Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Discussions
User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23265
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:11 pm

To put it more simply: Venezia's 2007 book is at odds with Lewenthal's contemporaneous documentation.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1913
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Balsamo » Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:40 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:To put it more simply: Venezia's 2007 book is at odds with Lewenthal's contemporaneous documentation.
Mind to put it LESS simply?

I do not mind you rely on the scrolls, but why would have those documents have more historical values than others? That is my question.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23265
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jul 17, 2018 10:55 pm

I am not relying on the SK manuscripts, nor any other single testimony or document, as I've said above and in the previous discussion of the SK.

But as to the SK transport list: Lewenthal (apparently) made a record at the time of the transports arriving to II-III and when each came, Hans posted the listing for a two week period. Hans wrote that the writing discovered with Lewenthal's manuscript was "a Polish language list of transports/groups exterminated in the crematoria between 9 and 24 October 1944. . . . The list details the date, the number of people killed, their gender, their origin as well as the crematorium used to liquidate them."

It is far less likely that Lewenthal was mistaken about these arriving transports, writing down details about them at roughly the time they had to be dealt with, than a witness recollecting time frames, without the benefit of records, 70-odd years later. At the very least, to prioritize Venezia (whose testimony you noted, in the other thread on this, was surprising in how it stands apart from others), you will need to account for Lewenthal's list. It seems to me to be important, useful evidence.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1913
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Balsamo » Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:01 am

So you mean that one :
7/10 460 male shot Sonder
9/10 2000 male camp German 2
9/10 2000 families Terezin 2
9/10 2000 female C camp 5
10/10 800 children Gypsis 5
11/10 2000 families Slovak 3
12/10 3000 female C camp 2
13/10 3000 female C camp 3
13/10 2000 families Terezin 2
14/10 3000 families Terezin 3
15/10 3000 female C camp 2
16/10 800 male camp German 3
16/10 600 male sick camp 3
17/10 2000 male Buna 2
18/10 3000 families Slovak 2
18/10 2000 families Terezin 3
18/10 300 families various 3
18/10 22 male Polish Bunker 3
18/10 13 female male Polish prison 3
19/10 2000 families Slovak 2
19/10 2000 families Terezin 3
20/10 2500 families Terezin 2
20/10 1000 male children
12 - 18 years ? 3
20/10 200 female C camp 3
??/10 ???? ? camp ? ?
21/10 1000 female C camp 5
23/10 400 male Gleiwitz? 3
24/10 2000 families Terezin 2
Which is of course available on Holocaust controversies "gold mine".
And if i may use one you word : " AND ?"

It cannot be a list of transport so to speak, but a list of how many victims were sent to krema at a certain date and where were they coming from.
So i repeat my question, what makes you think that this list is perfect and do not bear any mistakes? What does it have to do with testimony describing the working condition?

Then, even if two load of victims were sent to the same krema 2 on 9th of october (which could very well be a mistake), as there was no way to gas 4000 people on the same day, given that this specific gas chambers had been divided in two smaller ones, you can also see that no other load of victims were sent there until the 12th...which is more than 3 days.
On can also see that - regarding Krema 3 which is my reference - it killed 2000 on the 11th and received another load on the 13th...which counts 11, 12, 13...which fits with my model...

Of course you can find some data which would contradict, but then, this list is obviously the result of a collective work, which means that there a room for errors, and personal estimate from the observers when it comes to the numbers (who can really distinguish a crowed of 2000 from a crowed from 3000 without proceeding a proper counting?).
I do not dismissed the list as a whole, of course, but i cannot see any reason it has to be taken as granted (that is presumed without errors or mislocation)...the numbers 3000, 2000, 800 are obviously not the result of clear counting but more the result of estimate of very large, large and small loads of victims.

But to take on example, based on Krema 3, the least would be to show in a practical way how this krema could have killed 3000 (i am not aware of any such a number given by a SK by the way) on the 13th and be ready to kill another 3000 on the 14th. Remember that Krema 3 could not be helped by any open fires...
Besides, 3000 victims in that gas chamber would have meant a concentration of 14.3 people a square meter...

It is not because a list says a thing that the things is feasible, quite simple...the only conclusion is that there are some mistake or approximations in the list, NOT that those killing facilities or the SK working there had superpowers.

But problematic cases are not so numerous.
If one takes the example of the 18/10 at krema 3, it is said that 2000 were gassed, and additional 350 victims were also sent there...This is explained by Venezia, as it happened that in such case, people were just shot right in the ovens room.

To conclude, i don't see how this list would refute everything that does not match with it. It is just a list made by a collective (there were 400 m between krema 2 and 3 and krema 4 and 5) which unfortunately opens the door to mistakes being made.

