Denierbud Implodes

Question: When is 5% "very close" to 0%

Answer: When you are as deluded and dishonest as Denierbud.



Denierbud turned up on this JREF thread on the same day that the Negationist Team formally withdrew its acceptance of our challenge to debate the Aktion Reinhardt camps. The dishonesty of his opening post was immediately apparent to that forum's readers. Denierbud wrote:

I am a holocaust denier, but open to your view.

There are numerous holocaust denial videos found at:
holocaustdenialvideos.com

I'm most interested in what people think about the video "One Third Of The Holocaust" found there but feel free to discuss the other holocaust denial videos also.

I am asking if anyone here can watch some episodes of one of the videos and state specifically that they don't agree with in a specific episode. I request the following guidelines:

1) Discuss a specific episode of a specific video. The videos are all broken up into episodes. Don't change subject to another holocaust topic, which the videos don't cover. For instance the comment "what about the millions who saw it happen?" would be breaking this guideline, since the videos don't cover that and it thus changes the topic.

2) Don't focus on how it is or hateful to be a denier. Rather, state specifically what you don't agree with (or agree with) in a specific episode of a specific video at holocaust denial videos dot com.

Sorry to put "specific" in bold but you wouldn't believe how hard it is to get people to do this. We'll see if anyone can do it here.

The dishonesty here is clear: someone who is genuinely "open to your view" does not formulate rules that close off any questions that force him to explain his position and place his claims in context.

It also became apparent that JREF posters were familiar with our past rebuttals of Denierbud's videos and were able to link to our rebuttals without any prompting from ourselves. When a succession of JREF posters insisted that he respond to those rebuttals, Denierbud fell back on the bizarre claim that Pressac's estimate of Zyklon-B usage at Auschwitz was 'very close' to his own:

The point in the video is that even an acknowledged holocaust scholar says that 95 percent of the cans of Zyklon B were used for delousing. It's possible to use that and not agree with it. To paraphrase: "Even so and so says something that is very close to my view."--it's like that.

This last sentence is simply untrue. Whilst Pressac's claim has been disputed by other authorities (most notably Van Pelt), Pressac's position is diametrically opposed to Denierbud's, for the obvious reason that Pressac goes on to argue that the remaining 5% was still used to gas hundreds of thousands of Jews. Denierbud's entire dogma requires zero Jewish deaths by this method.

The difference between 5% and 0% is therefore huge in this context, just as it would be if I owned 5% of the USA's national wealth and my neighbour owned 0%.

Does Denierbud not grasp basic mathematics, and indeed basic logic, or is he simply a liar? Either way, his shambolic performance at JREF is further proof that denial, having failed in all other public fora, is now a laughing stock in the Internet community.

EDIT 1: Denierbud now admits:

I was never here to debate. Why did so many assume that?

Well nobody did assume it, they knew all along that he was just trying to sell his wares.

EDIT 2: A superb riposte from ElMondoHummus. This should be posted on denial's gravestone as its most succinct and accurate epitaph:

It's not about any one witness being right or wrong, or the subject of a given episode of a video peddling fraudulent alt-history. The whole point is that you can't overturn history by merely picking apart isolated elements. Not when you don't consider the context that has been built over the years from the massive accumulation of evidence. That context provides shape and boundaries to the narrative, and those boundaries cannot be exceeded simply because an isolated issue is in dispute. That's the point Nick Terry was making: You separate out whole reams of accumulated knowledge in your minute focus on individual points. And without allowing those reams of accumulated knowledge to shape your understanding, conclusions drawn from that minute focus fade into irrelevancy. Yes, it's legitimate to begin criticism by discussing isolated issues, but that goes nowhere fast when they stay isolated.

That's the central failure you and other holocaust deniers make. It's the same failure 9/11 truthers and other conspiracy peddlers for other myths make: You all hone in on isolated points as if they overturn the entire narrative, yet you all to a man (or woman) fail to demonstrate how even a legitimate and accurate refutation of any given isolated point shapes context. You all merely state that an isolated refutation equals an overall refutation, and willingly leap to the conclusion that the entire narrative must be junked. That's sloppy reasoning.

Everyone here can see the emphasis on isolated points. But we see absolutely no explanation relating how those points impact the overall narrative, not anything built on more than mere "See, this is wrong, that means it's all wrong" implication.

Even what little you provide goes nowhere and does nothing. Given that, why are we supposed to watch those videos? If all they are are yet continued retailing of isolated facts and contextless points, then there's zero reason to view them. And if you cannot even establish in posts here that there is some legitimate analysis of the impact your claims have on the established narrative, then you fail to sell any of us on the notion that the video is worth watching.

