«The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Questionnair

Discussions
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Poster
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:26 pm

«The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Questionnair

Post by Roberto Muehlenkamp » Wed Apr 11, 2012 6:10 pm

The "National Association of Forensic Historians" - NAFH (formerly "National Association of Forensic Criminologists, Archaeologists, Skeptics and Historians" – NAFCASH), a non-existing association consisting only of its "President", an obviously Nazi and White Supremacist fanatic by the name of Greg Gerdes, claims to offer $1,000 for each of a total of (by Gerdes’ count) 54 mass graves at the former Nazi extermination camps Bełżec, Sobibór, Treblinka and Chełmno that is proven to contain "the remains of - at least 19 bodies". The number is 19 because 19 is supposed to be "1/1,000 of 1 %" of the total number of people killed at these four camps according to Michael Shermer, or so Gerdes tells the readers of his website.

Applicants to the reward are supposed to post on the Skeptics Society Forum their evidence for each grave, in compliance with certain "official posting rules" that the applicant must request and confirm receipt of by e-mail. Said proof must then be «categorically endorsed by Michael Shermer (the sole appointed arbiter of the challenge), explicitly stating that said posted "proof" meets his own, "Skeptic" Magazine’s and the "Skeptics" Society’s claimed standards of proof». The required contents of the statement by Michael Shermer are included in a template of the proof submission to be posted by the applicant.

The "official posting rules" are changed at Gerdes’ discretion, a change having been introduced after my first proof submission on 15 February 2012 in order to make sure that, contrary to what is claimed on the NAFH website, the arbiter of the challenge is not Michael Shermer but Greg Gerdes himself.

The present thread starts with a presentation of Greg Gerdes in the manner I consider most appropriate – through his own words in a recent e-mail exchange related to the currently valid "official posting rules". There follows a commentary of and presentation/explanation of answers to «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves" Questionnaire», introduced as a prerequisite to be met by applicants prior to their next proof submission. This "questionnaire" was posted on the "CODOH Revisionist Forum" by one "Clem", obviously an alter-ego of Greg Gerdes, after the site on whose forum it had been originally posted (called "The Revisionist Workshop") went off the web. I’m addressing the "questionnaire" on the present forum as I have been banned from the "CODOH Revisionist Forum" (where censoring and banning inconvenient opposition posters is common practice, making a parody of the host organization’s claim to be a "Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust").

But first let Greg Gerdes introduce himself, through the aforementioned exchange of e-mails with this poster (whose e-mail name is "Guadalupe Salcedo", after a Colombian guerrilla leader in the 1950s). As Gerdes’ invective and general behavior is below the level of this forum, I have collected our e-mail exchanges at a place more suited to this kind of language.

Now that Greg Gerdes had properly introduced himself, let’s have a look at his latest questionnaire.

I’ll skip the introductory BS and go right to the questions and related notes. Note that the questions Gerdes asks are dishonestly self-serving in several ways:
a) They are not necessarily relevant, in that the answer to these questions doesn’t necessarily say anything about the accuracy of the established historical record of mass extermination at Bełżec, Sobibór, Treblinka and Chełmno as perceived by the person answering the questionnaire.
b) They are chosen and worded in such a way as to obtain the highest number of negative answers convenient to Gerdes’ articles of faith.
c) They demand either as "Yes" or "No" answer or a figure, without any explanation or substantiation, even though their subject matter calls for explanation and/or substantiation. Gerdes thereby wants to make sure that he can use the answers as it suits him, bereft of context, and make believe that they confirm or support his belief system.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]Part 1
For each of the 54 alleged “mass graves” - please answer the following simple
questions:
Note #1: A brief description of each alleged “mass grave” can be found here:
http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p= ... count=2666" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;[/quote]

Gerdes correctly counts 33 graves at Bełżec, insofar as 33 is the number of mass graves identified in an archaeological investigation conducted by archaeologist Prof. Andrzej Kola between 1997 and 1999 (descriptions and drawings of the graves can be read/viewed here).

The number for Chełmno is also correct, insofar as it corresponds to the results of archaeological investigations conducted in 2003-2004 by archaeologist Łucja Pawlicka-Nowak. A report about this archaeological investigation can be read here and here.

Regarding Sobibór extermination camp, Gerdes counts 10 graves, even though only 7 graves, all of them inside the camp’s former extermination area, have been identified by an archaeological investigation conducted by Prof. Kola and completed in 2001. The translated report about this investigation can be read here.

The 8th grave, by Gerdes’ count, is a monument known as the "ash mountain", set up inside camp’s former extermination area and visible in some of my photographs published here. It was presumably made of soil scraped together on the camp grounds after the war, and as that soil contained human cremation remains due to the activities of robbery diggers on site (the presence of such remains is documented in a postwar site investigation report quoted here), it can be expected to contain a certain but unknown proportion of human cremation remains, though it does not wholly consist of ashes as its name would suggest. I don’t consider this monument a grave because I define a grave as a pit or other structure made for the purpose of depositing human remains therein, so a mound of soil that happens to contain human remains but was not made for the purpose of depositing human remains therein is not a grave in my book. Gerdes, however, insists in calling the "ash mountain" monument a grave.

The 9th and 10th Sobibór graves counted by Gerdes are two comparatively small graves outside the Sobibór extermination area, depicted in a 2002 map by B. Rutherford showing the camp’s layout in June 1943. There is no archaeological confirmation so far, at least to my knowledge, of the existence of these two graves, and it is not known to me what evidence Rutherford based himself on when drawing these graves. It is possible that he took at face value the claims made at the Sobibór Trial in Hagen, German Federal Republic, by one of the defendants, a former member of the Sobibór staff by the name of Kurt Bolender. This defendant, who was in charge of the extermination sector, tried unsuccessfully to convince the court that the shootings of sick or infirm persons who could not walk to the gas chambers fast enough had been carried out at pits outside the area he was in charge of, and thus outside his responsibility. Therefore, unless and until archaeological investigation establishes the existence of these graves, they should be considered as non-existing. The absence of archaeological data, needless to say, also makes it impossible to make any however conjectural estimates about the size and contents of these graves. Gerdes should therefore have left them out of his questionnaire, as I often asked him to do.

