Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old July 24th, 2008 #821
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

Muehlenkamp hints that Shermer is a faggot!

Roberta:

"What could it be that Shermer did to poor little Gerdes? Could it be that he left Gerdes for a Jewish woman and that this is how Gerdes’ pathological hatred against Jews came into being?"

Oh that's a good one Roberta. You're intimating that your new partner is a faggot! Calling the person who's going to have THE major say in whether or not what you present to "SKEPTIC" magazine about Sobibor / Treblinka gets published or not a faggot wouldn't be the wisest thing to do at this point in the game.

See folks, she can't go one single post without bringing up the homo thing.
 
Old July 24th, 2008 #822
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

Roberta:

"Any other idea what those light grey, black and white substances in the light-brown soil of Sobibor might be, Mr. Gerdes? Let’s hear."

How about ashes of human bone and tissue for the light gray stuff, wood ashes for the black stuff and pure bone ashes for the white stuff?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

What does Shermer think about those photos Roberta? That's what really matters, because he's going to have to give the OK on anything you submitt for publication.

What did Shermer say to you about your intimating that he's a faggot?
 
Old July 24th, 2008 #823
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

BTW Roberta, could you please tell us how the Germans reduced the bodies of 250,000 greasy jews to "pure bone ashes?"

I know it's been alleged that the Germans had "bone crushing machines," but I didn't know they had "bone ashing machines."

Oh wait, they must have reduced all those jews to "pure bone ash" with "plugs," right? Here it is folks, jews being forced to turn their fellow grease spots into "pure bone ashes" and "tooth meal:"

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...neGrinders.jpg

Which one of those layers in those photos is comprised of "teeth meal" anyway Roberta?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

You are priceless Retardo.

Simply priceless.

BTW Roberta, In what months issue of "SKEPTIC" magazine are we going to see your submittal?
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #824
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Muehlenkamp hints that Shermer is a faggot!

Roberta:

"What could it be that Shermer did to poor little Gerdes? Could it be that he left Gerdes for a Jewish woman and that this is how Gerdes’ pathological hatred against Jews came into being?"

Oh that's a good one Roberta. You're intimating that your new partner is a faggot! Calling the person who's going to have THE major say in whether or not what you present to "SKEPTIC" magazine about Sobibor / Treblinka gets published or not a faggot wouldn't be the wisest thing to do at this point in the game.
Don’t make such a fuss, Gerdes. I’m just baiting you on account of your obvious obsession with a) Shermer and b) homosexuality. If Shermer has a sense of humor, he’ll just chuckle about my remark – and even more so about the chimp’s predictable reaction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
See folks, she can't go one single post without bringing up the homo thing.
Actually, as readers who have been following our discussion will surely have realized, that aptly describes Gerdes’ problem but not mine. I usually just point out that Gerdes’ obsession with the subject strongly suggests the psychological phenomenon known as projection.
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #825
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

"Any other idea what those light grey, black and white substances in the light-brown soil of Sobibor might be, Mr. Gerdes? Let’s hear."

How about ashes of human bone and tissue for the light gray stuff, wood ashes for the black stuff and pure bone ashes for the white stuff?

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!
Note that the lying piece of shit distorted my statement before breaking into yet another of his characteristic fits of hysterical nervous laughter.

What I actually wrote in the second quoted paragraph was the following (emphasis added):

Quote:
How about ashes of human bone and tissue for the light gray stuff, wood ashes for the black stuff and pure bone ashes or lime for the white stuff, Mr. Gerdes?
But then, lies are something that compulsive liar Gerdes cannot do anything about. It’s stronger than him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
What does Shermer think about those photos Roberta? That's what really matters, because he's going to have to give the OK on anything you submitt for publication.

What did Shermer say to you about your intimating that he's a faggot?
And this comes from the very clown who in his previous post mendaciously claimed that I "can't go one single post without bringing up the homo thing", go figure.

But then, Gerdes has done little throughout this discussion besides clearly showing that he is all he accuses his opponent of being.

As to my question, I don’t want to know right now what Shermer says. I will only contact Shermer, if at all, when I have collected what I consider sufficient evidence to meet the challenge requirements. Right now I want to know what Gerdes says, and it’s amusing to see how the chimp jumps up and down trying to dodge my question.
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #826
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
BTW Roberta, could you please tell us how the Germans reduced the bodies of 250,000 greasy jews to "pure bone ashes?"
Where did I claim they did that, Gerdes? Show me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
I know it's been alleged that the Germans had "bone crushing machines," but I didn't know they had "bone ashing machines."
You’re getting sillier by the hour, Gerdes. Bone ash would be the result of crushing calcinated human bones, simple as that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Oh wait, they must have reduced all those jews to "pure bone ash" with "plugs," right? Here it is folks, jews being forced to turn their fellow grease spots into "pure bone ashes" and "tooth meal:"

http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...neGrinders.jpg
Bone ashes, ashes of soft tissue and crushed remains of ashed teeth were probably mixed with each other in most cases, but where larger calcinated bones were crushed the result would have been the substance known as bone ash (see under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_ash ).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Which one of those layers in those photos is comprised of "teeth meal" anyway Roberta?
Distinguishable layers made up only of the crushed remains of ashed teeth are far less likely for obvious reasons than layers consisting mostly or only of crushed calcinated bones. Gerdes again forgot to think before writing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!
Keep up the hysterical laughter, Gerdes. One or the other dumb sucker may mistake it for an argument, but anyone with half a brain will recognize it as showing a hopeless fraud's lack of arguments and corresponding helpless rage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
You are priceless Retardo.