Sell better. You're doing badly.

Greg Gerdes

In his post of Tue May 13, 2008 2:45 pm on the "CODOH Revisionist Forum", a bigmouth who calls himself Greg Gerdes blustered away as follows:

Now let's look at what that incredible dullard - Roberto Muehlenkamp, has to say about the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor: (from: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/09/more-of-same-trash_18.html )

Quote:
"As before in regard to Treblinka and Belzec, Mr. Ugly Voice tries to take his readers for a ride by "estimating" the burial space available at Sobibor... it seems there are viewers blind and/or stupid enough to let themselves be taken in by such a kindergarten-level hoax. Which is not surprising, by the way, to who has spent some time looking at the world of "Revisionist" lunacy, which is full of fanatics eager to switch off their tiny brains in order to believe what they would like to believe.

...If, on the other hand, you use the plausible densities mentioned in the same article, you get the following:

• At 8 bodies per cubic meter (Mattogno’s "maximum capacity"): 99,592 bodies

• At 10.7 bodies per cubic meter (Alex Bay’s calculation): 133,204 bodies

• At 14.8 bodies per cubic meter (pursuant to Charles Provan’s experiment: 184.245 bodies.

So we can see that, even by the lowest calculation that can be considered reasonable, the American Football spectator crowd of about 80,000 people that Mr. Ugly Voice tries to impress his gullible viewers with could very well fit into the burial space available at Sobibor, as established according to Prof. Kola’s above-mentioned findings. Unsurprisingly, Mr. Ugly Voice has it all wrong once again."

So the dullest of all the holocaust controversies dullards claims that the estimate of 80,000 buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor is a hoax and also sneers at the figure of 100,000. He goes on to estimate 133,000 to 184,000 bodies are buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor.

Of course, this begs the question - Even if the maximum figure of 184,000 are buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor, then why do so many hoaxers claim that the figure is 250,000?

But of course, the real question is, a question that even a kindergartener would ask: IF the official Sobibor holocasut story is true - Then where EXACTLY are these alleged "huge mass graves?"

And a question:

When is Kola going to publish the results of this investigation?

Read more!


Never having met this Gerdes fellow before, I wondered why he was mad at me, as his mouthing suggests he his.

Was it only because I had referred to "Revisionist" nonsense in general and denierbud’s video clips in particular in rather unflattering and equally appropriate terms? Or was there more behind Gerdes' anger?

The latter is suggested by the fact that, as I found out by running "Greg Gerdes" on the Google search engine, our friend is the "president" of the so-called "National Association of Forensic Criminologists, Archeologists, Skeptics and Historians" (NAFCASH), whose mendacious "challenge" was appropriately commented by Sergey Romanov in this article. My own article Polish investigations of the Treblinka killing site were a complete failure … incidentally punched further holes in what these NAFCASH people (whose multi-colored and multi-sized collection of long-debunked "Revisionist" manure, such as the irrelevant "diesel gas chambers" baloney, is so shrill as to make it look like their initials actually stand for "National Association of Fish-Wives, Cretins and Screaming Hysterics") tell their readers about there being "no trace of mass graves" at Treblinka, by showing – on hand of a site investigation report quoted by "Revisionist" gurus Mattogno & Graf, who however failed to understand its significance – that the size of the presumable mass graves area of Treblinka extermination camp (an area of ca. 20,000 square meters covered by human ashes, bones and skulls, according to said report), as well as the likely depth of the mass graves established during the investigation (7.5 meters, go figure!), are compatible with the order of magnitude of mass murder at Treblinka that becomes apparent from documentary evidence. Another nail in NAFCASH's coffin was my recent article Gold Rush in Treblinka, with its mention of documentary evidence about the postwar digging-up of the Treblinka killing site by treasure hunters and the opinion of an expert in ground-penetrating radar (GPR) technology, both of which are further confirmation that NAFCASH’s poster-boy Richard Krege is, if not an inveterate liar, then at least an incompetent bungler who doesn't know much about GPR soil examination.

If Mr. Gerdes has read the above-mentioned articles – which I hope he has – that would explain his diatribes against Holocaust Controversies in general and "that incredible dullard" in particular even better than his anger at my having called a spade a spade in my article More of the same trash ….

Now, let’s look at Mr. Gerdes’ comments about the excerpt from that article quoted in his above-mentioned post, item by item.

