Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Discussions
User avatar
Darren Wilshak
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1405
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:16 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Darren Wilshak » Thu Oct 25, 2012 1:38 pm

Codoh runs a rigged game. If you think otherwise Bob, then that's another thing that you are wrong about. There is no debate there, manipulation, personal feelings, how much of a threat to the poor Revisionist "chimps" winning an argument someone is, they all take precedence at codoh over balance, even handedness and honesty. The place is rotten to the core.
"We are still waiting for anyone to rebut the main theme of the article that the decode in question and the numbers it quoted perfectly match those in the Korherr report.

Until such a rebuttal comes to light and goes through peer review the article stands the test of time. And after 10 years since the article was published both Peter (Witte) and I have moved on to other research projects. "

AHF

User avatar
Darren Wilshak
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1405
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:16 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Darren Wilshak » Thu Oct 25, 2012 1:56 pm

Here's something else that you might wish to consider on a thread that is actually sensible and if you join it you won't be alluded to as a "chimp."

Dr. Nick Terry:

"The real point is why you exalt internet forums at all. They are clearly not venues where truth can be decided conclusively. Most people post on forums for recreation, or to exchange information casually and quickly; they work quite well for passing on news stories, discussing new things, and having pointless arguments that can run for 1000s of pages. This format is not even up to blog standards. Forum posts are rarely going to be the equal of essays written for blogs, websites or 'print' publications. The sense that forums are not the same as essays put out elsewhere is practically built in to the WYSIWYG browser system."

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php? ... 4&page=139" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Perhaps I should have more patience with the handful of deniers who come here Nessie and be well behaved but as Mr. Ellard knows I cannot really be bothered with them any more and this is in part why they and their ideas are more often than not are referred to by me with barely disguised scorn or contempt. In the wider sense, despite what they believe they are doing as a contribution ain't none of them making one iota of difference to the understanding of History. That applies far and wide. It would be fairer to say that Jerzy with his moronic one liners on Youtube about the Holocaust is only contributing to the confusion of history. Stand him up in a proper debate though with someone who knows what they are talking about and he would quickly fall apart It would be nice to agree to disagree with deniers but somehow that doesn't seem to work either. For an historian trained in the methods of historiography, the revisionist approach to the subject must appear to be cavalier and shockingly amateurish. There are few trained historians attracted to this belief. In the more extreme cases such as those represented by Carlos Porter and Greg Gerdes and Fred Berg it does actually seem to resemble an aberrant mental condition.
"We are still waiting for anyone to rebut the main theme of the article that the decode in question and the numbers it quoted perfectly match those in the Korherr report.

Until such a rebuttal comes to light and goes through peer review the article stands the test of time. And after 10 years since the article was published both Peter (Witte) and I have moved on to other research projects. "

AHF

User avatar
Darren Wilshak
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1405
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:16 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Darren Wilshak » Thu Oct 25, 2012 1:59 pm

Jerzy's latest thread on Ada Bimko (snore) is a good example of the mental disturbance that seems to affect some deniers.
"We are still waiting for anyone to rebut the main theme of the article that the decode in question and the numbers it quoted perfectly match those in the Korherr report.

Until such a rebuttal comes to light and goes through peer review the article stands the test of time. And after 10 years since the article was published both Peter (Witte) and I have moved on to other research projects. "

AHF

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Thu Oct 25, 2012 3:22 pm

Nessie, you yourself proved again that you have nothing and I refuted your alleged evidence from you and your colleagues in the past no matter how many time you will repeat that I didn´t do it. You are affraid to be refuted again so you and you colleagues repeatedly refused to present your alleged evidence consisted from testimonies, train photo, aerial photo and etc. You simply act as if nothing has happened and you continue in telling to readers how alleged gassing or holes are supported by so much evidence.

I have nothing to add in your CODOH case, you did not prove that you are locked or banned since this is announced in separate threads by moderators, but if your behavior was the same like on this forum, then maybe you are locked or somewhat temporarily banned because you violated the rules which you have accepted during registration, so your complaints are simply irrelevant, repetitions, ad hominems, dodging is simply not allowed there, deal with the fact, that there is no anarchy like on skeptic forum and this explain why you are not comfortable with it.

Your reference to Pyrrho as some exception is also a bit weird, in fact, is quite revealing that administrator himself is involved in rude and offensive language or in dodging so this explain why this forum is full of foul language not moderated by anybody. When his claims about Wiesel , about medical care or usual exterminationist´s questions "why so many crematoria" "why they imprisoned innocent peoples" are answered and their criminal meaning refuted, he then disappears without a single word, but previously he hadn´t problem to comment and to be quite arrogant towards me. You made similar claims and asked similar questions, this simply prove that you and your colleagues simply do not care about what revisionists are writing since I already informed you (or maybe is this problem of your memory) and in fact, this prove that peoples here even do not read nor know basic orthodox literature like Pressac (1989, 1993, 1994) or Pelt (1994, 2002) in which their explained origin of crematoria, but you have enough courage to claim something about "tricks" and some "agenda" and insult peoples with foul language or spread lies about how i allegedly treat evidence in accordance with some sinister "agenda". With this approach, i doubt you folks are here because of some interest in the subject, when I saw these comments, your are here to ventilate hate against "deniers". Look at user Wilshak, I checked all his comments (click on his user name and search for his posts), and almost all are about some insults, hate and foul language, they lack any historical information related to subject, references, sources, quotes, books, authors, evidence, just something related to subject and when he is asked simple question related to subject, he ignored it. I agree with this individual only on one point, like in the case of exterminationists, revisionists have also individuals who are problematic and i do not agree with their claims or style of debate or with quality of their research like in the case of exterminationists, but number of these individuals in the revisionists "camp" is much smaller than in exterminationist "camp".

You started it but this is really off topic, if you are going to repeat yourself again as usual, I am leaving again (I have returned only because of false accustion from your colleague Ellard) since here is really no point for debate and nothing has changed here.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Thu Oct 25, 2012 3:49 pm

Bob, just because you think you have refuted the arguments put forward that Krema I and II were at times used as gas chambers does not influence my decision on the matter.

I know banned people appear to get a banned notice from CODOH as in some do. But I don't know if all do or not. I did not to my knowledge, I could not find one on the forum and I got nothing as a message to me. The person to find that out is you. I cannot.

You are a very frustrating arguer to deal with as you have a poor style of argument. You build many strawmen, use non sequiturs galore, perceive ad hominems at the drop of a hat and want to control the debate with your constant demands and claims of dodging. You twist others words and then cry liar when there was no lie.

Places like CODOH where challenges to your beliefs are heavily moderated and edited is the best place for you.

Come back if you ever find some new evidence, otherwise yes, goodbye.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Thu Oct 25, 2012 4:28 pm

Again only insults and false accusations, he again refused to present his alleged evidence, he ignored almost all my points, this is what I call logical fallacies, quite weird for someone who accused me of logical fallacies. How good is this user in logic can be deduced from his example ignored in my previous comment. Or here or here. I am afraid that someone who is asking "for what purpose they used crematorium if not for gassing" is not in position to accuse other of logical fallacies since such an individual is clearly not able to understand to term "logic".

He referred also to crematorium 1, my arguments against alleged holes in crematorium 1 are still without any reaction but he has no problem to claims that I only "believe" that I have refuted something.

Yes, farewell, let me know if you have something related and not only insults and accusations.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Thu Oct 25, 2012 5:09 pm

My refusal to post evidence is because I refuse to post the same evidence we have already been over. It is there in other debates. That you ignore my reason is your problem. New evidence I am fine with, but you have none.

You have missed the point I was making, that the Kremas were way in excess of what would be reasonable needed at a camp where there was supposedly no plan to kill on a large scale.

"In response to a question by Judge Thomas, Lagacé testified that there were six retorts in Calgary, a city with a population of about 650,000; the ratio thus being roughly one retort for every 100,000 persons. Crown counsel Pearson asked Lagacé that if this ratio was applied to the 46 retorts at Birkenau, the number would be 4.6 million. Lagacé agreed"

The population of the whole Auschwitz camp system does not warrant so many retorts.

http://www.jewishgen.org/forgottenCamps ... tzEng.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"By the end of 1943, the prisoner population of Auschwitz main camp, Birkenau, Monowitz and other sub-camps was over 80,000: 18,437 in the main camp, 49,114 in Birkenau, and 13,288 at Monowitz where I G Farben had its synthetic rubber plant. Up to 50,000 prisoners were scattered around 51 sub-camps such as Rajsko, an experimental agricultural station, and Gleiwitz, a coal mine..."

"The camp population reached in August 1944 105,168. The last roll-call on January 18th, 1945 showed 64,000 inmates."

Logic says if 46 retorts equals a population of 4.6 million, it is very odd that Auschwitz as a whole had a population that was in the tens and sometimes into the one hundred of thousands. Indeed if Calgary is an example Auschwitz as a whole needed two retorts.

But of course we know from evidence that the Nazis had little intentions of keeping the Jews in particular, but others as well healthy and alive. So add that up and now logic says 46 retorts makes sense.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Thu Oct 25, 2012 7:25 pm

You have missed the point I was making, that the Kremas were way in excess of what would be reasonable needed at a camp where there was supposedly no plan to kill on a large scale.
I see his point and that is why I have pointed out that Nessie do not understand to logic, problem is that his point is based on completely false illogical premise that cremation capacity depends on number of peoples while ignoring that this depends on mortality/strength of the camp ratio and on the conditions, thus Nessie ignores that mortality in Auschwitz in the summer of 1942 was some 4,400 in July and 8,600 in August (data available in Death books) because at this time there was the worst typhus epidemic and population of the male camp was little over 21,000, in this period the daily mortility was on average 277, but scored even 500. At this period they planned new crematoria, still at the end of July there was still only one planned crematorium, number 2, and on 29 July, the contract to build crematorium 2 was signed.[1]. In August, during the worst month ever, they decided to build more crematoria.

Maybe Nessie should bother to learn something about mortality in Calgary and compare conditions and moratility to Auschwitz to see that his logic if flawed and he compares apples and oranges.
"By the end of 1943, the prisoner population of Auschwitz main camp, Birkenau, Monowitz and other sub-camps was over 80,000: 18,437 in the main camp, 49,114 in Birkenau, and 13,288 at Monowitz where I G Farben had its synthetic rubber plant. Up to 50,000 prisoners were scattered around 51 sub-camps such as Rajsko, an experimental agricultural station, and Gleiwitz, a coal mine..."

"The camp population reached in August 1944 105,168. The last roll-call on January 18th, 1945 showed 64,000 inmates."
Nessie quoted some internet link without reference to these numbers so if somebody wants to check them, there is no way how to trace them. How reliable is this Nessie´s internet source can be deduced from this:

"Estimated number of victims: 2,1 to 2,5 million (This estimated number of death is considered by historians as a strict minimum. The real number of death is unknown but probably much higher, maybe 4 millions)"

There are so many errors that is worth of nothing. Is interesting that Nessie ignored this:

"It appears from the plans that the first two gas chambers were adapted from mortuaries which, with the huge crematoria attached to them, were initially intended to cope with mortalities amongst the slave labor force in the camp, now approaching 100,000 and subject to a horrifying death rate."

Thus Nessie deliberately omitted this information which could aimed him to right direction and to find true origins of crematoria.

Anyway, quoted numbers from this link are useless as they are dated to period quite irrelevant for this issue, Nessie thus proved he do not know much about origin of crematoria in Birkenau otherwise i do not know what these numbers dated "by the end of 1943 to Jan 18 1945" has to do with issue of planned crematoria.

Nessie omitted that in July/August Germans planned total capacity of 200,000 detainees[2] because of Himmler´s order[3] and then finally 140,000 according to final plan.[4] In this period of July-August, they planned new crematoria, as i pointed out above, mortality was terrible. Maybe Nessie is able to imagine what would have happened if such conditions would have been presented in the camp with 200,000 or 140,000 prisoners.
Logic says if 46 retorts equals a population of 4.6 million, it is very odd that Auschwitz as a whole had a population that was in the tens and sometimes into the one hundred of thousands.
Again, logic is missing completely, cremation capacity does not depends on number of prisoners but on mortality rate and conditions/strength of the camp ratio, Pressac already informed us that crematorium II and III (30 muffles total) were planned for hygienic purposes.[5] thus Pressac himself contradicts Nessies ´s logic since according to Nessie, 30 muffles corresponds to 3 millions and Pressac is probably "evil denier".

46 muffles corresponds to 92,000 detainees according to letter of July 10, 1942, from the head of the Auschwitz ZBL Karl Bischoff addressed to the Bauleitung of KL Stutthof, crematorium of II type (15 muffles) was for 30,000 detainees[6], thus ration one muffle per 2,000 detainees. For planned capacity of 200,000, this corresponds to 100 muffles, or 70 for 140,000. But as we know, there were only 46 muffles, thus Germans in fact planned inadequate cremation capacity for planned expansion of the camp.

With this false logic (one muffle = 100,000 people), the camps like Dachau or Buchenwald would have been even worse extermination centers than Auschwitz, problem is that nobody claims that Dachau or Buchenwald with their cremation capacity were extermination camps. According to this logic, camp like Auschwitz needed 0 muffles since population was not 100,000 in 1942. For the three camps Dachau, Buchenwald or Gusen, the Germans needed 0 muffles as well according to Nessie, and they in fact needed only 1 muffle for the entire population of Auschwitz+Dachau+Buchenwald+Gusen. Is this ridiculous enough for Nessie to realize how flawed his logic was when he compared war time camps with Calgary in 80´s?

Nessie does not read works of Mattogno, Pressac, or Pelt, but then for what reason is here on this forum if he demonstrated again that he lacks very basic picture of orthodox history or revisionists arguments? As i said, to ventilate hate against "deniers" like his colleagues since he do not even know what exerminationists or revisionists are saying.
But of course we know from evidence that the Nazis had little intentions of keeping the Jews in particular, but others as well healthy and alive. So add that up and now logic says 46 retorts makes sense.
But of course, Nessie "forgot" to show me this alleged evidence as usual.

