The Action Reinhard Camps

Discussions
User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3073
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Nessie » Sat Sep 15, 2018 4:48 pm

montgomery wrote:
Nessie wrote:.....

Take one eye witness and quote them where you think they are bogus.
........
I have provided a link in the OP of this thread and in that there is a list of witnesses being presented. If you consider any of those witnesses to be credible then name him or them. If you consider any of them to be bogus then name him or them. That has nothing to do with whether or not you like Mattogno.

I've put the same question to the book-kid so we'll see how he handles it too.

Fwiw, I have to insist that any witness that makes up tall tales is not to be considered credible and must be discarded. I'm not talking about small errors in the telling, I'm talking about stuff on the scale of the lobster-like steaming whopper.
The list of witnesses is;

a - Grossman, journalist, not a witness at an AR camp
b - Auerbach, writer, not a witness at an AR camp
c - Lukaszkiewicz, judge, not a witness at an AR camp
d - Blumental, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
e - Mushat, soldier and lawyer, not a witness at an AR camp
f - Steiner, novelist, not a witness at an AR camp
g - Marczewska & Waźniewski, historians, not witnesses at an AR camp
h - Gray, claimed to have escape Treblinka, dismissed as a hoaxer
i - Sereny, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
j - Wojtczak, author, not a not witness at an AR camp
k - Rückerl, German prosecutor, not a witness at an AR camp
l - Donat, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
m - Polish Commission
n - collective of authors
o - Lanzmann, film maker, not a witness at an AR camp
p - Arad, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
q - Czarkowski, a prisoner!!!! But at TI labour camp, not TII AR camp.
r - Gumkowski and Rutkowski, historians, not witnesses at an AR camp
s - Benz, German author, not a witness at an AR camp
t - Glazar, an eye witness who was at TII!!!!
u - Pressac, historian, not a witness at an AR camp

You have clearly not made any effort at all to read the book. Now, go find an eye witness and we can discuss them.
Which is evidence you are not a sceptic, you are a denier.
That proclamation or accusation is not in character for you, but it does indicate that you are slipping into the same mold as the others. If that's your choice then I will deal with you accordingly. I suggest you come back to the high road with me.
No, it is because you are evidenced to be a denier by your own words and you show no genuine scepticism.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3073
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Nessie » Sat Sep 15, 2018 4:53 pm

montgomery wrote:
Darren Wilshak wrote:Dunno why you bother, if he reads Wiernik, he'll just come back and mock it.
Would I find something to mock if I read Wiernik? I'll see if he's on Mattogno's list.
He is not on Mattogno's list, which is, if you had read any of it, is titled "Treblinka in Orthodox ‘Holocaust’ Literature". He is referenced by Mattogno, but better if you read Wiernik's book which is online.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26360
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Sep 15, 2018 4:53 pm

montgomery wrote:people would be running around believing that the Jews were nuked by the Nazis!
They don't?
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26360
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:27 pm

Nessie wrote:
montgomery wrote:
Nessie wrote:.....

Take one eye witness and quote them where you think they are bogus.
........
I have provided a link in the OP of this thread and in that there is a list of witnesses being presented. If you consider any of those witnesses to be credible then name him or them. If you consider any of them to be bogus then name him or them. That has nothing to do with whether or not you like Mattogno.

I've put the same question to the book-kid so we'll see how he handles it too.

Fwiw, I have to insist that any witness that makes up tall tales is not to be considered credible and must be discarded. I'm not talking about small errors in the telling, I'm talking about stuff on the scale of the lobster-like steaming whopper.
The list of witnesses is;

