Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Discussions
blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Sat Jul 07, 2018 7:50 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
blake121666 wrote:
I actually didn't read your OP until now; but there are alot of technical details being thrown around there and I'm not sure what exactly is being addressed throughout.

The "2 hour" delousing cycle he is referring to would be a different procedure than alleged for the homicidal gassings - involving forced circulation in a small, warm, and packed room. A delousing in the large rooms alleged at Auschwitz w/o forced circulation would take much longer. But this is due to the requirement to ensure that each nook and cranny receives enough gas pressure to penetrate and kill lice eggs.


It’s been some time since I looked up the technical details but I thought the timetable was 2-6 hours. This is something I thought of and brought up before, not only do you need to insure that the lice die but that their eggs are destroyed. Otherwise you just get another infestation.



With the alleged homicidal gassing of persons, one need only ensure that each person inhales a lethal amount of HCN to kill him in a reasonable amount of time. 5 to 10 minutes is absurd as he says to ensure that each person in the room has been subjected to and inhaled a lethal dose resulting in a quick death. But the outgassing and propagation of the gas is exponential and something like 30 minutes would probably ensure this.


The mesh columns in the gas chambers helped spread the gas equally so that helped. As I’ve noted before not only are the victims dealing with cyanide poisoning but their own carbon dioxide. You also have people trampling one another to get away from the source of gas so you have trauma involved.


He is referring to the Degesch delousing rooms with the Degesch blower. The goal was to delouse in an hour with that arrangement; but delousing needed to be performed in 1.25-1.50 hours in practice. For the room and building fumigations, section IX of NI-9912 has that being done for 6-32 hours. But that is for very different reasons than would apply to gassing persons as I described. In an arbitrary building one needs to ensure that all nooks and crannies receive enough gas concentration to penetrate lice eggs. The dispersion of HCN happens quickly and readily in open air but not into crevices. In the forced circulation chambers, the gas needs to penetrate through garments and such. But without forced circulation such has to occur naturally over a much longer timeframe. Such is not the case for persons inhaling the gas. They cannot hide inside clothing and crevices. So a person would need to breathe in the concentration of HCN in the open air and not have it FORCED into their circulatory system through an eggshell or anything. Such is why delousing necessarily takes longer than gassing people.

The mesh columns only help to spread the Zyklon granules thinly to allow for a more efficient HCN evaporation from the sources. And they would help with cleanup. But if you were to thinly toss Zyklon on the floor, you'd get comparable evaporation rates - all other things considered. Surface area and temperature determine the evaporation rate.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9004
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Sat Jul 07, 2018 8:26 pm

Thank you, that was interesting.
A joke going around Moscow during The Great Terror:

The NKVD knocks on a door.
The inhabitants ask who it is.
“NKVD.”
“You’ve got the wrong apartment. The Communists are upstairs.”

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sat Jul 07, 2018 10:17 pm

Blake, whether one agrees with every detail of your comments or not, they're well thought-through. What is stopping you from finally accepting the GCs and the mass murder, esp. as they're documented?

User avatar
Aaron Richards
Poster
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:03 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Aaron Richards » Sat Jul 07, 2018 10:34 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:In addition to Green's arguments, there's also this to consider: https://www.argunners.com/lack-prussian ... -chambers/


So the tl;dr version is, that conditions in the homicidal gas chambers resulted in the formation of zinc cyanide, which competes with the formation of prussian blue, and since it is easier to form than PB, and a competition reaction as well, it "won" and prevented the formation of PB, and as proof the KIFR report prepared for the 1946 Auschwitz trial in Krakow, Poland, is cited, in which samples taken from zinc-plated metal covers on "gas chamber exhaust ducts" (probably means the ventilation ducts) tested positive for zinc cyanide.

What bothers me about this article however is the following segment:
Upon further inspection of table 1, if one concentrates on the results of Rudolf1 and Leuchter2, one sees that in order to kill humans as quickly as attested to by the eye-witnesses, HCN gas (Zyklon-B) used in the gas chambers would have had to have had concentrations similar to those used for delousing procedures.

Of course, the author does not tell us why.
It has been suggested (from the data in table 1) that much less HCN gas would have been required to kill human in the gas chambers than to kill lice in the delousing chambers. But this argument does not make any scientific sense.

Why not? Warm-blooded humans are a lot more susceptible to cyanide poisoning in thinner concentrations than cold-blooded lice. But again, the author keeps his silence.

It also bothers me that the site prevents you from copy-pasting excerpts. :burn:
Last edited by Aaron Richards on Sat Jul 07, 2018 10:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Please subscribe to my YouTube channel "Holocaust Documents", where I fight back the sea of antisemitism & conspiracy theories that has taken over its comment section: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTBlSX ... Un5jIhWm7g
I compile rebuttals to popular holocaust denier canards here: http://imgur.com/a/725A7

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sat Jul 07, 2018 10:38 pm

Green agrees that the concentration argument should not be used.

"Many critics of Holocaust deniers have argued that because the lethal level of cyanide for a
human being is less than that for lice far lower concentrations were in fact used in the murdering process.
The fact that 300 ppm of HCN is rapidly lethal to human beings does not actually prove that such small
concentrations were used in the homicidal gas chambers. The advantage of using a higher concentration
is twofold: 1) the lethal effects can take place faster, and 2) the lethal concentration can be established
much faster. The advantage of using a lower concentration, of course, is that it would save money. I
have not seen evidence that the concentrations actually used for murder were significantly less (i.e., more
than a factor of 2 or 3) than those used for delousing."

He also shows that with ventilation the initial concentration matters much less anyway.

User avatar
Aaron Richards
Poster
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:03 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Aaron Richards » Sat Jul 07, 2018 10:48 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:Green agrees that the concentration argument should not be used.

"Many critics of Holocaust deniers have argued that because the lethal level of cyanide for a
human being is less than that for lice far lower concentrations were in fact used in the murdering process.
The fact that 300 ppm of HCN is rapidly lethal to human beings does not actually prove that such small
concentrations were used in the homicidal gas chambers. The advantage of using a higher concentration
is twofold: 1) the lethal effects can take place faster, and 2) the lethal concentration can be established
much faster. The advantage of using a lower concentration, of course, is that it would save money. I
have not seen evidence that the concentrations actually used for murder were significantly less (i.e., more
than a factor of 2 or 3) than those used for delousing."