Simply priceless.
Priceless is what I have appropriately called you, and you’re a lousy imitator apart from a lying coward and arguably one of the dumbest creatures in "Revisionist" cloud-cuckoo-land (and thus a showpiece and demonstration object of "Revisionist" manure as instructive as I could ever have wished for).

Now back to my questions:

Quote:
Quote:
The color of the soil, judging by the soil surface visible on these photographs, is a light brown. Yet these samples show layers underground that are light gray and black:





Or white:



How about ashes of human bone and tissue for the light gray stuff, wood ashes for the black stuff and pure bone ashes or lime for the white stuff, Mr. Gerdes?
Any other idea what those light grey, black and white substances in the light-brown soil of Sobibor might be, Mr. Gerdes? Let’s hear.
The light gray substance on the first two photos looks like ashes of human bone and tissue to me. I’ve seen such ashes elsewhere, hence the association.

The black substance on the second photo looks like wood ash to me. There’s a gray streak in the middle of the black suggesting that some human ashes may be there as well.

The white substances on the third photo could be either bone ash or the lime that was poured upon the dead bodies in the mass graves.

Now let’s see what alternative possibilities you come up with, Gerdes. Instead of seeking refuge in infantile derision and silly laughter, tell us what other than human ashes, wood ashes or lime the substances on these photos of Sobibor core drill samples, clearly distinguishable from the light-brown soil, could possibly be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
BTW Roberta, In what months issue of "SKEPTIC" magazine are we going to see your submittal?
I have no idea and don’t even know if I will use SKEPTIC and not ARCHAEOLOGY magazine. But please keep showing how nervous you are about what’s happening on site, Mr. Gerdes. The longer it takes, the longer I shall enjoy your squirming.
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #827
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

By the way, Gerdes, I just noticed another shifting of the goalposts.

Previously the applicant had the choice between SKEPTIC and ARCHAEOLOGY magazine, and you made a big bloody fuss concerning that magazine (emphases added):

Quote:
And since the Archaeology Institute of America has explicitly endorsed the veracity of the official version of the holocaust / pure extermination centers and the authenticity of these alleged archeological investigations / findings, ARCHAEOLOGY MAGAZINE (published by said institute) should be more than willing to publish the results of any scientific investigation that claims to have proven that these asinine pure extermination center legends have been forensically proven to be a fact. Therefore, one can also lay claim to THE FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE TM reward by having said claims / results published in ARCHAEOLOGY Magazine.
NOTE: The above Archaeology Magazine article / link concerning Chelmno contains the following quote: “’It’s one thing to hear about the crematory, it’s another to stand inside an enormous pit that is filled with human bones,’ says Krzysztof Gorczycae.’” An enormous pit that is filled with human bones? Really? Then why are there no photographs that prove it? There are fourteen photographs accompanying this article, yet not one that shows this alleged enormous pit! Isn’t it odd that a magazine article intended to verify this archeological investigation doesn’t include any
legitimate photographic proof of this allegedly proven holocaust within the holocaust? Why is it that it only includes irrelevant photographs and REVERENT NONSENSE about the trash that’s being dug out of an old refuse pit? The only thing that this deluding article gives us is a fraudulent, maliciously fabricated and emotionally charged mental image (i.e. – a cognitive illusion) of an alleged “enormous pit that is filled with human bones.” And if Chelmno isn’t just another holohoax within the holohoax, then why does Juliet Golden, the jewish author of this spurious ARCHAEOLOGY Magazine article, refuse to accept THE FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE TM?
Now the only reference to ARCHAEOLOGY magazine, unless my search engine missed something, is this:

Quote:
ALSO NOTE: If “SKEPTIC” magazine rejects your submittal, NAFCASH TM MAY grant you a second opportunity at becoming a reward applicant via Archaeology Magazine.
Apart from your having removed your mouthing-off about ARCHAEOLOGY magazine, you are no longer giving the applicant the choice between publishing in SKEPTIC magazine and publishing in ARCHAEOLOGY magazine. Now SKEPTIC magazine must be the applicant’s first choice for publication, and if SKEPTIC magazine rejects the applicant’s submittal, then NAFCASH may (or may not) accept publication in Archaeology Magazine instead.

Thanks for showing once more what a miserable coward you are, Mr. Gerdes.

And please tell us, what was it that made you get cold feet regarding ARCHAEOLOGY magazine?

Did Mrs. Golden accept the NAFCASH challenge and announce that she would submit evidence about the exact location and exact contents of a Chelmno mass grave as well the amount of human remains contained therein?

Or did you just decide that it was better not to take chances that she or someone else might do that?

Of course if you removed Chelmno and the howling about ARCHAEOLOGY magazine you also had to remove Belzec, otherwise it would have been too obvious what and who you are afraid of.

Or then someone let you know that a court of law might consider Prof. Kola’s Belzec report sufficient proof to meet your challenge requirements.

Or then it was both.
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #828
ced smythe
Member
 
ced smythe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
ced smythe
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roberto Muehlenkamp View Post
I disagree, but thanks for telling us why you hate Jews.

Your babblings are becoming increasingly incoherent, my friend.
Pride does not give rise to hate; you disagree with the world excluding Jews. If you insist on barking up the wrong tree over this issue, an issue that most people understand, it serves as a demonstration of what a relentless liar you can be.

Quote:
Boy, I must have hit a raw nerve with my comment, judging by how it sent CS into a fit of hysterical rage.
Beautiful. Another well timed substantiation of barking up the wrong tree. It pleases me that you whinge and attempt to explain away your paranoid fantasy of unequal opportunity. Evasive response to boot.

Quote:
No, that is clearly your problem. I’m saying that I consider setting up the challenge to be contemptible but responding to it to be less so or not at all. Can’t you read?
I'm not mistaken; you've contradicted yourself. Why don't you continue to rabbinize and self delude?