As concerns Treblinka, the 6 graves counted by Gerdes have been drawn on a map by Peter Laponder showing the camp’s layout in August 1943. Mr. Laponder based himself on eyewitness testimonies, in part also on air photo evidence, and his projections can be considered reasonable as concerns the number, position and size of the graves depicted. However, these projections have not yet been checked against the results of archaeological research, which means that archaeological research at Treblinka (currently being carried out by British archaeologist Caroline Sturdy Colls) may reveal a different number of mass graves than was projected by Mr. Laponder and also a different position and size of each grave. This means that, until the current archaeological investigations at Treblinka have been concluded, nothing definitive can be said about the number, size and position of mass graves at Treblinka, and it is also impossible to make any statement about their contents, i.e. to what extent they contain only human cremation remains or (like some of the mass graves at Bełżec and Sobibór) also unburned whole human bodies. Gerdes should therefore not have included the Treblinka graves in his questionnaire, as was pointed out to him more than once.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]Note #2: Provide ONLY the information that each question asks for - NOTHING more - NOTHING less.[/quote]

No context, no explanation, no substantiation, so Gerdes can make believe that the answers to his self-serving questions support his ideologically motivated beliefs.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]Note #3: Responding to a question with a lie or providing any information other than what is asked for is not an honest or unequivocal answer and is therefore contrary to the explicitly specified instructions for completing this questionnaire.[/quote]

Providing context, explanation and substantiation doesn’t make an answer dishonest, especially when the question’s subject matter calls for such. What is highly dishonest, however, is to demand answers of the "yes or no" type to questions that call for a more complex answer, or to forbid explaining an answer where such explanation is necessary or recommendable so as to avoid misunderstanding or misinterpretation. So the statement that "providing any information other than what is asked for is not an honest or unequivocal answer" is a charlatan’s self-serving nonsense. As to the "lie" thing, it should be borne in mind that Gerdes’ definition of "lie" is not that of a normal human being. Lying in the sense of stating something against better knowledge is one of his favorite pastimes (if not compulsive urge that he couldn’t resist even if he tried), but what Gerdes means by "lie" is anything that doesn’t fit his Jew-hating and Nazi-loving world-view.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]A - Is it known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “mass grave” actually / currently exists - Yes. - or - No. - ??
(Note: The definition of "grave" is a place of burial - i.e. - any pit or trench dug in the ground or any tomb / mausoleum / structure built above ground that contains human remains.)[/quote]

The answer is "Yes" regarding the aforementioned 33 mass graves at Bełżec, 7 mass graves at Sobibór and 5 mass graves at Chełmno that have been identified by archaeologists.

It is also "Yes" regarding the Sobibór "ash mountain" monument, if one considers it a grave pursuant to Gerdes’ definition (which I disagree with, as mentioned above).

Regarding the 2 Sobibór mass graves and 6 Treblinka mass graves projected on maps by researchers but not identified by archaeological research, the answer is "No" for the reasons explained in the comments to Note # 1. As there is no certainty that these graves exist at all (Sobibór) or that they exist in the number, in the position and with the shape and size projected on a map (Treblinka), this means that answers to all subsequent questions regarding these graves are pointless. The honest answer to questions "B" to "Z" regarding these graves is "not applicable" (NA). My comments to the further questions will therefore only address

a) those graves whose number, location and size is known, i.e. the 33 mass graves at Bełżec, 7 mass graves at Sobibór and 5 mass graves at Chełmno that have been identified and measured by archaeologists, and

b) the "ash mountain" monument (considering it a grave pursuant to Gerdes’ definition), whose physical existence and shape are certain and whose measurements have been or could be easily established, even though they are not at present known to me.

These 46 graves are hereinafter referred to as the "physically identified" graves.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]B - Is it known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “mass grave” was dug during the time period that the Germans administered the camp - Yes. - or - No. - ??[/quote]

The answer is "Yes" regarding the aforementioned 33 mass graves at Bełżec, 7 mass graves at Sobibór and 5 mass graves at Chełmno that have been identified by archaeologists.

It is "No" regarding the Sobibór "ash mountain" monument at Sobibór, which was obviously made after the Germans left the camp site.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]C - Has the existence of this alleged “mass grave” ever been proven - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - via one or more of the following geophysical methods: Ground Penetrating Radar, Magnetrometry, Resistivity and Conductivity, EM61 High Resolution Metal Detection, GEM19 Overhauser GPS Magnetic Gradiometer, EM38 Terrain Conductivity Meter or GPS Mapping - Yes. - or - No. - ??[/quote]

This is one of the most dishonest questions in the questionnaire, as Gerdes knows very well that the 33 mass graves at Bełżec and the 7 mass graves at Sobibór have not been identified by any of the listed non-invasive geophysical methods but by core drilling. This method, while rejected by religious Jews due to its invasive nature, is an archaeological method as valid, and at least as suitable for identifying mass graves and establishing their shape and size, as any of the listed geophysical methods. As concerns establishing the contents of a mass grave, it is an even more suitable method insofar as the drill physically penetrates the human remains contained in the soil and the nature and concentration of such remains can thus be determined on the basis of core drilling probes.

As concerns Chełmno, the description of the method applied in the respective archaeological reports does not allow for establishing if the method applied was a non-invasive geophysical method or involved probing excavations; information about the graves’ contents, namely human cremation remains, suggests the latter. Caution therefore requires assuming that the method applied was not a non-invasive geophysical method such as listed in Gerdes’ question.

Regarding the "ash mountain" monument, I do not have information from any archaeological investigation (by geophysical and other methods) about its size or contents.