Regarding the total amount of Zyklon-B poured into (e.g. the Krema II) gas chamber for a homicidal gassing. Dr. Franciszek Piper said in his book "Auschwitz Nazi Death Camp" (1996), that between 5 and 7 kilograms of Zyklon-B were typically used for a gassing of 1500 people. This would equivalate to eight 200g Zyklon-B cans per opening in the gas chamber roof, yielding 6.4kg in total. Considering 300ppm HCN concentration is all you need to start killing human beings vigorously, it is likely that the wholesale murder could be achieved with a smaller total kg amount of Zyklon.

However, what's important is that for the majority of testimonies to remain valid, the killing process must be complete well within half an hour.

This means, that from the bottom of the 4 wire-mesh Kula columns (where the Zyklon-B had fallen into) that connected the gas chamber floor with the ceiling openings, the gas needed to spread to most corners of the chamber within 10-15 minutes. And this is an air volume of some 420m³ in a 210m² gas chamber if the occupying volume of 1500 people is subtracted, as well as the volume occupied by the concrete pillars supporting the roof, whose number and dimensions can be obtained from the surviving blueprints stored in the Auschwitz archives.

Can gas emanating from 6.4kg of Zyklon, evenly distributed in quantities of 1.6kg in four places, spread to 420m³ to achieve a contamination of 300ppm in 15 minutes at room temperature? Short answer: Yes.

The long answer was provided at http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/aus ... yanide.001

...as it basically says 1kg of Zyklon-B emptied into the Krema II gas chamber, at a temperature of 25°C, and an evaporation rate of 1.66% per minute, will, after 13 minutes, have created a concentration of 300ppm throughout the chamber. So my assumption is if 6.7kgs were used, we're dealing with a concentration of around 2000ppm, not the 8000+ required to kill lice which as I remember were also the sort of concentrations required to kill prisoners in US gas chambers (overkill).
Please subscribe to my YouTube channel "Holocaust Documents", where I fight back the sea of antisemitism & conspiracy theories that has taken over its comment section: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTBlSX ... Un5jIhWm7g
I compile rebuttals to popular holocaust denier canards here: http://imgur.com/a/725A7

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sat Jul 07, 2018 10:54 pm

> emptied into the Krema II gas chamber, at a temperature of 25°C,

With 1500 ppl you can assume room temp = body temp.

You can also assume many die from suffocation even b4 ZB is poured in.

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Sat Jul 07, 2018 11:03 pm

Hans wrote:Blake,

you should not generalize on "anti-Revisionists" when you only talk about the (outdated) work of Zimmerman and those who cite him.

Take a look on a more recent treatement of the topic (and feel free to point out any misconceptions):

Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz, Part 1: Indoor Cremation


Yes, I have of course read this webpage (more than once actually) and decided to read it again just now. You've left out at least one important argument in your contention about concurrent cremation. In Mattogno's latest, which is called The Cremation Furnaces of Auschwitz, Mattogno looked over the cremation data for the Westerbork camp in chapter 8.4. At Westerbork was a Kori cremation oven which was utilized in different ways. There was of course the straightforward cremating of one corpse at a time sequentially using my aforementioned Gusen stoking procedure; but there were also genuine double-cremations of an adult with an infant - as well as staggered cremations (putting multiple corpses in the muffle at essentially random times). The data for the single adult cremations Mattogno lists (he has ALL the data, btw in an appendix) in 8.4.1 along with the combustion times. He shows 128 of these cremations which took a total 6570 minutes. Therefore the average for those was 6570 minutes / 128 corpses = 51.33 minutes per corpse. There are only a total of 7 infants cremated individually in 8.4.2. And they were cremated in 220 minutes. So that would be an average for them of 31.43 minutes. 8.4.3 has 7 2-and-3-infant concurrent cremations totaling 90 minutes. So they averaged 12.86 minutes per infant corpse. And 8.4.4 is a listing of 28 infant+adult double cremations (56 corpses altogether) totaling 1605 minutes. So they averaged 28.66 minutes per corpse. Mattogno confusingly writes that since it took about 50 minutes on average to singly cremate adults (his numbers come to 51.33 minutes) and that it took about 57.32 minutes to cremate an adult and infant concurrently (not per corpse but both together) that concurrent cremation here was no benefit! It's crazy, but that is what he is claiming. I of course claim that the average 57.32 minutes to concurrently cremate the adult+infant combination is a 31% reduction in the time it would take to cremate an adult individually (51.33 minutes) plus the time to cremate an infant individually (31.43 minutes). 57.32 minutes is 69.26% of (51.33 + 31.43 = 82.76) minutes.

So Mattogno has himself shown in these chapters that concurrent cremation resulted in a 1/3 reduction in average cremation time over sequential single cremations.

With respect to the argument of corpses fitting into the muffle space, the Charles Provan experiment we all know and love shows that one could fit many corpses into the muffle. The muffle is a little longer than Provan's box and its cross-section is larger than Provan's box' cross-section.

For the "thermochemical argument" you refer to there: The muffle area has direct flames directly directed at the corpses to quickly dehydrate them (or calcify or desiccate ... whichever word you're more comfortable with). The heat from a direct flame is hotter than the heat in the oven itself of course. While the oven experiences cooling from the evaporation, the heat of the flame is constant. It would need to be more thoroughly worked out than just my hand-waving here; but I don't anticipate anything to fret about with this.

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Sat Jul 07, 2018 11:20 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:Blake, whether one agrees with every detail of your comments or not, they're well thought-through. What is stopping you from finally accepting the GCs and the mass murder, esp. as they're documented?


The same arguments as in the OP actually! I think one could as easily make a case for no gas chambers as the case for gas chambers. There's no undeniable physical proof and I'm skeptical of that particular part of the story. Saying anything further would go too off-topic and open a can of worms. I don't believe the evidence converges better one way over the other.

The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Sun Jul 08, 2018 2:00 am

Sergey_Romanov wrote:Green agrees that the concentration argument should not be used.

"Many critics of Holocaust deniers have argued that because the lethal level of cyanide for a
human being is less than that for lice far lower concentrations were in fact used in the murdering process.
The fact that 300 ppm of HCN is rapidly lethal to human beings does not actually prove that such small
concentrations were used in the homicidal gas chambers. The advantage of using a higher concentration
is twofold: 1) the lethal effects can take place faster, and 2) the lethal concentration can be established
much faster. The advantage of using a lower concentration, of course, is that it would save money. I
have not seen evidence that the concentrations actually used for murder were significantly less (i.e., more
than a factor of 2 or 3) than those used for delousing."