Quote:
I think what I called the rabbi’s complaint was unintentional and therefore particularly credible evidence, and I don’t remember your having shown my reasoning to be wrong. If rabbis want to keep archaeological work from being done due to religious considerations, they are an obstacle that must be overcome.
The rabbi's emotion is not credible evidence, it's emotionalism, which is run of the mill deception as I've already explained.

Quote:
I disagree, but thanks for telling us why you hate Jews.

Your babblings are becoming increasingly incoherent, my friend.

Boy, I must have hit a raw nerve with my comment, judging by how it sent CS into a fit of hysterical rage.
I'm also telling you why Jews hate White children, their deadliest foe. On the question of babbling, you've repeated yourself, Bert.

Quote:
That was very lame, CS. Give it another try.
Oh, little Bobbajob. Fits of hysterical rage? Come on, Shorty.

Quote:
There’s nothing subjective about using the word "faith" for belief in the trustworthiness of an idea that (like "Revisionism") is supported by no evidence whatsoever, sorry. It follows from the definition.
On the question of incoherence, Bert, the point was and still is that I noted your instinctive dislike of White heritage in South America. Evasive, obfuscating tangents are part of Jew design.
__________________
Fear not the path of truth for the lack of those upon it.
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #829
ced smythe
Member
 
ced smythe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
ced smythe
Default

If there is going to be an archeological dig at Treblinka or any of the alleged scenes of mass murder, there should also be an independant television crew to follow the proceedings. I mean, this is big, the kind of event that has the potential to alter the course of history.

Given the extemes of relative experience, the chasm that exists between Jews' and Whites' interpretation of ultimate reality, it would be a waste of a wonderful chance to rid the world of this injurious lie.
__________________
Fear not the path of truth for the lack of those upon it.
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #830
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ced smythe View Post
If there is going to be an archeological dig at Treblinka or any of the alleged scenes of mass murder, there should also be an independant television crew to follow the proceedings. I mean, this is big, the kind of event that has the potential to alter the course of history.

Given the extemes of relative experience, the chasm that exists between Jews and Whites interpretation of ultimate reality, it would be a waste of a wonderful chance to rid the world of this injurious lie.
Keep dreaming, my friend.

And better remind your friend Gerdes to shift the goalposts by including that "independent television crew" crap in his challenge requirements. It's not there yet.
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #831
ced smythe
Member
 
ced smythe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
ced smythe
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roberto Muehlenkamp View Post
Keep dreaming, my friend.

And better remind your friend Gerdes to shift the goalposts by including that "independent television crew" crap in his challenge requirements. It's not there yet.
This has nothing to do with the NAFCASH challenge.

You don't object, surely?
__________________
Fear not the path of truth for the lack of those upon it.
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #832
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roberto Muehlenkamp
I disagree, but thanks for telling us why you hate Jews.

Your babblings are becoming increasingly incoherent, my friend.

Pride does not give rise to hate; you disagree with the world excluding Jews. If you insist on barking up the wrong tree over this issue, an issue that most people understand, it serves as a demonstration of what a relentless liar you can be.
So if someone disagrees with your opinion he a) disagrees with "the world excluding Jews" and b) is a "relentless liar"?

As I said before, your babblings are becoming increasingly incoherent. And accordingly instructive for demonstration purposes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
Boy, I must have hit a raw nerve with my comment, judging by how it sent CS into a fit of hysterical rage.

Beautiful. Another well timed substantiation of barking up the wrong tree. It pleases me that you whinge and attempt to explain away your paranoid fantasy of unequal opportunity. Evasive response to boot.
That's further confirmation of my above assessment of your utterances, thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
No, that is clearly your problem. I’m saying that I consider setting up the challenge to be contemptible but responding to it to be less so or not at all. Can’t you read?

I'm not mistaken; you've contradicted yourself. Why don't you continue to rabbinize and self delude?
Self-delusion I leave to true believers like you, my friend. One thing is setting up a challenge like Gerdes has set up. Another thing, in my opinion is responding to such a challenge. If the distinction is too hard for you to grasp, that’s your problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
I think what I called the rabbi’s complaint was unintentional and therefore particularly credible evidence, and I don’t remember your having shown my reasoning to be wrong. If rabbis want to keep archaeological work from being done due to religious considerations, they are an obstacle that must be overcome.

The rabbi's emotion is not credible evidence, it's emotionalism, which is run of the mill deception as I've already explained.
No, it’s as credible as the Wehrmacht commandant’s complaint about the stench from Treblinka, in that it is also not intended to be evidence for purposes of criminal investigation or historical research.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
I disagree, but thanks for telling us why you hate Jews.

Your babblings are becoming increasingly incoherent, my friend.

Boy, I must have hit a raw nerve with my comment, judging by how it sent CS into a fit of hysterical rage.

I'm also telling you why Jews hate White children, their deadliest foe. On the question of babbling, you've repeated yourself, Bert.
Oh, now "Jews hate White children, their deadliest foe". That's cute. Let’s have more such utterances from the cloud-cuckoo-land you live in, they are quite amusing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
That was very lame, CS. Give it another try.

Oh, little Bobbajob. Fits of hysterical rage? Come on, Shorty.
That try was even more lame than the previous one. Try again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
There’s nothing subjective about using the word "faith" for belief in the trustworthiness of an idea that (like "Revisionism") is supported by no evidence whatsoever, sorry. It follows from the definition.