Therefore the answer is "No" regarding all physically identified graves. Needless to say, this doesn’t change the fact that 33 graves at Bełżec, 7 graves at Sobibór and 5 graves at Chełmno have been proven to exist with "100 % CERTAINTY" (which I understand as meaning the degree of certainty that available archaeological data, alone or together with other evidence, can offer) through valid archaeological methods.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]D - It is known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that the volume of this alleged “mass grave” is - __?__ square meters?[/quote]

Volume is not measured in square but in cubic meters, except perhaps in Gerdes’ cloud-cuckoo-land.

About the area and volume of the "ash mountain" monument at Sobibór, I have no archaeological information at my disposal. On the other hand I cannot exclude that such information exists, so the answer is a number "unknown to me" of cubic meters.

As concerns the 33 mass graves at Bełżec, 7 mass graves at Sobibór and 5 mass graves at Chełmno that have been identified by archaeologists, the answer to the question is found in the column "(a) Volume m³" of each of the three tables below, which are part of my HC blog Human remains inside the mass graves at Chełmno, Bełżec and Sobibór. In this blog, or in blogs linked to therein, it is explained on what basis these volume data were established.

Chełmno

Bełżec

Sobibór

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]E - Have the claimed dimensions of this alleged “mass grave” ever been proven - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - via a real / full archaeological excavation - Yes. - or - No. - ??[/quote]

I assume that the by "real/full archaeological excavation" Gerdes means physical digging to the bottom of the graves.

Such excavation was done in October 1945 regarding some of the mass graves at Bełżec, as mentioned here. However, none of these excavations established the dimensions of the respective grave, and there is no information that would allow for determining in which of the 33 graves identified by Prof. Kola in 1997-99 these excavations were performed.

As concerns Chełmno and Sobibór, I know of no "real/full archaeological excavation".

Therefore the answer is "No" regarding all physically identified graves. Needless to say, this doesn’t change the fact that the dimensions of 33 graves at Bełżec, 7 graves at Sobibór and 5 graves at Chełmno have been proven with "100 % CERTAINTY" (which I understand as meaning the degree of certainty that available archaeological data, alone or together with other evidence, can offer) through valid archaeological methods.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]F - Has anyone ever claimed to have physically / tangibly located so-much-as ONE bullet from within this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??[/quote]

I don’t know of any reported finds of bullets inside any of the physically identified graves (which is not surprising as only some of the Bełżec graves were excavated, see answer to previous question, and none of these was necessarily the one used for shooting people), so the answer is "No" for all physically identified graves.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]G - It is known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “mass grave” currently contains __?__ bullets?[/quote]

While there are no reported finds of bullets inside any of the physically identified graves (which is not surprising considering the answer to questions "E" and "F"), it is known from other evidence that one of the graves at each Bełżec and Sobibór was used for shooting people. As there’s no telling which of the graves identified by archaeologists it was in each case, one can therefore not categorically say, regarding any of the mass graves at Bełżec and Sobibór, that the mass grave doesn’t contain any bullets. At Chełmno permanent inmates were often killed by shooting IIRC, but there’s no telling at which of the graves this was done.

So the appropriate answer regarding all physically identified graves is "no or an unknown number of" bullets. In the questionnaire matrix this item will thus be filled in with the words "none or unknown", also regarding the Sobibór "ash mountain" monument as it may theoretically contain bullets brought to the surface by robbery diggers.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]H - Can you provide a photograph of a bullet that was extracted from the inside of this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??[/quote]

As follows from the answers to questions "E" and "F", the answer to this question is "No" regarding all physically identified graves.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]I - Has anyone ever claimed to have physically / tangibly located so-much-as ONE tooth from within this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??[/quote]

The only reported physical/tangible finding of a human tooth inside a grave (which I understand includes physical contact with a core drill) that I know of was in Bełżec grave # 10, as mentioned on page 15 of Prof. Kola’s Belzec report (drill probe 484/XV-30-55).

So the answer is "Yes" regarding this grave, "No" regarding all other physically identified graves.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]J - It is known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “mass grave” currently contains __?__ teeth?[/quote]

The archaeological methods applied at all physically identified graves consisted in taking samples of the soil’s contents and making conclusions about these contents based on such samples, not in bringing to the surface everything that is in the soil. Therefore the fact that only one tooth was reported found in just one of the Bełżec mass graves does not exclude the possibility that further human teeth, perhaps even many thereof, survived cremation and subsequent crushing and are still inside the mass graves at Bełżec, Sobibór and Chełmno. Whether and how many teeth each grave contains cannot be established, however. The honest answer to this question regarding each of the physically identified graves is that it contains "no or an unknown number of" teeth. In the questionnaire matrix this item will thus be filled in with the words "none or unknown" regarding all physically identified graves except Bełżec grave # 10, where the answer will be "at least one tooth".

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]K - Can you provide a photograph of a tooth that was extracted from the inside of this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??[/quote]

Even the tooth found in Bełżec grave # 10 was returned to the grave after archaeologists assessed the respective core sample, as was done with all core samples to my knowledge. While I presume that photographs of core samples were taken, possibly including a photograph of this tooth, these photographs have not been published and are not at my disposal. So the answer is "No" regarding all physically identified graves.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]L - Has anyone ever claimed to have physically / tangibly located so-much-as ONE bone fragment from within this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??[/quote]

The question is as silly as can be, for huge amounts of human cremation remains (including but not limited to bone fragments in a restricted sense of the term, for the cremation remains found also included ashes and these ashes may have included ground remains of burned teeth or tooth meal) were found in all mass graves investigated by archaeologists, i.e. in all physically identified graves except Bełżec grave # 28 and except (as far as I know) the Sobibór "ash mountain" monument. Finds were physical/tangible as they occurred by core drilling at Bełżec and Sobibór, and obviously by probing excavations at Chełmno. So the answer is "No" regarding the Bełżec grave # 28 and the Sobibór "ash mountain" monument, "Yes" regarding all other physically identified graves.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]M - It is known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “mass grave” currently contains __?__ pounds of bone fragments?[/quote]

This is another of Gerdes’ highly dishonest questions if he wants the term "bone fragments" to be understood in a restricted sense and not as a synonym for human cremation remains.