Gerdes:

So the dullest of all the holocaust controversies dullards claims that the estimate of 80,000 buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor is a hoax and also sneers at the figure of 100,000. He goes on to estimate 133,000 to 184,000 bodies are buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor.

I refrain from calling Gerdes the dullest of "Revisionist" dullards because he has some stiff competition among his coreligionists, to say the least, but the fact is that the fellow is obviously too dumb to even read my article correctly.

I’m not arguing that the estimate of ca. 80,000 dead bodies buried in the Sobibor mass graves is wrong let alone a "hoax", and I am also not estimating that "133,000 to 184,000" dead bodies were buried in those mass graves. My argument is that, according to the measurements of the mass graves found in 2001 by Polish archaeologists, the Sobibor mass graves were large enough to hold more or much more than the number of dead bodies reportedly buried in them before the camp staff switched to incinerating the bodies instead of burying them. This in turn means that there is nothing implausible about these mass graves having contained about 80,000 dead bodies.

Maybe such elementary reasoning – if the mass graves could have held more corpses than they are reported to have held, then there’s nothing implausible about the reported figure – is too complex for a "Revisionist" simpleton like Gerdes to grasp.

Gerdes:

Of course, this begs the question - Even if the maximum figure of 184,000 are buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor, then why do so many hoaxers claim that the figure is 250,000?

Besides misreading my article, Gerdes apparently didn’t understand the video clip that this article refers to, which starts with the following quote from page 177 of Yitzhak Arad’s book Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka. The Operation Reinhard Death Camps:

Only one-third of the 250,000 victims in this camp had been killed and buried before the cremating began. Those who were gassed there afterward, in the period between October 1942 and October 1943, were taken directly from the gas chambers to the cremating sites.

Even denierbud, though not the sharpest tool in the shed, realized that this meant ca. 83,000 bodies buried before cremation became the body disposal method at Sobibor, whereas the remaining 167,000 were incinerated right after they had been killed, without ever being dumped into a mass grave. For Gerdes, on the other hand, even this simple reasoning seems to have been too much. Or then he didn’t even bother to watch denierbud’s video clip (not that he would have missed anything of value).

The number given by Arad is the highest estimate of the number of victims of Sobibor that I know of. A more cautious estimate was made at the trial against former members of the Sobibor staff before the District Court in Hagen, Germany, which concluded that at least 150,000 Jewish civilians had been killed at Sobibor. As I mentioned in this article, an expert report provided during this trial managed to reconstruct (with remarkable accuracy, as a comparison with documentary evidence discovered decades after this trial shows) the dates and places of origin of the transports included in the minimum number of victims assumed by the court. So despite the Nazis’ documented attempts to get rid of as much evidence as possible, enough documents and other evidence survived to allow for a court expert’s detailed reconstruction of transports to Sobibor, adding up to about 150,000 people, at a trial held more than 20 years after the end of the war.

This leads us to a question far more pertinent that Gerdes’ high-handed (and already answered) question:

But of course, the real question is, a question that even a kindergartener would ask: IF the official Sobibor holocasut story is true - Then where EXACTLY are these alleged "huge mass graves?

The more pertinent question is this: if, as claimed by "Revisionist" fantasists like Gerdes, Sobibor was not an extermination camp but a transit camp from which Jews were distributed to ghettos or labor camps further east, then which were these alleged ghettos or labor camps, what evidence is there that shows large numbers of Jews from Sobibor being transported to these places and accommodated there, and what evidence is there regarding what eventually became of all those Jews?

Common sense alone (which is something alien to "Revisionist" thinking) already tells us that, if Sobibor had been a transit camp and large numbers of Jews had been transported somewhere further east from there, Mattogno & Graf (the only "Revisionists" who, to my knowledge, have tried to come up with something like an answer to this question) would be able to reconstruct these transports at least as precisely as German court expert Wolfgang Scheffler managed to reconstruct transports to Sobibor at the above-mentioned trial, all the more so as the Germans would have had no reason to keep resettlement transports from a Sobibor transit camp a secret or to destroy the related documentary evidence, as they are known to have done with most of the documents pertaining to the Aktion Reinhard(t) camps Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka. Had a massive resettlement operation via these three "transit camps" actually taken place, Mattogno & Graf wouldn’t be reduced to citing a handful of eyewitnesses about a few small transports from Sobibor to other places, as they do in the excerpt proudly quoted by Gerdes in his opening post of Tue May 13, 2008 1:38 pm (regarding the mendacity of Mattogno & Graf’s claims based on these selectively quoted testimonies, see Jonathan Harrison’s article Mattogno and Graf: Reverse Logic). Nor would these "Revisionist" gurus have to vaguely babble about Polish Jews deported to Ukraine or White Russia, only to be screwed by their own source (apart from shamelessly misrepresenting the writings of German historian Christian Gerlach, as I may demonstrate in a future article). If Mattogno & Graf’s lame endeavors quoted in Gerdes’ OP are the best that "Revisionists" have got by way of an answer to the essential question what, if not mass murder, is supposed to have happened to the Jews deported to Sobibor and the other Aktion Reinhard(t)camps, then one can only feel sorry for these faithful folks and the lunatic creed they embrace.