Yes, very little intentions, they only constructed Central Sauna for hundreds of thousands of Reichsmarks, they wasted money for Zyklon B since according to Pressac more than 95% of entire supply was used for hygienic purposes, the orders of Himmler or Glücks to lower mortality for all cost were only jokes, maybe the plan decided in 1942 and started in 1943 called "Special Measures for the improvement of Hygienic installations" was only joke.....Nessie, you simple do not know what you are talking about.

How something based on poor knowledge and on false premises can make sense? I do not know.

Notes (edit - i added two more reference for note 5)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1]Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers, The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York 1989, p. 187.
[2]GARF, 7021-108-32, p. 41.; Plan published by Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers, The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York 1989, p. 203.
[3]J-C Pressac and Robert Jan Van Pelt in Yisrael Gutman, Michael Berenbaum (eds.), Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, 1994, p. 216
[4]The Lageplan des Kriegsgefangenenlagers Auschwitz O/S (Lay-out plan for PoW camp Auschwitz – Upper Silesia) dated October 6, 1942, had a strength of 20,000 detainees in BAI, 60,000 in BAII and as many in BA III. VHA, OT 31(2)/8.
[5]Jean-Claude Pressac, Les crématoires d’Auschwitz. La machinerie du meurtre de masse. CNRS Editions, Paris, 1993., p. 53f.;Die Krematorien von Auschwitz. Die Technik des Massenmordes, R. Piper GmbH & Co. KG, Munchen 1994, second edition 1995, p. 67f., p. 62.; In the respect to "excess cremation capacity at Birkenau" - J.-C. Pressac, op. cit. (note 1), p. 227.
[6]Letter from Bischoff to Bauleitung of Stutthof dated July 10, 1942. RGVA, 502-1-272, p. 168.
Last edited by Bob on Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:08 pm

The comparison with Calgary shows what would be expected for a healthy population compared with an unhealthy one, the Auschwitz camp system. I said "what would be reasonable needed at a camp where there was supposedly no plan to kill on a large scale." and showed no plans for widespread deaths would mean 2 retorts. Instead there were 46 retorts. But the Nazis were expecting very high death rates as shown by Wannsee where

"Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labor in the East. Able-bodied Jews, separated according to sex, will be taken in large work columns to these areas for work on roads, in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.

The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history.)"

http://www.h-net.org/~german/gtext/nazi/wanneng2.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Forced labour, an expectation of natural causes to kill many followed by others to be treated accordingly in the Final Solution. Calgary is an apt comparison as many inmates thought of Canada as the height of good living and so named the best part of the camp Canada. In Auschwitz as a whole the expectation was to die not to live in the long term.

You go on to show very high mortality rates, as per the Nazi plan, backing up my argument that the camp and working population was very low to have so many retorts. So what happened to the rest? As you show they died in very high numbers and had to be cremated.

If you think there are errors in the source, show a source which contradicts the very high death rates and plan and use of so many retorts.

I do not accept your argument of working back from allegedly no holes so no gassing. Hence I was not referring to the gas chambers and instead looking at why so many retorts?

The dates cover the times the Kremas were functioning, how is that irrelevant? You go on to provide more evidence for my case that deaths would be very high and that retorts were built for that very reason. You say at Auschwitz the plan was one retort per 2000, yet in a healthy population it is more like one per 100,000. Even taking into account health improvements, with population growth that is one hell of a difference and it proves my logic, you went to Auschwitz with the expectation by the Nazis you would die.

That some measures were taken to manage camp hygiene was to keep some inmates alive to work, the staff, as well as stopping disease spreading to the population nearby the camps. Zyklon B was also used to fumigate clothing to be sent back to Germany.

Your logic is arse over elbow.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:39 pm

and showed no plans for widespread deaths would mean 2 retorts. Instead there were 46 retorts. But the Nazis were expecting very high death rates
Yes, i already demonstrated and backed why they planned 46 muffles.

You link to Wannsee, there isn´t anything related to this issue.
You go on to show very high mortality rates, as per the Nazi plan, backing up my argument that the camp and working population was very low to have so many retorts.
This has nothing to do with Nazi plan but with typhus epidemic.

Population was low, but mortality incredible, see above, Nessie still does not understand that cremation capacity depends on mortality/strenght of the camp ratio.
If you think there are errors in the source, show a source which contradicts the very high death rates and plan and use of so many retorts.
In my source, there are no errors, feel free to read death books yourself.
I do not accept your argument of working back from allegedly no holes so no gassing
No holes, no gassing ,simple.
Hence I was not referring to the gas chambers and instead looking at why so many retorts?
Why so many retorts, already explained and backed up, Nessie as usual ignored almost everything and claims that Calgary with 650,000 people had 6 retorts according to Lagace thus Auschwitz needed 0 retorts with population far below 100,000 and this is clear nonsense.

Is Nessie able to tell to readers how many retorts were needed for normal non-criminal usage in Auschwitz in the conditions in summer of 1942 onwards and in the light of planned expansion?
The dates cover the times the Kremas were functioning, how is that irrelevant?
Because relevant is only period during the crematoria were planned and not when they were already operated for more than half a year since this will tell us nothing about reasons why they constructed them.
that deaths would be very high and that retorts were built for that very reason
I already demonstrated that exactly for this reason of potential epidemic in the future in the camp with 200,000/140,000 prisoners they installed 46 muffles.
You say at Auschwitz the plan was one retort per 2000, yet in a healthy population it is more like one per 100,000.
False, this ratio refers to crematorium II-III type no to Auschwitz.

Healthy population of Calgary in 80´s is hardly comparable with WW2 camps during world war 2 during 40´s. My town has some 35,000 people thus we do not need even one single oven according to Nessie, but we have whole crematorium thus according to Nessie, in our city we have secret extermination operation.
That some measures were taken to manage camp hygiene was to keep some inmates alive to work, the staff, as well as stopping disease spreading to the population nearby the camps. Zyklon B was also used to fumigate clothing to be sent back to Germany.
False, already refuted and Nessie simply acts as if nothing has happened.
Your logic is arse over elbow.
In fact, you are only embarrassing yourself with your absurdities. Nessie also ignores that his false claims are refuted even by Pressac or Pelt.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Thu Oct 25, 2012 11:57 pm

There is a lot we agree upon. The high death rates, the number of Kremas.

The reason why I have quoted Wannsee is to show that it was planned and expected to have so mnay deaths. Then we move to no agreement. As well as natural causes I say there was also murder which was also agreed at Wansee. You do not believe that, so be it.

But mass forced migration, camps designed to cope with huge numers of deaths is ethnic cleansing and genocide. Do you agree Bob?

The plan was and there 46 retorts. If that is for non criminal use, it is a hell of a lot. If it is to cope with diease only there are big questions about the conditions the inmates were kept in. But we know from POW camp death rates tgat the Nazi run camps had tge highest. So more evidence that they felt no duty of care for people they regarded as an enemy of the state and to be vermin. There is no way you can justify Nazi actions as non criminal.

What population does your local crematorium cover? I am quite sure it is not just your town.

Why do you say my comments about the use of Zyklon B are false and refudiated? Are you duggesting it was not used for camp hygiene, delousing clothes and to stop the spread of disease out with the camps?
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:35 am

The reason why I have quoted Wannsee is to show that it was planned and expected to have so mnay deaths. Then we move to no agreement. As well as natural causes I say there was also murder which was also agreed at Wansee. You do not believe that, so be it.
There is not a single word about some murder or Auschwitz, thus Nessie´s claims are simply unfounded inventions.
But mass forced migration, camps designed to cope with huge numers of deaths is ethnic cleansing and genocide. Do you agree Bob?
False, firstly, Nessie transformed one camp (Auschwitz) to "camps" (plural). Secondly, alleged pure extermination camps created only for the purpose of extermination (AR camps) were not equipped with any crematoria thus Nessie´s invention collapses from the beginning and there is thus no connection between crematoria and extermination.
The plan was and there 46 retorts. If that is for non criminal use, it is a hell of a lot. If it is to cope with diease only there are big questions about the conditions the inmates were kept in. But we know from POW camp death rates tgat the Nazi run camps had tge highest.
Nessie is not in position to polemize if this is "hell" lot or not as he obviously do not understand it, presented evidence prove that Nessie´s claims are false. Germans had problems with typhus during world war because there were lots of peoples of various groups, soviet pows, jews, criminals, civilians...and is impossible to achieve what Nessie expect., i.e. camp with no diseases, this is probably possible only in the world called "utopia". In my world, in my country and in my town in the modern "war free" year 2012 with all the modern medical facilities and drugs, there so many various diseases among population that according to Nessie´s logic I am probably vermin determined to be exterminated by our government.
But we know from POW camp death rates that the Nazi run camps had tge highest. So more evidence that they felt no duty of care for people they regarded as an enemy of the state and to be vermin.
Again, is proven that Nessie´s claims are refuted, they cared very lot about prisoners, definitely much more than Soviets or Americans with primitive Gulags or like in the case of post-war American camp - simple field with fence without anything. Thus Nessie is again refuted.
What population does your local crematorium cover? I am quite sure it is not just your town.
If you are sure or not is quite irrelevant as I am the one who lives in my town and not you, number already provided. Do not expect that I will reveal my location to be possibly stalked by you or your colleagues since this is quite possible when I see all the hate here. Do some basic research and check every town with crematorium for population and cremation capacity, your own research will be the best proof for you which will force you (hopefully) to stop with your absurd claims about how one retort is needed for 100,000 peoples. Then ask peoples running crematorium how many retorts are needed in town with 100,000 population with possible risk of month mortality around 25,000 peoples per month.
Why do you say my comments about the use of Zyklon B are false and refudiated?
I do not know to which quote this refers, quote me.

Nessie again "forgot" to address:

Is Nessie able to tell to readers how many retorts were needed for normal non-criminal usage in Auschwitz in the conditions in summer of 1942 onwards and in the light of planned expansion?

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Fri Oct 26, 2012 3:32 am

That Wannsee does not mention Auschwitz or murder does not mean there is no connection between what was planned and what took place there. Or have you got a different version of events as to why so many went to camps such as at Auscheitz and what they were used for?

Fact is forced emigration to the likes of Auschwitz and being worked, dying of natural causes and another solution fits perfectly with what took place. But rather than deal withat you sidestep and point out that threr were many camps. But they are usually refered to as a whole as Auschwitz and that is what I mean.

That the AR camps did not have Kremas such as seen with the ones at Birkenau is because there is another way of cremation with open air pyres. Then as an alternative there are mass graves. Please answer the questions is mass forced emigration ethnic cleansing. Is presiding over mass planned deaths genocide?

To those at Aushwitz it was hell. Read Spectator to Hell about British POWs there if you do not believe me. Or imagine the situation reversed and Jews rounding up Nazis and putting them in camps having said the plan was for them to die.

Yes there were problems with disease, hence the Kremas and use of Zyklon B. But the plan was to make many work till they died.



Please evidence the Nazis caring for prisoners with death rates in the various camps, compared to when the Nazis were held as prisoners themselves.

The biggest city where I live has a population of just under 600000 and 2 crematoriums with two retorts each.

Finally I already answered your question about the number of retorts needed for non criminal use at the Auschwitz site. It was 46. That is how many the Nazis built, which is heck of a lot for non criminal use.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:24 am

That Wannsee does not mention Auschwitz or murder does not mean there is no connection between what was planned and what took place there. Or have you got a different version of events as to why so many went to camps such as at Auscheitz and what they were used for?
Since you have no evidence, your claim will remain unfounded. Emigration and labor force took place through/in Auschwitz. This is again another story.
But they are usually refered to as a whole as Auschwitz and that is what I mean.
Sorry, but this is nonsense, Belzec, Treblinka or Sobibor and Auschwitz are not referred "as whole as Auschwitz". You said "camps designed to cope with huge numers of deaths" but only Auschwitz-Birkenau is the camp known as the camp allegedly designed with excessive crematoria capacity so when you speak in plural, you are wrong, there is no other camp in Auschwitz complex, nor in whole occupied territory which is claimed to have been been equipped and designed with excessive crematoria capacity, at least to my knowledge.
That the AR camps did not have Kremas such as seen with the ones at Birkenau is because there is another way of cremation with open air pyres. Then as an alternative there are mass graves.
Nessie ignored that I refuted his alleged connection between crematoria capacity and extermination since allegedly pure extermination AR camps were designed without any crematoria thus his "another ways" are quite irrelevant since we are dealing with his claim about crematoria.
Please answer the questions is mass forced emigration ethnic cleansing. To those at Aushwitz it was hell. Read Spectator to Hell about British POWs there if you do not believe me. Or imagine the situation reversed and Jews rounding up Nazis and putting them in camps having said the plan was for them to die. But the plan was to make many work till they died. Please evidence the Nazis caring for prisoners with death rates in the various camps, compared to when the Nazis were held as prisoners themselves.
No. Nessie started to divert subject. Nobody dispute that conditions were bad especially during epidemics. We do not need to imagine it, Americans did this after the war with Germans, but that is another story, sorry Nessie, I will not accept your strategy to divert subject as usual, subject is already diverted to your claims about crematoria capacity so stick with it. Nessie is again wrong, they didn´t said that "the plan was for them to die", this is invention.
The biggest city where I live has a population of just under 600000 and 2 crematoriums with two retorts each.
If under 600,000 means something around 580,000 thus according to Nessie´s logic, Calgary is place of extermination since there is similar number of peoples 650,000, but 6 retorts and he contradicted own claim that one retort is for 100,000 people as he claimed.

Here is my question:

Is Nessie able to tell to readers how many retorts were needed for normal non-criminal usage in Auschwitz in the conditions in summer of 1942 onwards and in the light of planned expansion?

Nessie´s answer:

Finally I already answered your question about the number of retorts needed for non criminal use at the Auschwitz site. It was 46. That is how many the Nazis built, which is heck of a lot for non criminal use.