On the question of incoherence, Bert, the point was and still is that I noted your instinctive dislike of White heritage in South America.
Critical assessment and "instinctive dislike" are two different pairs of boots, except for emotional fanatics like you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Evasive, obfuscating tangents are part of Jew design.
Thanks for complying so quickly with my request for utterances from cloud-cuckoo-land. And please keep complying!
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #833
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ced smythe View Post
This has nothing to do with the NAFCASH challenge.

You don't object, surely?
No, but I don’t consider it necessary.

What would be an "independent" television crew for you, by the way?
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #834
ced smythe
Member
 
ced smythe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
ced smythe
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roberto Muehlenkamp View Post
So if someone disagrees with your opinion he a) disagrees with "the world excluding Jews" and b) is a "relentless liar"?

As I said before, your babblings are becoming increasingly incoherent. And accordingly instructive for demonstration purposes.
Pride is not related to hate so spinning relentlessly over emotion that everybody understands is futile.

Quote:
That's further confirmation of my above assessment of your utterances, thanks.
This remark changes nothing: you are posting in an equal opportunity forum and I am not in an hysterical rage.

Quote:
Self-delusion I leave to true believers like you, my friend. One thing is setting up a challenge like Gerdes has set up. Another thing, in my opinion is responding to such a challenge. If the distinction is too hard for you to grasp, that’s your problem.
My problem seems to be an ability to spot your evasive subtlety.

Quote:
No, it’s as credible as the Wehrmacht commandant’s complaint about the stench from Treblinka, in that it is also not intended to be evidence for purposes of criminal investigation or historical research.
The emotions of a rabbi are not credible evidence and they have nothing to do with a complaint about stench.

Quote:
Oh, now "Jews hate White children, their deadliest foe". That's cute. Let’s have more such utterances from the cloud-cuckoo-land you live in, they are quite amusing.
Evasive non sequitur.

Quote:
Critical assessment and "instinctive dislike" are two different pairs of boots, except for emotional fanatics like you.
This is another rabbinic interpretation and it evades the point yet again. The incubus on your mind ensures that "critical assessment" consistently sides with the interests of world Jewry.

Quote:
No, but I don’t consider it necessary.

What would be an "independent" television crew for you, by the way?
On this matter of great importance, due to the extremes of relativism, I consider it an imperative.

Independent needs no hairsplitting definitions.
__________________
Fear not the path of truth for the lack of those upon it.
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #835
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

Originally Posted by Gerdes

Muehlenkamp hints that Shermer is a faggot!

Roberta:

"Don’t make such a fuss, Gerdes... If Shermer has a sense of humor, he’ll just chuckle about my remark."

Do you think he'll also "just chuckle about your remark" that you made in topix post #796?

Gerdes:

Is it for the same reason you didn't bring up Shermer alleged investigations?

Roberta:

"What would that reason be, Gerdes? I don’t think much of Shermer as a researcher, as I have told you."

Yes Roberta, no one does, as I told you in my reply of post #797. You remember that post, don't you Robert? Of course you do, because you censored my reply in post 797 by cowardly reporting it to the cowardly moderator at topix and it was deleted.

Roberta:

"By the way, Gerdes, I just noticed another shifting of the goalposts."

Only a jew would call my simplifying and clarifying, at the jews own insistence, as "shifting the goalposts."

Roberta:

"you are no longer giving the applicant the choice between publishing in SKEPTIC magazine and publishing in ARCHAEOLOGY magazine. Now SKEPTIC magazine must be the applicant’s first choice for publication, and if SKEPTIC magazine rejects the applicant’s submittal, then NAFCASH may (or may not) accept publication in Archaeology Magazine instead."

Just for you Roberta. Of course your failure to notice sooner further illustrates what a retard you are.

And of course, since there is no conceivable reason why Shermer / "SKEPTIC" magazine wouldn't publish legitimate proof, there's nothing for you to be worried about, now it there Retardo?

Thank you Roberta.

Roberta:

"Did Mrs. Golden accept the NAFCASH challenge and announce that she would submit evidence about the exact location and exact contents of a Chelmno mass grave as well the amount of human remains contained therein?"

If jew-lie Golden wants to accept THE FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE the way it was previously, which included Chelmno and Archaeology Magazine, I, and all twenty supporters will make any and all special accommodations for such an announcement. We will bend over backwards to make sure it happens. We will set up a new challenge independent of THE FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE, just for her. Just like we modified the FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE just to make it easier for you retardo.

In fact, nafcash challenges jew-lie golden and ARCHAEOLOGY magazine to accept a Chelmno / Archaeology Magazine challenge. Perhaps you and your fellow funny boy freaks over at HC (Hysterical and Cowardly HIV Contagious Homosexual Creeps espousing Holocaust Claptrap and other Historical Canards) can help nafcash make it happen. After all, you do want to help stop holocaust denial - don't you retardo?

Thank you Roberta.

You are priceless.

BTW Roberta, just how much "human remains contained therein" have been located at Chelmno?
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #836
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

Roberta:

“What is visible in these samples is quite interesting. The color of the soil, judging by the soil surface visible on these photographs, is a light brown. Yet these samples show layers underground that are light gray and black:

The light gray substance on the first two photos looks like ashes of human bone and tissue to me. I’ve seen such ashes elsewhere, hence the association.

The black substance on the second photo looks like wood ash to me. There’s a gray streak in the middle of the black suggesting that some human ashes may be there as well.

The white substances on the third photo could be either bone ash or the lime that was poured upon the dead bodies in the mass graves.”

1 - http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/...adania/F5.html

2 - http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/...adania/F6.html

3 - http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/...adania/F7.html

Roberta continues:

“How about ashes of human bone and tissue for the light gray stuff, wood ashes for the black stuff and pure bone ashes or lime for the white stuff, Mr. Gerdes?