In what Krema was Lewenthal working, wasn't it 4 or 5 ?

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:04 am

Note though that's there's doubt as to the accuracy of L's assumed numbers. He apparently used the supposed maximum capacity numbers or something like that in lieu of the lacking real figures.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23265
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Wed Jul 18, 2018 10:40 am

Balsamo, thanks, I do think this list has to be taken into account, but I am still not on board with what you're saying.
Balsamo wrote:So you mean that one :
7/10 460 male shot Sonder
9/10 2000 male camp German 2
9/10 2000 families Terezin 2
9/10 2000 female C camp 5
10/10 800 children Gypsis 5
11/10 2000 families Slovak 3
12/10 3000 female C camp 2
13/10 3000 female C camp 3
13/10 2000 families Terezin 2
14/10 3000 families Terezin 3
15/10 3000 female C camp 2
16/10 800 male camp German 3
16/10 600 male sick camp 3
17/10 2000 male Buna 2
18/10 3000 families Slovak 2
18/10 2000 families Terezin 3
18/10 300 families various 3
18/10 22 male Polish Bunker 3
18/10 13 female male Polish prison 3
19/10 2000 families Slovak 2
19/10 2000 families Terezin 3
20/10 2500 families Terezin 2
20/10 1000 male children
12 - 18 years ? 3
20/10 200 female C camp 3
??/10 ???? ? camp ? ?
21/10 1000 female C camp 5
23/10 400 male Gleiwitz? 3
24/10 2000 families Terezin 2
Which is of course available on Holocaust controversies "gold mine".
And if i may use one you word : " AND ?"

It cannot be a list of transport so to speak, but a list of how many victims were sent to krema at a certain date and where were they coming from.
I think you're correct. I made a mistake in writing my posts. These were people dealt with by the SK - and the list provides date, number, gender, origin, and Krema.
Balsamo wrote:. . . Of course you can find some data which would contradict. . . .
Leaving aside for a moment Sergey's post, and focusing on II/III, here is the translated list sorted by Krema (taken from Hans' table):

[Date] [Number] [Gender] [Origin] Crematorium
9/10 2000 male camp German 2
9/10 2000 families Terezin 2
12/10 3000 female C camp 2
13/10 2000 families Terezin 2
15/10 3000 female C camp 2
17/10 2000 male Buna 2
18/10 3000 families Slovak 2
19/10 2000 families Slovak 2
20/10 2500 families Terezin 2
24/10 2000 families Terezin 2

[Date] [Number] [Gender] [Origin] Crematorium
11/10 2000 families Slovak 3
13/10 3000 female C camp 3
14/10 3000 families Terezin 3
16/10 800 male camp German 3
16/10 600 male sick camp 3
18/10 2000 families Terezin 3
18/10 300 families various 3
18/10 22 male Polish Bunker 3
18/10 13 female male Polish prison 3
19/10 2000 families Terezin 3
20/10 1000 male children
12 - 18 years ? 3
20/10 200 female C camp 3
23/10 400 male Gleiwitz? 3

A number of groups of victims (3 at Krema II - see below, 3 at Krema III) apparently were dealt with more quickly than you have said was possible. The "And" is: how was it possible for the SK to go faster than you've said that they could go? Having six cases outside your window casts doubt on the size of your window.

To avoid more misunderstanding, I want to state my point again: this list is evidence against its taking 72 hours to process about 2000 victims. It is not known to be “perfect,” the numbers appear to have been rounded, the list is not the only evidence, it is not dispositive, it is not the single bullet, it does not "speak for itself," it doesn’t describe all aspects of the operation. It is, however, important evidence that you hadn’t even touched on until now.
Balsamo wrote:So i repeat my question, what makes you think that this list is perfect and do not bear any mistakes? What does it have to do with testimony describing the working condition?
It doesn't describe working conditions, of course, but gives ballpark numbers of victims dealt with by location and day. In Hans' words,
Also discovered with this manuscript was a Polish language list of transports/groups exterminated in the crematoria between 9 and 24 October 1944, which is attributed to Lewenthal as well (reproduced in Inmitten, p. 136). The list details the date, the number of people killed, their gender, their origin as well as the crematorium used to liquidate them . . .
I wouldn't argue that the list is error-free or doesn't use estimates, but also I wouldn't cherrypick certain information as being in error.
Balsamo wrote:In what Krema was Lewenthal working, wasn't it 4 or 5 ?
According to Chare & Williams, Lewenthal’s notes were found with pages written by Langfus and the October 1944 list at Crematorium III, in a glass jar. Lewenthal’s manuscript says at the top “****** written from ******* the narrow circle Sonderko Crema 2 15-19/8 44 by <Za>lman Lewental Poland - Ciechnów” and “Lewental wanted to preserve not only his own words, but also evidence from others. In fact, his writing has commentary on the Łódź diary, which he presumably found in the effect of someone brought from Lodz and murdered in Crematorium III. . . . Lewental can be seen as a historian and archivist of the Sonderkommando.” (p 126) “Lewental . . . shows familiarity with the bigger picture.” (p 147)

