Treblinka's mass graves

mrolonzo wrote:

Nessie is an innumerate so don't count on him being able to comprehend what I'm saying. As I said, I have set out the issue but it doesn't appear to have penetrated Nessie's ignorance of simple mathematics.

Nessie wrote:

NO! I DIDN'T say that. I said that 4.53 hectares would be the minimum area required for one continuous grave to contain 725,000 cadavers. That doesn't include the UNKNOWN amount of top cover for the graves or the UNKNOWN number of graves. There was one pit inside the lazarette for burning cadavers. There weren't multiple pits inside the lazarette area.

Nessie wrote:

It DOES matter how many graves there were since there has to be a space between the graves.

My aching arse! How thick can you be? The M&H dragline could excavate no more than about 32 cubic meters of ex per meter of grave. The top cover reduces the volume of grave that can be used for burial. If the entire 32 cubic meters of grave is used for burial then the resulting grave will be 2.83 km long. If the volume of burial space is reduced by one meter of top cover then the resulting grave will be 3.78 km long. That's for one continuous grave. That grave will have to be dug in much shorter sections to fit into the totenlager.

If that's the case, then each grave will have to be between 283 and 378 meters long. IOW, it will have to be longer than 283 meters by the amount of top cover for each grave.

Do you see that the 4.53 hectare, 2.83 km long grave is the base number that by definition will be smaller than the actual numbers. That is due to the fact that the amount of top cover and the number of graves are both UNKNOWNS.

Nessie wrote:

Trying to teach Nessie mathematics is indeed a hopeless task. NO, the M&H dragline couldn't dig a 4X20 meter pit. It couldn't dig a pit any larger than 32 cubic meters per meter of grave. That could be doubled to 64 cubic meters if a double cone stockpile was built. One on each side of the grave but none of the sketches or models show double cone stockpiles. In any event that's still less than your 80 cubic meter of ex per meter of grave.

Lukaszkiewcz's claim that the mass graves disappeared after they were used to bury the cadavers is absurd. So is your claim that CS-C's claims are "corroborated" and Krege's claims weren't.

I don't understand why a surface area of 4.53 will not fit inside a surface area of 5.66.



How does a barracks, a gas chamber, a pyre and space to walk between the graves take up one fourth of 5.66 hectares?



There was enough room by your calculations, especially when the Lazarette is taken into account.

Were the nazis being rewarded for their service or were they enemies of the victorious regime? Were nazis being executed and jailed? Were nazis tortured? All evidence of pressure.

It literally does mean that. Go ahead just show the numbers, the chemical traces in the ground from the samples. The photographs of hundreds of thousands of people.

I addressed it already. I even mentioned the AR finance document that destroyed the notion even further. You ignore it, so let's talk about this lovely logic loop of yours and wide application in history.


If you don't like that. Just tell me one bit of evidence that is absolutely incontrovertible proof of mass murder at Belzec, just to hone it down. Maybe a witness statement? A statement from Kola? The claim from 45 about a hand or a jew bone without teeth being found? Go on. Hit me with some real detail.

Why did you calculate it at 4.53, when it was more than that?

Why are you not taking into account at least one grave was in the Lazarette?



A fourth of 5.66 hectares is 1.41 hectares, or 3.4 US football pitches. I do not believe your claim the barracks, gas chambers etc were that big.



What is entertaining is watching you squirm as your calculations prove you wrong. Only someone with a limited grasp of the truth, would argue that 4.53 hectares, plus two buildings and a pyre could not fit inside 5.66 hectares.