a - Grossman, journalist, not a witness at an AR camp
b - Auerbach, writer, not a witness at an AR camp
c - Lukaszkiewicz, judge, not a witness at an AR camp
d - Blumental, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
e - Mushat, soldier and lawyer, not a witness at an AR camp
f - Steiner, novelist, not a witness at an AR camp
g - Marczewska & Waźniewski, historians, not witnesses at an AR camp
h - Gray, claimed to have escape Treblinka, dismissed as a hoaxer
i - Sereny, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
j - Wojtczak, author, not a not witness at an AR camp
k - Rückerl, German prosecutor, not a witness at an AR camp
l - Donat, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
m - Polish Commission
n - collective of authors
o - Lanzmann, film maker, not a witness at an AR camp
p - Arad, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
q - Czarkowski, a prisoner!!!! But at TI labour camp, not TII AR camp.
r - Gumkowski and Rutkowski, historians, not witnesses at an AR camp
s - Benz, German author, not a witness at an AR camp
t - Glazar, an eye witness who was at TII!!!!
u - Pressac, historian, not a witness at an AR camp

You have clearly not made any effort at all to read the book. Now, go find an eye witness and we can discuss them.
Which is evidence you are not a sceptic, you are a denier.
That proclamation or accusation is not in character for you, but it does indicate that you are slipping into the same mold as the others. If that's your choice then I will deal with you accordingly. I suggest you come back to the high road with me.
No, it is because you are evidenced to be a denier by your own words and you show no genuine scepticism.
Thanks for this, Nessie. I haven't read this book in a number of years - Krzepicki and Rabinowicz show up in the index, but Mattogno, perhaps because they are so problematic for his project, barely discusses them. Donat was a witness but, as you say, "not a witness at an AR camp"; he was at Majdanek, Dachau and other camps. His book Holocaust Kingdom has a useful section on Majdanek, and he edited a collection of testimonies about Treblinka, which, surprise, included one of Krzepicki's statements.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

montgomery
BANNED
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 4:30 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by montgomery » Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:28 pm

Nessie wrote:
montgomery wrote:
Nessie wrote:.....

Take one eye witness and quote them where you think they are bogus.
........
I have provided a link in the OP of this thread and in that there is a list of witnesses being presented. If you consider any of those witnesses to be credible then name him or them. If you consider any of them to be bogus then name him or them. That has nothing to do with whether or not you like Mattogno.

I've put the same question to the book-kid so we'll see how he handles it too.

Fwiw, I have to insist that any witness that makes up tall tales is not to be considered credible and must be discarded. I'm not talking about small errors in the telling, I'm talking about stuff on the scale of the lobster-like steaming whopper.
The list of witnesses is;

a - Grossman, journalist, not a witness at an AR camp
b - Auerbach, writer, not a witness at an AR camp
c - Lukaszkiewicz, judge, not a witness at an AR camp
d - Blumental, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
e - Mushat, soldier and lawyer, not a witness at an AR camp
f - Steiner, novelist, not a witness at an AR camp
g - Marczewska & Waźniewski, historians, not witnesses at an AR camp
h - Gray, claimed to have escape Treblinka, dismissed as a hoaxer
i - Sereny, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
j - Wojtczak, author, not a not witness at an AR camp
k - Rückerl, German prosecutor, not a witness at an AR camp
l - Donat, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
m - Polish Commission
n - collective of authors
o - Lanzmann, film maker, not a witness at an AR camp
p - Arad, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
q - Czarkowski, a prisoner!!!! But at TI labour camp, not TII AR camp.
r - Gumkowski and Rutkowski, historians, not witnesses at an AR camp
s - Benz, German author, not a witness at an AR camp
t - Glazar, an eye witness who was at TII!!!!
u - Pressac, historian, not a witness at an AR camp

You have clearly not made any effort at all to read the book. Now, go find an eye witness and we can discuss them.
Which is evidence you are not a sceptic, you are a denier.
That proclamation or accusation is not in character for you, but it does indicate that you are slipping into the same mold as the others. If that's your choice then I will deal with you accordingly. I suggest you come back to the high road with me.
No, it is because you are evidenced to be a denier by your own words and you show no genuine scepticism.
No, I haven't read his book. And I gather that you don't like any of his sources. Is that because he hasn't talked to any eye witnesses? So let's get on with it and you refer me to your favorite eye witness account. If you don't accept any of Mattogno's then it's going to have to be first hand too. That probably means an author though, or a self-proclaimed historian, or any of the other titles you tag on to Mattogno's witnesses?