He also shows that with ventilation the initial concentration matters much less anyway.


This couldn't be more wrong. The LC50 of HCN is 300 ppm. The 1-minute LC100 is 10 times that - that is why American execution chambers were designed to obtain an average distribution of 3200 ppm. An LC50 of 300 ppm means that precisely HALF of persons exposed to 300 ppm would eventually die from that exposure (at any time in the future - not necessarily quickly). In order to ensure a timely death of all persons, one needs to expose all those persons to 10 times your 300 ppm concentration (its actually been lowered to 2000 ppm a few years ago). 300 ppm would only result in half of persons dying. That is what an LC50 is. Green (and apparently you) are utterly clueless about that 300 ppm figure.

To say it a 3rd time in hopes that it sticks: If you exposed a room of people to 300 ppm HCN in air, only ONE HALF of those people would end up dead from that exposure - and not necessarily "rapidly" as you claim (although it tends to be rapid in the case of HCN).

These types of misunderstandings from your side is why you idiotically call facts "gibberish" in the title of your thread!

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2211
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balmoral95 » Sun Jul 08, 2018 3:01 am

In case the last is lost on some readers:

http://www.chemsafetypro.com/Topics/CRA ... ptors.html

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9004
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:18 am

blake121666 wrote:
The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.


That is where the outdoor cremation comes in.
A joke going around Moscow during The Great Terror:

The NKVD knocks on a door.
The inhabitants ask who it is.
“NKVD.”
“You’ve got the wrong apartment. The Communists are upstairs.”

Hans
Poster
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Hans » Sun Jul 08, 2018 7:25 am

blake121666 wrote:
Sergey_Romanov wrote:Blake, whether one agrees with every detail of your comments or not, they're well thought-through. What is stopping you from finally accepting the GCs and the mass murder, esp. as they're documented?


The same arguments as in the OP actually! I think one could as easily make a case for no gas chambers as the case for gas chambers. There's no undeniable physical proof and I'm skeptical of that particular part of the story. Saying anything further would go too off-topic and open a can of worms. I don't believe the evidence converges better one way over the other.

The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.


Blake, the average number of unfit Hungarian Jews arriving in Birkenau was about 5,000 per day and the maximum number can be estimated to about 10,000 unfit Hungarian Jews, which was reached only on six days in May/June/July 1944. As Jeff mentioned, it's not a secret how the excess number of corpses was dealt with in Auschwitz-Birkenau:

The Auschwitz Open Air Incineration Photographs as Evidence for Mass Extermination

Open-Air Cremations in Auschwitz, August 1943

The Auschwitz Open Air Incineration Ground Photographs and Revisionist Forgery Allegations

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sun Jul 08, 2018 8:28 am

blake121666 wrote:
Sergey_Romanov wrote:Green agrees that the concentration argument should not be used.

"Many critics of Holocaust deniers have argued that because the lethal level of cyanide for a
human being is less than that for lice far lower concentrations were in fact used in the murdering process.
The fact that 300 ppm of HCN is rapidly lethal to human beings does not actually prove that such small
concentrations were used in the homicidal gas chambers. The advantage of using a higher concentration
is twofold: 1) the lethal effects can take place faster, and 2) the lethal concentration can be established
much faster. The advantage of using a lower concentration, of course, is that it would save money. I
have not seen evidence that the concentrations actually used for murder were significantly less (i.e., more
than a factor of 2 or 3) than those used for delousing."

He also shows that with ventilation the initial concentration matters much less anyway.


This couldn't be more wrong. The LC50 of HCN is 300 ppm. The 1-minute LC100 is 10 times that - that is why American execution chambers were designed to obtain an average distribution of 3200 ppm. An LC50 of 300 ppm means that precisely HALF of persons exposed to 300 ppm would eventually die from that exposure (at any time in the future - not necessarily quickly). In order to ensure a timely death of all persons, one needs to expose all those persons to 10 times your 300 ppm concentration (its actually been lowered to 2000 ppm a few years ago). 300 ppm would only result in half of persons dying. That is what an LC50 is. Green (and apparently you) are utterly clueless about that 300 ppm figure.

To say it a 3rd time in hopes that it sticks: If you exposed a room of people to 300 ppm HCN in air, only ONE HALF of those people would end up dead from that exposure - and not necessarily "rapidly" as you claim (although it tends to be rapid in the case of HCN).

These types of misunderstandings from your side is why you idiotically call facts "gibberish" in the title of your thread!

OK, I guess I was too quick with calling your comments well thought-through. Green actually has a long discussion of these values and what they mean. That you would hysterically jump in to just score some imaginary points without actually taking time to research the issue exhibits a certain kind of irrationality that probably also prevents you from accepting the obvious and documented fact of the existence of the homicidal gas chambers and mass murder in Auschwitz.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22242
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 08, 2018 12:31 pm

Hans wrote:
blake121666 wrote:
Sergey_Romanov wrote:Blake, whether one agrees with every detail of your comments or not, they're well thought-through. What is stopping you from finally accepting the GCs and the mass murder, esp. as they're documented?


The same arguments as in the OP actually! I think one could as easily make a case for no gas chambers as the case for gas chambers. There's no undeniable physical proof and I'm skeptical of that particular part of the story. Saying anything further would go too off-topic and open a can of worms. I don't believe the evidence converges better one way over the other.

The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.


Blake, the average number of unfit Hungarian Jews arriving in Birkenau was about 5,000 per day and the maximum number can be estimated to about 10,000 unfit Hungarian Jews, which was reached only on six days in May/June/July 1944. As Jeff mentioned, it's not a secret how the excess number of corpses was dealt with in Auschwitz-Birkenau:

The Auschwitz Open Air Incineration Photographs as Evidence for Mass Extermination

Open-Air Cremations in Auschwitz, August 1943

The Auschwitz Open Air Incineration Ground Photographs and Revisionist Forgery Allegations

Revisionists do with the selection process what they do with the cremation pits - exclude these factors from their mental universe and calculations in order to make "no gas chambers" fit into their "skepticism."