Any other idea what those light grey, black and white substances in the light-brown soil of Sobibor might be, Mr. Gerdes? Let’s hear.

Try explaining why charred human remains and remains in a state of decay should be visible on any given core-drilling sample from mass graves that can be expected to largely or mostly contain cremains.

Bone ashes, ashes of soft tissue and crushed remains of ashed teeth were probably mixed with each other in most cases, but where larger calcinated bones were crushed the result would have been the substance known as bone ash.

Distinguishable layers made up only of the crushed remains of ashed teeth are far less likely for obvious reasons than layers consisting mostly or only of crushed calcinated bones.”

Thanks for that Roberta.

Have I ever told you you are priceless?

Now, let’s remind everyone what the mentally ill jewbitch wrote earlier:

Quote: Originally Posted by Gerdes

She hasn't been able to even prove that the "huge mass grave" of Sobibor exists;

Roberta:

Actually I’m able to prove the existence of all of these mass graves by simply referring to Prof. Kola’s description.”


Yes Roberta, could you tell us again what Kola “described” finding in the “huge mass graves” of Sobibor?

Roberta:


Proof is contained in Prof. Kola’s published report about his findings on site, and in the documentary and eyewitness evidence about the mass killings at Sobibor, which is compatible with Kola’s findings.”

And what were Kola’s findings again Roberta?

Roberta:

“This proof is and has been accepted by historians and criminal investigators, Gerdes. So unless you can show relevant rules or standards of evidence that these people did not comply with or strong indications of evidence manipulation, it is proof for the purpose of our discussion as well (and may even be considered proof for the purpose of meeting your "challenge" by a court of law, so better be more specific about what kind of proof you want – that’s well meaning advice)... Because Prof. Kola said so and there’s no reason to doubt the statements of this renowned archeologist, especially as they are also in line with what all other known evidence tells us about Sobibor… And the reason to doubt the archeologist’s public statement that would support this "allegedly" is? None? I thought so.”

And what did Kola say again Roberta?

Roberta:

IV. Sobibor

IV.2 Physical evidence

IV.2.1 Physical evidence described in a public statement by Prof. Kola about an archaeological excavation conducted at Sobibor in 2001, mentioned in a Reuters press release.

And tell us again what Kola claims he found in that press release Roberta?

Roberta:

“Any other idea what those light grey, black and white substances in the light-brown soil of Sobibor might be, Mr. Gerdes? Let’s hear.”

Better yet Roberta - why waste time talking about what my ideas might be?

What do the frauds at the Sobibor Archaeology Project say it is? They’re the ones who analysed the core samples – right? They DID analyse the core samples – DID THEY NOT – Roberta?

Thank you Roberta.
 
Old July 25th, 2008 #837
Greg Gerdes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
Greg Gerdes
Default

OK Roberta, time to get down to business.

Now that you and your "not much of a researcher" partner are team members, it's time for you to answer the one simple question that has been on everyone’s mind since day one. And it is a very very simple question -

On what dates did Shermer carry out his alleged Sobibor and Treblinka "investigations?"

Do I have to make it simpler for you retardo?

On what day did Shermer first step foot in Sobibor and on what date did he leave Sobibor for good?

On what day did Shermer first step foot in Treblinka and on what date did he leave Treblinka for good?


No more excuses Roberta. Shermer is part of your team. This information is a major part of the alleged "investigations" of these two camps. The answer is an exchange of emails by two team members away.

On what dates did Shermer carry out his alleged Sobibor and Treblinka "investigations?"

Answer the question jew.
 
Old July 26th, 2008 #838
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roberto Muehlenkamp View Post
So if someone disagrees with your opinion he a) disagrees with "the world excluding Jews" and b) is a "relentless liar"?

As I said before, your babblings are becoming increasingly incoherent. And accordingly instructive for demonstration purposes.

Pride is not related to hate so spinning relentlessly over emotion that everybody understands is futile.
Pride may lead to hating what harms the object of pride, and "everybody understands" has never been an argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
That's further confirmation of my above assessment of your utterances, thanks.
This remark changes nothing: you are posting in an equal opportunity forum and I am not in an hysterical rage.
You’re right, this is an equal opportunity forum – because none of my several opponents is a match for me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
Self-delusion I leave to true believers like you, my friend. One thing is setting up a challenge like Gerdes has set up. Another thing, in my opinion is responding to such a challenge. If the distinction is too hard for you to grasp, that’s your problem.

My problem seems to be an ability to spot your evasive subtlety.
No, your problem is deluding yourself into believing that you spotted something, including but not limited to my "evasive subtlety".

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
No, it’s as credible as the Wehrmacht commandant’s complaint about the stench from Treblinka, in that it is also not intended to be evidence for purposes of criminal investigation or historical research.

The emotions of a rabbi are not credible evidence and they have nothing to do with a complaint about stench.
Actually they are evidence as good as the Wehrmacht commandant’s complaint about the stench. One complained about an offense to his nostrils, the other about an offense to his religious feelings, and neither of both intended his complaint to be evidence to a crime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
Oh, now "Jews hate White children, their deadliest foe". That's cute. Let’s have more such utterances from the cloud-cuckoo-land you live in, they are quite amusing.

Evasive non sequitur.
No, amused derision of lunacy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
Critical assessment and "instinctive dislike" are two different pairs of boots, except for emotional fanatics like you.

This is another rabbinic interpretation and it evades the point yet again.
No, it’s a pertintent and reasonable distinction. Whereas this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
The incubus on your mind ensures that "critical assessment" consistently sides with the interests of world Jewry.
is just another expression of a true believer’s articles of faith – or shall we say superstitions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Quote:
No, but I don’t consider it necessary.