The (minimum) amount of human cremation remains can be calculated, and has been calculated by me, on the basis of archaeological data about the volume of each grave and the thickness of layers of human remains, plus reasonable assumptions about the minimum concentration of human cremation remains in the soil of each grave. The methodology is explained in detail in my HC blog Human remains inside the mass graves at Chełmno, Bełżec and Sobibór, and the weight of human cremation remains in each grave is stated in the tables from that blog mentioned in the comment to question "D" (in metric tons, see column "(f)" of each table – 1 metric ton equals 2,204.6226218 pounds). Only one grave – Bełżec grave # 28 – was not reported to contain human cremation remains, though it contains human corpses in wax-fat transformation.

Now, if Gerdes wants quantities/weights of bone fragments and bone fragments only in a restricted sense of the term, and not quantities/weights of human cremation remains in general, he knows very well that there are no archaeological data available that would allow for quantifying bone fragments and bone fragments only in a restricted sense of the term. If this is Gerdes’ understanding, the honest answer regarding all physically identified graves (except Bełżec grave # 28, where the answer is "zero", and the Sobibór "ash mountain" monument, where the answer is "unknown") is the following: "many but unquantifiable" pounds of bone fragments. The questionnaire matrix will be filled in accordingly.

If, one the other hand, Gerdes should understand the term "bone fragments" in a wider sense, as meaning human cremation remains in general, the following are the equivalents in pounds of the weights in metric tons stated in column "(f)" of the tables mentioned in the answer to question "D":

Chełmno

Grave #_Weight of human cremation remains ("bone fragments") in pounds
1_33,317
2_146,993
3_115,081
4_150,465
5_451,507
Total_897,363

Bełżec

Grave #_Weight of human cremation remains ("bone fragments") in pounds
1_234,885
2_14,054
3_142,316
4_19,355
5_223,218
6_99,208
7_264,555
8_140,545
9_46,297
10_167,704
11_2,205
12_33,069
13_69,227
14_305,891
15_66,139
16_57,871
17_82,673
18_47,124
19_82,673
20_182,323
21_2,894
22_16,535
23_45,470
24_42,990
25_19,745
26_26,455
27_11,136
28_0
29_74,406
30_6,201
31_7,441
32_32,043
33_9,921
Total_2,576,569

Sobibór
Grave #_Weight of human cremation remains ("bone fragments") in pounds
1_119,037
2_148,918
3_69,136
4_451,167
5_34,360
6_104,697
7_5,158
Total_932,473

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]N - Can you provide a photograph of a bone fragment that was extracted from the inside of this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??[/quote]

As Gerdes well knows, I can provide quite a few photos of bones or bone fragments, e.g. those shown on the HC forum thread My Trip to Sobibór. However, as I can never establish which grave exactly a photographed bone or bone fragment comes from (that’s the trick of this dishonest question), the answer to this question regarding all physically identified graves is "No", except regarding Bełżec grave # 28 where it is "NA" as the grave is considered to contain no human cremation remains pursuant to published archaeological finds.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]O - Has anyone ever claimed to have physically / tangibly located so-much-as ONE “whole” corpse from within this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??[/quote]

Prof. Kola reported that his core drilling came upon human corpses in wax-fat transformation, in layers of sometimes considerable thickness, in some of the mass graves at Bełżec (graves numbers 1, 3, 4, 10, 13, 20, 25, 27, 28, 32) and Sobibór (graves numbered 3, 4, 5 and 6). Based on archaeological information about the thickness of these corpse layers and substantiated estimates of the density at which corpses were buried in each camp (i.e. number of corpses per cubic meter), I have made maximum and minimum estimates of the numbers of corpses that the corpse layers described correspond to. For the maximum estimates, I assumed that each corpse layer is as extensive as the respective grave’s surface area established by archaeological research. For the minimum estimate, on the other hand, I considered the possibility that the graves narrowed towards their bottom (where the corpses were located) and that the area occupied by corpse layers was therefore somewhat smaller than the grave’s surface area. The resulting numbers are stated in the blog Human remains inside the mass graves at Chełmno, Bełżec and Sobibór, where the calculations leading to these numbers are also shown and explained.

So regarding the aforementioned 10 Bełżec graves and 4 Sobibór graves, the answer to this question is "Yes". Regarding all other physically identified graves, the answer is "No”.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]P - The largest number of “whole” corpses ever claimed to have been - TANGIBLY – located within this alleged “mass grave” is - __?__.[/quote]

Gerdes is asking for the maximum estimate only, but I’ll show both the maximum and minimum numbers calculated hereafter as stated in the aforementioned blog.

Bełżec

Assuming that each corpse layer is as extensive as the grave’s surface area, the number of corpses in wax-fat transformation inside each grave at a density of 19.51 corpses per cubic meter (the density at which corpses were buried in the Bełżec mass graves identified by Kola, if these were the only mass graves at Bełżec extermination camp, is most likely to have been this high or even higher considering the corpses’ decomposition while the graves were being filled, as was explained in the blog Mattogno, Graf & Kues on the Aktion Reinhard(t) Mass Graves (3)) would be the following (regarding corpse layer volumes see the blog Mattogno, Graf & Kues on the Aktion Reinhard(t) Mass Graves (2), where the assumed density is a conservative 15 corpses per cubic meter):

Grave #_Area (m2)_Thickness of corpse layer (m)_Volume of corpse layer (m3)_Number of corpses at 19.51 corpses per m3

1_480.00_0.40_192.00_3,746~
3_240.00_1.00_240.00_4,682
4_96.00_0.40_38.40_749
10_432.00_0.40_172.80_3,371
13_199.75_1.00_199.75_3,897
20_286.00_0.40_114.40_2,232
25_60.00_0.45_27.00_527
27_111.00_1.00_111.00_2,166
28_25.00_0.40_10.00_195
32_75.00_0.40_30.00_585
Total_2,004.75_5.85_1,135.35_22,150

A more and perhaps even exceedingly cautious approach to establishing the volume of the corpse layers assumes that the graves narrowed considerably towards the bottom due to sloping of the graves’ walls and that the graves’ bottom area was thus considerably lower than the surface area (Prof. Kola’s estimates of the graves’ volumes obviously took into account such a volume-diminishing effect, though not to the same extent as was done for good measure in the calculations shown hereafter). Based on this assumption, my calculations of the corpse layers’ volume and the corresponding number of corpses (at the aforementioned concentration of 19.51 corpses per cubic meter) are the following:

Grave # 1: corpse layer volume 79.44 m³, 1,550 corpses.