Anyway, since blake is concerned about going off topic to explain his full understanding of Auschwitz, here is where he can lay out his views on the totality of the evidence and the "loose ends" without risk of derailing a discussion.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Hans
Poster
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Hans » Sun Jul 08, 2018 1:06 pm

blake121666 wrote:This couldn't be more wrong. The LC50 of HCN is 300 ppm.


Blake, I would say that you could not be more wrong to use the term LC50 on a gas without considering exposure time. 300 ppm HCN in the air for 1 min has a different effect than the same concentration for 20 min. We are not talking about injecting a dose, but people taking it up via breathing and skin from the air of that HCN concentration. In this case, the lethal effects depends critically on exposure time. Green has understood this, by the way.

The 1 min LC100 - even if it were accurately known for the sake of argument - says little about the minimum concentrations needed in the homicidal gas chambers in the crematoria, since a) the exposure time to a dynamic HCN concentration (increasing in the first 20 min, decreasing during the ventilation period) was at least 40 min and b) the gassing required everybody to be at least unconscious for sufficient time, but not necessarily medically dead. So both the 1 min exposure time and 100% dead criterion do not apply to the HGC. Besides, 1min LC100 are hardly estimated for the rather poor physiologial state of the exhausted and weak victims, the temperature, the panic and the reduced O2/increased CO2 in the gas chambers...

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1801
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Sun Jul 08, 2018 7:17 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
blake121666 wrote:
The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.


That is where the outdoor cremation comes in.


Outdoor cremation does not help you to kill through gassing 11.000 people a day, unfortunately. And then, even "only 5000" seems to high if on a daily basis.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9004
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Sun Jul 08, 2018 8:13 pm

Balsamo wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
blake121666 wrote:
The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.


That is where the outdoor cremation comes in.


Outdoor cremation does not help you to kill through gassing 11.000 people a day, unfortunately. And then, even "only 5000" seems to high if on a daily basis.


Are we talking a full day of 24 hours?
The issue is always disposal. The actual killing process takes the least amount of time.

I don’t get the disconnect with this issue. We aren’t talking about a single method of getting of the bodies. With the crematorium functioning along with outdoor burning Auschwitz had sufficient means to dispose of those killed.

I also think this is misconstrued, this idea that they were doing this on a daily basis. From what I remember even at the height of the Hungarian action trains didn’t come everyday.
A joke going around Moscow during The Great Terror:

The NKVD knocks on a door.
The inhabitants ask who it is.
“NKVD.”
“You’ve got the wrong apartment. The Communists are upstairs.”

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9004
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Sun Jul 08, 2018 8:15 pm

Hans
Poster
Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers
Sun Jul 08, 2018 1:25 am

blake121666 wrote:
Sergey_Romanov wrote:
Blake, whether one agrees with every detail of your comments or not, they're well thought-through. What is stopping you from finally accepting the GCs and the mass murder, esp. as they're documented?


The same arguments as in the OP actually! I think one could as easily make a case for no gas chambers as the case for gas chambers. There's no undeniable physical proof and I'm skeptical of that particular part of the story. Saying anything further would go too off-topic and open a can of worms. I don't believe the evidence converges better one way over the other.

The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.


Blake, the average number of unfit Hungarian Jews arriving in Birkenau was about 5,000 per day and the maximum number can be estimated to about 10,000 unfit Hungarian Jews, which was reached only on six days in May/June/July 1944. As Jeff mentioned, it's not a secret how the excess number of corpses was dealt with in Auschwitz-Birkenau
A joke going around Moscow during The Great Terror:

The NKVD knocks on a door.
The inhabitants ask who it is.
“NKVD.”
“You’ve got the wrong apartment. The Communists are upstairs.”

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9004
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Sun Jul 08, 2018 8:18 pm

I think if we want to discuss Auschwitz we should do it here:

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=27784
A joke going around Moscow during The Great Terror:

The NKVD knocks on a door.
The inhabitants ask who it is.
“NKVD.”
“You’ve got the wrong apartment. The Communists are upstairs.”

User avatar
Nessie
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2892
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Nessie » Sun Jul 08, 2018 8:29 pm

My attitude is that we know they did it (gas and cremate), we just do not have a huge amount of clear detail as to how. There should have been much better interviewing of witnesses to get more detail.

It is entertaining how deniers act like technical experts whose opinion is equal to evidence. There is no questioning of Mattogno, that well known technical experts on pretty much everything.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sun Jul 08, 2018 9:21 pm

Balsamo wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
blake121666 wrote:
The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.


That is where the outdoor cremation comes in.


Outdoor cremation does not help you to kill through gassing 11.000 people a day, unfortunately. And then, even "only 5000" seems to high if on a daily basis.

Killing wasn't the bottleneck.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1801
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Sun Jul 08, 2018 10:55 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:
Balsamo wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
blake121666 wrote:
The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.


That is where the outdoor cremation comes in.


Outdoor cremation does not help you to kill through gassing 11.000 people a day, unfortunately. And then, even "only 5000" seems to high if on a daily basis.

Killing wasn't the bottleneck.


If by "killing" you mean the period during the gas is poured and how long it took for the victims to die, of course not.
But to kill a convoy, is a process that involved many steps, before and after that specific fatal step.

Actually, if i may add provocatively, the evaluation of how many people could be killed based ONLY on the cremation capacity of the ovens is a topic in which there is still "gibberish" on our side.
The Charles Provan experiment being one good example.
Cremation capacity = gas chambers capacity being another.
I have already wrote about that, but just to point out two point, the ovens could operate 24h a day, a gas chambers could not. The two process are complementary but not simultaneous.
I think it was Denyng-History (but i am not sure ) who proposed the calculation that a convoy could be disposed of in 32 hours...If one assume a convoy for one krema to be let's say 1800 (Krema II or III)...the theoretical killing capacity would be 1800/32 or 51 people an hour...even though the ovens had a capacity way over that number. In D-H hypothesis, 32 hours covering the time between victims arriving at the doors of the gas chamber and the moment the gas chambers is ready to be used again, considering that during this lapse, the gas chambers could only be used once.

