![A literal coverup [533x566 - 449KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/RLx1m3.png){kind=link}
Okay, there's your research.
Where? The link is an abstract - there is no information there. Where is the article with the data, methodology, assumptions, stated error and limitations of the study, and opinions/conclusions?
You wrote a lot of words and showed nothing.
Hes a fucking kike. Here's the study he linked too on scihub without the fucking paywall. https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.culher.2018.04.012 Dude is a stupid fucking nigger that thinks people can't look up a god damn study on scihub and read it.
Thanks for the link. It says they did a thorough survey that will be available for further analysis. All mention of buildings and graves are incorporated from other writings or pure speculation. This whole topic is a ghost with everyone reusing everyone else's guesswork. There's no substance to any of it.
Can you get a copy of Reference #3: The Heart of Terror: A Forensic and Archaeological Assessment of the Old Gas Chambers at Treblinka. Caroline Sturdy Colls & Kevin Colls. They claim to have done further analysis using the imaging from this article.
http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/6032/1/Sturdy%20Colls%20and%20Colls%20-%20The%20Heart%20of%20Terror%20FINAL%20pre-proof.pdf THey didnt find shit. Any remains they found were not in a mass grave and could have been from anything. The russians and germans fought a fucking knock down drag out war throughout the whole area in addition to anyone at the camp during the ending of the war probably starving to death and remains getting scattered around by animals because bodies were laid out in the open and scavenged by animals. The way war residue was typically cleaned up by russians post war was trenches were dug and everything was bulldozed into the hole and buried. On top of that the author of these studies has a masters degree in jumping to conclusions. Lots of bias with very little evidentiary proof of what any of these buildings actually were. Their terminology reads more like them trying to fit their findings to supposed eyewitness accounts rather than trying to build an account from their findings.
I have access to it. You have to pay for it or have access to it through your institution.
If you are genuinely interested in the research, you can e-mail and she will likely send it to you for free.
I can see the scans, images, markups, each section, etc.
She even states that this does not give us a body count - it only gives us evidence of mass graves. Body counts are impossible to conduct, now.
I read the write up at the link provided by our fellow commentor. They seem to have done a thorough imaging, but all concussions presented thereon are supposition upon hearsay upon prior articles upon guesswork upon conflicting eyewitness testimony. They also make some pretty large assumptions based on prior assumptions presented in previous works. The biggest assumption seems to be that eyewitness testimony is truthful and accurate. Remove those descriptions from the analysis and the empirical proof for their conclusions lacks any reasonable basis whatsoever.
Ground depressions are indicative of graves just as easily as they are indicative of buried trash, and bricks and tile fragments just as indicative of a bakery as they are of a gas chamber. I am very much underwhelmed by the objective support and reasoning presented. Seems to me they are taking everything that they find and attempting to validate prior testimony with each piece without considering the pieces or the findings on their own to reach conclusions without bias. If you are only looking for pieces to verify the stories you have been told, that isn't science it's advocacy.
They seem to have done a thorough imaging, but all concussions presented thereon are supposition upon hearsay upon prior articles upon guesswork
Only if you ignore all of the evidence of there being tons of dead bodies there in the past including the "Jew-gold rush" where folks were digging up the bodies to get their jewelry, gold teeth, etc.
The imaging activity was not to prove whether or not there were bodies, there. The imaging activity was to prove there were mass graves to discredit Krege's dishonest GDR "study."
What the study does not do is determine the number of bodies. It has no way to determine that. But it did, inexorably, prove there were multiple mass graves thus destroying Krege's "study." I say "study" because Krege had to falsify his findings, deliberately, to conclude what he did. Folks doubt if he actually had a GDR when he did his work. He said the soil was indisturbed and scanned down to 30 meters and found nothing as if nothing ever happened, there. Odd that this other study directly contradicts all of that. Also odd that Krege would ignore the evidence from the Jewish Gold Rush where the ground was literally dug up, disturbed immensely, but was reburied and recovered when the Cabal put a stop do it (for whatever reason - maybe they didn't want body counting to occur, maybe it was to let the dead rest as they claim, maybe it was because they needed to control the narrative at the time).
Bullshit you have access to it. It's on fucking sci hub kike. Post it faggot.
"Kike"? Lmao, that's the best argument you can come up with. You're a loser, for sure.
When someone on Poal says that, 99/100 times, it is wrong. Take a wild guess which part of that fraction you're in? I'll give you a hint since you seem very stupid: since I've clearly criticized the body count as not be credible, you can probably guess where I stand.
And, nah. You look it up yourself. Someone already posted another link to it. My company pays for my science direct access: you jealous, bruh?
(post is archived)