Grave # 3: corpse layer volume 99.29 m³, 1,937 corpses.

Grave # 4: corpse layer volume 15.89 m³, 310 corpses.

Grave # 10: corpse layer volume 71.49 m³, 1,395 corpses.

Grave # 13: corpse layer volume 82.64 m³, 1,612 corpses.

Grave # 20: corpse layer volume 47.33 m³, 923corpses.

Grave # 25: corpse layer volume 11.17 m³, 218 corpses.

Grave # 27: corpse layer volume 45.92 m³, 896 corpses.

Grave # 28: corpse layer volume 4.14 m³, 81 corpses.

Grave # 32: corpse layer volume 12.41 m³, 242 corpses.

Sobibór

Assuming that each corpse layer is as extensive as the grave’s surface area, the number of corpses in wax-fat transformation inside each grave at a density of 9.1 per cubic meter (as calculated in the blog Mattogno, Graf & Kues on the Aktion Reinhard(t) Mass Graves (3)) would be the following:

Grave #_Area m2_Minimum thickness of corpse layer m3_Number of corpses at 9.1 corpses per m3
3_240.00_0.40_874
4_1,575.00_0.40_5,733
5_120.00_0.40_437
6_375.00_0.40_1,365
Total_3,210.00_ _8,409

A more and perhaps even exceedingly cautious approach to establishing the volume of the corpse layers assumes that the graves narrowed considerably towards the bottom due to sloping of the graves’ walls and that the graves’ bottom area was thus considerably lower than the surface area (my estimates of the Sobibór graves’ volumes available for burial took into account such a volume-diminishing effect, though not to the same extent as was done for good measure in the calculations shown hereafter). Based on this assumption, my calculations of the corpse layers’ volume and the corresponding number of corpses (at the aforementioned concentration of 9.1 corpses per cubic meter) are the following:

Grave # 3: corpse layer volume 39.72 m³, 361 corpses.

Grave # 4: corpse layer volume 260.64 m³, 2,372 corpses.

Grave # 5: corpse layer volume 19.86 m³, 181 corpses.

Grave # 6: corpse layer volume 62.06 m³, 565 corpses.

In responses to earlier questionnaires, the calculated minimum number of corpses in each grave was filled in. However, as Gerdes now wants to see the maximum number of corpses that I consider to be lying in the aforementioned graves, this maximum number is what will be filled in for each of these graves under this item.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]Q - Can you provide a photograph of a “whole” corpse, or even part of a corpse, that was extracted from the inside of this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ?? [/quote]

As archaeological investigations of the physically identified mass graves did not involve the extraction of corpses where such were found at the bottom of the graves, there are also no photographs of such corpses. The answer regarding all physically identified mass graves is therefore "No" or "NA", depending on whether archaeologists reported finding corpses (besides or instead of human cremation remains) in the respective grave.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]R - Can you prove - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “mass grave” currently contains the remains of at least 19 bodies - Yes. - or - No. ?? [/quote]

The answer is "Yes" regarding all physically identified mass graves except the Sobibór "ash mountain", about the contents of which I have no archaeological information that would allow for estimating the amount of human remains contained therein. The tables already mentioned in the response to question "D":

Chełmno

Bełżec

Sobibór

show the calculated numbers of corpses corresponding to the calculated minimum amounts of human remains (usually cremation remains, in the above-mentioned 10 Bełżec and 4 Sobibór graves also corpses in wax-fat transformation) contained in each grave (column "(j)" of the Chełmno table, column "(l)" of the Bełżec and Sobibór tables).

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]S - Do you have the courage, integrity and character to accept - The National Association of Forensic Historians TM - Crime Scene Investigation Challenge TM * AND * post your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty ‘buried remains’ proofs” for this alleged “mass grave” on the so-called “Skeptics” Society’s forum while complying with - THE OFFICIAL - N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. - POSTING RULES - to the letter - to prove to the world that you’re not a lying coward - Yes. - or - No. ?? [/quote]

What we have here is not the most dishonest but the most imbecilic of Gerdes’ questions, and also the one that reveals most about his mindset and his problems. First of all, his "prove to the world" remark suggests serious delusions of grandeur, for I’m probably one of the few people in the world that pay attention to Gerdes’ antics, and that only because I consider him an embarrassment to "Revisionism" that can be put to good use against the same. Second, there is his obvious obsession with "courage, integrity and character", which is obviously related to his having neither of these qualities. Gerdes has shown himself to be a compulsive liar throughout our many discussions on the VNN forum and the extinct RODOH and The Revisionist Workshop forums. He has also displayed his "character" by indulging in foul invective strongly suggesting projection of certain habits and/or tendencies of his own that he doesn’t wish to confess. And his lack of courage has been made plain by, among other things, his running away from just about every question he has been asked. On the TRW forum alone there were 345 questions of mine unanswered by Gerdes as of 6 February 2012, the 153rd day after I started counting how long Gerdes had been running away from my questions (the TRW forum is extinct but screenshots have been preserved and can be provided to whoever might be interested). Gerdes’ most miserable display of cowardice was his running away from our appointment at Sobibór on 15.10.2008, after he had loudly and menacingly announced that he would be there to meet me (see post # 1525 on the VNN forum thread linked to above, and the HC blog Mass Graves at Sobibor – 10th Update).