What would be an "independent" television crew for you, by the way?

On this matter of great importance, due to the extremes of relativism, I consider it an imperative.
Your opinion is taken note of, but it doesn’t answer my question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS
Independent needs no hairsplitting definitions.
Now that is evasive.

Come on, CS, independent from whom or from what?

And what existing institutions would qualify, as we’re at it? Name a few, please.
 
Old July 26th, 2008 #839
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Originally Posted by Gerdes

Muehlenkamp hints that Shermer is a faggot!

Roberta:

"Don’t make such a fuss, Gerdes... If Shermer has a sense of humor, he’ll just chuckle about my remark."
You forgot the essential statements in between and afterwards, liar. The whole thing reads as follows:

Quote:
Don’t make such a fuss, Gerdes. I’m just baiting you on account of your obvious obsession with a) Shermer and b) homosexuality. If Shermer has a sense of humor, he’ll just chuckle about my remark – and even more so about the chimp’s predictable reaction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Do you think he'll also "just chuckle about your remark" that you made in topix post #796?

Gerdes:

Is it for the same reason you didn't bring up Shermer alleged investigations?

Roberta:

"What would that reason be, Gerdes? I don’t think much of Shermer as a researcher, as I have told you."

Yes Roberta, no one does, as I told you in my reply of post #797. You remember that post, don't you Robert? Of course you do, because you censored my reply in post 797 by cowardly reporting it to the cowardly moderator at topix and it was deleted.
Thanks for that one, Mr. Gerdes!

Actually, you stinking filthy liar, Topix # 797 was one of my posts. It is now gone, but is was still there on 16.07.2008, when I took a screenshot of that Topix page. The text of post # 797 was the following:

Quote:
>BTW Robeta, why have you censored my posts 373 & 379? Calling my laughing at you>"abusive" just shows what a lowlife coward you are.

Come on, Gerdes, that old dog won’t hunt. As you well know I never reported any of your posts to the moderator, and who has followed a discussion will easily realize that it's the last thing I would do as I enjoy the way you expose yourself as the sorry crackpot you are.

I understand you’d like to debate only on VNN under
http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php... in the company of your buddies (of which I’m currently taking on four, though only one – certainly not Gerdes – is a worthy adversary) and are therefore trying to find a way out of here without loosing face. But it’s not by accusing me against better knowledge of having censored your posts that you will achieve this.

# 379 is one of my posts, by the way: http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T1V7A87T8P...

And your # 373 can be viewed under http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T1V7A87T8P...
And it gets better: in Topix post # 801 under http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T...H7P8C/p39#c801 , which you stupidly forgot to have deleted as you obviously did with post # 797, I asked you what had happened to my post # 797:

Quote:
Hey Gerdes, what happened to my post # 797?

You know, the one where, in response to your post # 795 reading:

«BTW Robeta, why have you censored my posts 373 & 379? Calling my laughing at you "abusive" just shows what a lowlife coward you are.»

I pointed out the falsity of your accusation that I censored your posts # 379 and # 373, by explaining that and why reporting any post of yours to the moderator is the last thing I would think of and showing that # 379 was one of <my> posts and your # 373 had not been deleted?

Meanwhile, my post # 379 has mysteriously disappeared, but your # 373 is still there under http://www.topix.com/forum/history/T1V7A87T8P... . It reads as follows:

«Roberta, just to be clear, you did claim that Treblinka was divided into 3 different areas, correct?»

It seems you reported # 797 to the moderator and had it deleted, because it showed so clearly what an idiot and a liar you are. Then you also had # 379 removed so I couldn’t point it out again. I presume you also tried to get # 373 removed, but it was so innocuous that the moderator didn’t heed your request.

Ah, and please don’t try to play the same game with the present post. I’ve taken a screenshot.

The rest of your latest crap I’ll address later if at all, it seems to be just another copy-and-past repetition of your idiotic "show me photos" demands and mendacious "recaps" anyway. Whoever has been following this discussion long enough should have you figured out.
You’re not only a stinking filthy liar, my dear Gerdes, you are also a fucking stupid stinking filthy liar.

Thanks again for making it so clear what you’re all about, you sorry piece of dog-shit.

As to your harking back to what I said about Shermer, your intention is obvious to anyone with half a brain: after altering your NAFCASH site so as to limit an applicant’s publishing options to SKEPTIC magazine alone (previously the applicant could choose between SKEPTIC and ARCHAEOLOGY magazine, now ARCHAEOLOGY magazine "MAY" be accepted by NAFCASH if SKEPTIC refuses to publish the applicant’s article, and it’s clear to who has been dealing with slime-ball players like you that this "MAY" means "WILL NOT"), you are now trying to make sure that Mr. Shermer gets angry at me and refuses publication of my future article for this reason alone.

Isn’t that so, you miserable piece of chicken-shit?

Ah, and of course this limitation of an applicant’s publication choices (requiring that an applicant publish in either of two specific magazines and not be free to choose his publisher was bad enough already), followed by your obvious attempt to hinder the applicant’s access to the only publisher you left him, is a clear sign that you got cold feet and are scared shitless that proof meeting your challenge requirements may actually be forthcoming.

Thanks also for that, Mr. Gerdes. You are making my day today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

"By the way, Gerdes, I just noticed another shifting of the goalposts."

Only a jew would call my simplifying and clarifying, at the jews own insistence, as "shifting the goalposts."
So restricting the applicant’s choice to one publisher when he previously had two to choose from is "simplifying and clarifying", Mr. Gerdes? Come on, tell me another one.