I should add that Chare & Williams don’t attribute the deaths list to Lewenthal but describe it as anonymous. I didn’t look up Chare & Williams (I should have before posting) and they find one error - the double entry for the 9th - which they attribute not to the original list but to Mark’s misreading. They do call the arrivals “transports,” which they weren’t, as you say, in the sense we think of transports.

Chare & Williams describe the list as simply deaths and dates of deaths.

And . . . a question for Sergey, "Lewenthal" seems to have used specific estimated numbers, not standard capacity numbers. I know only what Hans and Chare & Williams have written about the list, where can we find more that would bolster doubt about the ballpark accuracy of the numbers and their being "supposed maximum capacity" figures?
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Wed Jul 18, 2018 6:34 pm

SM, Hans researched the list and it's his doubt I'm basing on. Plz ask him for further details.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23265
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:41 pm

thanks, Sergey - I shall - and will in the meantime search HC to see if he wrote about it there . . .
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:44 pm

He did a bit.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23265
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:57 pm

I've emailed Hans and in the meantime found that, in the same piece I quoted from above, Hans wrote that the list he presented is "based on Des Voix Sous La Cendre, p. 177, except for a few entries which seemed transcribed mistaken or questionable." Chare & Williams have identified one entry (noted above) as mistaken, due to an error introduced by Mark. (I searched HC for Lewenthal and Lewental to find references to the list; Hans also included it, as it cites executions of SK members on on 7 October 1944, in his piece on the SK revolt.)
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Hans
Poster
Posts: 320
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Hans » Thu Jul 19, 2018 5:11 am

I did suggest that "the absolute figures provided in the list have to be taken very carefully, since it appears that the author assumed numbers of killed prisoners close to the maximum capacity of the facility in the absence of exact figures" here, but without elaborating the point too much.

Where it can be checked, most figures appear to have been generously rounded up:

9/10 2000 families Terezin 2 [transport: 1550, thereof at least 191 women and unknown number of men selected for work]

11/10 2000 families Slovak 3 [transport: about 1900]

13/10 2000 families Terezin 2 [transport: 1600, thereof at least 181 women and an unknown number of men selected for work]

14/10 3000 families Terezin 3 [transport: 1500, thereof at least 242 women and 3 men selected for work]

18/10 3000 families Slovak 2 [transport: 900, perhaps 1900 from an early October transport]

18/10 2000 families Terezin 3 [transport: 1500, thereof at least 157 women and an unknown number of men selected for work]

19/10 2000 families Slovak 2 [transport?, 113 Slovak Jews selected for work]

19/10 2000 families Terezin 3 [transport?]

20/10 200 female C camp 3 [194 women "specially treated"]

20/10 2500 families Terezin 2 [transport: 1500, thereof at least 169 women and 173 men selected for work]

21/10 1000 female C camp 5 [515 women "specially treated"]

24/10 2000 families Terezin 2 [transport: 1715, thereof at least 215 women and 219 men selected for work]

So it's noteworthy that not even somebody like the SK chronologist did have full and reliable insight into the extermination machinery and could often only guess and crudely estimate the number of killed people (usually assuming 2000 - 3000 people) without access to actual figures.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23265
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jul 19, 2018 10:15 am

Thanks, very helpful. Your last point seems to speak to a limit to what the extant evidence can tell us. I'd figured a bit less rounding up, but not necessarily much less, the 1500 rounded to 2500 is more rounding than I assumed, the 1500-1900 or so rounded to 2000 more like what I'd thought.

A follow-on question: the list mixes arriving transports (as above) and also groups taken from inside the camp, right?
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Hans
Poster
Posts: 320
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Hans » Thu Jul 19, 2018 3:25 pm

I think it is tricky to use the Lewenthal extermination list specifically as evidence against Balsamo's 72 hours hypothesis, as at first sight I cannot see a series of days with reliable killing figures.

