It was both. There were sites where ground penetrating radar found anomalous readings that could have been anything. No graves have been found at all at these sites. The readings might as well be old tree roots.
Then there have been a few cases where derelict grave yards have been pointed at as unmarked “mass graves.” Then, under further scrutiny, it turns out the grave site was a community burial ground that was known about by everyone, native and Canadian authorities alike, but had fallen into disrepair and the makeshift wooden grave markers had fallen down over time.
That’s the problem with ridiculous over hyped claims like this. You make one claim, like no graves were found at all, and some activist points to an opposing case where a derelict grave site is being claimed as a mass grave. There’s not enough honest reporting going on to make an educated statement to refute the claim on the spot though. If the media were willing to report the truth even when it contradicts the acceptable narrative, everyone would already know it was just a normal grave site, but they’re not willing to report honestly.
You make another claim, like the graves that have been found have always been known about, and that they were just normal burial sites from a time where the average mortality rate was much higher than today, and another activist will point to another example of a site that’s being claimed as a “mass grave” when no body was actually found and no evidence of foul play exists, but the only reporting going on in the mainstream media are fluff pieces taking accusations at face value.
It’s all just misdirection meant to muddy the waters and make it harder to see the truth. There’s a grievance they want to push, and mass graves alluding to genocide lends weight to that grievance. It doesn’t matter that it’s not true, they just want their grievance validated. And the entire cathedral is willing to lie in unison to see the narrative made reality, no matter the damage it does to Canadian credibility on the world stage. If such a thing ever existed.
Right but I thought they detected bodies in neat rows with even spacing between them and some were children because children died pretty regularly in the 19th century
The diversity hire ground penetrating radar professor misinterpreted drainage and sewage lines dug decades earlier as "mass graves" as debunked by amateur researchers with construction records and aerial photographs, along with an actual Simon Fraser University archeological dig decades earlier of the same area that everyone conveniently memory-holed.
A child had approximately a 50% chance of making it to adulthood in the 19th century. Life before antibiotics, blood tests, and x-rays was pretty shitty.
Not only there were no mass graves, there were no graves at all.
I thought there were graves but they were normal graves in an unmarked graveyard
It was both. There were sites where ground penetrating radar found anomalous readings that could have been anything. No graves have been found at all at these sites. The readings might as well be old tree roots.
Then there have been a few cases where derelict grave yards have been pointed at as unmarked “mass graves.” Then, under further scrutiny, it turns out the grave site was a community burial ground that was known about by everyone, native and Canadian authorities alike, but had fallen into disrepair and the makeshift wooden grave markers had fallen down over time.
That’s the problem with ridiculous over hyped claims like this. You make one claim, like no graves were found at all, and some activist points to an opposing case where a derelict grave site is being claimed as a mass grave. There’s not enough honest reporting going on to make an educated statement to refute the claim on the spot though. If the media were willing to report the truth even when it contradicts the acceptable narrative, everyone would already know it was just a normal grave site, but they’re not willing to report honestly.
You make another claim, like the graves that have been found have always been known about, and that they were just normal burial sites from a time where the average mortality rate was much higher than today, and another activist will point to another example of a site that’s being claimed as a “mass grave” when no body was actually found and no evidence of foul play exists, but the only reporting going on in the mainstream media are fluff pieces taking accusations at face value.
It’s all just misdirection meant to muddy the waters and make it harder to see the truth. There’s a grievance they want to push, and mass graves alluding to genocide lends weight to that grievance. It doesn’t matter that it’s not true, they just want their grievance validated. And the entire cathedral is willing to lie in unison to see the narrative made reality, no matter the damage it does to Canadian credibility on the world stage. If such a thing ever existed.
Meanwhile churches were burned
Which went largely unreported.
No bodies have been dug up afaik
Right but I thought they detected bodies in neat rows with even spacing between them and some were children because children died pretty regularly in the 19th century
The diversity hire ground penetrating radar professor misinterpreted drainage and sewage lines dug decades earlier as "mass graves" as debunked by amateur researchers with construction records and aerial photographs, along with an actual Simon Fraser University archeological dig decades earlier of the same area that everyone conveniently memory-holed.
No. They used some gadget that detects "anomalies" in the ground, but those anomalies could be a thousand other things besides human remains.
A child had approximately a 50% chance of making it to adulthood in the 19th century. Life before antibiotics, blood tests, and x-rays was pretty shitty.