I have a completely open mind and I'm ready to read your witness's evidence.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26360
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:41 pm

>> I have a completely open mind

He made a typo and typed "open" for "empty."

Is this clown brain dead? How many times does he have to be told something to register it? He is really going to lengths to avoid dealing with Hans. I would, too, if I were a "skeptic" of his type.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27466
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Location: sometimes

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by scrmbldggs » Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:49 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Nessie wrote:
montgomery wrote:
Nessie wrote:.....

Take one eye witness and quote them where you think they are bogus.
........
I have provided a link in the OP of this thread and in that there is a list of witnesses being presented. If you consider any of those witnesses to be credible then name him or them. If you consider any of them to be bogus then name him or them. That has nothing to do with whether or not you like Mattogno.

I've put the same question to the book-kid so we'll see how he handles it too.

Fwiw, I have to insist that any witness that makes up tall tales is not to be considered credible and must be discarded. I'm not talking about small errors in the telling, I'm talking about stuff on the scale of the lobster-like steaming whopper.
The list of witnesses is;

a - Grossman, journalist, not a witness at an AR camp
b - Auerbach, writer, not a witness at an AR camp
c - Lukaszkiewicz, judge, not a witness at an AR camp
d - Blumental, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
e - Mushat, soldier and lawyer, not a witness at an AR camp
f - Steiner, novelist, not a witness at an AR camp
g - Marczewska & Waźniewski, historians, not witnesses at an AR camp
h - Gray, claimed to have escape Treblinka, dismissed as a hoaxer
i - Sereny, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
j - Wojtczak, author, not a not witness at an AR camp
k - Rückerl, German prosecutor, not a witness at an AR camp
l - Donat, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
m - Polish Commission
n - collective of authors
o - Lanzmann, film maker, not a witness at an AR camp
p - Arad, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
q - Czarkowski, a prisoner!!!! But at TI labour camp, not TII AR camp.
r - Gumkowski and Rutkowski, historians, not witnesses at an AR camp
s - Benz, German author, not a witness at an AR camp
t - Glazar, an eye witness who was at TII!!!!
u - Pressac, historian, not a witness at an AR camp

You have clearly not made any effort at all to read the book. Now, go find an eye witness and we can discuss them.
Which is evidence you are not a sceptic, you are a denier.
That proclamation or accusation is not in character for you, but it does indicate that you are slipping into the same mold as the others. If that's your choice then I will deal with you accordingly. I suggest you come back to the high road with me.
No, it is because you are evidenced to be a denier by your own words and you show no genuine scepticism.
Thanks for this, Nessie. I haven't read this book in a number of years - Krzepicki and Rabinowicz show up in the index, but Mattogno, perhaps because they are so problematic for his project, barely discusses them. Donat was a witness but, as you say, "not a witness at an AR camp"; he was at Majdanek, Dachau and other camps. His book Holocaust Kingdom has a useful section on Majdanek, and he edited a collection of testimonies about Treblinka, which, surprise, included one of Krzepicki's statements.
Am wondering about "c - Lukaszkiewicz, judge, not a witness at an AR camp", since he wasn't a witness at an active AR camp, but surveyed the flattened but quite burst open TII, IIRC, in 1945?
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

montgomery
BANNED
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 4:30 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by montgomery » Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:56 pm

Nessie wrote:
montgomery wrote:
Darren Wilshak wrote:Dunno why you bother, if he reads Wiernik, he'll just come back and mock it.
Would I find something to mock if I read Wiernik? I'll see if he's on Mattogno's list.
He is not on Mattogno's list, which is, if you had read any of it, is titled "Treblinka in Orthodox ‘Holocaust’ Literature". He is referenced by Mattogno, but better if you read Wiernik's book which is online.
I missed this post by you for the obvious reasons I've told you about. Always your loss when I do.