Hans wrote:
Blake, the average number of unfit Hungarian Jews arriving in Birkenau was about 5,000 per day and the maximum number can be estimated to about 10,000 unfit Hungarian Jews, which was reached only on six days in May/June/July 1944. As Jeff mentioned, it's not a secret how the excess number of corpses was dealt with in Auschwitz-Birkenau:


Based on this list here
http://www.zchor.org/hungaria.htm

I count much more days than that, i stopped at 9 and was still in the months of may.
Just to give a few ones:
16th May : 13.963 people are counted as "killed"
17th may: 8.841
18th May : 8.917
19th May : 8.772
20th May : 6.620
21th May : 9.662

Now, i do not deny that those were selected to be killed, but it is just impossible that they all have been killed on the same days.
I am not a Birkenau specialist like you, and i am open to explanation on how so many people could be killed during the declared time frame, but my impression is that there is something missing in how those victims were actually killed.
Maybe this list of transports have since then been corrected...i don't know.

Now i have my personal hypothesis on the subject, but it is just that...an hypothesis.
But i am not aware of any logical explanation of the process.

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Mon Jul 09, 2018 12:08 am

Sergey_Romanov wrote:
blake121666 wrote:
Sergey_Romanov wrote:Green agrees that the concentration argument should not be used.

"Many critics of Holocaust deniers have argued that because the lethal level of cyanide for a
human being is less than that for lice far lower concentrations were in fact used in the murdering process.
The fact that 300 ppm of HCN is rapidly lethal to human beings does not actually prove that such small
concentrations were used in the homicidal gas chambers. The advantage of using a higher concentration
is twofold: 1) the lethal effects can take place faster, and 2) the lethal concentration can be established
much faster. The advantage of using a lower concentration, of course, is that it would save money. I
have not seen evidence that the concentrations actually used for murder were significantly less (i.e., more
than a factor of 2 or 3) than those used for delousing."

He also shows that with ventilation the initial concentration matters much less anyway.


This couldn't be more wrong. The LC50 of HCN is 300 ppm. The 1-minute LC100 is 10 times that - that is why American execution chambers were designed to obtain an average distribution of 3200 ppm. An LC50 of 300 ppm means that precisely HALF of persons exposed to 300 ppm would eventually die from that exposure (at any time in the future - not necessarily quickly). In order to ensure a timely death of all persons, one needs to expose all those persons to 10 times your 300 ppm concentration (its actually been lowered to 2000 ppm a few years ago). 300 ppm would only result in half of persons dying. That is what an LC50 is. Green (and apparently you) are utterly clueless about that 300 ppm figure.

To say it a 3rd time in hopes that it sticks: If you exposed a room of people to 300 ppm HCN in air, only ONE HALF of those people would end up dead from that exposure - and not necessarily "rapidly" as you claim (although it tends to be rapid in the case of HCN).

These types of misunderstandings from your side is why you idiotically call facts "gibberish" in the title of your thread!

OK, I guess I was too quick with calling your comments well thought-through. Green actually has a long discussion of these values and what they mean. That you would hysterically jump in to just score some imaginary points without actually taking time to research the issue exhibits a certain kind of irrationality that probably also prevents you from accepting the obvious and documented fact of the existence of the homicidal gas chambers and mass murder in Auschwitz.


I have researched the issue - just not in quite some time. You are correct that I wished to "hysterically jump in to just score some imaginary points"! I just scanned Green's paper again and see that he has a discussion about this issue in it - which I had forgotten about. The 300 ppm is somewhat arbitrary but not out of the general neighborhood of what one would expect. I jumped the gun on this denunciation. Your models generally have persons exposed to more than this anyway as you say. A real quick google I've just done right now turns up a very interesting book chapter which I actually have not come across before now which I will need to read through:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK207601/

The issue is a very complicated one as I'm sure we're all aware. One interesting thing mentioned in this link in chapter 7.1 is:

Bonsall (1984), a 6-min exposure at approximately 450 ppm, with recovery from symptoms and effects, can be considered short-term upper limits for healthy adults.


I'm throwing this out there as an interesting reference to what we are talking about - not as any type of refutation to Green. The issue is a complicated one as I've said.

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Mon Jul 09, 2018 2:11 am

redacted
Last edited by blake121666 on Mon Jul 09, 2018 8:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Mon Jul 09, 2018 2:26 am

Hans wrote:
blake121666 wrote:
Sergey_Romanov wrote:Blake, whether one agrees with every detail of your comments or not, they're well thought-through. What is stopping you from finally accepting the GCs and the mass murder, esp. as they're documented?


The same arguments as in the OP actually! I think one could as easily make a case for no gas chambers as the case for gas chambers. There's no undeniable physical proof and I'm skeptical of that particular part of the story. Saying anything further would go too off-topic and open a can of worms. I don't believe the evidence converges better one way over the other.

The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.


Blake, the average number of unfit Hungarian Jews arriving in Birkenau was about 5,000 per day and the maximum number can be estimated to about 10,000 unfit Hungarian Jews, which was reached only on six days in May/June/July 1944. As Jeff mentioned, it's not a secret how the excess number of corpses was dealt with in Auschwitz-Birkenau:

The Auschwitz Open Air Incineration Photographs as Evidence for Mass Extermination

Open-Air Cremations in Auschwitz, August 1943

The Auschwitz Open Air Incineration Ground Photographs and Revisionist Forgery Allegations


I didn't notice your links at first and mentioned your post in another thread. I'll have to look over your links.

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:17 am

Balsamo wrote:Based on this list here
http://www.zchor.org/hungaria.htm

I count much more days than that, i stopped at 9 and was still in the months of may.
Just to give a few ones:
16th May : 13.963 people are counted as "killed"
17th may: 8.841
18th May : 8.917
19th May : 8.772
20th May : 6.620
21th May : 9.662

Have you confused the arrival dates with the other dates?

E.g. your 16th (on which 5542 are estimated to have been killed) should be 18th, and summed up gives 11427 and not your number. The sum of arrivals for this date is 14083.

On the 19th we have 9859 arrivals, of them 6591 assumed killed by Honey.

Then 10123 arrivals on the 20th, 5835 assumed killed by Honey.

Then 15795 arrivals on the 21st, 11905 assumed killed by Honey.