Gerdes ends his rambling with the following question:

When is Kola going to publish the results of this investigation?

Well, I suggest that Gerdes contact Prof. Kola and ask him this question, which I don’t think anyone else can answer.

Is the absence of a publication similar to Kola’s report about Belzec supposed to mean anything, like there being something wrong with Kola’s announcement of the discovery of mass graves at Sobibor and the measurements thereof? Only in the conspiraloon cloud-cuckoo-land of "Revisionism" could this be seriously claimed, also considering that Prof. Kola is a renowned archaeologist and that his findings are matched by all other evidence to what happened at Sobibor. Gerdes would also be shooting himself in the foot by arguing thusly, insofar as Richard Krege has not yet published the results of the touted "detailed forensic examination" he is supposed to have conducted in 1999. One might say that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, except that there's a significant difference between the findings of a renowned professor of archaeology at Sobibor and those of a "Revisionist" nobody at Treblinka: the former are in line with all known evidence about Sobibor that has been investigated and researched by criminal justice authorities and historians over the past six decades, whereas the latter are at odds with all known eyewitness, documentary and physical evidence about the mass murder at Treblinka.

Gerdes seems to be fond of challenging others, namely Michael Schermer, to debate him.

So here’s a challenge to you, Mr. Gerdes:

Come out and debate the "incredible dullard" about any subject of your choosing related to your "specialty", the Aktion Reinhard(t) camps.

I would reply to you on CODOH if I could post there, but webmaster Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis banned me from that lovely place some years ago, obviously because neither he nor any of his acolytes could handle my arguments. But there’s a forum, owned by a "Revisionist", that offers open and uncensored debate. This forum, which Hargis is so afraid of that he made his software automatically change its name into "shills", is called RODOH, which stands for "Real Open Debate on the Holocaust" (the pun on the falsely so-called "Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust" is intended).

I’m waiting for you on RODOH, Mr. Gerdes.

"Hannover" Hargis’ Hysteria ...

... came to the fore once more after Joachim Neander mentioned a recent Polish newspaper article about the Gold Rush in Treblinka.

Read more!


In a recent thread on the "CODOH Revisionist Forum" (a.k.a. the Cesspit), headed Anybody know what tin sheets were used for?, Joachim Neander wrote the following (Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:27 pm):

Sorry, Mr. Dahl, I did not study Sobibor. I only researched a little bit the "Treblinka gold rush" from 1944 to 1950. Two Polish (non-Jewish) journalists wrote an article about it that appeared in the Polish newspaper "Gazeta Wyborcza" in the beginning of this year. I translated it into German and Roberto Muehlenkamp into English. It can be found at the shills Web site under "Documents." The article deals with illegal excavations made by local people and members of the nearby Soviet garrison in search of gold and precious stones. BTW, similar "excavations" took place at Auschwitz, but they were quickly suppressed by the local Polish authorities. At Treblinka, the authorities turned a blind eye on the "excavations," most probably after having received their share of the "findings." In every respect, a disgusting story.

Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis, Keeper of the "Revisionist" Faith, thereupon started jumping up and down trying to discredit this unexpected and inconvenient information (Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:57 pm):

How convenient, but absurd, this story is.

What are these 'journalists' sources?

They claim that there were 'illegal' excavations, yet all too conveniently these alleged 'excavations' were not documented by official Polish sources, since they supposedly "turned a blind eye". On the contrary, making the alleged finds known and visible at the time would have been a bonanza to the propaganda ... IF the 900,000 Jews tale was true.

This is hardly credible evidence for a desperate cover story whose intent is to claim that the alleged mass grave for an alleged 900,000 Jews at Treblinka (10 X The Rose Bowl) cannot be found because there were 'illegal' excavations. Only with the 'holocaust' can people get away with this junk.