But I found it and it appears that you are saying that Mattogno mentions Wiernik. If so then I'll try to search out what Mattogno says about Wiernik and get back to you. If Wiernik is a straight shooter and Mattogno tries to discredit him wrongly then I'll definitely bring that to your attention for your comments. But if Wiernik blows it then it's not going to be worth my time to read him as representative of an H.P.'ers best.

montgomery
BANNED
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 4:30 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by montgomery » Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:59 pm

Well, that didn't take very long!
Yankiel Wiernik, a survivor of Treblinka who saw the cremation process, wrote that the “. . . bodies of women burned more easily than those of men. Accordingly, the bodies of women were used for kindling the fire.”[1] The self-named “Denierbud,” an American Holocaust denier and YouTube video maker, cites this passage in Wiernik’s memoirs to assert something different than what Wiernik actually said. Denierbud claims that Wiernik said that the bodies of women burned on their own “like wood.” Denierbud then claims that this was impossible. How does he know? He cites the results of his own experiment cremating a single leg of lamb over a beach bonfire.[2]
Any comments on this anybody?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26360
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:04 pm

Yes. It appears that you are too lazy to read Wiernik's testimony. And most of us have read the HDOT material. Still stalling Hans, I see.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

montgomery
BANNED
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 4:30 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by montgomery » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:16 pm

What are you comments on this:
Yankiel Wiernik, a survivor of Treblinka who saw the cremation process, wrote that the “. . . bodies of women burned more easily than those of men. Accordingly, the bodies of women were used for kindling the fire.”[1] The self-named “Denierbud,” an American Holocaust denier and YouTube video maker, cites this passage in Wiernik’s memoirs to assert something different than what Wiernik actually said. Denierbud claims that Wiernik said that the bodies of women burned on their own “like wood.” Denierbud then claims that this was impossible. How does he know? He cites the results of his own experiment cremating a single leg of lamb over a beach bonfire.[2]
Not worthy of you comments?
You would rather not talk about Wiernik?
You can stand with Wiernik and what he's said?
Other?

I'll be answering Hans when he gets back, providing he is the good guy you claim him to be. If he's another eggs then it won't take long to figure that out.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27466
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Location: sometimes

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by scrmbldggs » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:17 pm

montgomery wrote:What are you comments on this:
Yankiel Wiernik, a survivor of Treblinka who saw the cremation process, wrote that the “. . . bodies of women burned more easily than those of men. Accordingly, the bodies of women were used for kindling the fire.”[1] The self-named “Denierbud,” an American Holocaust denier and YouTube video maker, cites this passage in Wiernik’s memoirs to assert something different than what Wiernik actually said. Denierbud claims that Wiernik said that the bodies of women burned on their own “like wood.” Denierbud then claims that this was impossible. How does he know? He cites the results of his own experiment cremating a single leg of lamb over a beach bonfire.[2]
Not worthy of you comments?
You would rather not talk about Wiernik?
You can stand with Wiernik and what he's said?
Other?

I'll be answering Hans when he gets back, providing he is the good guy you claim him to be. If he's another eggs then it won't take long to figure that out.
You're forgetting those citations again, dear. I thought Pyrrho asked you to do better with such.
Last edited by scrmbldggs on Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26360
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:19 pm

montgomery wrote:What are you comments on this:
Yankiel Wiernik, a survivor of Treblinka who saw the cremation process, wrote that the “. . . bodies of women burned more easily than those of men. Accordingly, the bodies of women were used for kindling the fire.”[1] The self-named “Denierbud,” an American Holocaust denier and YouTube video maker, cites this passage in Wiernik’s memoirs to assert something different than what Wiernik actually said. Denierbud claims that Wiernik said that the bodies of women burned on their own “like wood.” Denierbud then claims that this was impossible. How does he know? He cites the results of his own experiment cremating a single leg of lamb over a beach bonfire.[2]
Not worthy of you comments?
You would rather not talk about Wiernik?
You can stand with Wiernik and what he's said?
Other?
Jesus Christ, montgomery. You asked if anybody had comments on your quoting HDOT, without linking to your source, and your apparent laziness in not reading the primary source. I commented.
montgomery wrote:I'll be answering Hans when he gets back, providing he is the good guy you claim him to be. If he's another eggs then it won't take long to figure that out.
Gee, forums don't work that way. You can answer Hans right now, as you could have yesterday. Anyone who's not a craven whiny little coward would. I think everyone here knows what this makes you.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3073
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Nessie » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:20 pm

montgomery wrote:......