Hm, this is his answer? He has just completely contradicted himself, he has just confirmed that 46 retorts were installed for normal non criminal use as i asked and I really do not know why he did so much fuss about it and why he falsely claimed that capacity was designed for center of mass killing.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Fri Oct 26, 2012 3:17 pm

Please explain how it is that there is no evidence to show Wannsee and Auschwitz are connected. What was discussed and decided at Wannsee in 1942 is what happened at Auschwitz, mass forced emigration to camps, working to die of natural causes and a special action. That fits perfectly. It also helps to prove the case that Auschwitz was designed and intended for people to go there and die.

Do you accept forced emigration of particular groups like Jews and gypsies is ethnic cleansing?

Do you accept that mass deaths whether by shooting, being worked to death with hunger and disease is genocide?

It is not nonsense to refer to Auschwitz as the whole of the camp system. In the most common source for information on the site http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auschwitz_ ... ation_camp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; the entry starts with

"Auschwitz concentration camp (German: Konzentrationslager Auschwitz [ˈaʊʃvɪts] ( listen)) was a network of concentration and extermination camps built and operated by the Third Reich in Polish areas annexed by Nazi Germany during World War II. It was the largest of the German concentration camps, consisting of Auschwitz I (the Stammlager or base camp); Auschwitz II–Birkenau (the Vernichtungslager or extermination camp); Auschwitz III–Monowitz, also known as Buna–Monowitz (a labor camp); and 45 satellite camps.[1]"

In the same way I have seen many a reference to Treblinka which covers both camps I and II. The labour camps in particular are relevant as the plan was to used forced labour until death. The Kremas served all parts of the camp, so it is relevant to take them and their populations into account.

You say "nor in whole occupied territory which is claimed to have been been equipped and designed with excessive crematoria capacity," which is you acknowledging Auschwitz was different and specifically to cope with huge numbers of deaths. Ask yourself, why was that?

This "Nessie ignored that I refuted his alleged connection between crematoria capacity and extermination since allegedly pure extermination AR camps were designed without any crematoria thus his "another ways" are quite irrelevant since we are dealing with his claim about crematoria." does not work as an argument. Firstly there is a connection between crematorium capacity and number of deaths, the more retorts the higher the number of deaths. Extermination is an emotive word, so how about very high death rate? Do you accept there is a connection between high numbers of retorts and high death rate? Do you accept that a camp with a high number of retorts is designed for high numbers of deaths? Do you also accept that Kremas are not necessarily needed to deal with high numbers of deaths and mass graves can be used instead? The Soviets did not build a Krema at Katyn, they used mass graves. So your attempt to unlink the connection between high deaths and number of retorts and use of mass graves fails.

Bob, please evidence your claim "Again, is proven that Nessie´s claims are refuted, they cared very lot about prisoners, definitely much more than Soviets or Americans with primitive Gulags or like in the case of post-war American camp - simple field with fence without anything...". This shows the worst offenders was the Nazis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner_o ... rld_War_II" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and only 0.15% of Nazis held by the Americans died in captivity. That is not a diversion as it shows the difference between holding people in captivity and holding people who are expected to die in captivity. Where they are expected to die in captivity you build Kremas or dig mass graves. There were no Kremas or mass graves in the POW camps. So when you say "Nessie is again wrong, they didn´t said that "the plan was for them to die", this is invention" it is not an invention. Look at what exactly was said "doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.....The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly
consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly..."

I am not claiming one retort per 100,000 is a standard figure. I just pointed out that was the figure for Calgary, compared to what it was at Auschwtiz as the judge confirmed with the expert witness. That the biggest city where I live has one retort per 150000 is not wildly out especially as it is based on rounded up population figures.

So are you going to claim that 46 retorts to cover the Auschwitz camp complex was for non criminal activity? Going by the one per 100000 the camps should have had 4.6 million people living there. A revisionist study finds the population of the camp over the years had at most 710,000 inmates.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v20/v20n2p21_Widmann.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"The numbers of registered inmates for the entire concentration camp system during the years of Auschwitz's existence are known. Analyzing the data for all camps, we find that the system averaged around 100,000 inmates in 1941 and 1942. By August of 1943, the numbers had doubled to 220,000. They continued to rise, reaching 520,000 by August of 1944. In January 1945, when Auschwitz was abandoned, the population of the concentration camp system was recorded as 710,000 inmates."

That is clearly way less than what would be expected for the number of retorts. Given it was a war and there was disease non criminal activity would suggest the need for at most 14 retorts (double the one per 100000), not 46.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Fri Oct 26, 2012 4:06 pm

Nessie adopted popular style of debate of exterminationists as i see, long trash comments with many off topic points which dodge and ignore opponents´s comment.

I repeat - not a single word about murder or Auschwitz or crematoria in Wannsee minutes, thus irrelevant for the topic of origin of crematoria.

I will not accept his strategy to divert subject to comparing the conditions of the camps and who treated peoples better or worse, this is again really irrelevant. Feel free to do more research on your own and good luck in finding delousing chambers, medical facilities, theatre, sauna and other structures in post war allied camps and soviet gulags.
So are you going to claim that 46 retorts to cover the Auschwitz camp complex was for non criminal activity?
I said this, and backed this by sources and evidence, you dodged it. But i consider this case as closed since you said:

"Finally I already answered your question about the number of retorts needed for non criminal use at the Auschwitz site. It was 46. "
"The numbers of registered inmates for the entire concentration camp system during the years of Auschwitz's existence are known. Analyzing the data for all camps, we find that the system averaged around 100,000 inmates in 1941 and 1942. By August of 1943, the numbers had doubled to 220,000. They continued to rise, reaching 520,000 by August of 1944. In January 1945, when Auschwitz was abandoned, the population of the concentration camp system was recorded as 710,000 inmates."

That is clearly way less than what would be expected for the number of retorts. Given it was a war and there was disease non criminal activity would suggest the need for at most 14 retorts (double the one per 100000), not 46.
Seriously, you are embarrassing and making a real fool of yourself with your absurdities, you can´t be serious.

There were never 710,000 peoples, this poor individual simply add up all peoples who ever came through the camp complex according to his source and from this he invented 14 crematorium muffles based on half ratio (100,000 : 2) in Calgary during 80´s, but these peoples were never housed there of course thus these invented 14 muffles in Birkenau are based on non-existing peoples, I can point out more ridiculous errors, but i guess this will be waste of time. He of course, as usual, again contradicted his previous answer when he claimed that for non-criminal use they needed 46 muffles. Now he changed his story and he again contradicts even Pelt, Pressac and most of the historians as i already showed, thus according to him, they are probably all "deniers" or what. This guy simply do no know what he is talking about and his "methodology" is theatre of absurd. One of the most absurd things i ever saw so far (and i saw a lot)

Here I (revisionists and partly orthodox historians) explained origins of crematoria, this is completely dodged and ignored by this individual who produce his fantasies as if nothing has happened.
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 00#p304813" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Fri Oct 26, 2012 4:54 pm

The debate is why were there so many retorts at Auschwitz?

The ethnic cleansing of Jews and others east from Germany and other occupied land, the plan to make people work till they died and special treatment for others helps to explain what Auschwitz was made for. There were prison camps, work camps and with all of the retorts it shows death was expected and prepared for at Auschwitz. But not for all. There were British POWs, Poles, Soviets and others at the camps, including Jews who were interred and did 'enjoy' certain privileges. They found themselves in Canada or other camps in the complex to work, as per the plan.

Post war Allied camps were temporary and the Gulags just as bad as the Nazi camps. Pot calling kettle black diversion warning on that subject and diversion.

I said that the Nazis felt that 46 retorts were needed for the camp. If you think they acted in a non criminal way then based on other figures I would argue 14 is closer to the mark. If you disagree with a source, please provide your own figures for the overall population of the camps at Auschwitz. Then dispute what I said about retorts per person.

When you say "Here I (revisionists and partly orthodox historians) explained origins of crematoria...." do you understand what is mean by per 100,000? It is a commonly used figure used to make equal comparisons between groups of people. If we are talking about numbers of retorts needed per 100,000 that is talking about the numbers who are dying per 100, 000. The emphasis is on the death rate. Thus in the linked to post #208 where you say "Nessie do not understand to logic, problem is that his point is based on completely false illogical premise that cremation capacity depends on number of peoples while ignoring that this depends on mortality/strength of the camp ratio and on the conditions..." you have shown you do not understand about measuring per 100,000.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:19 pm

The debate is why were there so many retorts at Auschwitz?

The ethnic cleansing of Jews and others east from Germany and other occupied land, the plan to make people work till they died and special treatment for others helps to explain what Auschwitz was made for....

If you think they acted in a non criminal way then based on other figures I would argue 14 is closer to the mark.
So again:

Pressac already informed us that crematorium II and III (30 muffles total) were planned for hygienic purposes.[5] thus Pressac himself contradicts Nessies ´s logic since according to Nessie, 30 muffles corresponds to 3 millions and Pressac is probably "evil denier".
I said that the Nazis felt that 46 retorts were needed for the camp
False, Nessie did no say anything about that "nazis felt", my question was:

Is Nessie able to tell to readers how many retorts were needed for normal non-criminal usage in Auschwitz in the conditions in summer of 1942 onwards and in the light of planned expansion?

His answer in which he admitted what number of retorts were needed for criminal purpose:

Finally I already answered your question about the number of retorts needed for non criminal use at the Auschwitz site. It was 46. That is how many the Nazis built, which is heck of a lot for non criminal use.

Case Closed.
do you understand what is mean by per 100,000? It is a commonly used figure used to make equal comparisons between groups of people. If we are talking about numbers of retorts needed per 100,000 that is talking about the numbers who are dying per 100, 000. The emphasis is on the death rate. Thus in the linked to post #208 where you say "Nessie do not understand to logic, problem is that his point is based on completely false illogical premise that cremation capacity depends on number of peoples while ignoring that this depends on mortality/strength of the camp ratio and on the conditions..." you have shown you do not understand about measuring per 100,000.
Yes, that you are off as usual when you invented fictional ratio 1 retort per 100,000 which you contradicted yourself by example of your town (assumed ratio 1 per 145 000) or my town (at least 1 per 35,000* ). You are not good even in math, if Calgary had 650,000 peoples with 6 retorts, this corresponds to 1 per 108,333 thus for 46 muffles correspond to 4,989,318 and not to 4,6 mil. I repeat again, your case of Calgary is total nonsense when compared to war time camps, how many times I need to repeat it and prove it? Is this really so hard for you to grasp it?

So again:

46 muffles corresponds to 92,000 detainees according to letter of July 10, 1942, from the head of the Auschwitz ZBL Karl Bischoff addressed to the Bauleitung of KL Stutthof, crematorium of II type (15 muffles) was for 30,000 detainees[6], thus ration one muffle per 2,000 detainees. For planned capacity of 200,000, this corresponds to 100 muffles, or 70 for 140,000. But as we know, there were only 46 muffles, thus Germans in fact planned inadequate cremation capacity for planned expansion of the camp.

And i add, that when the new crematoria came into operation, they put out off operation crematorium I with 6 muffles.

*I did not ask how many retorts are there, so 1 is the lowest number possible.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:48 pm

So Pressac states 30 retorts were for hygienic reasons. That will be the hygienic disposal of a very high number of dead people. Which still fits with Auschwitz being a camp were large numbers, as per the Nazi plan, were expected to die.

I don't follow what you are going about here

"False, Nessie did no say anything about that "nazis felt", my question was:

Is Nessie able to tell to readers how many retorts were needed for normal non-criminal usage in Auschwitz in the conditions in summer of 1942 onwards and in the light of planned expansion?

His answer in which he admitted what number of retorts were needed for criminal purpose:

Finally I already answered your question about the number of retorts needed for non criminal use at the Auschwitz site. It was 46. That is how many the Nazis built, which is heck of a lot for non criminal use.

Case Closed."

since I gave the answer of the Nazis thought 46 were needed and based on figures which you dispute I say 14 would have sufficed. So the case is still open as to why the Nazis needed so many retorts in a camp where supposedly nothing criminal was going on.

Instead of my estimates of about 1 retort per 100,000 for a place which has 'non criminal activity' you claim and show that the supposedly 'non criminal activity' at Auschwitz meant a need for 1 per 2000, so if expanded there would have been a need of 70 retorts for 140,000 people. Even compared to my vague estimate, that is way higher. Can you not see that the evidence as you present it agrees with me? The number of retorts was excessively high for a place with supposedly non criminal activity.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:07 pm

So Pressac states 30 retorts were for hygienic reasons. That will be the hygienic disposal of a very high number of dead people. Which still fits with Auschwitz being a camp were large numbers, as per the Nazi plan, were expected to die.

So the case is still open as to why the Nazis needed so many retorts in a camp where supposedly nothing criminal was going on.
This is ridiculous, what plan? Nessie claims that Nazis had plan to create typhus epidmic? Nonsense, as demonstrated, so again:

Nessie ignores that mortality in Auschwitz in the summer of 1942 was some 4,400 in July and 8,600 in August (data available in Death books) because at this time there was the worst typhus epidemic and population of the male camp was little over 21,000, in this period the daily mortility was on average 277, but scored even 500. At this period they planned new crematoria, still at the end of July there was still only one planned crematorium, number 2, and on 29 July, the contract to build crematorium 2 was signed.[1]. In August, during the worst month ever, they decided to build more crematoria.

Nessie omitted that in July/August Germans planned total capacity of 200,000 detainees[2] because of Himmler´s order[3] and then finally 140,000 according to final plan.[4] In this period of July-August, they planned new crematoria, as i pointed out above, mortality was terrible. Maybe Nessie is able to imagine what would have happened if such conditions would have been presented in the camp with 200,000 or 140,000 prisoners.

since I gave the answer of the Nazis thought 46 were needed
But i did not ask what Nazis thought, i asked Nessie.