My answer to question "S" is "Yes" regarding all graves that it applies to, i.e. the 45 mass graves at Bełżec, Sobibór and Chełmno that have so far been identified by archaeological research, for each one of which I intend to post a proof submission on the 15th of each month in accordance with Gerdes’ "official posting rules". I have already posted one such submission and intend to post the next one on the 15th of the present month, the following one on the 15th of next month, and so on. Unlike Gerdes, I have these three qualities that he keeps babbling about because he lacks them – courage, integrity and character. Of course I don’t think responding to Gerdes’ "challenge" by posting proof submissions on this forum in accordance with Gerdes’ "official posting rules" is a matter of courage, integrity and character. It’s a matter of having the required evidence at one’s disposal, first of all. And then it’s a matter of patience, humor and having sufficient time on one’s hands. I dare say that Gerdes will rarely find a person with enough patience and humor to not simply ignore his simian tirades, and even such person will usually have better things to do than pay attention to Gerdes’ hysterical hollering.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]T - Can you provide the name of a member of a skeptical organization who has publicly and explicitly endorsed your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty ‘buried remains’ proofs” for this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. ?? [/quote]

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]U - Can you provide the name of a professional forensic anthropologist who has publicly and explicitly endorsed your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty ‘buried remains’ proofs” for this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. ?? [/quote]

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]V - Can you provide the name of an employee of Archaeology Magazine who has publicly and explicitly endorsed your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty ‘buried remains’ proofs” for this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. ??[/quote]

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]W - Can you provide the name of a member of The American Academy of Forensic Sciences who has publicly and explicitly endorsed your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty ‘buried remains’ proofs” for this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. ?? [/quote]

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]X - Can you provide the name of a PHD professor - currently teaching forensic anthropology and / or archaeology classes at a university in the United States - who has publicly and explicitly endorsed your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty ‘buried remains’ proofs” for this alleged “mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. ?? [/quote]

The answer to these imbecilic questions is "No" regarding all physically identified graves (except for grave "8/46", where it is "NA" as I don’t expect obtaining archaeological data for a proof submission regarding the Sobibór "ash mountain") and it will probably stay that way as I can think of no member of a "skeptical organization", professional forensic archaeologist, employee of Archaeology Magazine, member of The American Academy of Forensic Sciences or PHD professor who would be willing to give any attention to the imbecilic utterances of a gutter-level creature like Greg Gerdes or to any response to such utterances. Academics or renowned publishers don’t get down to Gerdian levels, and for this reason alone Gerdes can be fairly sure that none of them will bother to endorse my submissions, assuming he or she even gets to read them and however solid he or she considers my case to be. This does not mean, of course, that any of the mentioned persons calls in question the proven historical fact that Chełmno, Bełżec, Sobibór and Treblinka were extermination camps and Gerdes’ Nazi heroes murdered enormous numbers of people at each of these places (for estimates on the death toll of these camps according to the current status of historical research see here and here).

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]Y - Is it known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - via laboratory / “micro-chemical” analysis that - ANYTHING - claimed to have been extracted from within this alleged “mass grave” is of human origin - Yes. - or - No. ?? [/quote]

Based on my current knowledge of what laboratory/micro-chemical analyses had been done, I can answer this question (as concerns my own personal knowledge and not as concerns what "is known", of course), with a "Yes" regarding Bełżec grave nº 1, based on the following information contained in Prof. Kola’s report about the Bełżec archaeological investigation (footnote 18 on page 21):
Microchemical analysis confirms in the sample taken from the drill 218/XXII - 25-75 (depth 150-180 cm from the ground surface) the existence of molecules of burnt human bodies and charcoal (from crematory grave No 2/97 in ha XXII) appearance of compounds typical for bone structures (calcium carbonate, calcium phosphate); compare A. S. Skibińscy Badania materiałoznawcze próbek z byłego hitlerowskiego obozu zagłady w Bełżcu, The Archive of the ROPWiM.
ROPWiM = Rada Ochrony Pamięci Walk i Męczeństwa (Council of Protection of Memory of Combat and Martyrdom), Warsaw, Poland.

[quote="Greg "Clem" Gerdes"]Z - Can you provide an actual / tangible photocopy of a legitimate scientific paper which details any alleged laboratory DNA / “micro-chemical” analysis that forensically proved - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that - ANYTHING - claimed to have been extracted from within this alleged “mass grave” is of human origin - Yes. - or - No. ?? [/quote]

No, I don’t have a copy of the paper mentioned in the answer to the previous question.

***

All questions now having been duly commented and the answers presented, I shall in the following post fill in Gerdes’ questionnaire matrix in accordance with what was written above.
Last edited by Roberto Muehlenkamp on Thu Apr 12, 2012 10:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

Roberto Muehlenkamp
Poster
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by Roberto Muehlenkamp » Wed Apr 11, 2012 7:20 pm

This is Gerdes questionnaire matrix mentioned in this thread's OP, duly filled in:

On one page:
Image

On four pages:
Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
Pyrrho
Administrator
Posts: 9919
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 12:31 am

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by Pyrrho » Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:05 am

Presumptuous of him to volunteer this forum without asking. Not that I'm surprised. I don't allow him to post here anymore so I suppose he had to figure out some way of doing it by proxy. His latest post remains locked in the approval queue. I suppose under the circumstances I could release it but that would mean allowing a banned user to post, which is something I don't knowingly allow.
For any forum questions or concerns please e-mail skepticforum@gmail.com or send a PM.

The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.

User avatar
bluespaceoddity
Poster
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 12:20 pm

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by bluespaceoddity » Thu Apr 12, 2012 5:53 am

Pyrrho wrote:Presumptuous of him to volunteer this forum without asking. Not that I'm surprised. I don't allow him to post here anymore so I suppose he had to figure out some way of doing it by proxy. His latest post remains locked in the approval queue. I suppose under the circumstances I could release it but that would mean allowing a banned user to post, which is something I don't knowingly allow.
Gerdes is the most effective Holocaust denier around. He was only banned because you, so called, Skeptics have no other way of dealing with his reasoning. You allow a few token -self appointed- revisionist acts like David and Chester but they're obviously only here to make a farce of denial. I strongly urge you to allow Gerdes to post alongside Berty48 and give revisionism a genuine chance of succeeding here at SSF.
Holocaust deniers have nothing of value to contribute to the record of history.