No, I haven't read his book. And I gather that you don't like any of his sources.
No, it is how he interprets the source which is the problem.
Is that because he hasn't talked to any eye witnesses? So let's get on with it and you refer me to your favorite eye witness account. If you don't accept any of Mattogno's then it's going to have to be first hand too. That probably means an author though, or a self-proclaimed historian, or any of the other titles you tag on to Mattogno's witnesses?

I have a completely open mind and I'm ready to read your witness's evidence.
I have already suggested a primary eye witness account and what his book is called. Do you need me to locate it for you on the internet?
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3073
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Nessie » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:22 pm

scrmbldggs wrote:....
Am wondering about "c - Lukaszkiewicz, judge, not a witness at an AR camp", since he wasn't a witness at an active AR camp, but surveyed the flattened but quite burst open TII, IIRC, in 1945?
After those who were actually there, I think he is the next most important witness.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

montgomery
BANNED
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 4:30 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by montgomery » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:23 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
montgomery wrote:What are you comments on this:
Yankiel Wiernik, a survivor of Treblinka who saw the cremation process, wrote that the “. . . bodies of women burned more easily than those of men. Accordingly, the bodies of women were used for kindling the fire.”[1] The self-named “Denierbud,” an American Holocaust denier and YouTube video maker, cites this passage in Wiernik’s memoirs to assert something different than what Wiernik actually said. Denierbud claims that Wiernik said that the bodies of women burned on their own “like wood.” Denierbud then claims that this was impossible. How does he know? He cites the results of his own experiment cremating a single leg of lamb over a beach bonfire.[2]
Not worthy of you comments?
You would rather not talk about Wiernik?
You can stand with Wiernik and what he's said?
Other?
Jesus Christ, montgomery. You asked if anybody had comments on your quoting HDOT, without linking to your source, and your apparent laziness in not reading the primary source. I commented.
montgomery wrote:I'll be answering Hans when he gets back, providing he is the good guy you claim him to be. If he's another eggs then it won't take long to figure that out.
Gee, forums don't work that way. You can answer Hans right now, as you could have yesterday. Anyone who's not a craven whiny little coward would. I think everyone here knows what this makes you.
Be patient on my answering Hans. We're going to do this my way. In the meantime, are you going to answer my questions on Wiernik or run for cover? I've given you the choice of 'other' so lets get on with it. Can you stand with Wiernik or are you going to reject him?

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3073
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Nessie » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:23 pm

montgomery wrote:
Nessie wrote:
montgomery wrote:
Darren Wilshak wrote:Dunno why you bother, if he reads Wiernik, he'll just come back and mock it.
Would I find something to mock if I read Wiernik? I'll see if he's on Mattogno's list.
He is not on Mattogno's list, which is, if you had read any of it, is titled "Treblinka in Orthodox ‘Holocaust’ Literature". He is referenced by Mattogno, but better if you read Wiernik's book which is online.
I missed this post by you for the obvious reasons I've told you about. Always your loss when I do.

But I found it and it appears that you are saying that Mattogno mentions Wiernik. If so then I'll try to search out what Mattogno says about Wiernik and get back to you. If Wiernik is a straight shooter and Mattogno tries to discredit him wrongly then I'll definitely bring that to your attention for your comments. But if Wiernik blows it then it's not going to be worth my time to read him as representative of an H.P.'ers best.
I think you should come to your own conclusions and not blindly follow a biased source. Just read Wiernik's book.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26360
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:27 pm

montgomery wrote:Be patient on my answering Hans. We're going to do this my way. In the meantime, are you going to answer my questions on Wiernik or run for cover? I've given you the choice of 'other' so lets get on with it. Can you stand with Wiernik or are you going to reject him?
unfinished business first ... and the first unfinished business, since you clearly won't answer what I asked you about Treblinka witnesses, is Hans' request ... and in this way you can actually read Wiernik ...
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

montgomery
BANNED
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 4:30 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by montgomery » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:28 pm