I should also note that any mass grave, especially one of the size alleged at Treblinka, would still, today, leave a massive, easily detected footprint. 'illegal excavations' or not.

The liars have not and cannot show us the alleged mass grave for the alleged 900,000 Jews at Treblinka.

- Hannover

What follows are my comments to Hargis' utterances.

Hargis:

How convenient, but absurd, this story is.

Actually the most "absurd" things have happened in human history, so "absurdity" is never an argument when there's evidence. And the pilfering of the Treblinka victims' belongings was not so much an "absurdity" as a showpiece of the greed and selfishness that, unfortunately, are among the features of human nature. The "story" is also everything other than convenient, on the contrary: as becomes apparent from the Gazeta Wyborcza article (see my English translation of Dr. Neander's translation from Polish into German), the Treblinka "gold rush" is an uncomfortable, shameful subject that contemporaries and their descendants in Poland are still reluctant to talk about.

Hargis:

What are these 'journalists' sources?

Interviews with elder villagers who took part in the "gold rush", contemporary Polish reports about the scavenging, photographs that the journalists found or that were shown to them by a Polish historian – Piotr Głuchowski and Marcin Kowalski are very specific about their sources. All it takes to answer Hargis’ unnecessary question is reading their article.

Hargis:

They claim that there were 'illegal' excavations, yet all too conveniently these alleged 'excavations' were not documented by official Polish sources, since they supposedly "turned a blind eye".

Actually, and as the Gazeta Wyborcza article shows, the excavations in search of treasures were mentioned in several contemporary Polish documents, including

• Two reports from the Siedlce Section of the NSZ Task Force for Special Actions" [NSZ = Narodowe Siły Zbrojne - National Armed Forces, right-wing nationalist, anti-communist Polish partisan organization] about the raising of contributions from local inhabitants who ravished the graves in Treblinka;

• A vivid description of the site and the pilfering by a member of an investigative delegation from Warsaw, Karol Ogrodowczyk;

• An activity report by militia commandant of Kosów Lacki about (futile) measures taken by his unit against the pilferers;

• A photograph from an action against the pilferers undertaken by a militia unit from Ostrowa Mazowieckie, shown in the Gazeta Wyborcza article and in my review thereof.

Why didn't Hargis read the article, instead of jumping to convenient conclusions based on a statement of Dr. Neander’s? (This statement is not contradicted by the existence of the above-mentioned documents, by the way – a few half-hearted actions against the Treblinka scavengers don’t change the fact that these people's disgraceful activity, which went on for 15 years after the roundup resulting in the above-mentioned photograph, was allowed to proceed unhindered most of the time.)

Well, maybe he did and is lying – though he's obviously as afraid of this article as he is of anything that comes from the RODOH forum, the name of which is automatically changed into "shills" by the forum software on the Cesspit, lest one of Hargis’ fellow "truth-seekers" take a look through the telescope.

Hargis:

On the contrary, making the alleged finds known and visible at the time would have been a bonanza to the propaganda ...

What, making it known and visible that noble Polish citizens were digging up the ashes and bones of murdered Jews in search of whatever valuables the victims may have taken with them to their graves? As often before, Hargis shows that his reasoning, apart from being based on nothing other than hollow preconceived notions, leaves much to be desired in terms of logic.

The aspect of the Treblinka grave site was made known and visible at the time, by the way – not for the purpose of propaganda, but within the scope of a criminal site investigation carried out by Examining Judge Lukaszkiewicz, the results of which were summarized in a protocol presented by the Soviets at the Nuremberg Trial as Document USSR-344 (see my article Polish investigations of the Treblinka killing site were a complete failure …) and included in the report about The Treblinka Extermination Camp by the Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, published in 1946. But then, who would have expected Hargis to read even his own "Revisionist" sources (the Polish site investigation report is quoted in my above-mentioned article after Mattogno & Graf’s Treblinka screed) before shooting the bull?

Hargis:

IF the 900,000 Jews tale was true.

900,000 happens to be the figure given by Głuchowski and Kowalski, which I criticized in my review. Is Hargis' mention of the same figure a coincidence, or did Hargis read my translation of the Gazeta Wyborcza article? In the latter case, he’s lying rather stupidly about the article’s contents.

Hargis:

This is hardly credible evidence for a desperate cover story whose intent is to claim that the alleged mass grave for an alleged 900,000 Jews at Treblinka (10 X The Rose Bowl) cannot be found because there were 'illegal' excavations.