Hans
Poster
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Hans » Mon Jul 09, 2018 8:09 am

blake121666 wrote:Hans wrote:
Blake, the average number of unfit Hungarian Jews arriving in Birkenau was about 5,000 per day and the maximum number can be estimated to about 10,000 unfit Hungarian Jews, which was reached only on six days in May/June/July 1944. As Jeff mentioned, it's not a secret how the excess number of corpses was dealt with in Auschwitz-Birkenau:


Based on this list here
http://www.zchor.org/hungaria.htm

I count much more days than that, i stopped at 9 and was still in the months of may.
Just to give a few ones:
16th May : 13.963 people are counted as "killed"
17th may: 8.841
18th May : 8.917
19th May : 8.772
20th May : 6.620
21th May : 9.662

Now, i do not deny that those were selected to be killed, but it is just impossible that they all have been killed on the same days.
I am not a Birkenau specialist like you, and i am open to explanation on how so many people could be killed during the declared time frame, but my impression is that there is something missing in how those victims were actually killed.
Maybe this list of transports have since then been corrected...i don't know.

Now i have my personal hypothesis on the subject, but it is just that...an hypothesis.
But i am not aware of any logical explanation of the process.


Admittedly, my peak figure (based on 5 transports with 2000 victims) was a bit too low compared to Honey's analysis. But your calculation is not proper either. You have summed up the figures for the dates when the transports were passing the border station Kosice. The actual date when the transport was processed in Birkenau is in the column "date arrrived Auschwitz". If I've added it up correctly, the figures of people to be killed in Birkenau looks like this (I've equally distributed the figures for 28 May on 28 and 29 May as there is obviously a typo and I have adjusted the extremely low figure of fit men from the last transport on 18 May as it looks like a typo too):

16.05.1944 5542
17.05.1944 2536
18.05.1944 10627
19.05.1944 6591
20.05.1944 5835
21.05.1944 11905
22.05.1944 8819
23.05.1944 9662
24.05.1944 8707
25.05.1944 10745
26.05.1944 12528
27.05.1944 10116
28.05.1944 11273
29.05.1944 11273
30.05.1944 4767
31.05.1944 6668
01.06.1944 11627
02.06.1944 8649
03.06.1944 8399
04.06.1944 7953
05.06.1944 5984
06.06.1944 7641
07.06.1944 7133
08.06.1944 3318
09.06.1944 1974
10.06.1944 814
11.06.1944 756
12.06.1944 8921
13.06.1944 7729
14.06.1944 7518
15.06.1944 8601
16.06.1944 4650
17.06.1944 8622
18.06.1944 2309
19.06.1944 0
20.06.1944 0
21.06.1944 0
22.06.1944 0
23.06.1944 0
24.06.1944 0
25.06.1944 0
26.06.1944 2470
27.06.1944 2747
28.06.1944 3838
29.06.1944 7495
30.06.1944 0
01.07.1944 6655
02.07.1944 0
03.07.1944 0
04.07.1944 0
05.07.1944 0
06.07.1944 0
07.07.1944 7481
08.07.1944 8797
09.07.1944 9837
10.07.1944 9878
11.07.1944 3249
12.07.1944 0
13.07.1944 0
14.07.1944 0
15.07.1944 0

The figure for the killed females is only estimated and it is assumed that it was 10% higher than men. One has to take into account this uncertainty and for all we know the percentage of fit women might have been higher for some of the May transports reducing the number of people to be killed. Another thing to consider is that the numbers of unfit people did not have to be cremated on the very same or the next day, but in principle they could have been hold back and liquidated later on days of lesser activity (there might be not much, if any evidence on this, but this could be so because there would be no survivors of such practice). Thirdly, one needs to take into account that the proportion of children was rather high (which, as you know, reduces the required cremation capacity), since the selection rate for the fit people (driven by the Nazis' need for fresh forced laborers) was relatively high considering that many young men had been already hold back by the Hungarian authorities.

In terms of body disposal, the most dense and critical period was from 25.5 to 31.5.1944 with 9,600 assumed victims in average. Whatever is taken for the capacity of the crematoria, several thousands of people had to be cremated in the open, as is established by numerous evidence on outdoor cremation in Auschwitz in that period (I might estimate the available m² for open air pyres later the day, if that helps you to understand "how it was possible").

Hans
Poster
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Hans » Mon Jul 09, 2018 8:23 am

blake121666 wrote:
Hans wrote:
blake121666 wrote:
Sergey_Romanov wrote:Blake, whether one agrees with every detail of your comments or not, they're well thought-through. What is stopping you from finally accepting the GCs and the mass murder, esp. as they're documented?


The same arguments as in the OP actually! I think one could as easily make a case for no gas chambers as the case for gas chambers. There's no undeniable physical proof and I'm skeptical of that particular part of the story. Saying anything further would go too off-topic and open a can of worms. I don't believe the evidence converges better one way over the other.

The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.


Blake, the average number of unfit Hungarian Jews arriving in Birkenau was about 5,000 per day and the maximum number can be estimated to about 10,000 unfit Hungarian Jews, which was reached only on six days in May/June/July 1944. As Jeff mentioned, it's not a secret how the excess number of corpses was dealt with in Auschwitz-Birkenau:

The Auschwitz Open Air Incineration Photographs as Evidence for Mass Extermination

Open-Air Cremations in Auschwitz, August 1943

The Auschwitz Open Air Incineration Ground Photographs and Revisionist Forgery Allegations


I didn't notice your links at first and mentioned your post in another thread. I'll have to look over your links.


The links establish that open air cremation was carried out (since you did not mention this), but it is not so much about the magnitude. However, it is straightforward to estimate the potential cremation area from photographs and then one can plug in Roberto Mühlenkamp's extensive writings on the matter or perform some own estimations using witness descriptions of the stacking procedure...

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Mon Jul 09, 2018 8:32 am

Hans wrote:
blake121666 wrote:Hans wrote:
Blake, the average number of unfit Hungarian Jews arriving in Birkenau was about 5,000 per day and the maximum number can be estimated to about 10,000 unfit Hungarian Jews, which was reached only on six days in May/June/July 1944. As Jeff mentioned, it's not a secret how the excess number of corpses was dealt with in Auschwitz-Birkenau:


Based on this list here
http://www.zchor.org/hungaria.htm

I count much more days than that, i stopped at 9 and was still in the months of may.
Just to give a few ones:
16th May : 13.963 people are counted as "killed"
17th may: 8.841
18th May : 8.917
19th May : 8.772
20th May : 6.620
21th May : 9.662

Now, i do not deny that those were selected to be killed, but it is just impossible that they all have been killed on the same days.
I am not a Birkenau specialist like you, and i am open to explanation on how so many people could be killed during the declared time frame, but my impression is that there is something missing in how those victims were actually killed.
Maybe this list of transports have since then been corrected...i don't know.