Is Nessie able to tell to readers how many retorts were needed for normal non-criminal usage in Auschwitz in the conditions in summer of 1942 onwards and in the light of planned expansion?
I say 14 would have sufficed.
And you refuted it yourself and i as well, simple, so again:

There were never 710,000 peoples, this poor individual simply add up all peoples who ever came through the camp complex according to his source and from this he invented 14 crematorium muffles based on half ratio (100,000 : 2) in Calgary during 80´s, but these peoples were never housed there of course thus these invented 14 muffles in Birkenau are based on non-existing peoples, I can point out more ridiculous errors, but i guess this will be waste of time. He of course, as usual, again contradicted his previous answer when he claimed that for non-criminal use they needed 46 muffles. Now he changed his story and he again contradicts even Pelt, Pressac and most of the historians as i already showed, thus according to him, they are probably all "deniers" or what.

you invented fictional ratio 1 retort per 100,000 which you contradicted yourself by example of your town (assumed ratio 1 per 145 000) or my town (at least 1 per 35,000* ).
Instead of my estimates of about 1 retort per 100,000 for a place which has 'non criminal activity' you claim and show that the supposedly 'non criminal activity' at Auschwitz meant a need for 1 per 2000, so if expanded there would have been a need of 70 retorts for 140,000 people. Even compared to my vague estimate, that is way higher. Can you not see that the evidence as you present it agrees with me? The number of retorts was excessively high for a place with supposedly non criminal activity.
So again:

46 muffles corresponds to 92,000 detainees according to letter of July 10, 1942, from the head of the Auschwitz ZBL Karl Bischoff addressed to the Bauleitung of KL Stutthof, crematorium of II type (15 muffles) was for 30,000 detainees[6], thus ration one muffle per 2,000 detainees. For planned capacity of 200,000, this corresponds to 100 muffles, or 70 for 140,000. But as we know, there were only 46 muffles, thus Germans in fact planned inadequate cremation capacity for planned expansion of the camp.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:49 pm

Most of what you have written is a re-hash with no sensible reasoning or commentary.

A few points.

You say "This is ridiculous, what plan? Nessie claims that Nazis had plan to create typhus epidmic?". The plan is as laid out at Wannsee and the issues you dodge about ethnic cleansing and genocide. Not a strawman about creating a typhus epidemic. That there was typhus fitted in with the plan to work Jews and others till they died of natural causes. The Nazis just did not want the typhus to become epidemics spreading to staff and the population outside of the camps.

Do you not see that when you say the "mortality was terrible", that itself shows genocide :roll: The Nazis saw the Jews as sub human vermin, to be worked till they die.

http://www.chdhu.org/images/139.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


You say "you invented fictional ratio 1 retort per 100,000 which you contradicted yourself by example of your town (assumed ratio 1 per 145 000) or my town (at least 1 per 35,000* ).". No it was the ratio given regarding Calgary. That does not mean it is a fixed ration world wide. The biggest city in the place where I live has approximately 1 to 145000, but there is another town which has 2 retorts at its crematorium and a population there of 45,000. But it covers a huge area outwith that town of two regions of about 180,000. Add the 45,000 and we are back to the approximately 1 per 100,000. I am quite sure your town's crematorium covers and area outwith the town and its population. But in any case it is way more than your quoted figure for Auschwitz of 1 to 2000.

So Bob thinks 1 retort per 2000 people is not an issue, no crime here, case closed :roll: I think you will only find it is deniers who agree with you on that point.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:15 pm

Most of what you have written is a re-hash with no sensible reasoning or commentary.
As usual, false statement. There is only little truth, i must repeat myself since you still repeat already refuted claims.
You say "This is ridiculous, what plan? Nessie claims that Nazis had plan to create typhus epidmic?". The plan is as laid out at Wannsee and the issues you dodge about ethnic cleansing and genocide.
So again:!

Pressac already informed us that crematorium II and III (30 muffles total) were planned for hygienic purposes.[5] thus Pressac himself contradicts Nessies ´s logic since according to Nessie, 30 muffles corresponds to 3 millions and Pressac is probably "evil denier".

When this individual will finally understand that probably no serious historian today claims that at least crematoria II-III were designed for some alleged "ethnic cleansing or "extermination"?

When this man will finally understand that crematorium II-III type was firstly designed some 3-4 months before Wannsee conference?[1]

Is there a chance that this individual will stop with his unfounded and refuted inventions and fantasies?
Do you not see that when you say the "mortality was terrible", that itself shows genocide :roll: The Nazis saw the Jews as sub human vermin, to be worked till they die.
Utter nonsense, typhus epidemic is not genocide.
No it was the ratio given regarding Calgary. That does not mean it is a fixed ration world wide.
Yet Nessie used it for Auschwitz during 40´s, this is just ridiculous he again contradicted own thesis and now this ratio is not "fixed". He cannot even keep his inventions straight.
So Bob thinks 1 retort per 2000 people is not an issue, no crime here, case closed :roll: I think you will only find it is deniers who agree with you on that point.
Well, this is lie, not Bob, but war time document (see note 6). Again lie, my explanation is much complex than "1 retort per 2000 people is not an issue, no crime here, case closed" as Nessie claims, explanation is here and since you do not have even one single counter argument, case closed.
I think you will only find it is deniers who agree with you on that point.
This is nice compliment about "deniers" good.

As I said, you only embarrass yourself with your absurdities and i really do not enjoy refuting all of your nonsenses which are refuted even from the point of orthodox literature. No wonder that you refused to debate gas chambers. What is worse, Nessie began to lie again.

Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1]Jean-Claude Pressac, Les crématoires d’Auschwitz. La machinerie du meurtre de masse. CNRS Editions, Paris, 1993., document 9.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:09 pm

So lets run with your claim that the high number of retorts was due to a typhus epidemic.

When was the epidemic?

How many did it kill?

How many prisoners were in the camp at that time?

How does the epidemic fit in with when the various retorts were built?

Was there a typhus epidemic at any other camp? (If no stop, if yes, please answer as the above questions for each camp)
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:57 pm

So lets run with your claim that the high number of retorts was due to a typhus epidemic.

When was the epidemic?

How many did it kill?

How many prisoners were in the camp at that time?

How does the epidemic fit in with when the various retorts were built?
So again:!

I see his point and that is why I have pointed out that Nessie do not understand to logic, problem is that his point is based on completely false illogical premise that cremation capacity depends on number of peoples while ignoring that this depends on mortality/strength of the camp ratio and on the conditions, thus Nessie ignores that mortality in Auschwitz in the summer of 1942 was some 4,400 in July and 8,600 in August (data available in Death books) because at this time there was the worst typhus epidemic and population of the male camp was little over 21,000, in this period the daily mortality was on average 277, but scored even 500. At this period they planned new crematoria, still at the end of July there was still only one planned crematorium, number 2, and on 29 July, the contract to build crematorium 2 was signed.[1]. In August, during the worst month ever, they decided to build more crematoria.

Nessie omitted that in July/August Germans planned total capacity of 200,000 detainees[2] because of Himmler´s order[3] and then finally 140,000 according to final plan.[4] In this period of July-August, they planned new crematoria, as i pointed out above, mortality was terrible. Maybe Nessie is able to imagine what would have happened if such conditions would have been presented in the camp with 200,000 or 140,000 prisoners.

From September 1942 till February 1943, average month mortality was still around 4,500. In February 1943, because of serious conditions, they again ordered complete closure of Auschwitz camp.[1]
Was there a typhus epidemic at any other camp? (If no stop, if yes, please answer as the above questions for each camp)
Following data refers to period when the new muffles/ovens were planned.

Buchenwald - daily/month mortality on average 9/337, housed population on average 8,000 (6 planned muffles)
Dachau - daily/month mortality on average 4/66, housed population on average 15,000 (4 planned muffles)
Auschwitz - daily/month mortality on average 277/8,600, population see above (31 planned muffles)

I we apply ratio from Buchenwald to Auschwitz, then 31 planned muffles were inadequate, they needed 153. According to Nessie´s inventions, in Dachau or Buchenwald they prepared "extermination operation" and not in Auschwitz if we compare mortality/strength of the camps and new planned muffles. Yet, nobody claims that these camps were extermination camps.

What Nessie present here with his inventions is simply theatre of absurd. If he wants to see reference, simply request them, revisionists like Carlo Mattogno or Germar Rudolf pointed this out long time ago.

Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Standortbefehl Nr. 2/43, APMO, Standort-Befehl, D-AuI-1, p. 46.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:57 pm

You keep saying

"that is why I have pointed out that Nessie do not understand to logic, problem is that his point is based on completely false illogical premise that cremation capacity depends on number of peoples while ignoring that this depends on mortality/strength of the camp ratio and on the conditions,"

but I have only ever talked about death rates and the need for retorts, referring to healthy populations and comparing to unhealthy ones. Hence a healthy population appears to need one retort per approximately 100,000, but at Auschwitz and an unhealthy population that plummets to one per 2000.

You said "mortality in Auschwitz in the summer of 1942 was some 4,400 in July and 8,600 in August (data available in Death books) because at this time there was the worst typhus epidemic and population of the male camp was little over 21,000"

So in the summer of 1942 there was a population of 21000 (males, so there would have been more with females and children, lets guestimate and double to 42000) and that the worst of the epidemic killed 13000 in two months. How many retorts were there then and how many bodies could they deal with?
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:15 pm

Nessie wrote:but I have only ever talked about death rates and the need for retorts, referring to healthy populations and comparing to unhealthy ones. Hence a healthy population appears to need one retort per approximately 100,000,
Refuted, so again:!

you invented fictional ratio 1 retort per 100,000 which you contradicted yourself by example of your town (assumed ratio 1 per 145 000) or my town (at least 1 per 35,000* ).

When you will finally understand that you yourself contradicted this invented ratio not based on anything and I refuted it as well with example of my town? I repeated it three times or four times.
So in the summer of 1942 there was a population of 21000 (males, so there would have been more with females and children, lets guestimate and double to 42000) and that the worst of the epidemic killed 13000 in two months. How many retorts were there then and how many bodies could they deal with?
Almost yes, there was around. 40,000 peoples in A-B as far as i know in the summer of 1942. Before the new crematoria, there was only one crematorium 3km far away in Stammlager, crematorium I with 6 muffles. (three double-muffle ovens). As I said, already on Oct 24 1941 they prepared first blueprint for crematorium II, this crematorium was originally for Stammlager instead of old crematorium I because of expansion and awaited "wave" of some 120,000 Russians as mentioned in report dated Oct 30 1941 and for the reasons to combat possible risk of epidemics.[1] (edit - for this reason they also planned simplified two three muffle cremation installations for PoW camp awaiting these Russians [2] and then in Jan/Feb 1942 they finally transferred new crematorium II to Birkenau. And then......you already know it.

Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1]RGVA, 502-1-314, p. 8.
[2]Visible on plan dated January 5, 1942 published by Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers, The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York 1989, p. 189. - nothwest corner of sector III, southwest corner of sector II.; plan of A-B - http://vho.org/tr/2003/1/Image1099.gif" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Sat Oct 27, 2012 11:59 am

Bob wrote:
Nessie wrote:but I have only ever talked about death rates and the need for retorts, referring to healthy populations and comparing to unhealthy ones. Hence a healthy population appears to need one retort per approximately 100,000,
Refuted, so again:!

you invented fictional ratio 1 retort per 100,000 which you contradicted yourself by example of your town (assumed ratio 1 per 145 000) or my town (at least 1 per 35,000* ).

When you will finally understand that you yourself contradicted this invented ratio not based on anything and I refuted it as well with example of my town? I repeated it three times or four times.
So in the summer of 1942 there was a population of 21000 (males, so there would have been more with females and children, lets guestimate and double to 42000) and that the worst of the epidemic killed 13000 in two months. How many retorts were there then and how many bodies could they deal with?
Almost yes, there was around. 40,000 peoples in A-B as far as i know in the summer of 1942. Before the new crematoria, there was only one crematorium 3km far away in Stammlager, crematorium I with 6 muffles. (three double-muffle ovens). As I said, already on Oct 24 1941 they prepared first blueprint for crematorium II, this crematorium was originally for Stammlager instead of old crematorium I because of expansion and awaited "wave" of some 120,000 Russians as mentioned in report dated Oct 30 1941 and for the reasons to combat possible risk of epidemics.[1] (edit - for this reason they also planned simplified two three muffle cremation installations for PoW camp awaiting these Russians [2] and then in Jan/Feb 1942 they finally transferred new crematorium II to Birkenau. And then......you already know it.

Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1]RGVA, 502-1-314, p. 8.
[2]Visible on plan dated January 5, 1942 published by Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers, The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York 1989, p. 189. - nothwest corner of sector III, southwest corner of sector II.; plan of A-B - http://vho.org/tr/2003/1/Image1099.gif" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Bob, here is where the 1 to 100,000 came from, post 207...

"In response to a question by Judge Thomas, Lagacé testified that there were six retorts in Calgary, a city with a population of about 650,000; the ratio thus being roughly one retort for every 100,000 persons. Crown counsel Pearson asked Lagacé that if this ratio was applied to the 46 retorts at Birkenau, the number would be 4.6 million. Lagacé agreed"

...so to claim I made it up is not correct. It is roughly the same ratio where I live (though to be more accurate in the approximation it is about 110,000 per retort in Calgary and it is also over 100,000 in two areas where I live) and you have dodged my question about what population the crematorium where you live actually covers. Just because it is in your town does mean it covers only your town. So no contradiction and no refutation, try again.

You say in October 1941 they started to prepare for Krema II. What about the others? Is there any evidence to show the Kremas were only built to cope with epidemics? Pre-planning for death by natural causes still fits in with what was discussed at Wannsee.

If we agree the population was 40,000 in the summer of 1942 and 120,000 more were to come we end up with a ratio of 1 to 3478 (160,000/46). Now from this report by Mattogno and Deana

http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndcrema.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I see that by 1943 the maximum theoretical capacity for all Kremas was claimed by the report authors was 1040 bodies per day, but they go on to say the actual number was less at 624 per day (para 7.4). Pressac states it was 3540 (para 2)

So say the population is at 160,000, the lowest estimate means the entire camp population could be cremated in 256 days (160,000/624) and with the highest estimate that would drop to just over 45 days.

