary equipment? I call bullsh!t. If the Germans moved the ex from the camp, how did they do it? Where did they take it and how was it stored? Remember, the ex had to be replaced after the cadavers were supposedly exhumed and cremated. By all means let's hear more of your fantasies, Nessie. I can see how the Germans could dig large pits in a camp next to a quarry. Next you will claim the Treblinka quarry is a hoax, because in your opinion the Germans are unable to dig large pits and transport the ex. |
|
mrolonzo
âď¸
đđđđŤđ˘đđ˘đđ§
Posts: 869
|
Post by mrolonzo on Jun 10, 2022 16:09:23 GMT
Nessie wrote: Without auxiliary equipment? I call bullsh!t. If the Germans moved the ex from the camp, how did they do it? Where did they take it and how was it stored? Remember, the ex had to be replaced after the cadavers were supposedly exhumed and cremated. By all means let's hear more of your fantasies, Nessie. I can see how the Germans could dig large pits in a camp next to a quarry. Next you will claim the Treblinka quarry is a hoax, because in your opinion the Germans are unable to dig large pits and transport the ex. You cannot see how this treblinka extermination was managed. You simply say you can. No hoaxer has ever produced a technical study of this unparalleled event. |
|
Nessie
đŚ
đđđ§đđŤđđđ˘đĽđ˘đŹ đŽđąđˇđđąđśđ°đŽđđźđż (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,517
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 10, 2022 16:16:46 GMT
I can see how the Germans could dig large pits in a camp next to a quarry. Next you will claim the Treblinka quarry is a hoax, because in your opinion the Germans are unable to dig large pits and transport the ex. You cannot see how this treblinka extermination was managed. You simply say you can. No hoaxer has ever produced a technical study of this unparalleled event. What would a "technical study" involve and how would it be evidential? |
|
mrolonzo
âď¸
đđđđŤđ˘đđ˘đđ§
Posts: 869
|
Post by mrolonzo on Jun 10, 2022 18:23:09 GMT
You cannot see how this treblinka extermination was managed. You simply say you can. No hoaxer has ever produced a technical study of this unparalleled event. What would a "technical study" involve and how would it be evidential? It would explain the history of the camps, the surrounding history of CO gas chambers, chemical examination of CO as a killing gas. Timings , volume, what it would need, what results one could hope to obtain with available and existing technologies. It will thus be evidential in building a logical foundation to the mass murder allowing mock up test runs to be carried out. Then of course one could try studying the technical issues of the disposal too. this would be evidence of the possibility of the event and exactly to what extent it was possible. |
|
Turnagain
âď¸
đđźđťđźđżđŽđđđ
Posts: 2,302
|
Post by Turnagain on Jun 10, 2022 22:36:52 GMT
Nessie wrote:
Nessie could see how a little boy could ride his tricycle to the moon if that supported the holyhoax.
Glad you mentioned T-I. Did you know that years ago over at the Klown's forum it was claimed that the photos of the draglines showed them digging the graves at T-II? At any rate, according to mfg. specs, the M&H mB was 13 feet high at its highest point and the photo shows a stockpile of ex where it's working just a few feet higher than the M&H house. That confirms my calculation that the M&H could build a stockpile no higher than about 5.5 meters.
In any event, in his interview with Faurisson, Olszuk mentions that he worked at T-I shoveling sand into carts. That corroborates that the Germans did in fact move sand out of the quarry and shows that laborers and other equipment was used to move the ex. Where are your witnesses to the ex being moved out of T-II? Why do the models of T-II show single cone stockpiles of ex alongside the alleged mass graves? According to witnesses such as Wiernik and Rajchman the stockpiles would have to be 3-4 times the height of the stockpiles shown by the photos of the draglines working in T-I.