The claim that it took 72 hours to exterminate a transport at crematorium 2/3 is incompatible with the body of evidence and I would not bother anymore about it. It makes no sense to establish a system of transporting corpses at a rate of 600 to 700 corpses per day, when the cremation ovens fed by this transport could handle some 2000 corpses. Even if it had been poorly engineered and organized like this from the start, there is no reason this absurd situation had not been fixed until summer 1944.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23265
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jul 19, 2018 4:08 pm

I am at the end of my knowledge about this - probably past it - in any event! Thanks for the thoughts, they clarify things for me.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1913
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Balsamo » Thu Jul 19, 2018 4:54 pm

Hans,
thank you a lot for those information.
Just a question: when you write this
19/10 2000 families Terezin 3 [transport?]
Does it mean that there was a transport but that the number of victims are not known or does it mean that a possible transport is missing from the list? that is that this potential transport is not to be found in any source?

Hans
Poster
Posts: 320
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Hans » Thu Jul 19, 2018 7:21 pm

Balsamo wrote:Hans,
thank you a lot for those information.
Just a question: when you write this
19/10 2000 families Terezin 3 [transport?]
Does it mean that there was a transport but that the number of victims are not known or does it mean that a possible transport is missing from the list? that is that this potential transport is not to be found in any source?
Balsamo, I could not identify this transport among those who are known to have left Theresienstadt to Auschwitz. It seems like a "phantom" transport. Danuta Czech left out the nationality of the victims in her Kalendarium, i.e. she had no clue either what this is supposed to be. Likewise, the entry on Slovak victims on this day appears to be a phantom, as no corresponding transport is known to have left the camp Sered (but Slovak Jews were registered on this day, so there was something going on). The whole issue (of the list and the exact meaning of the entries; perhaps unknown transports or selections among "depot prisoners") definitely deserves more attention. I cannot look on this any further though, as I'm stil fully occupied with researching gas vans and Chelmno.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1913
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Balsamo » Thu Jul 19, 2018 11:03 pm

Hans wrote:I think it is tricky to use the Lewenthal extermination list specifically as evidence against Balsamo's 72 hours hypothesis, as at first sight I cannot see a series of days with reliable killing figures.

The claim that it took 72 hours to exterminate a transport at crematorium 2/3 is incompatible with the body of evidence and I would not bother anymore about it. It makes no sense to establish a system of transporting corpses at a rate of 600 to 700 corpses per day, when the cremation ovens fed by this transport could handle some 2000 corpses. Even if it had been poorly engineered and organized like this from the start, there is no reason this absurd situation had not been fixed until summer 1944.
Just a last comment about this hypothesis. Actually it is NOT mine. It is Venezia's who speak about it twice.
Second, it can also be interpreted - especially when he speaks about the working condition - as a time allowed by some time table which would have allowed the Nazis to fully organized the killing process.
And not as rule that every killing process DID last 72 hours. This is why Venezia uses terms like "on average" or "we were supposed", "IF it lasted longer than 3 days we would have been in trouble". That the job could have been faster cannot be excluded from his words.

When saying this, it is highly probable that he refers to the peak of the activity when the gas chambers were working at maximum capacity, that is not dealing with gassing of 1319 people but with 2000 or 2500. It does make a huge difference.

What can be called "MY MODEL" is basically based on the cremation capacity mentioned on the available German documents, as opposed to the various estimates of witnesses (which goes for the 4 krema from 6600 or so up to 10.000), which should be the attitude given that documents prime over witnesses.
It also take into account the time necessary to make the victims enter the undressing room, to lead them into the gas chamber, all the steps needed to make the gas chamber ready for the next batch of victims.
THIS model DOES NOT reach 72 hours.

Regarding VENEZIA's testimony:
Even if we disagree with him, although i still fail to read a irrefutable reason why we should, what it implies in term of organization remains to be considered.

It is quite unrealistic to imagine the Nazi making selection on the ramp 24 hours a day without knowing which killing facilities would be available at the moment the group of victims are led to the gas chambers. SK testimonies are quite vague regarding this issue. Sackar said it was the Germans who organized this - which make sense of course - but just continue by saying in substance " If our crematorium (3) was not ready, the victims would be sent to another one, crematorium 1 or 4 or 5"...without any precision...others mentions a motorcyclist whose role was to check.
Whatever the time frame, it raises the issue of "coordination".
Something the "body of evidence" did not do, as far as i know.

Regarding "Balsamo's hypothesis":
It just states that over 1320 victims, it is impossible to kill and to cremate the bodies within the same 24h. For a simple reason.
If X is the 24h needed for the process to burn a certain number of bodies.
The killing process of this same amount of victims and the time the gas chamber is put back in service is at least X + 4 hours...( take X+3 hours if you wish). Which makes a exact correlation/coordination between the two processes impossible. At best, both can be simultaneous as long as the number of people killed does not exceed 1320.
PS: I also did not take into account the daily "4 hours cool off" some are talking about.