Further on in the report we then find what a Nazi, Bischoff, the Chief of the Auschwitz Central Construction Office sated the capacity was by 1943, 4756 people a day (para 6.1). So now they can wipe out the entire camp population in 33 and a half days (160,000/4756)

I see that there were other documents with the makers own estimates at what the capacity should be at and it is lower. The first is 2 per hour (so 2 bodies x24 hours x46 retorts = 2208 per day for all retorts) and the second is 30 to 36 per 10 hour period (so lets go with 33 bodies x2 (ten hour periods) x46 retorts = 3036 per day for all retorts). So even the Krema makers with their lower figure would have the entire camp population wiped out in 72 and a half days (160,000/2208).

I have to say that the claim with the most credibility is the one from the Nazi there at the time (no matter how much the report authors try and make out somehow he was wrong based on coke supplies). So that is the ability to wipe out 160,000 typhus victims every 33 and a half days.

Just how many epidemics were the Nazis planning for?
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Sat Oct 27, 2012 2:31 pm

...so to claim I made it up is not correct.
Yes, you made it up, since this ratio is related to Calgary, that´s all and is not possible to use it for Auschwitz. If I am wrong than the best what you can achieve is that you "only" parroted stupid blunder from your source, but this doesn´t sound very good as well, does it?
and you have dodged my question about what population the crematorium where you live actually covers. Just because it is in your town does mean it covers only your town. So no contradiction and no refutation, try again.
You are lying again:

Fri Oct 26, 2012 1:35 am - If you are sure or not [about area which is covered by crematorium in my town] is quite irrelevant as I am the one who lives in my town and not you, number already provided.

As i proved, Nessie contradicted own ratio and I refuted it as well. Everybody can check some town and how many ovens are there to see that his man is off as usual with his 1 per 100,000.
You say in October 1941 they started to prepare for Krema II. What about the others? Is there any evidence to show the Kremas were only built to cope with epidemics? Pre-planning for death by natural causes still fits in with what was discussed at Wannsee.
So again:! (i guess this is six time i repeat it)

Pressac already informed us that crematorium II and III (30 muffles total) were planned for hygienic purposes.[5] thus Pressac himself contradicts Nessies ´s logic since according to Nessie, 30 muffles corresponds to 3 millions and Pressac is probably "evil denier".

And again!
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 00#p304813" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If we agree the population was 40,000 in the summer of 1942 and 120,000 more were to come we end up with a ratio of 1 to 3478 (160,000/46).
Nessie again made it up, I never said that in summer 1942, some "120,000 more were to come" this number refers to report dated Oct 1941, so again:!

awaited "wave" of some 120,000 Russians as mentioned in report dated Oct 30 1941


In the respect to summer 1942, I said this again:!

in July/August Germans planned total capacity of 200,000 detainees[2] because of Himmler´s order[3] and then finally 140,000 according to final plan.[4] In this period of July-August, they planned new crematoria, as i pointed out above, mortality was terrible.
So say the population is at 160,000
Again made up, at least to my knowledge, there were never 160,000 peoples.
I see that by 1943 the maximum theoretical capacity for all Kremas was claimed by the report authors was 1040 bodies per day, but they go on to say the actual number was less at 624 per day (para 7.4). Pressac states it was 3540 (para 2)

So say the population is at 160,000, the lowest estimate means the entire camp population could be cremated in 256 days (160,000/624) and with the highest estimate that would drop to just over 45 days.

Further on in the report we then find what a Nazi, Bischoff, the Chief of the Auschwitz Central Construction Office sated the capacity was by 1943, 4756 people a day (para 6.1). So now they can wipe out the entire camp population in 33 and a half days (160,000/4756)

I see that there were other documents with the makers own estimates at what the capacity should be at and it is lower. The first is 2 per hour (so 2 bodies x24 hours x46 retorts = 2208 per day for all retorts) and the second is 30 to 36 per 10 hour period (so lets go with 33 bodies x2 (ten hour periods) x46 retorts = 3036 per day for all retorts). So even the Krema makers with their lower figure would have the entire camp population wiped out in 72 and a half days (160,000/2208).

I have to say that the claim with the most credibility is the one from the Nazi there at the time (no matter how much the report authors try and make out somehow he was wrong based on coke supplies). So that is the ability to wipe out 160,000 typhus victims every 33 and a half days.
Nessie proved again his ignorance, as i already proved, the planned capacity was 200,000 in the period of planning of new crematoria. Nessie thus deliberately ignored it and he has chose figure lower by 40,000 to achieve his goal. Only later they changed final capacity of the camp to 140,000, but this was later and not in period of planning of the new muffles. Nessie also deliberately omitted in his calculation, that number of new planned muffles was 31 and not 46, 46 is total capacity of new planned crematoria (31) + crematorium 2 (15), but this crematorium 2 was already planned and designed from the fall of 1941 as a replacement for old crematorium 1 in the main camp. I already said this in this thread, thus Nessie deliberately omitted it.

To show again dishonesty and silliness of his approach i will use ONLY (WRONG) data from Nessie and period in which they planned new muffles in camps Dachau or Buchenwald (figures are rounded up):
Taking into account ratio cremated bodies/muffles/ per day - 624/46 - 14 per muffle:

Buchenwald - at the mentioned period, they could cremate entire population in 95 days in NEW 6 muffles.
Dachau - at the mentioned period, they could cremate entire population in 268 days in NEW 4 muffles, or in 179 days in all 6 muffles.
Auschwitz - according to Nessie, this can be achieved in 256 days

Correct figure for Auschwitz is 460 days for planned 200,000 population or 322 days for final later planned figure of 140,000 people with correct number of planned 31 muffles. Or 320 days and 224 days for all 46 muffles.
Taking into account ratio cremated bodies/muffles/ per day - 3540/46 - 77 per muffle:

Buchenwald - at the mentioned period, they could cremate entire population in 17 days in NEW 6 muffles.
Dachau - at the mentioned period, they could cremate entire population in 49 days in NEW 4 muffles, or in 32 days in all 6 muffles.
Auschwitz - according to Nessie, this can be achieved in 45 days

Correct figure for Auschwitz is 84 days for planned 200,000 population or 59 days for final planned figure of 140,000 people with correct number of planned 31 muffles. Or 56 days and 40 days for all 46 muffles.
Taking into account ratio cremated bodies/muffles/ per day - 4756/46 - 103 per muffle:

Buchenwald - at the mentioned period, they could cremate entire population in 13 days in NEW 6 muffles.
Dachau - at the mentioned period, they could cremate entire population in 36 days in NEW 4 muffles, or in 24 days in all 6 muffles.
Auschwitz - according to Nessie, this can be achieved in 33,5 days

Correct figure for Auschwitz is 63 days for planned 200,000 population or 44 days for final planned figure of 140,000 people with correct number of planned 31 muffles. Or 42 days and 29 days for all 46 muffles.
Taking into account ratio cremated bodies/muffles/ per day - 2208/46 - 48 per muffle:

Buchenwald - at the mentioned period, they could cremate entire population in 28 days in NEW 6 muffles.
Dachau - at the mentioned period, they could cremate entire population in 78 days in NEW 4 muffles, or in 52 days in all 6 muffles.
Auschwitz - according to Nessie, this can be achieved in 72,5 days

Correct figure for Auschwitz is 134 days for planned 200,000 population or 94 days for final planned figure of 140,000 people with correct number of planned 31 muffles. Or 91 days and 63 days for all 46 muffles.
What these numbers means? That concentration camps Buchenwald or Dachau, could cremate entire population much quicker than alleged extermination camp Auschwitz - Birkenau! Especially in the case of Buchenwald, this camp would have been true extermination factory. Problem with this nonsense of course is, that nobody (except poor Nessie) claims that Dachau or Buchenwald were extermination camps. When we take into account that Nessie deliberately falsified population of 200,000 to 160,000 and number of new planned muffles 46 instead of 31 to make cremation in Auschwitz quicker and more convincing, final result is even worse as shown. He even used data for ovens in KL Gusen which are not the same as ovens in Auschwitz. And Dachau ovens were not the same as Auschwitz as well, this individual ingores it of course. This individual also ignored that Mattogno, Deana explained why data used by Nessie are wrong and data in letter of June 28 1943 as well, Pressac himself called them "propaganda lie"[1] What is more, Nessie ignored other documents which are contradicting with these in this letter, thus he is proven to be individual who picks up what suits him. But this is another story.

With the correct figures for Auschwitz planned population and number of planned muffles, the results are then total disaster for Nessie´s fantasies as demonstrated. But even the distorted and false figures deliberately picked up to suit his goal as much as possible destroy his thesis like a house of card as demonstrated. Nessie again unmasked himself and demonstrated dishonesty and "value" of his approach. His fantasies are refuted again.

What is really bad is the fact that since i have already provided him with data for Dachau and Buchenwald in my previous comments he could have easily expose himself that his thesis is false.
Just how many epidemics were the Nazis planning for?
Nonsensical question, they of course did not plan any epidemics, they only wanted to be prepared in the case that epidemic will break out again in the camp with planned 200,000 population and they based it on experience with the worst typhus epidemic raging in the camp in the summer of 1942 during which they planned new crematoria. That crematoria were planned to be able to cope with possible epidemic and other risks and that this is the purpose of higher cremation capacity, this was discussed by Germans already in the report dated Oct 30 1941 when they awaited Russian pows and in this report they discussed new cremation plant, i already said this together with reference.

Is there some reason to debate with this individual? I doubt it again. Question is if he wants to deceive readers on purpose or if this all is based on his poor knowledge and inability to understands to numbers, math, historical context, documents and comments. This also refers to other threads in which he participate.

Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1]Jean Claude Pressac,Die Krematorien von Auschwitz. Die Technik des Massenmordes, R. Piper GmbH & Co. KG, Munchen 1994, second edition 1995, p. 103.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Sat Oct 27, 2012 6:44 pm

Your allegation of me making figures up is false. I have shown you where I got the Calgary figure from (post #207) and went on to correct it to a more accurate 1 to 110,000 in post #227. I then used the biggest city where I live, population 580,000 and retorts 4 (rounded up to 600,000 post #213) so being more accurate it is 1 to 145,000. I finally used a town's crematorium which also covers two regions, total population 225,000 with 2 retorts so 1 to 112,500. So your town has 1 retort to 35,000, a much lower figure. Please confirm whether or not your town's crematorium only covers your town and no where else. Also, if you are going to claim this "Everybody can check some town and how many ovens are there to see that his man is off as usual with his 1 per 100,000." then evidence it.

That is relevant to Auschwitz as it gives perspective as to what makes for a high ratio of retorts. I have shown three places with ratios of over 100,000 to each retort. You have shown one place with maybe 35,000 to each retort, but Auschwitz and the other camps are way down at a few thousand per retort. Run away from those figures all you want, I will keep repeating them to show how the Nazis had very high numbers of retorts at Auschwitz, so logic says they were prepared for high death rates.

You go on about Pressac's hygienic purposes, please explain what is meant by that. I say it means clean disposal of bodies, in this case lots and lots of them, which the whole point of this discussion, why have the capacity to dispose of so many bodies? You say disease only, I say fine, that is a hell of a lot of disease and what was planned at Wannsee for the Jews, to work till they die.

I have been looking for figures for the camp's population and expected population and have found various numbers from various sources. So I went with 160,000 as it was our agreed camp population of about 20,000 in the summer of 1942. I then added the 120,000 Soviets to get a known and expected population together. I never said it was anything other than made up, but made up for a reason, just as there was a reason for the figure of 200,000, which never happened. It any case it does matter as even with the higher figures 46 retorts is 1 to 4348, way higher than any other ratio found.

Lets go with your figure of planning for 200,000. I will use 46 retorts as that is what was planned and was there in Birkenau started in 1942. So by 1943 we have Bischoff reporting 4756 people cremated a day, that means the entire camp population cremated in 42 days. Then we have the makers own figures of 2208 or 3036 per day. That means the entire camp cremated in either 90 and a half or just under 66 days.

Another way of giving this issue perspective is to ask how many could be cremated in total. According to Bischoff in a year (1943 to 44) 1,735,940 or Topf either 805,920 or 1,108,140.

That you have shown other camps had very high cremation capacities again fits in with Nazi plans to make Jews work till they died and were going to forcibly deport them in their millions from across occupied Europe to the various camps.

Your bleating attack about the figures is a smoke screen to try and hide the fact that the Nazi camps, Auschwitz being the biggest had huge over capacity for cremations beyond what could be expected in an epidemic. I have shown it does not matter a huge amount which figure you go with, 140,000, 160,000 or 200,000. All find massive over capacity. You even resort to strawman comments about that "Nonsensical question, they of course did not plan any epidemics". I never said that they did, I asked how many epidemics were they planning for? By your reasoning they were planning for the mother of all epidemics that would wipe out the entire camp's population in a few months, for the Nazis to repopulated the camp and it all to happen again, repeatedly.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Sat Oct 27, 2012 8:12 pm

Your allegation of me making figures up is false.
No.
I have shown you where I got the Calgary figure from (post #207) and went on to correct it to a more accurate 1 to 110,000 in post #227.
Nice, but I already pointed it out and corrected you in post #218, so again:

You are not good even in math, if Calgary had 650,000 peoples with 6 retorts, this corresponds to 1 per 108,333
so being more accurate it is 1 to 145,000. I finally used a town's crematorium which also covers two regions, total population 225,000 with 2 retorts so 1 to 112,500. So your town has 1 retort to 35,000, a much lower figure. Please confirm whether or not your town's crematorium only covers your town and no where else. Also, if you are going to claim this "Everybody can check some town and how many ovens are there to see that his man is off as usual with his 1 per 100,000." then evidence it.
1 per 100,000
1 per 110,000
1 per 145,000
1 per 112,500
I already confirmed that my number is correct for region, so 1 (at least) per 35,000.
I have also data for our capital city, but i cannot reveal them because of anonymity reasons.