And I am supposed to have insisted that you scratch ARCHAEOLOGY and leave SKEPTIC alone as the applicant’s choice for publication of his proof?

Come on, Gerdes, do yourself the favor of not telling such obvious lies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

"you are no longer giving the applicant the choice between publishing in SKEPTIC magazine and publishing in ARCHAEOLOGY magazine. Now SKEPTIC magazine must be the applicant’s first choice for publication, and if SKEPTIC magazine rejects the applicant’s submittal, then NAFCASH may (or may not) accept publication in Archaeology Magazine instead."

Just for you Roberta.
You said it, Mr. Gerdes: it was just for me that you introduced this restriction, because what I wrote about Shermer on Topix made you expect that ARCHAEOLOGY and not SKEPTIC would be my first choice for publication. Therefore you removed ARCHAEOLOGY from the already limited choice of publishers (for it’s clear that your "MAY" means "WILL NOT") and on top of that made a fuss about my opinion regarding Shermer to make sure that I would not have access to SKEPTIC as a publisher either.

This, my dear Gerdes, only shows how fucking scared you are that proof meeting your challenge requirements might actually be presented.

Your transparent attempt to leave this potential applicant without a publisher and thus without a possibility of even qualifying for the challenge clearly shows your cowardice, once more.

And it also shows how well you are aware of how full of shit you are and that your "Revisionist" articles of faith are but a sack full of mendacious bullshit.

As I said before, you are really making my day today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Of course your failure to notice sooner further illustrates what a retard you are.
No, Gerdes. It just shows that I also have other things to do than check your NAFCASH bullshit for what changes you make. On the other hand, your failure to highlight this major change, this major limitation of an applicant’s chances, shows what a greasy, dishonest slime-ball player you are. Thanks for that, too!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
And of course, since there is no conceivable reason why Shermer / "SKEPTIC" magazine wouldn't publish legitimate proof, there's nothing for you to be worried about, now it there Retardo?
Of course there is, asshole. My chances of finding a publisher for the proof I’m trying to obtain were cut in half. And on top of that, you’re going out of your way to make sure that the one publisher left, the editor of SKEPTIC magazine, won’t accept my submission because he is offended at my having expressed that I don’t think much of him as a researcher. In other words, you are trying to reduce my chances of finding a publisher (which were limited from the very start) to zero.

Again, thanks for thus showing what a fraud, charlatan and coward you are.

And how scared you are of what evidence I might be able to obtain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Thank you Roberta.
Gratitude is all on my side, Mr. Gerdes. You keep making my day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

"Did Mrs. Golden accept the NAFCASH challenge and announce that she would submit evidence about the exact location and exact contents of a Chelmno mass grave as well the amount of human remains contained therein?"

If jew-lie Golden wants to accept THE FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE the way it was previously, which included Chelmno and Archaeology Magazine, I, and all twenty supporters will make any and all special accommodations for such an announcement. We will bend over backwards to make sure it happens. We will set up a new challenge independent of THE FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE, just for her. Just like we modified the FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE just to make it easier for you retardo.

In fact, nafcash challenges jew-lie golden and ARCHAEOLOGY magazine to accept a Chelmno / Archaeology Magazine challenge. Perhaps you and your fellow funny boy freaks over at HC (Hysterical and Cowardly HIV Contagious Homosexual Creeps espousing Holocaust Claptrap and other Historical Canards) can help nafcash make it happen. After all, you do want to help stop holocaust denial - don't you retardo?

Thank you Roberta.

You are priceless.

BTW Roberta, just how much "human remains contained therein" have been located at Chelmno?
Blah, blah, blah, Mr. Gerdes.

A whimpering coward’s lame and transparent attempt to avoid answering the questions I asked him in post # 827 under http://206.41.117.128/showpost.php?p...&postcount=827 about his reasons for scratching ARCHAEOLOGY magazine as a first publishing option (and in practice scratching it as a publishing option at all).

But the whimpering coward need no longer reply to this question. The answer, see above, is already as clear as it could be.
 
Old July 26th, 2008 #840
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
Roberto Muehlenkamp
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

“What is visible in these samples is quite interesting. The color of the soil, judging by the soil surface visible on these photographs, is a light brown. Yet these samples show layers underground that are light gray and black:

The light gray substance on the first two photos looks like ashes of human bone and tissue to me. I’ve seen such ashes elsewhere, hence the association.

The black substance on the second photo looks like wood ash to me. There’s a gray streak in the middle of the black suggesting that some human ashes may be there as well.

The white substances on the third photo could be either bone ash or the lime that was poured upon the dead bodies in the mass graves.”

1 - http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/...adania/F5.html

2 - http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/...adania/F6.html

3 - http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/...adania/F7.html

Roberta continues:

“How about ashes of human bone and tissue for the light gray stuff, wood ashes for the black stuff and pure bone ashes or lime for the white stuff, Mr. Gerdes?

Any other idea what those light grey, black and white substances in the light-brown soil of Sobibor might be, Mr. Gerdes? Let’s hear.

Try explaining why charred human remains and remains in a state of decay should be visible on any given core-drilling sample from mass graves that can be expected to largely or mostly contain cremains.

Bone ashes, ashes of soft tissue and crushed remains of ashed teeth were probably mixed with each other in most cases, but where larger calcinated bones were crushed the result would have been the substance known as bone ash.

Distinguishable layers made up only of the crushed remains of ashed teeth are far less likely for obvious reasons than layers consisting mostly or only of crushed calcinated bones.”

Thanks for that Roberta.