Roberto Muehlenkamp
Poster
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by Roberto Muehlenkamp » Thu Apr 12, 2012 9:44 am

bluespaceoddity wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:Presumptuous of him to volunteer this forum without asking. Not that I'm surprised. I don't allow him to post here anymore so I suppose he had to figure out some way of doing it by proxy. His latest post remains locked in the approval queue. I suppose under the circumstances I could release it but that would mean allowing a banned user to post, which is something I don't knowingly allow.
Gerdes is the most effective Holocaust denier around. He was only banned because you, so called, Skeptics have no other way of dealing with his reasoning. You allow a few token -self appointed- revisionist acts like David and Chester but they're obviously only here to make a farce of denial. I strongly urge you to allow Gerdes to post alongside Berty48 and give revisionism a genuine chance of succeeding here at SSF.
I am also in favor of allowing Gerdes to post here, even though Gerdes' tirades can hardly be called "reasoning" and the new poster, while using an alias suggesting someone else, may be a sockpuppet of Gerdes (who has adopted aliases used by other people on at least one previous occasion).

However far-fetched such claim is, Gerdes shouldn't be allowed the benefit of claiming that he's banned on account of his "effectiveness" as a denier. If he's allowed to post here and spout his repetitive "questionnaires" while running away from every question he is asked, he'll be effective the other way round, as an instructive embarrassment to "Revisionism".

To be sure, he requires moderation lest he fill the forum with spam. He should namely be compelled to address his opponent's arguments instead of just ignoring them and posting copy-paste repetitions of his refuted junk (one of his standard tactics), to answer his opponent's questions and to refrain from editing posts after they have been responded to and from opening several threads about more or less the same issues. And of course he should be required to write either under his real name or under a single alias that doesn't claim to be someone other than Gerdes.

Violations of these rules should be sanctioned with temporary but not permanent bans, preceded by a warning in each case. Only if Gerdes persists in such violations after several temporary bans should a permanent ban be considered.

PS: I've read some other posts from the poster BSO, who seems to be the real BSO rather than a Gerdes sockpuppet, if only because his writing suggests an intelligence higher than Gerdes'.

Roberto Muehlenkamp
Poster
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by Roberto Muehlenkamp » Thu Apr 12, 2012 11:23 am

Landscape format version of the filled-in questionnaire matrix:

Page 1
Page 2

User avatar
bluespaceoddity
Poster
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 12:20 pm

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by bluespaceoddity » Thu Apr 12, 2012 11:24 am

Roberto Muehlenkamp wrote:
bluespaceoddity wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:Presumptuous of him to volunteer this forum without asking. Not that I'm surprised. I don't allow him to post here anymore so I suppose he had to figure out some way of doing it by proxy. His latest post remains locked in the approval queue. I suppose under the circumstances I could release it but that would mean allowing a banned user to post, which is something I don't knowingly allow.
Gerdes is the most effective Holocaust denier around. He was only banned because you, so called, Skeptics have no other way of dealing with his reasoning. You allow a few token -self appointed- revisionist acts like David and Chester but they're obviously only here to make a farce of denial. I strongly urge you to allow Gerdes to post alongside Berty48 and give revisionism a genuine chance of succeeding here at SSF.
I am also in favor of allowing Gerdes to post here, even though Gerdes' tirades can hardly be called "reasoning" and the new poster, while using an alias suggesting someone else, may be a sockpuppet of Gerdes (who has adopted aliases used by other people on at least one previous occasion).

However far-fetched such claim is, Gerdes shouldn't be allowed the benefit of claiming that he's banned on account of his "effectiveness" as a denier. If he's allowed to post here and spout his repetitive "questionnaires" while running away from every question he is asked, he'll be effective the other way round, as an instructive embarrassment to "Revisionism".

To be sure, he requires moderation lest he fill the forum with spam. He should namely be compelled to address his opponent's arguments instead of just ignoring them and posting copy-paste repetitions of his refuted junk (one of his standard tactics), to answer his opponent's questions and to refrain from editing posts after they have been responded to and from opening several threads about more or less the same issues. And of course he should be required to write either under his real name or under a single alias that doesn't claim to be someone other than Gerdes.

Violations of these rules should be sanctioned with temporary but not permanent bans, preceded by a warning in each case. Only if Gerdes persists in such violations after several temporary bans should a permanent ban be considered.

PS: I've read some other posts from the poster BSO, who seems to be the real BSO rather than a Gerdes sockpuppet, if only because his writing suggests an intelligence higher than Gerdes'.
Not to belabor the point but it is self evident why Greg Gerdes was banned at SSF. At Codoh it has long been acknowledged that Mr. Gerdes is the most effective weapon agains the ugly myth but Codoh management and regular posters are also aware that Mr. Gerdes is prone to squandering his full proselytizing potential by restricting his activities to posting within the Fuehrer bunker.
The Codoh moderator has once more encouraged Mr. Gerdes to spend his time more efficiently and sent him back out into the world, away from the adulation.
With his calendar freed up it is likely that Mr. Gerdes will come knocking here at SSF soon but should he find that door closed as well I would be honored and quite willing to don the binary and be a local proxy for the master.
Is that an option? Yes, No, ... Maybe?

[Obviously I would need some more time to practice.]
Holocaust deniers have nothing of value to contribute to the record of history.

Roberto Muehlenkamp
Poster
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by Roberto Muehlenkamp » Thu Apr 12, 2012 11:38 am

I sent this e-mail to Gerdes:
Re: OFFICIAL - N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. - POSTING RULES - * correction *
Hide Details

FROM:

Guadalupe Salcedo

TO:

Greg Gerdes

Message flagged
Thursday, April 12, 2012 12:36 PM
Hi chimp,

While you were again projecting your unconfessed habits and tendencies, I filled in your "questionnaire":

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c166/ ... SPage1.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c166/ ... SPage2.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The questionnaire is posted on the SSF under this link: http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 49#p277449" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

On the same thread, bluespaceoddity and I are lobbying for you to be allowed to post again on SSF. I hope you appreciate our efforts.
Let's see how he reacts.