Still this individual do not see that his 1 per 100,000 is flawed since he himself contradicted it several times. This number is silly and unfounded even when we ignore that this man compares it with World War 2 concentration camp Auschwitz.
"Everybody can check some town and how many ovens are there to see that his man is off as usual with his 1 per 100,000." then evidence it.
I already did and Nessie too what I find really ridiculous.
That is relevant to Auschwitz as it gives perspective as to what makes for a high ratio of retorts.
Nonsense, Calgary during 80´s cannot be compared to camp Auschwitz during 40´s during second world war with common typhus epidemics. I cannot believe that I really participate in debate about such stupidity.
Run away from those figures all you want,
Is it bad but I must say it again, Nessie is liar, my comments prove that i am dissecting every figures he is making, but he ignores my refutations and still compares Calgary with Auschwitz.
Nazis had very high numbers of retorts at Auschwitz, so logic says they were prepared for high death rates.
That is exactly point I am making whole the time, they prepared camp for 200,000 peoples and for the cases of possible epidemic or epidemics since when they planned crematoria, there was the most terrible epidemic ever.
You go on about Pressac's hygienic purposes, please explain what is meant by that.
To get rid off bodies of diseases as soon as possible since these bodies laying in the camp are great danger. Rest of your paragraph is again full of already refuted nonsenses.
I have been looking for figures for the camp's population and expected population and have found various numbers from various sources. So I went with 160,000
Please, provide me with sources for 160,000 if your claims about basing it on various source is true, I am waiting.
as it was our agreed camp population of about 20,000 in the summer of 1942.
Again lie (or maybe his usual confusion), here is what we have agreed and what Nessie himself said:

If we agree the population was 40,000 in the summer of 1942

Now he changed it to 20,000.
I then added the 120,000 Soviets to get a known and expected population together.
And this is nonsense since this is related to Oct 1941 and not to summer of 1942 when they raised capacity to 200,000. Nessie´s math is truly exceptional: 120,000 + 20,000 = 160,000!
just as there was a reason for the figure of 200,000, which never happened.
Irrelevant since this figure was planned, they couldn´t know that figure 200,000 will be later changed or never accomplished because of defeat of Germany, that would have been time paradox.
It any case it does matter as even with the higher figures 46 retorts is 1 to 4348, way higher than any other ratio found.
Lie again:

Buchenwald: planned 6 muffles gives ratio 1 per 1333 at the period in which they planned them.
Dachau: planned 4 muffles gives ratio 1 per 3750 at the period in which they planned them. (together with 2 muffles in old crematorium, ratio is 1 per 2500)
Auschwitz: planned 31 muffles gives ratio 1 per 6451 at the period in which they planned them. (all 46 muffles gives ratio 1 per 4348)

Nessie again ignores that since crematorium of II-III type had ratio 1 per 2,000 muffle, then 1 per 4348 is thus inadequate and it invalidate Nessie´s fantasies about how the local capacity was allegedly large., as is proven, they needed more to cope with the NORMAL use of the camp, approx. 70 for final 140,000 capacity and not 46. When compared to other camps, they needed even more as demonstrated.
Lets go with your figure of planning for 200,000. I will use 46 retorts as that is what was planned and was there in Birkenau started in 1942. So by 1943 we have Bischoff reporting 4756 people cremated a day, that means the entire camp population cremated in 42 days. Then we have the makers own figures of 2208 or 3036 per day. That means the entire camp cremated in either 90 and a half or just under 66 days.

Another way of giving this issue perspective is to ask how many could be cremated in total. According to Bischoff in a year (1943 to 44) 1,735,940 or Topf either 805,920 or 1,108,140.
So again
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 00#p305137" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That you have shown other camps had very high cremation capacities again fits in with Nazi plans to make Jews work till they died and were going to forcibly deport them in their millions from across occupied Europe to the various camps.

Your bleating attack about the figures is a smoke screen to try and hide the fact that the Nazi camps, Auschwitz being the biggest had huge over capacity for cremations beyond what could be expected in an epidemic. I have shown it does not matter a huge amount which figure you go with, 140,000, 160,000 or 200,000. All find massive over capacity.
So this wasn´t joke or total incompetence? This individual really claims that Dachau or Buchenwald were camps for planned extermination and Buchenwald is thus probably the most criminal extermination camp from all camps even despite the "little" fact that has never been equipped with gas chamber and nazis thus expected more deaths from alleged planned "forced to work till death" than from the use of gas chambers in "pure extermination" camps! :lol: This is even more ridiculous when one realizes that they expected this in the camp to which they had sent (during the entire existence of this camp, some 8 years) only fragment of what they had sent to alleged "pure extermination" camps in a months! :lol: Again, this is more ridiculous when one realizes that this plan somehow failed since during the entire existence of this camp, "only" tens of thousands of people have died, and most of them during the last months of the war because of obvious problems associated with complete collapse of Germany.
You even resort to strawman comments about that "Nonsensical question, they of course did not plan any epidemics". I never said that they did, I asked how many epidemics were they planning for?
And i said that they did not plan any particular epidemics because of obvious problem that is not possible to know how many epidemics will broke out in the future, there can be zero epidemics, but tens as well so is not possible to plan it. Their plan was to be able to cope with something similar to what they had experienced during the summer of 1942.

This individual simply does not deserve more attention, his comments are just theatre of absurd, so many lies, distortions, bad math, inventions, ignoring and dodging.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Sat Oct 27, 2012 8:54 pm

I have not been plucking figures from the air, all sources are quoted, so no making up the figures. I have been rounding up and down, I have not been hiding that, so your clutching at straws saying I am not good at maths and changing 110,000 to 108,333. I am quite sure others here know about rounding up or down.

I have repeatedly explained why I used those figures. Just as in the trial where the Calgary figures came from, it shows perspective on what is a reasonable number of retorts for a certain number of people. I understand why that annoys you as it shows how bad the Nazis expected life and ultimately death to be for those in their camps.

You said "That is exactly point I am making whole the time, they prepared camp for 200,000 peoples and for the cases of possible epidemic or epidemics since when they planned crematoria, there was the most terrible epidemic ever."

I see you want to concentrate on the typhus epidemic and I know you do not accept gassings. What about all the different causes of deaths listed in the records for Auschwitz? What about the shootings? The plan was to go to the camps and die there.

So we agree on hygienic reasons for disposal of bodies "To get rid off bodies of diseases as soon as possible since these bodies laying in the camp are great danger."

This was my mistake "And this is nonsense since this is related to Oct 1941 and not to summer of 1942 when they raised capacity to 200,000. Nessie´s math is truly exceptional: 120,000 + 20,000 = 160,000!" It was the population of the camp of 40,000 plus the 120,000 Soviets. Sorry.

You have got the wrong end of the stick when you claim a lie about "it does matter as even with the higher figures 46 retorts is 1 to 4348, way higher than any other ratio found." as I was comparing to retort ratios of places other than the camps. You know the places you are desperate to ignore as they show the Nazis were planning for very high deaths at their camps. (BTW, you don't need to name any city, just give us the approximate population and number of retorts, as I have done. Indeed I had a look at another place in my country and found 1 retort to 129,000)

That Auschwitz is in a similar ratio to other Nazi camps just furthers my point about Nazi intentions about the Jews and others. Go to camps to die. As I say ethnic cleansing and genocide. But there was further planning beyond just move and die. There were camps set up specifically for work, such as Monowitz and at Buchenwald the main purpose was working in armament factories. What was the purpose of Birkenau? With its 46 retorts in one camp?

So you say "Their plan was to be able to cope with something similar to what they had experienced during the summer of 1942." So you expect people to believe they wanted the capacity to cremate entire populations of the camp in a few months because of possible epidemics. I thought the deniers claimed the Zyklon B was to prevent disease and the Nazis did their best to keep inmates healthy. Which one is it, keep them healthy or cremate hundreds of thousands into millions of dead from disease?

You are rattled trying to justify so many retorts if you have to resort to desperate attempts to dissuade further discussion on this issue "This individual simply do not deserve more attention, his comments are just theatre of absurd, so many lies, distortions, bad math, inventions, ignoring and dodging."
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Sat Oct 27, 2012 9:21 pm

The same refuted story over and over as if nothing has happened and my comments are invisible for this individual. Debate in these conditions is impossible.

Farewell.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:06 am

Bob, you have refuted nothing. Your comments are perfectly visible and debate is possible. But it is clear to me and I find others that the number of retorts at all the camps, Birkenau in particular with 46 in one place is a major problem for denier/revisionists.

This reports has answered many of my question, 'Body Disposal At Auschwitz' - Zimmerman

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschw ... -disposal/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"In 1977 Arthur Butz, the best known of American deniers, hinted that typhus was a principal reason for building so many new ovens. However, this hint became explicit, and by 1992 he was attributing the typhus epidemic which swept the camp in the summer of 1942 as the reason for the building campaign. [18] Carlo Mattogno attributes the building campaign to the typhus epidemic and a decision by the camp authorities to greatly expand the population of the camp. [19]

One of the reasons deniers need to make this argument is that they must find a justification for building so many ovens. This argument also involves the amount of bodies these new ovens could dispose of in a 24 hour period."

My next question to Bob was going to be how many people are recorded as having died of typhus at Auschwitz? I found the answer

"...the nearly 69,000 death certificates available afford researchers the opportunity to see exactly what was killing registered prisoners. It is now known on the basis of these certificates that very few prisoners died from typhus. [32] They show that only 2060 of the 68,864 deaths were from typhus..."

So the Nazis made enough capacity to cremate every person who is recorded as having died of typhus in one mornings work at the Kremas. I was always suspicious of Bob's figure of 1 retort to at least 35,000 in his home town since I kept finding places with 1 to 100,000 plus. I now cannot believe for one moment that the denier/revisionist claim that all the retorts were for epidemics. There is too big a gap between what is to be expected and what they claim is normal. However, there is a get out clause which is it appears many death entries were faked.

The above is disagreed with here 'The Crematoria Ovens of Auschwitz and Birkenau' - Carlo Mattogno

http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndcrema.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"There were two related reasons for extending the cremation facilities in Birkenau. The first reason was an order given by Himmler during his visit to Auschwitz on July 17 and 18, 1942, to enlarge the camp so that it could hold 200,000 inmates.[162] The second factor was the inmates' mortality, caused by a terrible typhus epidemic that broke out in July 1942."

I have already been through how quickly 200,000 inmates can be cremated before in the debate. The claim here is that the height of the typhus epidemic was in June 1942 when 8600 died. I have already been through how much capacity there was to cope with even that many deaths. Mattogno himself accepts

"The number of the corpses of alleged gassed victims that could have been cremated is therefore:[182]

Crematoria II & III: (745 � 360 corpses/day =) 268,200

Crematoria IV & V: (232 � 192 corpses/day =) 44,500

In Total: 312,700

Even though these figures are based on real data, they are merely theoretical..."

Thats the problem, he is having to make the evidence fit his conclusion. He talks of breakdowns, coke supplies, anything to get away from the damming evidence he posts in para 6.1 The Documents

"The highly controversial issue of the time required for a single cremation in the Topf cremation ovens is addressed in three documents that, however, give quite contradictory data.."

But the data is not contradictory. It shows Topf describing the retort at Mauthausen on November 1, 1940 was capable of 2 bodies per hour. The second letter shows and increase

"letter dated July 14, 1941, in which Topf replied to a specific inquiry of the SS New Construction Office of the concentration camp Mauthausen:[134] "30 to 36 bodies may be cremated in about 10 hours in the coke-fired Topf Double-Muffle Cremation Oven."

The third is what was being achieved at Birkenau

"...a letter sent on June 28, 1943 by SS-Sturmbannführer Bischoff, the Chief of the Auschwitz Central Construction Office, to SS-Brigadeführer Kammler, the Chief of the Economic-Administrative Main Office Amtsgruppe C. In this letter he mentions the following 24-hour capacities of the crematoria of Auschwitz and Birkenau:[135]
� old crematorium I: 340 persons � crematorium IV: 768 persons
� crematorium II: 1,440 persons � crematorium V: 768 persons
� crematorium III: 1,440 persons

Total: 4,756 persons"

That shows the Nazis were working the Kremas beyond their theoretical capacities to destroy as many bodies as possible.

If the typhus epidemic in June 1942 killed 8600 in one month, the Nazi response was to build capacity where they could cremate all those bodies in just over two days. Talking about inefficient over kill.

Another issue I raised with Bob before he scarpered was the use of Zyklon B to disinfect. Denier/revisionists love to claim the Nazis cared for their prisoners. So what about actions to tackle the disease itself, rather than just the remains of the deceased? Zimmerman reports

".... Mengele was disturbed about the typhus epidemic. The former prisoner wrote: "Alas, typhus epidemics did rage in the camp, but at this time we had comparatively few victims. The same day he [Mengele] sent us a large quantity of serum and directed mass vaccinations." [35] Petro Mirchuk, a Ukranian prisoner, wrote that a delousing in August 1942, the worst month of the epidemic, "eliminated the epidemic and the billions of fleas and lice ceased to exist." [36]

Thus, it can be seen that people could recover from typhus and that the authorities did have means of combating the disease..."

Mattogno completely ignores that issue of dealing with the disease itself. I can see why. He and the rest like Bob have a huge issue they cannot spin away. What was the massive over capacity of retorts at Auschwitz for?
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:39 pm

This is my last response, since I have received BAN, but on IP address so I easily bypassed it since i do not use my own IP on dangerous place like this, but I expect ban on username next time, so this is my last response. Peoples here are obviously very afraid of informed revisionists, they know very well that revisonists are correct. What is especially ridiculous and hypocrite, this forum and local users have enough courage to claim that CODOH is place of censorship and that revisionists are afraid of something. This place has no rules, the most disgusting foul language and arrogance from "believers" like Ellard, Wilshak, Muehlenkamp and others are allowed here, but they ban revisionists for their backed up and evidenced comments? I did not receive anything about reason why I got ban, but if something so disgusting and not acceptable like foul language of above mentioned gentlemen is allowed here, which worse actions I had committed to be banned? Answer is all here in this thread and forum, irrefutable and evidenced revisionists arguments. Surprise, surprise.