Nessie wrote:
montgomery wrote:
Nessie wrote:
montgomery wrote:
Darren Wilshak wrote:Dunno why you bother, if he reads Wiernik, he'll just come back and mock it.
Would I find something to mock if I read Wiernik? I'll see if he's on Mattogno's list.
He is not on Mattogno's list, which is, if you had read any of it, is titled "Treblinka in Orthodox ‘Holocaust’ Literature". He is referenced by Mattogno, but better if you read Wiernik's book which is online.
I missed this post by you for the obvious reasons I've told you about. Always your loss when I do.

But I found it and it appears that you are saying that Mattogno mentions Wiernik. If so then I'll try to search out what Mattogno says about Wiernik and get back to you. If Wiernik is a straight shooter and Mattogno tries to discredit him wrongly then I'll definitely bring that to your attention for your comments. But if Wiernik blows it then it's not going to be worth my time to read him as representative of an H.P.'ers best.
I think you should come to your own conclusions and not blindly follow a biased source. Just read Wiernik's book.
Nope, doesn't work that way Nessie. First of all, I don't know yet if Wiernik is accepted as being the gospel. And second, I don't know if you H.P.'ers accept Wiernik. And thirdly, I've already found some questionable testimony that appears to have come from Wiernik that might make it a waste of my time.

So I'm putting that to you, S.M., and any others who want to answer to it.

And when Hans gets back I'll carry on a discussion with him in the same polite way I do with you.

I think we might be getting close to where the rubber meets the road!

VFX
BANNED
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:36 am

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by VFX » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:29 pm

montgomery wrote:Well, that didn't take very long!
Yankiel Wiernik, a survivor of Treblinka who saw the cremation process, wrote that the “. . . bodies of women burned more easily than those of men. Accordingly, the bodies of women were used for kindling the fire.”[1] The self-named “Denierbud,” an American Holocaust denier and YouTube video maker, cites this passage in Wiernik’s memoirs to assert something different than what Wiernik actually said. Denierbud claims that Wiernik said that the bodies of women burned on their own “like wood.” Denierbud then claims that this was impossible. How does he know? He cites the results of his own experiment cremating a single leg of lamb over a beach bonfire.[2]
Any comments on this anybody?
The moisture within a leg of lamb or a human body is mainly contained within the cells. The average weight of a human being is 71kg which means that 48kg of water needs to be evaporated before any incineration will start. Water boils at 100 degrees, the internal part of that corpse will not rise above 100C until all of the water is gone. Since it takes two to four hours at temperatures ranging from 1,400 and 2,100 F, or 760 and 1,150 C, the estimated energy required to cremate one body is roughly equal to the amount of fuel required to drive 4,800 miles, or 7,725 kilometers.
It takes the same amount of energy whether the bodies are in a fire pit or an oven. With less than perfect burnings it will take about 25kg of coke per cadavar at oven operating temperatures.
To suggest that water can burn by itself is total nonsense.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27466
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Location: sometimes

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by scrmbldggs » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:32 pm

VFX wrote:The moisture within a leg of lamb or a human body is mainly contained within the cells. The average weight of a human being is 71kg which means that 48kg of water needs to be evaporated before any incineration will start. Water boils at 100 degrees, the internal part of that corpse will not rise above 100C until all of the water is gone. Since it takes two to four hours at temperatures ranging from 1,400 and 2,100 F, or 760 and 1,150 C, the estimated energy required to cremate one body is roughly equal to the amount of fuel required to drive 4,800 miles, or 7,725 kilometers.
It takes the same amount of energy whether the bodies are in a fire pit or an oven. With less than perfect burnings it will take about 25kg of coke per cadavar at oven operating temperatures.
To suggest that water can burn by itself is total nonsense.
Garbage.
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26360
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:36 pm