Hans:
It makes no sense to establish a system of transporting corpses at a rate of 600 to 700 corpses per day, when the cremation ovens fed by this transport could handle some 2000 corpses.
Actually, the idea to make a model is called a "RECONSTITUTION" which is a requirement in every murder case.
My system, as you called it, is not between 600 to 700 per day, but based on cremation capacity as mentioned on documents of 4 bodies per muffle per hour. Therefore my base is 690 bodies per shift which was at best of 11 hours and an half per day...

Now it is quite obvious to everyone that the killing installations in both crematoria 2 and 3 were not OPTIMAL, if only because of the two levels, and small issues like one single door (connecting the gas chambers) and one single elevator added to the problem of performance. Granted, the AR camps did not have those issues and were much more efficient.
But then what? It is the installation the Nazis used nevertheless.

Sorry, without wanting being rude here, but what you say is like it does not make sense to build Ferrari's when you cannot drive faster than 120 km/h on most roads, when my perspective is "let's make a Ferrari so we can handle whatever the road".

It is not that i, neither obviously the Nazis, build the model based on the elevator. Again, i took the 1440 bodies per 24 hours, and concluded that it posed no issues on the ground level. The ovens could handle what was coming from downstairs. It is only if one chose to follow the highest numbers provided by the witnesses that problems start to appear in those two specific crematoria (2 and 3).
Even if it had been poorly engineered and organized like this from the start, there is no reason this absurd situation had not been fixed until summer 1944.
Maybe, but then how? They did not rebuild the crematoria, didn't they? Improvements were made on the ovens, but the human factors as well as the elevator remained the same.
But in my humble opinion i do not see a daily 1440 cremation capacity as a failure, same with the capacity to kill 2000 people three or four times a week. It is already awfully impressive.


Nevertheless, thank you all for this discussion. I will retain that:
- the idea that the Nazi had a kind of "reservoir" which allowed them to handle the killing of such massive quantities of people arriving at Birkenau has not been completely excluded.
- Hans valuable remarks on Lewenthal list which confirms that all numbers have to be taken with caution, and if i may add deserves to be thought about. Well, i would be lying if i say i have not done it already. But that will be for a next post.

Actually my original interrogation was if there were some archives left to explore that could bring new information, in case one would accept to make some change in one'a original perspective, in order to replace those premises stating that killing and burning 8600 people within 24h was the norm.
To conclude on a negative note - although it is always a bad idea - i am still not convinced that THIS was possible.

PS: Just saw you last post Hans, thank you for your answer.
The works you are doing, and that includes all the HC staff, deserves much more than the "blog level". Keep doing it. You are all essential to us for keeping us informed of the latest research, and i think I speak for all in saying that it is a privilege to be able to having discussion with you.

Hans
Poster
Posts: 320
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Hans » Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:31 pm

Balsamo wrote: What can be called "MY MODEL" is basically based on the cremation capacity mentioned on the available German documents, as opposed to the various estimates of witnesses (which goes for the 4 krema from 6600 or so up to 10.000), which should be the attitude given that documents prime over witnesses.
Balsamo, if I may interrupt you here, it is fallacious to argue that documents trump over witnesses. Documents can contain errors, misunderstandings, unreliable information, hearsay, deceptions, lies. Take the Auschwitz death books, which are full of systematic lies.

Now, if there were actual cremation records, and if could be supported that these are reliable, then one may argue that those fictional records would trump eyewitness estimations. But this specific document you are referring to is not an actual cremation record. The figure was derived from the cremation rate expected 20 months earlier, before the ovens were even constructed, and with the corpses of Russian POWs instead of Jewish families unfit for work (the document even provides for crematoria 4 & 5 the same rate as for crematoria 2 & 3 although the former was supposedly an inferiour construction). The author was involved in the construction of the crematoria and he merely reported and confirmed a figure that had been planned before that. It is not to be confused with the actual operation.

Since there are no actual cremation records, the next best source are the people in charge of the extermination in Auschwitz, i.e.the SS men involved in the extermination and the Sonderkommando prisoners, especially those loading the ovens. And according to this, the ovens were reloaded in a way that 2000 or more corpses per day (which is about the gas chamber capacity) was a figure that could have been continuosly achieved.

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Fri Jul 20, 2018 4:29 pm

I must say, in spite of all, I appreciate count Cagliostro's pesky questions. If anything, thinking about them makes history more precise.