The fact remains that the witnesses were lying about the mass graves. No such graves as described by the witnesses existed at T-II. It didn't happen.
|
|
Nessie
đŚ
đđđ§đđŤđđđ˘đĽđ˘đŹ đŽđąđˇđđąđśđ°đŽđđźđż (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,517
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 11, 2022 9:20:10 GMT
What would a "technical study" involve and how would it be evidential? It would explain the history of the camps, the surrounding history of CO gas chambers, chemical examination of CO as a killing gas. Timings , volume, what it would need, what results one could hope to obtain with available and existing technologies. It will thus be evidential in building a logical foundation to the mass murder allowing mock up test runs to be carried out. Then of course one could try studying the technical issues of the disposal too. this would be evidence of the possibility of the event and exactly to what extent it was possible. Which would obviously have to conducted by independent experts and not deniers. Jean-Claude Pressac attempted what you suggest, but even though he approached the subject with a great deal of scepticism and has been referred to as a denier, he changed his mind, so deniers reject his findings, as he says what they do not want to hear. Mattogno is both a denier and not an expert, so his claims can be rejected as not independent.
Evidentially, such a report would be of limited value, because it would have to make assumptions and fill in gaps in our knowledge. Depending on who wrote the report, the conclusion could be both mass gassings were possible and not possible. So, it would not be a reliable indicator.
|
|
Nessie
đŚ
đđđ§đđŤđđđ˘đĽđ˘đŹ đŽđąđˇđđąđśđ°đŽđđźđż (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,517
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 11, 2022 9:23:48 GMT
Nessie wrote: Nessie could see how a little boy could ride his tricycle to the moon if that supported the holyhoax. False comparison. Digging a large pit next to a quarry is clearly physically possible. Germans designing and building gas chambers is also physically possible and you have agreed on that, since you accept they had delousing chambers. Your doubts and inability to work out what happened to the ex, is not evidence. It is argument from incredulity. |
|
Turnagain
âď¸
đđźđťđźđżđŽđđđ
Posts: 2,302
|
Post by Turnagain on Jun 11, 2022 10:07:50 GMT
Nessie wrote:
I made no analogy. What I said was that you would support the tale of a little boy riding his tricycle to the moon if it supported the holyhoax.
What you are saying is don't pay any attention to those idiot eyewitnesses. They ALL made mistakes, exaggerated, used emotive language or perhaps even (gasp) lied. All that matters to you is that they claimed that Jews were gassed, buried, exhumed and cremated. The fact that their claims for how that was accomplished are as ridiculous as the fantasy of a little boy riding his tricycle to the moon is irrelevant to you. You excuse all of their lies and claim that the "ever so clever but eeevul Narzis knew how to get 'er done".
It's NOT up to me to "work out" what happened to the ex. No witness testified to the Germans moving the ex out of the camp. No witness testified to any other equipment used to dig the graves other than the "digger/excavator". All of the models of the camp show single cone stockpiles of ex alongside the graves. What you have is your fantasies about what "COULDA" happened and "the eeevul Narzis knew how to do it". Argument from incredulity my shiny hiny.