Now i have my personal hypothesis on the subject, but it is just that...an hypothesis.
But i am not aware of any logical explanation of the process.


Admittedly, my peak figure (based on 5 transports with 2000 victims) was a bit too low compared to Honey's analysis. But your calculation is not proper either. You have summed up the figures for the dates when the transports were passing the border station Kosice. The actual date when the transport was processed in Birkenau is in the column "date arrrived Auschwitz". If I've added it up correctly, the figures of people to be killed in Birkenau looks like this (I've equally distributed the figures for 28 May on 28 and 29 May as there is obviously a typo and I have adjusted the extremely low figure of fit men from the last transport on 18 May as it looks like a typo too):

16.05.1944 5542
17.05.1944 2536
18.05.1944 10627
19.05.1944 6591
20.05.1944 5835
21.05.1944 11905
22.05.1944 8819
23.05.1944 9662
24.05.1944 8707
25.05.1944 10745
26.05.1944 12528
27.05.1944 10116
28.05.1944 11273
29.05.1944 11273
30.05.1944 4767
31.05.1944 6668
01.06.1944 11627
02.06.1944 8649
03.06.1944 8399
04.06.1944 7953
05.06.1944 5984
06.06.1944 7641
07.06.1944 7133
08.06.1944 3318
09.06.1944 1974
10.06.1944 814
11.06.1944 756
12.06.1944 8921
13.06.1944 7729
14.06.1944 7518
15.06.1944 8601
16.06.1944 4650
17.06.1944 8622
18.06.1944 2309
19.06.1944 0
20.06.1944 0
21.06.1944 0
22.06.1944 0
23.06.1944 0
24.06.1944 0
25.06.1944 0
26.06.1944 2470
27.06.1944 2747
28.06.1944 3838
29.06.1944 7495
30.06.1944 0
01.07.1944 6655
02.07.1944 0
03.07.1944 0
04.07.1944 0
05.07.1944 0
06.07.1944 0
07.07.1944 7481
08.07.1944 8797
09.07.1944 9837
10.07.1944 9878
11.07.1944 3249
12.07.1944 0
13.07.1944 0
14.07.1944 0
15.07.1944 0

The figure for the killed females is only estimated and it is assumed that it was 10% higher than men. One has to take into account this uncertainty and for all we know the percentage of fit women might have been higher for some of the May transports reducing the number of people to be killed. Another thing to consider is that the numbers of unfit people did not have to be cremated on the very same or the next day, but in principle they could have been hold back and liquidated later on days of lesser activity (there might be not much, if any evidence on this, but this could be so because there would be no survivors of such practice). Thirdly, one needs to take into account that the proportion of children was rather high (which, as you know, reduces the required cremation capacity), since the selection rate for the fit people (driven by the Nazis' need for fresh forced laborers) was relatively high considering that many young men had been already hold back by the Hungarian authorities.

In terms of body disposal, the most dense and critical period was from 25.5 to 31.5.1944 with 9,600 assumed victims in average. Whatever is taken for the capacity of the crematoria, several thousands of people had to be cremated in the open, as is established by numerous evidence on outdoor cremation in Auschwitz in that period (I might estimate the available m² for open air pyres later the day, if that helps you to understand "how it was possible").


It looks like you require open air cremations practically EVERY day for the first month. Is this your contention?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22242
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jul 09, 2018 11:53 am

blake121666 wrote:It looks like you require open air cremations practically EVERY day for the first month. Is this your contention?

But first, do you now accept that your estimates of 12,000 Hungarian Jews arriving and 11,000 killed per day are wrong?
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22242
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jul 09, 2018 11:54 am

Hans' figures above, adjusting from Honey's, show 5 days where blake's claimed average number killed was met.

blake's seems determined to maintain the 3 denier fallacies which Hans already pointed out - overestimating daily arrivals, underestimating the number deemed fit for labor, and minimizing the outdoor cremations. Until at least he directly answers Hans (and Sergey) on the daily lists they've constructed.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Mon Jul 09, 2018 2:04 pm

> It looks like you require open air cremations practically EVERY day for the first month. Is this your contention?

I think this has always been the default assumption supported by witness evidence.

User avatar
Aaron Richards
Poster
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:03 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Aaron Richards » Mon Jul 09, 2018 2:45 pm

blake, you're still assuming historians are claiming everyone, or even the overwhelming majority of people who died in a homicidal gas chamber at Auschwitz-Birkenau, died from a fatal dose of hydrogen cyanide inhalation, when the reality is we simply do not know who died from what causes inside the chambers. It is obvious that a mass of some 1500 writhing, panicking, hyperventilating people clawing at and crushing each other will have ALSO expired from a wide variety of causes other than the aforementioned. This is why "revisionist science", with its reference to calmly seated US prisoners being executed by HCN is a meaningless comparison. A bloke who might have died only after 17 minutes of gassing in a US chamber might not have lasted two minutes in Krema II, morgue 1.
Please subscribe to my YouTube channel "Holocaust Documents", where I fight back the sea of antisemitism & conspiracy theories that has taken over its comment section: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTBlSX ... Un5jIhWm7g
I compile rebuttals to popular holocaust denier canards here: http://imgur.com/a/725A7

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1801
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Mon Jul 09, 2018 2:53 pm

Sergey:
Have you confused the arrival dates with the other dates?


Oups, indeed...i really need new glasses...
But the new results corrected by Hans do not really change the problem.

@Hans: It is not Blake who wrote the post you quoted

Hans wrote:
Another thing to consider is that the numbers of unfit people did not have to be cremated on the very same or the next day, but in principle they could have been hold back and liquidated later on days of lesser activity (there might be not much, if any evidence on this, but this could be so because there would be no survivors of such practice).


Two important things here.
The first is when you write that those people did not have to be cremated on the very same. Again, here is one of the issue: before being cremated those people had to be killed first.
To evaluate their disposal only based on the cremation capacity would suppose that they were already dead, and the bodies directly delivered to the cremation facilities.
My whole point being that the cremation capacities were enough, especially supported by open pits, but that the limits was within the killing process, which seems completely forgotten.
Even if we assumed that 8819 people were killed in the gas chambers on the 22th of May - and i doubt the gas chambers had the capacity for so many people, but again let's assume it was possible - it would have been impossible use those gas chambers the very next morning, and the more people in the gas chambers, the longer it would have taken to empty it, even if only because of the delays between the two process. Especially at Krema II and III.