Have I ever told you you are priceless?
Again, gratitude is all on my side. Apart from showing that you’re a lousy imitator of my "priceless" remark appropriately directed at you, you are thereby making it clear that you have no arguments at all against what I wrote and are therefore reduced to hollow derision and the arrogant feigning of superiority.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Now, let’s remind everyone what the mentally ill jewbitch wrote earlier:

Quote: Originally Posted by Gerdes

She hasn't been able to even prove that the "huge mass grave" of Sobibor exists;

Roberta:

“Actually I’m able to prove the existence of all of these mass graves by simply referring to Prof. Kola’s description.”

Yes Roberta, could you tell us again what Kola “described” finding in the “huge mass graves” of Sobibor?

Roberta:

“Proof is contained in Prof. Kola’s published report about his findings on site, and in the documentary and eyewitness evidence about the mass killings at Sobibor, which is compatible with Kola’s findings.”

And what were Kola’s findings again Roberta?

Roberta:

“This proof is and has been accepted by historians and criminal investigators, Gerdes. So unless you can show relevant rules or standards of evidence that these people did not comply with or strong indications of evidence manipulation, it is proof for the purpose of our discussion as well (and may even be considered proof for the purpose of meeting your "challenge" by a court of law, so better be more specific about what kind of proof you want – that’s well meaning advice)... Because Prof. Kola said so and there’s no reason to doubt the statements of this renowned archeologist, especially as they are also in line with what all other known evidence tells us about Sobibor… And the reason to doubt the archeologist’s public statement that would support this "allegedly" is? None? I thought so.”

And what did Kola say again Roberta?

Roberta:

IV. Sobibor

IV.2 Physical evidence

IV.2.1 Physical evidence described in a public statement by Prof. Kola about an archaeological excavation conducted at Sobibor in 2001, mentioned in a Reuters press release.

And tell us again what Kola claims he found in that press release Roberta?
It’s obvious what you’re trying to get at, Mr. Gerdes. You produced the same retarded shit in your post of Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:28 pm on the CODOH thread under http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=5059 . In today’s update of my HC article under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogsp...challenge.html, I commented that retarded shit as follows:

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes, Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:28 pm

I kid you not folks, only a certifiable nut case or a paid professional liar could come up with this - This is Muehlenkamp's latest:

"Try explaining why charred human remains and remains in a state of decay should be visible on any given core-drilling sample from mass graves that can be expected to largely or mostly contain cremains Mr. Gerdes."

Mmmmm. She quotes Kola to say that his word alone is proof that the Sobibor holocaust has been proven by archeological means:

WARSAW (Reuters) - Polish archaeologists excavating the Nazi death camp in Sobibor said they have found mass graves at the site. The excavations could provide valuable new evidence on the number of victims. “We uncovered seven mass graves with an average depth of five meters. In them there were charred human remains and under them remains in a state of decay” archaeologist Andrzej Kola was quoted by the Polish PAP news agency telling a news conference.

Then asks how anyone could believe that what Kola says he found could be found!

This of course begs the question - If Muehlenkamp isn't a paid professional liar, then - Is he mentally ill or retarded?

Either way, she's priceless isn't she?

Like Hannover says - It's so easy.
What is actually easy is to once more demonstrate, on hand of his above babblings, what a sorry idiot Mr. Gerdes is.

The poor fellow seems to believe there is a contradiction between Prof. Kola’s description of the mass graves’ contents in a press conference and the presence of what seems to be mixed ashes of human bone and tissue on these two photos of drill samples:

http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/...adania/F5.html


http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/...adania/F6.html


and what seems to be either bone ash or lime on this photo of a core drill sample:

http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/...adania/F7.html


Why should there be such a contradiction?

First of all, I don’t know – as I expressly pointed out on VNN – if these core drill samples are related to Prof. Kola’s 2001 investigation or to later archaeological work.

Second, how does Gerdes know what core samples of "charred human remains" would look like and that they would look different from the light-gray substance visible on the core samples in the first two photographs shown above?

Third and most important, assuming that core samples of "charred human remains" would have a different aspect, how would the presence of "charred human remains" in the Sobibor mass graves rule out the presence of ashes? Even if some of the bodies were not reduced to mere ashes and bone fragments, the incineration of the bodies on grids at Sobibor must have produced lots of such smaller remains, and it stands to reason that these were not left lying around and neither necessarily taken somewhere to be scattered, but returned to the mass graves together with the incompletely burned remains that are suggested by the term "charred human remains" – assuming this is a correct translation of what Prof. Kola told the Polish news agency in Polish language.

So there’s no banana again for Mr. Gerdes, sorry. The chimp just showed once more that he forgot to think before writing.
And that’s one the things that make the chimp a priceless demonstration object of "Revisionist" imbecility. Just one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerdes
Roberta:

“Any other idea what those light grey, black and white substances in the light-brown soil of Sobibor might be, Mr. Gerdes? Let’s hear.”

Better yet Roberta - why waste time talking about what my ideas might be?

What do the frauds at the Sobibor Archaeology Project say it is? They’re the ones who analysed the core samples – right? They DID analyse the core samples – DID THEY NOT – Roberta?

Thank you Roberta.
I don’t know if these samples belong to the 2001 Kola investigation, to posterior investigations mentioned by the Friends of Sobibor Remembrance association on whose website http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/ these photos are shown, or to investigations by the Sobibor Archaeology Project, whose website is under http://www.undersobibor.org/ . But I will try to find out as much as I can about these samples from both entities.

Meanwhile, I take note of and appreciate your admission that you have no alternative explanation for the light-gray substance suggesting ashes of human bone and tissue, the black substance suggesting wood ash and the white substance suggesting either bone ash or lime, that are clearly distinguishable from the light-brown soil one one or more of those three photographs.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:12 AM.
Page generated in 0.16520 seconds.