|
|
Nessie
đŚ
đđđ§đđŤđđđ˘đĽđ˘đŹ đŽđąđˇđđąđśđ°đŽđđźđż (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,517
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 11, 2022 12:08:11 GMT
Nessie wrote: I made no analogy. What I said was that you would support the tale of a little boy riding his tricycle to the moon if it supported the holyhoax. You repeatedly use that as an analogy to support your argument from incredulity. You are also using it as a strawman argument, where you make an unfounded claim about what I have argued. You do that because you cannot dispute my actual methodology, of assessing evidence by corroboration. You don't have evidence, so you rely on fallacies. You are lying again. If a witnesses claim can be explained by normal witness behaviour, then it is wrong to merely dismiss it. It is normal for witnesses to make mistakes etc. That you then dismiss their claims based solely on that, is wrong. You take the witnesses far too literally as part of your argument from incredulity. False analogy. A witness claiming the Nazis used excavators to dig large pits, is not the same as a witness claiming a boy cycled to the moon. That merely means the pits were not as big as the witnesses said they were, which is supported by the smaller pits found during the geophysical survey. Your arguments from incredulity are based on your irrational, unrealistic, over literal interpretation of the witness evidence. |
|
Turnagain
âď¸
đđźđťđźđżđŽđđđ
Posts: 2,302
|
Post by Turnagain on Jun 11, 2022 13:46:03 GMT
Nessie wrote:
Once again Nessie puts his innumeracy on display. It's claimed that well over 700,000 cadavers were buried before the order to exhume and cremate them was given. However, just to make the calculation easier, let's just call it 700,000. At eight (8) cadavers per cubic meter of grave that would require 87,500 cubic meters of grave space. Eight cadavers per cubic meter is generous and accounts for any compression of the bodies as they were buried. As has been proven, the dragline couldn't build a stockpile of ex any higher than 5.5 meters but let's be generous and say it was between 5.5 and 6 meters or about 32 cubic meters per meter of grave.
The most likely configuration for a grave would then be four (4) meters deep and eight (8) meters wide. Since there is 87,500 meters of grave space required for the cadavers we see that the length of the 4X8 meter grave would necessarily be 2,734.4 meters or about 2.7 km long. That doesn't include the 11-12 meter wide stockpile of ex that would lay alongside the grave. That doesn't take into account the required top cover for the graves either.
So, tell us how the "smaller pits" from the "geophysical survey" would contain over 700,000 cadavers. Alternately, tell us how graves that totaled over 2.7 km in length could fit inside camp 2, the alleged killing area. Oh, wait a minute, I know. Those ever so clever but eeevul Narzis would know how to do it.
|
|
Nessie
đŚ
đđđ§đđŤđđđ˘đĽđ˘đŹ đŽđąđˇđđąđśđ°đŽđđźđż (Nessies forum)
Posts: 4,517
|
Post by Nessie on Jun 11, 2022 14:15:41 GMT
850,000 bodies at 8 bodies per m3 is a total of 106,250m3 of grave space required. Divide that between 10 mass graves at an average of 10,625m3 per grave. If the grave is 4m deep and 8m wide, it would be 332m long. Geophysics found pits up to 14m wide, so if it was 4m deep, it would be 189m long. Graves that long would fit under the memorial, especially the graves that extend out from under the memorial. Ten graves at 332m x 8m is 26,656m2, or 2.6 hectares in a camp with an overall size of 17 hectares. About a third of the camp was used for the graves, so 2.6 hectares of graves in 5.6 hectares of space. I can work out how mass graves would fit inside TII, along with the ex. According to you, something happened if you can work out how it happened, so I can work out how the mass graves could fit inside TII, therefore there were mass graves at TII. That is my argument from credulity.
We can argue this for ever more, it is not evidence, it is our opinion and thoughts based on what we think along with some maths. Hence, your repeated use of the argument from incredulity, which I can counter with arguments from credulity, is not a substitute for evidence.
|
|
Turnagain
âď¸
đđźđťđźđżđŽđđđ
Posts: 2,302
|
Post by Turnagain on Jun 11, 2022 15:22:39 GMT
Nessie wrote:
Going by your numbers, if there were 10 graves it would total 3,320 meters of grave. That's ~3.3 km.
That's amusing. You've apparently forgotten about the stockpiles of ex. It would take at least 11 square meters of single cone stockpile per meter of grave or another 36,520 square meters or 3.65 hectares and a total of 6.3 hectares. Neither does that account for the necessary top cover for the graves. Neither does it account for the walkways necessary to access the graves.
The size of the graves necessary to bury 700,000+ cadavers is just an "opinion"? It doesn't actually have anything to do with the claims made for Treblinka as an extermination facility? I'm beginning to think that b-t's questioning of your sanity is realistic.
|
|