Roberto Muehlenkamp
Poster
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by Roberto Muehlenkamp » Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:55 pm

This was Gerdes' reaction:
Re: OFFICIAL - N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. - POSTING RULES - * correction *
Hide Details

FROM:

Greg Gerdes

TO:

Guadalupe Salcedo

Message flagged
Thursday, April 12, 2012 2:07 PM
Says the effeminate, mentally ill, homosexual transvestite who needs drugs and a shrink to get through his miserable life.


Roberto Rump Ranger

Roberto by day, Roberta by night

That cross dressing faggot is quite a sight.

From suit and tie to lipstick and rouge

And heshe is ready to go out for a cruise.

Gay boy by day, drag queen by night

That {!#%@} transvestite is quite a sight.

From 5 o'clock shadow at the end of the day

He transforms into Roberta via Mary Kay.

Liar by day, lady by night

That felch slurping homo is quite a sight.

Black dick is his weakness and there's only one cure

And Roberta get's the dose, that's for sure.

On his feet all day, on her knees all night

That mud shark queer is quite a sight.

Brief case by day, purse by night

Roberto Rump Ranger is mentally not right.

But that doesn't stop him from getting his kicks

Cause Roberta just loves big black dicks.

Pants by day, dress by night

That butt-hole surfer is quite a sight.

He hates himself, and you can see why

Cause every night she gets spuzz in her eye.

He fights it by day, she gives in to it by night

With daemons 24/7 heshe has to fight.

He knows he's insane, she knows she's sick

But they just can't resist sucking black dick.

Roberto by day, Roberta by night

That mentally ill faggot is quite a sight.



Bwa ha ha ha ha!!!



Greg Gerdes

President

The National Association of Forensic Historians

http://www.nafcash.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The vilest form of self-abasement is the subordination of your responsibility to reason to the minds of others.

A true measure of a man's charater is his willingnes to speak the turth - even at the expense of his reputaion.

A hallmark of self-deceiving cowards is their acceptance of authority as their truth, rather than the truth as their authority.
This was my response:
Re: OFFICIAL - N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. - POSTING RULES - * correction *
Hide Details

FROM:

Guadalupe Salcedo

TO:

Greg Gerdes

Message flagged
Thursday, April 12, 2012 2:53 PM
Greg Gerdes can't keep quiet about what his heart is full of.

But he should at least correct the spelling of his custom signature:

"charater" = "character" (something Greg Gerdes will never have)

"turth" = "truth" (the last thing Greg Gerdes cares about)

"reputaion" = "reputation" (Greg Gerdes' reputation is fubar, not because he speaks the truth but because he has amply shown to be a spineless coward, a compulsive liar, and a characterless gutter-mouth who reveals his secret habits/tendencies through his self-projecting invective)

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34843
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by Gord » Thu Apr 12, 2012 2:46 pm

Roberto Muehlenkamp wrote:Greg Gerdes can't keep quiet about what his heart is full of.

But he should at least correct the spelling of his custom signature:

"charater" = "character" (something Greg Gerdes will never have)

"turth" = "truth" (the last thing Greg Gerdes cares about)

"reputaion" = "reputation" (Greg Gerdes' reputation is fubar, not because he speaks the truth but because he has amply shown to be a spineless coward, a compulsive liar, and a characterless gutter-mouth who reveals his secret habits/tendencies through his self-projecting invective)
You missed "willingnes".
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

User avatar
Monster
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5560
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:57 pm
Location: Tarrytown, NY, USA

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by Monster » Thu Apr 12, 2012 3:09 pm

Man, that Greg Gerdes response email really is something, isn't it.
Listening twice as much as you speak is a sign of wisdom.

Roberto Muehlenkamp
Poster
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by Roberto Muehlenkamp » Thu Apr 12, 2012 7:11 pm

Gord wrote:
Roberto Muehlenkamp wrote:Greg Gerdes can't keep quiet about what his heart is full of.

But he should at least correct the spelling of his custom signature:

"charater" = "character" (something Greg Gerdes will never have)

"turth" = "truth" (the last thing Greg Gerdes cares about)

"reputaion" = "reputation" (Greg Gerdes' reputation is fubar, not because he speaks the truth but because he has amply shown to be a spineless coward, a compulsive liar, and a characterless gutter-mouth who reveals his secret habits/tendencies through his self-projecting invective)
You missed "willingnes".
Thanks, I added it:
Re: OFFICIAL - N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. - POSTING RULES - * correction *
Hide Details

FROM:

Guadalupe Salcedo

TO:

Greg Gerdes

Message flagged
Thursday, April 12, 2012 8:10 PM
PS:

I missed one:

willingnes = willingness (Greg Gerdes' willingness to answer pertinent questions, accept historical facts or at least make his "challenges" honest is nil).

User avatar
Pyrrho
Administrator
Posts: 9919
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 12:31 am

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by Pyrrho » Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:17 am

I appreciate the sentiment. I do not find the arguments compelling enough to knowingly allow a repeat offender to post here. I could not care less how he characterizes the reasons for his banishment. Anyone curious about the reasons can look up posts related to "cnote" and other guises.

Please do not post any more of his emails here, and please do not post his responses to discussions. Acting as his proxy is not advisable.
For any forum questions or concerns please e-mail skepticforum@gmail.com or send a PM.

The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3073
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: «The N.A.F.H. - C.S.I. / Alleged "Mass Graves " Question

Post by Nessie » Fri Apr 13, 2012 6:14 pm

Having read through Gerdes posts elsewhere I can save you all the bother of knowing how he would post back here - Robertos a ***** and a *****. The Jews are *******************************************************

Thats about it really.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.