First of all, what would Hargis consider "credible evidence", and what rules or standards of criminal investigation and/or historical research - if any - are his requirements based on? This is a question I would love to directly ask the fellow one day, though I expect him to run away from it like other "Revisionists" to whom this question has been asked.

Second, whence did Hargis derive the supposed "intent" of the Gazeta Wyborcza article? The source seems to be none other than his own paranoia, for nowhere in the article is it stated that the "the alleged mass grave for an alleged 900,000 Jews at Treblinka" cannot be found because of the robbery-digging. There is just one mention of the robbery-digging "blurring the traces of the German mass crime" (which it certainly did, independently of the extent to which the original mass graves remained identifiable), and that is contained in one of those official Polish reports that Hargis claims do not exist. From my translation:

In the archives of the IPN there is the activity report of the militia commandant of Kosów Lacki: "The area was guarded by unidentified armed persons, who barred access to non-adepts and stood guard for those who dug out the remaining watches, jewelry or gold (...) This situation led to blurring the traces of the German mass crime, and there was the risk of an epidemic of diseases dangerous for people. (...) We carried out a roundup and expelled the human hyenas, but they doggedly returned to take up again their interrupted search."

Third, who is supposed to have "alleged" that all victims of Treblinka extermination camp were dumped into one single mass grave? The eyewitness testimonies addressing this issue that I know of mention several mass graves in the "death camp" area of Treblinka extermination camp.

The "Rose Bowl" herring seems to have been borrowed from our old friend "denierbud", by the way. It is one of the arguments that the Ugly Voice fellow (who is probably identical with Hargis' acolyte "Carto’s Cutlass Supreme") uses to impress suckers, like in his clip # 13.

Hargis:

Only with the 'holocaust' can people get away with this junk.

It would be far more appropriate to say that only on a forum like the "CODOH Revisionist Forum", which Hargis controls by deleting inconvenient posts and banning inconvenient posters like this writer, one can get away with writing junk such as has once more been produced by Hargis. On an uncensored open discussion forum like RODOH, such junk would be taken apart by evidence-backed arguments and slapped around the poster's ears – which Hargis probably knows very well, as he has never been known to debate on a forum where he cannot control the debate.

Hargis:

I should also note that any mass grave, especially one of the size alleged at Treblinka, would still, today, leave a massive, easily detected footprint. 'illegal excavations' or not.

… says "Hannover" Hargis, the self-appointed expert in detecting mass graves, without informing the readers why mass graves emptied of their contents, then refilled with human ashes, bone fragments and soil, then leveled off and planted with lupines and then excavated over a period of 15 years by robbery-diggers even using explosives to blast holes in the ground, should leave "a massive, easily detected footprint". Though I’m no expert either, my common sense tells me that if anything left "a massive, easily detected footprint" under these conditions it would have been the robbery-digging, and this seems to have been so indeed. From my translation of the Gazeta Wyborcza article:

"When we went around the memorial we found slots in the area," we say when bidding farewell to the director. "Judging by the trees growing inside them they must be several dozen years old. Are these pits from the diggings?" - "No ... those are from artillery shells. In 1944 the front line was here for some weeks."[…] Martyna Rusiniak thinks that a part of the pits are the hyena's heritage. Especially from the time when bombs were used for "extraction". The young historian shows us photos of the largest postwar excavation sites. The pits have a length of ten meters, one of them looks like the construction pit of a several-story building.

Hargis

The liars have not and cannot show us the alleged mass grave for the alleged 900,000 Jews at Treblinka.

Actually the "liars" (Hargis probably means criminal investigators and historians who have documented the mass killings at Treblinka) have shown eyewitness, documentary and physical evidence that allows for only one reasonable conclusion, the conclusion that about 750,000 people were murdered at Treblinka extermination camp. This article explains how documentary evidence to the magnitude of the killing is corroborated by the findings of Examining Judge Lukaszkiewicz on site.

With all available evidence pointing to mass murder and none suggesting anything else, "Revisionists" are not in a position to play the expectant princess and yell "show me". They are the ones who have to show something, namely an evidence-backed alternative scenario about the fate of the hundreds of thousands who were deported to Treblinka. This they are not able to do, hard though they (especially their gurus Mattogno & Graf) have tried and despite the fact that any scenario other than mass murder should be far better documented (for the Nazis would have had no reason to try getting rid of the documentation) than the scenario that becomes apparent from all known evidence.

Without any evidence supporting "Revisionist" claims or insinuations as to what "actually happened" to all these people, folks like Hargis can whine and squeal all they like. They will never have anything like a case.