montgomery wrote:First of all, I don't know yet if Wiernik is accepted as being the gospel.
No single witness is "accepted as being the gospel." Phrasing your comment this way demonstrates an utter lack of familiarity with how historians do research and evaluate and use sources.
montgomery wrote:And second, I don't know if you H.P.'ers accept Wiernik.
No H.P.ers here.
montgomery wrote:And thirdly, I've already found some questionable testimony that appears to have come from Wiernik that might make it a waste of my time.
Why in god's name would questionable points in someone's testimony make it a waste of time?
montgomery wrote:So I'm putting that to you, S.M., and any others who want to answer to it.
What I want is to see the questions you have for Hans.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27466
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Location: sometimes

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by scrmbldggs » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:38 pm

montgomery wrote:...
So I'm putting that to you, S.M., and any others who want to answer to it.

And when Hans gets back I'll carry on a discussion with him in the same polite way I do with you [, Nessie].
...
I won't answer any of the user's careening questions unless and until s/he's sensibly discussed with Hans personally.


On second thought - if at all. These interactions are mind-numbingly boring.
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

montgomery
BANNED
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 4:30 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by montgomery » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:40 pm

scrmbldggs wrote:
VFX wrote:The moisture within a leg of lamb or a human body is mainly contained within the cells. The average weight of a human being is 71kg which means that 48kg of water needs to be evaporated before any incineration will start. Water boils at 100 degrees, the internal part of that corpse will not rise above 100C until all of the water is gone. Since it takes two to four hours at temperatures ranging from 1,400 and 2,100 F, or 760 and 1,150 C, the estimated energy required to cremate one body is roughly equal to the amount of fuel required to drive 4,800 miles, or 7,725 kilometers.
It takes the same amount of energy whether the bodies are in a fire pit or an oven. With less than perfect burnings it will take about 25kg of coke per cadavar at oven operating temperatures.
To suggest that water can burn by itself is total nonsense.
Garbage.
Thanks eggs! FwyW, it's at least a rejection of Wiernik. So with you we won't be referring to him. But then why would anybody expect anything more than that from eggs over easy.

It's getting very distracting to click on your name and find nothing but spam. I really don't like to put anyone on ignore because it's taking a chance of missing something worthwhile. But it's now just got to the point at which it's just too time consuming to bother. There's never anything worth reading eggs, and so I'm just about at that point where I'll have to ignore you. Act accordingly!

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26360
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:41 pm

scrmbldggs wrote:
montgomery wrote:...
So I'm putting that to you, S.M., and any others who want to answer to it.

And when Hans gets back I'll carry on a discussion with him in the same polite way I do with you [, Nessie].
...
I won't answer any of the user's careening questions unless and until s/he's sensibly discussed with Hans personally.


On second thought - if at all. These interactions are mind-numbingly boring.
Agreed. No business with the coward until he deals with Hans. Everything else he posts is just a way of dodging.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

VFX
BANNED
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:36 am

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by VFX » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:41 pm

scrmbldggs wrote:
VFX wrote:The moisture within a leg of lamb or a human body is mainly contained within the cells. The average weight of a human being is 71kg which means that 48kg of water needs to be evaporated before any incineration will start. Water boils at 100 degrees, the internal part of that corpse will not rise above 100C until all of the water is gone. Since it takes two to four hours at temperatures ranging from 1,400 and 2,100 F, or 760 and 1,150 C, the estimated energy required to cremate one body is roughly equal to the amount of fuel required to drive 4,800 miles, or 7,725 kilometers.
It takes the same amount of energy whether the bodies are in a fire pit or an oven. With less than perfect burnings it will take about 25kg of coke per cadavar at oven operating temperatures.
To suggest that water can burn by itself is total nonsense.
Garbage.
Your lack of scientific knowledge is only surpassed by your ignorance of the written language. If you have scientific data then show it otherwise shut up.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26360
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:41 pm