Things would have been easier if someone had tried to evaluate a time frame for the whole killing process, that is how long it took from people waiting outside the killing installation and the time this installation was ready for the next victims.
This is of course open to discussion, and of course only evaluated, as there are a lot of factors involved. What is valid for Kerma II and III are not for Krema IV and V...etc.

My remarks are based on the fact that before reaching the ovens at the upper level (krema II and III), the corpses had to be dragged out of the gas chambers - which according to the draggers testimonies was not easy especially at the beginning and then after a few hours when rigidity started - women's hair cut, mouth checked for teeth, gold teeth eventually removed, then bodies loaded on the elevator, elevator sent up (and back down) bodies unloaded from the elevator BEFORE they could be put in the oven. And then, once the gas chamber is empty, it had to be cleaned and made ready for the next victims...

Actually, as strange as it might seem, there is only ONE SK, Schlomo Venezia, who has been asked "how long did it take" and of course, his anwer - which was already discussed here- is kind of problematic as he said "Up to 6 shifts". Now even if we reject that answer, and let's say cut it in half, the issue remains the same. cremation capacity does not equal killing capacity.

Which actually brings to you second point:

they could have been hold back and liquidated later on days of lesser activity


This is also my conclusion actually and the only solution basically. Now i don't enough on the topic to look for proofs, but it seems that there were Depot lager in sector BII, as well as the sector BIII, and that there is this german term "gesondert untergrebracht" which quite fit with the need.
Now i know that HC has concluded that it was just another way to express "to kill", but well, maybe, just maybe...it only mean what it actually says, that is "specially (gesondert having the same meaning than in SB, only while Treatment means death, Untergebracht means lodged until put to death... Just an idea.

Have to go.

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:42 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
blake121666 wrote:It looks like you require open air cremations practically EVERY day for the first month. Is this your contention?

But first, do you now accept that your estimates of 12,000 Hungarian Jews arriving and 11,000 killed per day are wrong?


You've misrepresented what I meant, here. I was referring to peaks. And such is what you have for peaks.

EDIT: BTW, I can tell that others understood what I meant. You wish to pedantically bicker.
Last edited by blake121666 on Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:49 pm

I think I see where this is going. You are going to claim that the 2-3 each half hour is REALLY more than that when one includes special circumstances (women and children cremate faster, ... whatever else). Such was already included in any acceptance of the 2-3 per half hour acceptance.

It looks like you are in all instances going to present a "just-so" case and not only max out estimates but exceed them. I need time to digest such claims (which while not claimed yet, I see that is where this is going).

And SM is going to bicker pedantically and claim that it is I who is doing that. :roll:

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22242
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:03 pm

blake121666 wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
blake121666 wrote:It looks like you require open air cremations practically EVERY day for the first month. Is this your contention?

But first, do you now accept that your estimates of 12,000 Hungarian Jews arriving and 11,000 killed per day are wrong?


You've misrepresented what I meant, here. I was referring to peaks. And such is what you have for peaks.

EDIT: BTW, I can tell that others understood what I meant. You wish to pedantically bicker.

I don't know what you now say you meant because I can only read what you wrote, for example:
The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.

5 random days at your rates are neither a "per day" figure nor sustained periods - when it comes to killing capacity questions. You may wish to describe my asking you to be clear as "pedantic bickering" whereas I see you squirming to continue trying to salvage your mistaken impression.

I gave you a clear answer to the limited question you asked me,; now for some reason you need to engage in metaconversation when you're asked a similar kind of question.

Again, the question, which I hope you won't keep dodging, is simple and clearcut: "do you now accept that your estimates of 12,000 Hungarian Jews arriving and 11,000 killed per day are wrong?" And since you dodged it the first time, I will add, do you accept roughly the timetables presented by Hans and Sergey? Have the guts to say what you think, clearly.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:12 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
blake121666 wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
blake121666 wrote:It looks like you require open air cremations practically EVERY day for the first month. Is this your contention?

But first, do you now accept that your estimates of 12,000 Hungarian Jews arriving and 11,000 killed per day are wrong?


You've misrepresented what I meant, here. I was referring to peaks. And such is what you have for peaks.

EDIT: BTW, I can tell that others understood what I meant. You wish to pedantically bicker.

I don't know what you now say you meant because I can only read what you wrote, for example:
The Auschwitz claim is that over 11,000 corpses per day were incinerated somehow. These ovens don't even get you half that. So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau. At the very least, you need to tie up loose ends - of which there are very very many in the whole narrative.

5 random days at your rates are neither a "per day" figure nor sustained periods - when it comes to killing capacity questions. You may wish to describe my asking you to be clear as "pedantic bickering" whereas I see you squirming to continue trying to salvage your mistaken impression.

I gave you a clear answer to the limited question you asked me,; now for some reason you need to engage in metaconversation when you're asked a similar kind of question.

Again, the question, which I hope you won't keep dodging, is simple and clearcut: "do you now accept that your estimates of 12,000 Hungarian Jews arriving and 11,000 killed per day are wrong?" And since you dodged it the first time, I will add, do you accept roughly the timetables presented by Hans and Sergey? Have the guts to say what you think, clearly.


I have been clear enough. You are bickering. There are sustained periods of overly large numbers to be cremated in the lists. Such was all that was ever meant and such is what is being claimed by you.
Last edited by blake121666 on Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1801
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:14 pm

Aaron Richards wrote:blake, you're still assuming historians are claiming everyone, or even the overwhelming majority of people who died in a homicidal gas chamber at Auschwitz-Birkenau, died from a fatal dose of hydrogen cyanide inhalation, when the reality is we simply do not know who died from what causes inside the chambers. It is obvious that a mass of some 1500 writhing, panicking, hyperventilating people clawing at and crushing each other will have ALSO expired from a wide variety of causes other than the aforementioned. This is why "revisionist science", with its reference to calmly seated US prisoners being executed by HCN is a meaningless comparison. A bloke who might have died only after 17 minutes of gassing in a US chamber might not have lasted two minutes in Krema II, morgue 1.


I agree 100% with this Aaron,
Even a dropped firecracker would have resulted in 100's of deaths...
In addition, more or less time of exposure to the poison gas has absolute no consequences...


Return to “Holocaust, Genocide, and Mass Violence”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Balmoral95, Balsamo and 2 guests