Obviously, someone wanted to help Nessie to deal with my arguments and refutations so ban was the only way.

I also guess i got it because I pointed out how local administrator Pyrrho is also involved in offensive language towards users and not towards arguments or "methodology" and when I pointed out how he deals with arguments. So this could have be also some kind of revenge from him.
Bob, you have refuted nothing. Your comments are perfectly visible and debate is possible. But it is clear to me and I find others that the number of retorts at all the camps, Birkenau in particular with 46 in one place is a major problem for denier/revisionists.
False, revisionists perfectly explained it, proven here, that you ignore it or you do not want to see it, that´s your business, this will not change anything, you must produce counter arguments and not ignorance or censorship, ignorance and censorship will never refute anything.
This reports has answered many of my question, 'Body Disposal At Auschwitz' - Zimmerman
Feel free to see nice example of of "scholarship" and "competence" of your source and how his claims were refuted:

First response:
http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/techniqu ... rieng.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Zimmerman´s response
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschw ... -mattogno/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Second response
http://www.vho.org/GB/c/CM/Risposta-new-eng.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Revised and enlarged second response
http://www.scribd.com/doc/76583653/An-A ... s-and-Lies" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Your Zimmerman then disappeared from the scene, his poor knowledge, lies, omissions and errors are simply unbelieveable for someone who wanted to write something about this subject or against "deniers", he never even visited Auschwitz as proven by his claims. What is more absurd, individuals like Nessie or Muehlenkamp then repeats these blunders since they do not bother to check Zimmerman´s sources.
"...the nearly 69,000 death certificates available afford researchers the opportunity to see exactly what was killing registered prisoners. It is now known on the basis of these certificates that very few prisoners died from typhus. [32] They show that only 2060 of the 68,864 deaths were from typhus..."
This nonsense of "typhus myth" created by Zimmerman was debunked long time ago and in fact, only common sense is needed to see that this is nonsense:
11.4. The Typhus “Myth”

Well, two facts are incontestable: that at the beginning of July 1942 a typhus epidemic broke out in Auschwitz, and during that month the mortality of the prisoners increased enormously. Now if Professor Zimmerman doesn't want to see a cause and effect connection between these two facts, that's his business. Of course it's true that some survived the typhus epidemics, such as Lucie Adelsberger and Ella Lingens Reiner (p. 5), but it's equally true that the poor devils who were not "Prominent" - even if they survived that sickness - because of the general prostration of their physique, the weakening of their immune system, and because of the scarcity of medicinals, they could easily incur other ailments and died from other causes. In my opinion this explains the relatively small number of deaths from typhus in the Sterbebücher of Auschwitz.

As to the reason for the small number of causes of death documented in the death books related to typhus, I fully maintain everything I wrote in point 39 of my “Observations,” which is that deaths of sick persons from typhus could have been due to complications arising from a general prostration of their physique and weakening of their immune system, aggravated by the scarcity of medication. I can cite a document, the “Notes on the treatment with preparation
3582/IGF/ against typhus,” to confirm this. At the beginning of February 1943, an experiment at Auschwitz with a new drug against typhus was carried out on 50 detainees affected with this disease, 15 of whom died during the treatment or immediately after it stopped. The note points out:212 “Of the 15 deceased death occurred: 6 due to weakening of the heart, 6 due to toxic cachexia, 2 due to brain complications (encephalitis), 1 due to resulting fever, the origin of which could not be determined.” So none of these 15 detainees died from typhus, but that illness was nonetheless the indirect cause of their death.

In many cases, death of typhus victims occurred due to various organ failures caused by what is called typhus. If merely such organ failure was reported in the death records, then this does not mean that typhus did not exist. Similar today, if someone dies of AIDS, medical records might hardly ever say “Aids” or “HIV” but name the actual medical reasons, which can be rather complex. That does not mean the victim did not die of what we popularly refer to as “Aids.” Editor’s remark.
So Nessie based his next claims in his comment on false foundations created by "scholar" Zimmerman and his "typhus myth" since according to him, typhus epidemics with enormous death tolls in Auschwitz didn´t exist and only some 2060 peoples had died of typhus during the existence covered by Auschwitz Death Books (IIRC approx. 50% of entire existence of the camp). Germans thus ordered complete disclosure of the camp several times for some "imaginary" epidemics, and all documents speaking about problem with typhus epidemics and needed disclosure are probably forgeries, this is so silly that one must wonder about courage to repeat this nonsense publicly on forum. Nessie´s claims are only repeated already debunked false claims, but he do not know it since he just discovered and googled this Zimmerman as something new, but everybody at least somehow interested in this subject is already familiar with this and this isn´t anything new and I am tired out to educate Nessie again about basic things, this is especially waste of time since Nessie deliberately ignores my comments.

This myth of "typhus myth" is of course contradicted by Pressac or Pelt, but Zimmerman or Nessie simply do not bother with these "details".
Mattogno completely ignores that issue of dealing with the disease itself. I can see why. He and the rest like Bob have a huge issue they cannot spin away. What was the massive over capacity of retorts at Auschwitz for?
Again false, Mattogno and revisionists addressed and explained this issue and documents above dealing with crematoria capacity in several articles or updated publications (Auschwitz Lies, Auschwitz The Case for Sanity, Auschwitz - The End Of a Legende, Auschwitz Plain Facts, The Crematoria Ovens of Auschwitz and Birkenau or in preparation The Crematory Ovens of Auschwitz) and other smaller articles, Nessie ignores just everything what means problems for his claims or he do not want to read what revisionists write despite the fact that Nessie is here to debate "deniers", no surprise he ignores my comments and refutations. What is more fascinating, he do not know even publications of exterminationists Pressac or Pelt since they themselves contradicts and refute Nessie´s fantasies on several fundamental points as shown here.

So again explanation why so many retorts:
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 00#p304813" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And comparison to other casual concentration camps not considered by anybody (expect for Nessie on skeptic forum) as extermination camps:
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 00#p305037" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No wonder that peoples here are afraid to debate alleged gas chambers, the very basic pillar of holocaust when they must suppress even subject of origin of crematoria. This ban is nothing but usual way how to deal with informed revisionists and with the truth.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Sun Oct 28, 2012 5:49 pm

Firstly, if you have been banned I think that is wrong. Your use of language is unfortunate and makes you appear very arrogant, but it not like the abuse Matthew and David heap on each other. I stand by my view CODOH is even worse for censorship and show why in my thread of my experiences there. I would be quite happy for you not to be banned. I do not need any help arguing with you. Even with my limited knowledge compared to most here I can drive huge wedges into the holes in your arguments.

I do not believe that denier/revisionists have explained away the need for 46 retorts at Birkenau. I have shown even with figures provided by Mattogno the Nazi response to an epidemic in 1942 was to build enough retorts to cremate the entire camp in anything from a few days to a few months depending on the figures for number of cremations possible.

I noticed both he and you keep missing out the evidence of those at the camp fighting the typhus outbreak. Instead you act as if the the epidemic was to allowed to run its course and the real issue is cremating all the dead people. Thousands upon thousands of them, every day.

You keep linking back to post #208 which shows that is the case "mortality in Auschwitz in the summer of 1942 was some 4,400 in July and 8,600 in August (data available in Death books) because at this time there was the worst typhus epidemic and population of the male camp was little over 21,000, in this period the daily mortility was on average 277, but scored even 500. At this period they planned new crematoria, still at the end of July there was still only one planned crematorium, number 2, and on 29 July, the contract to build crematorium 2 was signed.[1]. In August, during the worst month ever, they decided to build more crematoria."

So according to you the Nazi response to high death rates from an epidemic was not to fight the epidemic, but to prepare for ever increasing epidemics and have a massive ability to cremate those who perish. That again reminds me of what was predicted and planned for at Wannsee in January 1942 before the epidemics and building of all the Kremas "...in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.

I read through the Mattogno and Zimmerman critiques and they can go backwards and forwards as much as they like. Fact is from Mattogno's first response

http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/techniqu ... rieng.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"I shall spare the reader of this article the refutation of the Zimmerman technical foolishness, and shall limit this to mentioning one single document, and that concerns a letter of the head of the Zentralbauleitung dated 10 July 1942 from which results that a crematorium of type II/III, with 15 muffles was projected for 30,000 prisoners, whereby the muffle-prisoner ratio was 1:2,000. Thus the 46 muffles of Birkenau were projected for 92,000 prisoners, but according to the final plans of the SS, the Birkenau camp was supposed to contain 140,000 prisoners, and 70 muffles were supposed to have been requested. In practice, the number of muffles at Birkenau were really inadequate in regards to the projected expansion of the camp!"

That is a very odd conclusion considering Mattogno is a revisionist/denier. If the Kremas were to deal with epidemics, at 1 retort per 2000 the Nazis were preparing for one hell of an ongoing epidemic, where they would have to keep a camp going with more and more new inmates who would be expected to die from the epidemic to be replaced by more and more inmates. That makes no sense, especially when compared to what happened at Buchenwald in 1945, discussed further on.

The reference to death certificates is interesting. Mattogno claims there was no cover up as many of the recorded reasons for death could be complications from typhus "...which is that deaths of sick persons from typhus could have been due to complications arising from a general prostration of their physique and weakening of their immune system, aggravated by the scarcity of medication." So it is a could, he does not really know. In any case since it is clear that the Nazis falsified many of the certificates and the cause of death, I went with the claim of 8600 deaths in June 1942. But even that figure does not fully explain why so many retorts as we have a Nazi writing in June 1943 that the capacity to cremate was now 4,756 persons a day.

Bob makes scant reference to attempts to actually fight the disease, such as closure of the camps precisely because he knows attempts to fight the disease would contradict the reason to build so many Kremas. If the Nazis prevented typhus and other epidemics, or at least controlled any out breaks, there is no need for such a high number of retorts.

So the revisionist/deniers have a choice, either the Nazis did nothing to control disease at the camp and they deliberately put people there to die from disease, so needing a high number of retorts. Or they controlled the diseases and actually needed the high number of retorts for another cause of death.

Bob goes on to say that other camps had just as high a ratio of retorts and in post # 224 he speaks of Buchenwald and its 6 retorts. Buchenwald housed 238,380 whilst it was open. Some 56,545 deaths occurred there. That is 24% of the camps population died. So whilst not an extermination camp in name, it was built to meet the plan of work and die. In any case what Bob ignores is that each of the six retorts could well have been used at Buchenwald at a lower rate than at Birkenau. They were not necessarily used 24 hours a day with more than one body at a time . The 6 retort crematorium was built in 1942 and by 1943 there were 37,000 prisoners there, or 1 retort per 6000, 3 times more prisoners per retort than at Birkenau. That prisoner population kept rising to almost double by the end of 1942, with no extra retorts planned or added. There was a typhus epidemic there in 1945 by when there were over 80,000 prisoners in the camp and its sub camps or 1 retort to 13,300 prisoners.

"The horrendous death toll during the first two months of 1945 was due to a typhus epidemic in the camp. During the same time period, there were also severe epidemics in all the other major concentration camps in Germany.

Typhus is spread by lice and prisoners coming into Germany from the death camps in what is now Poland were the carriers of the lice. The worst epidemic of all was at Bergen-Belsen where 35,000 prisoners died in March and the first two weeks of April 1945.

The death statistics for the first 11 days of April in Buchenwald indicate that the typhus epidemic was being brought under control there. (January to March 1945 - 13,056 deaths reduced to March to April 11, 1945 - 913 deaths). The Nazis did not use DDT, which was first used to stop epidemics in Europe in 1943. To kill the lice that spreads typhus, the Nazis used Zyklon-B....."

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Buchenwal ... stics.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buchenwald ... ation_camp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So Buchenwald had fewer retorts per head and disease was dealt with by use of Zyklon B. That makes Bob and Mattogno's explanation as to why Birkenau needed so many retorts look even more suspect.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Sun Oct 28, 2012 8:20 pm

I am still allowed to post, still no ban on my username, ok, then I will respond.
Your use of language is unfortunate and makes you appear very arrogant....Even with my limited knowledge compared to most here I can drive huge wedges into the holes in your arguments.
To say that somebody is dodging, ignoring or incompetent or lying is not arrogance, I always back this up and I proved it. If you are not comfortable with calling these activities by correct names, then stop with them and problem solved. I consider your language as quite arrogant especially when you think that your comments have some value or that you are able to argue against revisionists. Be serious.

Second sentence is quite ridiculous and of course false as proven here, Nessie is not in position to argue against revisionists. he don´t even know what exerminationists claim.
I do not believe that denier/revisionists have explained away the need for 46 retorts at Birkenau.
Thus Nessie again proved, that no matter what is proven to him, he simply claims that he "do not believe" and thus "problem solved". This is exactly his only way how to deal with arguments - "I do not believe" - just absurd.
Instead you act as if the the epidemic was to allowed to run its course and the real issue is cremating all the dead people. Thousands upon thousands of them, every day.
False, he simply do not know what he is talking about, they fought against epidemic of course, material evidence and documents prove it.
That is a very odd conclusion considering Mattogno is a revisionist/denier. If the Kremas were to deal with epidemics, at 1 retort per 2000 the Nazis were preparing for one hell of an ongoing epidemic, where they would have to keep a camp going with more and more new inmates who would be expected to die from the epidemic to be replaced by more and more inmates. That makes no sense, especially when compared to what happened at Buchenwald in 1945, discussed further on.
I see nothing odd so again:
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 00#p304813" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
So according to you the Nazi response to high death rates from an epidemic was not to fight the epidemic
Utter nonsense and I must say lie since I already informed him:

Yes, very little intentions, they only constructed Central Sauna for hundreds of thousands of Reichsmarks, they wasted money for Zyklon B since according to Pressac more than 95% of entire supply was used for hygienic purposes, the orders of Himmler or Glücks to lower mortality for all cost were only jokes, maybe the plan decided in 1942 and started in 1943 called "Special Measures for the improvement of Hygienic installations" was only joke.....Nessie, you simple do not know what you are talking about.

