The Holocaust in the Ukraine

To accurately related what has already occurred, the past is studied to establish what happened.



A lot of the work of historians is to establish what is myth and legend and what really happened, from ancient narratives that weave real events into mythical ones, to atrocity stories during wars.



There are revisionists who deny Babi Yar happened, but in any case, I am making a point that establishing what did not happen, does not tell us what happened. Historians are very much interested in what happened, if a narrative is shown to be false. If it was proved there were no massacres at Babi Yar, historians would be very interested in finding out really did happen to the Jews of Kiev.

So, could you please answer my questions about what you said about the evidence from Babi Yar here;

"The same situation that you have at Babi Yar you true-believers have at T2 and Birkenau. I.e, you have an emotionalised, greatly exaggerated/false mythology that can not be supported by empirical evidence. On the contrary, the archeological, forensic and empirical evidence REFUTES it."

I would like to see the archaeological, forensic and empirical evidence that refutes a series of massacres took place at Babi Yar. The only physical site examination was the 1944 Soviet one, of which we have very limited information.

Analysis of the Times of Israel account on Babi Yar, recently presented here as ‘evidence’.
www.timesofisrael.com/mystery-solved-babyn-yar-massacre-location-pinpointed-after-79-years/
Q. How could it have “remained hidden” if:
i.) there were known witnesses who supposedly were there and described it, plus
ii.) if the Soviets excavated and researched there in 1944? 
That claim defies simple logic. 

Q. if 33,771 jewish people were “slaughtered” there over 36 hours in the claimed batches of ten people, then that would mean 939 people were shot each hour continuously, each hour, for a day and a half, throughout the night. 
Which to most reasonable, sane people is obviously a highly impractical so improbable scenario.
 
If we assume the massacre was discontinued during the hours of darkness, that would still mean 33,771 people were shot during daylight hours, about 24 hours. I.e. 1,407 people each hour.
As the narrative claims these people were killed in batches of ten people, that would have taken 42 seconds to kill each batch, and ONLY if that was done CONTINUOUSLY during all the daylight hours, without any pause. Another impractical, highly improbable scenario. 
 
Q. If the narrative is accurate, and 70,000 non-Jews were killed there after the 33,771 Jews were, why is this Jewish representative making it soley about Jews and complaining the Soviets suppressed only Jewish history? 

This claim also defies simple logic. We are expected to believe that during the fight for German survival, when the tide of war was turning against them, and when ALL their resources, manpower and attention was required to avoid a devastating, existentialist defeat, somehow they could afford to assign manpower and resources to such a huge undertaking?!  🤪
And succeeded in destroying all the empirical evidence of mass-murder??? 😮🤦‍♂️ 
This seems to me to be further sign of the gullibility of the masses and the self-delusional nature of this highly improbable narrative which appears to me to be exaggerated atrocity propaganda.
 
Hmmm? 🤔
So over 33,000 Jewish people were supposedly killed here in batches of ten every 43 seconds, continuously for 24 hours and then neatly buried, “stacked in layers, like sardines” over just 2 days?? 🙄🤦‍♂️
And then the procedure was supposedly repeated here in this small ravine to another 70,000 non-Jewish victims who were also shot and buried here in the following months?
I wonder how any intelligent history graduate and ex-police detective can take this narrative seriously, let alone believe it implicitly and post it as ‘evidence’. 

What’s the problem?

I have posted numerous questions and doubts that I have about the official Babi Yar narrative. If any knowledgeable person who believes the official narrative is accurate can answer these questions I would appreciate it.

Please go ahead.

Nessie says we shouldn’t dodge questions if we are to have meaningful discussion.
So please do honestly and reasonably answer the unanswered one’s I have already put without dodging or obvious denial of reality. Then — i.e. AFTERWARDS — if you have questions about the skeptic’s position, they can be addressed also.
Easy. 🙂

Why won’t you do that?
Is it perhaps because you don’t like questions whose answers you on some level know undermine the H belief system?

I will remind members of the Praecepta 

• 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘆 𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗼𝗽𝗶𝗰. 𝗗𝗼 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗮𝗺𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮 𝘂𝗻𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗮𝘀𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗰𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗗𝗼 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗹.
• 𝗜𝗳 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗮𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗮𝘆 𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴. 𝗞𝗻𝗲𝗲 𝗷𝗲𝗿𝗸 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗲𝗽𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲.
• 𝗥𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗳𝘂𝗹 𝗼𝗳 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗲𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀. 𝐊𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟; 𝐥𝐞𝐭 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐮𝐩 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝.

It may be time to remind ourselves what a debate is, what is it not is a melee, brawl, fracas.

"Debate is a process that involves formal discourse on a particular topic, often including a moderator and audience."

Please state what knowledge you have, perhaps ask for clarification. Keep it civil and kindly.