This list is of course very short and is much longer.
So it is a could, he does not really know.
False, he explained why only some two thousands records can contain "typhus" as explicit cause of death and Nessie has no counter arguments as usual. What Nessie and Zimmerman claim is that all effort and panic in the camp was because of some 2 typhus victims (hypothetical victims in missing volumes from period of lower typhus "activity" included in calculation) dying per day! This is ridiculous.

Possible False causes of false death in several cases have little to do with our subject.
I went with the claim of 8600 deaths in June 1942. But even that figure does not fully explain why so many retorts as we have a Nazi writing in June 1943 that the capacity to cremate was now 4,756 persons a day.
So again:!
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 00#p304813" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Bob makes scant reference to attempts to actually fight the disease, such as closure of the camps precisely because he knows attempts to fight the disease would contradict the reason to build so many Kremas. If the Nazis prevented typhus and other epidemics, or at least controlled any out breaks, there is no need for such a high number of retorts.
Firstly this is lie, I provided lot of reference and not "scant" the list can be much longer of course.

Secondly, "non sequitur" fallacy. To fight diseases and to prepare camp for possible case of similar conditions like in the summer 1942 are fully logical activities, no contradiction here of course. Such activity is common even today, governments or institutions are also prepared for exceptional cases of disasters together with fight against possible risks, does this means that they plan to exterminate peoples? This is again ridiculous. If the Germans were like Nessie, then I do not want to imagine that disaster.

If there is some contradiction which is ignored by Nessie, then it is the one noted by Pressac himself:

There is INCOMPATIBILITY in the creation of a health camp a few hundred yards from four Krematorien where, according to official history, people were exterminated on a large scale. (Pressac´s emphasis)

Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas chambers, Beate-Klarsfeld-Foundation, New York 1989, p. 512.
So the revisionist/deniers have a choice, either the Nazis did nothing to control disease at the camp and they deliberately put people there to die from disease, so needing a high number of retorts. Or they controlled the diseases and actually needed the high number of retorts for another cause of death.
No need for choice, Nessie created fictional problem, that´s all, he didn´t even bother to back it up with some evidence.
Bob goes on to say that other camps had just as high a ratio of retorts and in post # 224 he speaks of Buchenwald and its 6 retorts. Buchenwald housed 238,380 whilst it was open. Some 56,545 deaths occurred there. That is 24% of the camps population died. So whilst not an extermination camp in name, it was built to meet the plan of work and die. In any case what Bob ignores is that each of the six retorts could well have been used at Buchenwald at a lower rate than at Birkenau. They were not necessarily used 24 hours a day with more than one body at a time . The 6 retort crematorium was built in 1942 and by 1943 there were 37,000 prisoners there, or 1 retort per 6000, 3 times more prisoners per retort than at Birkenau. That prisoner population kept rising to almost double by the end of 1942, with no extra retorts planned or added. There was a typhus epidemic there in 1945 by when there were over 80,000 prisoners in the camp and its sub camps or 1 retort to 13,300 prisoners.
This is nonsense, and Nessie must know it, his source is wikipedia:

Between April 1938 and April 1945, some 238,380 people of various nationalities including 350 Western Allied POWs were incarcerated in Buchenwald. One estimate places the number of deaths in Buchenwald at 56,000.

Thus this refers to entire period and to all peoples who ever came through the camp, they were not all housed there at particular period as this individual is suggesting!

His "it was built to meet the plan of work and die." is unfounded so no wonder he did not back it up again. I already refuted this nonsense.
In any case what Bob ignores is that each of the six retorts could well have been used at Buchenwald at a lower rate than at Birkenau. They were not necessarily used 24 hours a day with more than one body at a time .
Thus the same logic goes for Auschwitz, right? Nessie has just contradicted own entire thesis. And I do not ignore it, this is one of the basic revisionist´s argument - that ovens were not operated on frenetic continuous scale! Nessie again proved he does not know anything about revisionism.

Secondly, if the output of Auschwitz oven is like exterminationist/Nessie claim, they could easily order only one muffle for Buchenwald and operate it like in Auschwitz if this was "oh so efficient" muffle and there was in fact no need to waste money, effort and fuel for five more muffles and operate them on lower scale to waste as much resources as possible instead of using only one muffle and operate it like in Auschwitz if exterminationists´s claims about output of one muffle are true. According to Zimmerman, in the worst imaginable case (data below in the comment) - this one muffle could easily cremate whole daily mortality of the camp in one day (mortality some 81 per day, cremation capacity of one muffle 57 to 96 per day). Nessie somewhat didn´t think out thoroughly his explanation. I expect some damage control as usual.

Nessie failed to explain why they wanted much bigger capacity than in Auswhitz since Buchenwald was not extermination camp, and there were some 9 deaths per day in the mentioned period of muffle planning.
That prisoner population kept rising to almost double by the end of 1942, with no extra retorts planned or added. There was a typhus epidemic there in 1945 by when there were over 80,000 prisoners in the camp and its sub camps or 1 retort to 13,300 prisoners.
Again Nessie´s incompetence, he refers to population in December 1943 and to population of little more than 85,000 in Oct 1944 (or in his case in 1945), thus he argues retrospectively "as though the Central Construction Office of Weimar-Buchenwald was planning this expansion before August 1942, but his statement is “without any proof.” - as Carlo Mattogno already pointed out. What we have here is again time paradox, they did not plan any expansion nor they planned defeat of Germany and following migration of prisoners from eastern territories. :roll:
That prisoner population kept rising to almost double by the end of 1942, with no extra retorts planned or added.
First of all, this is again false, until January 1943, population was stable aroud 9,000, thus is impossible to be doubled (16,000) in the respect to period of planned new muffles (some 8,000) , from January 1943 the population began to raise (Konzentrationslager Buchenwald. Weimar, without date, pp. 84-85.) and doubled figure is dated to July 1943. As i said, his math is just terrible.

Secondly, according to Nessie´s source Zimmerman, these 6 muffles could cremate some 342 to 576 bodies per day, if we assume the most extreme case and highest population of some 85,000 during Oct 1944, then there would have been mortality some 81 per day based on experiences during the first six months of 1942 or some 18 per day (based on Nessie´s false figure of some 16,000 at the end of 1942), so for what purpose they needed more muffles at the end of 1942 or even in 1944 if these victims could be cremated in some four hours or one hour respectively? They didn´t need any according to Zimmerman, Nessie thus deliberately ignored own source!
"The horrendous death toll during the first two months of 1945 was due to a typhus epidemic in the camp. During the same time period, there were also severe epidemics in all the other major concentration camps in Germany.

Typhus is spread by lice and prisoners coming into Germany from the death camps in what is now Poland were the carriers of the lice. The worst epidemic of all was at Bergen-Belsen where 35,000 prisoners died in March and the first two weeks of April 1945.
What? I thought that typhus epidemics are myth according to Nessie and Zimmerman! Or this is somehow magically related only to Auschwitz and there was some magic protection against typhus?
So Buchenwald had fewer retorts per head and disease was dealt with by use of Zyklon B.
This is again lie since Nessie is already familiar with correct data, population during the planning (spring 1942) and installation (Aug/Oct 1942) of the new muffles was some 8,000 on average. Nessie falsely used population from December 1943 and 1944/45 thus he comitted "little" fraud to achieve his goal and to raise number of prisoners per retort. Exactly like Zimmerman.

In Auschwitz, they used Zyklon B too, steam or microwave delousing device. They apparently used this high-tech device only as some paperweight because Nessie already informed us that Germans didn´t care about fight with typhus epidemics which according to him and Zimmerman are only a "myth"!
That makes Bob and Mattogno's explanation as to why Birkenau needed so many retorts look even more suspect.
No, only Nessie is really suspect since i proved lots of his deceptions.

btw - if you are not going to stop with your deceptions, dodging and ignorance, i will not respond in the future no matter if i will/will not receive ban on username. This is my last warning, stop with your strategy since this renders whole debate absurd.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3074
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Nessie » Sun Oct 28, 2012 9:34 pm

Good, you are not banned.

You say "To say that somebody is dodging, ignoring or incompetent or lying is not arrogance, I always back this up and I proved it. If you are not comfortable with calling these activities by correct names, then stop with them and problem solved. I consider your language as quite arrogant especially when you think that your comments have some value or that you are able to argue against revisionists. Be serious."

Attack me all you want, I will forever be more civil than you in these debates. I know your tactics of trying to control the subject, dictate the topic and your jibes to try and force me to accept what you have said.

"Second sentence is quite ridiculous and of course false as proven here, Nessie is not in position to argue against revisionists. he don´t even know what exerminationists claim."

Another attack, when will you get to the topic.

"Thus Nessie again proved, that no matter what is proven to him, he simply claims that he "do not believe" and thus "problem solved". This is exactly his only way how to deal with arguments - "I do not believe" - just absurd."

That is what I mean by arrogant. I can also use you technique and say it is a lie. You are so sure what you say is the case and that is the end of it you are unable to even contemplate others may disagree with you and your arguments. Sorry Bob, but I am not convinced by your so called proof.

So finally we get back to the subject and yes I agree the Nazis did fight against epidemics, at times. But building Kremas is not fighting an epidemic. It is for dealing with the dead. Use of Zyklon B is, particularly with typhus. Feeding prisoners so they are not so week would also be another way of fighting the epidemic. As would widespread vaccination programmes. Was there any vaccination at the camps? That is what prompted my comment "So according to you the Nazi response to high death rates from an epidemic was not to fight the epidemic" which is not a lie, but to draw you on the contradictions that are clear in your argument. I do not think you have spotted the contradiction.

You replied "Yes, very little intentions, they only constructed Central Sauna for hundreds of thousands of Reichsmarks, they wasted money for Zyklon B since according to Pressac more than 95% of entire supply was used for hygienic purposes, the orders of Himmler or Glücks to lower mortality for all cost were only jokes, maybe the plan decided in 1942 and started in 1943 called "Special Measures for the improvement of Hygienic installations" was only joke.....Nessie, you simple do not know what you are talking about."

If the Nazis were doing all they could to fight the epidemics, which they did successfully as shown at Auschwitz in 1942 and Buchenwald in 1945, why build so many Kremas for people who were expected to live?

Mattogno only has a theory as to why so few records contained typhus as cause of death. I see you take his word as law, but I see no reason to do so. I doubt they can be trusted anyway as there are so many false ones. In any case I showed I accepted a higher death figure.

It was not a lie to say you made scant reference to attempts to fight the disease as you have spent far more time trying to explain away all the retorts. For example "Secondly, "non sequitur" fallacy. To fight diseases and to prepare camp for possible case of similar conditions like in the summer 1942 are fully logical activities, no contradiction here of course. Such activity is common even today, governments or institutions are also prepared for exceptional cases of disasters together with fight against possible risks, does this means that they plan to exterminate peoples? This is again ridiculous. If the Germans were like Nessie, then I do not want to imagine that disaster."

Now, if that really was the case, what did the 4,756 person who were being cremated in a day (as reported by SS-Sturmbannführer Bischoff in June 1943) die of? There was no epidemic then. Is there any evidence of the retorts usage being influenced by the number of people dying of typhus at the camp? So epidemic, high use, no epidemic, low use. The non sequitur remains as far as fighting typhus is concerned. The evidence points to another use for so many retorts, something else that was killing people by their thousands each day.

I need to stop now, the rest of your post will be answered later.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

Bob
Regular Poster
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:41 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Bob » Sun Oct 28, 2012 10:35 pm

Nessie ignored my warning, ok, so I will address only two points not related to subject:
Attack me all you want, I will forever be more civil than you in these debates. I know your tactics of trying to control the subject, dictate the topic and your jibes to try and force me to accept what you have said.
This is again false, I do not attack Nessie, but his arguments and "approach" he uses, that is quite a difference, he is the one who argues ad hominem and calls peoples antisemites, neo-nazis and etc. He thus received what he deserved for his debate style and insults, complete exposure of his deceptions.
That is what I mean by arrogant. I can also use you technique and say it is a lie. You are so sure what you say is the case and that is the end of it you are unable to even contemplate others may disagree with you and your arguments. Sorry Bob, but I am not convinced by your so called proof.
Yes, Nessie can use this alleged "technique", his big problem will be the fact that he is not able to back it up since there are no lies from me. I backed up his lies and deceptions as shown in comments. Nessie can disagree, no problem but without any evidence this has no value. When i disagree, i always back up why and I refute opponent´s arguments because declarations like "I do not believe" "I am not convinced" "I disagree" are no counter argument.
Sorry Bob, but I am not convinced by your so called proof.
I learned long time ago that Nessie cannot be convinced, his mind is already made up, he does not want to be confused with facts and figures.

Case closed, debate with someone who stubbornly refuses to reads opponent´s comments and to follow grasp them is like to talk to wall. Anyway, thank you for your effort.

David
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5006
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by David » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:25 am

Nessie wrote:
So according to you the Nazi response to high death rates from an epidemic was not to fight the epidemic, but to prepare for ever increasing epidemics and have a massive ability to cremate those who perish..

Hello Nessie- The Germans made huge efforts to fight typhus and save inmate lives.
The entire Sauna complex was built to save lives. The Germans had a
vigorous program of educating detainees to keep clean. Several German doctors
even came down with typhus while saving inmates' lives.
Buildings were regularly fumigated.
Inmates were regularly deloused and vaccinated.

You can bash the Germans for many things but not for making major efforts
to fight typhus among the detainees.



Jerzy Ulicki-Rek
Poster
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 9:26 am

Re: Gas introduction in crematorium 2 in Auschwitz-Birkenau

Post by Jerzy Ulicki-Rek » Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:20 am

Darren Wilshak wrote:Jerzy's latest thread on Ada Bimko (snore) is a good example of the mental disturbance that seems to affect some deniers.
Come on! Do you doubt the words and testimony of madame BIMKO ?
Then you a "holo-denier" Sir!!!
Welcome on board... :)
Don't forget to leave a link to latest thread on Ada Bimko. Could help :)

Jerzy Ulicki-Rek