montgomery wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote:
VFX wrote:The moisture within a leg of lamb or a human body is mainly contained within the cells. The average weight of a human being is 71kg which means that 48kg of water needs to be evaporated before any incineration will start. Water boils at 100 degrees, the internal part of that corpse will not rise above 100C until all of the water is gone. Since it takes two to four hours at temperatures ranging from 1,400 and 2,100 F, or 760 and 1,150 C, the estimated energy required to cremate one body is roughly equal to the amount of fuel required to drive 4,800 miles, or 7,725 kilometers.
It takes the same amount of energy whether the bodies are in a fire pit or an oven. With less than perfect burnings it will take about 25kg of coke per cadavar at oven operating temperatures.
To suggest that water can burn by itself is total nonsense.
Garbage.
Thanks eggs! FwyW, it's at least a rejection of Wiernik. So with you we won't be referring to him. But then why would anybody expect anything more than that from eggs over easy.

It's getting very distracting to click on your name and find nothing but spam. I really don't like to put anyone on ignore because it's taking a chance of missing something worthwhile. But it's now just got to the point at which it's just too time consuming to bother. There's never anything worth reading eggs, and so I'm just about at that point where I'll have to ignore you. Act accordingly!
Answer Hans, big boy.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

montgomery
BANNED
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 4:30 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by montgomery » Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:46 pm

Is Hans back? When he gets back he can simply state his request of me. That's the way it's going to be sm.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27466
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Location: sometimes

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by scrmbldggs » Sat Sep 15, 2018 7:07 pm

VFX wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote:
VFX wrote:The moisture within a leg of lamb or a human body is mainly contained within the cells. The average weight of a human being is 71kg which means that 48kg of water needs to be evaporated before any incineration will start. Water boils at 100 degrees, the internal part of that corpse will not rise above 100C until all of the water is gone. Since it takes two to four hours at temperatures ranging from 1,400 and 2,100 F, or 760 and 1,150 C, the estimated energy required to cremate one body is roughly equal to the amount of fuel required to drive 4,800 miles, or 7,725 kilometers.
It takes the same amount of energy whether the bodies are in a fire pit or an oven. With less than perfect burnings it will take about 25kg of coke per cadavar at oven operating temperatures.
To suggest that water can burn by itself is total nonsense.
Garbage.
Your lack of scientific knowledge is only surpassed by your ignorance of the written language. If you have scientific data then show it otherwise shut up.
This subforum is full of relevant discussions and has a search function, use it. You know how it works, right?
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

VFX
BANNED
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:36 am

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by VFX » Sat Sep 15, 2018 7:11 pm

scrmbldggs wrote: This subforum is full of relevant discussions and has a search function, use it. You know how it works, right?
I have the relevant information on cremation. It would seem what is here is garbage. A cremator needs to operate at 760-1150C for 75 minutes per cremation and it's easy to see how much energy is required. In fact, a cremator uses about 285 kiloWatt hours of gas and 15kWh of electricity on average per cremation - roughly the same domestic energy demands as a single person for an entire month.
This is 300 megajoules in comparison to my calculated 84 megajoules per corpse at Auschwitz or elsewhere.
Auschwitz used less than a third of the energy , though would still take about 40 mins, using 25kg of coke as at Gusen.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27466
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Location: sometimes

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by scrmbldggs » Sat Sep 15, 2018 7:29 pm

VFX wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote: This subforum is full of relevant discussions and has a search function, use it. You know how it works, right?
I have the relevant information on cremation. It would seem what is here is garbage. A cremator needs to operate at 760-1150C for 75 minutes per cremation and it's easy to see how much energy is required. In fact, a cremator uses about 285 kiloWatt hours of gas and 15kWh of electricity on average per cremation - roughly the same domestic energy demands as a single person for an entire month.
This is 300 megajoules in comparison to my calculated 84 megajoules per corpse at Auschwitz or elsewhere.
Auschwitz used less than a third of the energy , though would still take about 40 mins, using 25kg of coke as at Gusen.
Spoiler:
Image
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3073
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Nessie » Sat Sep 15, 2018 8:56 pm

montgomery wrote:
Nessie wrote:......
I think you should come to your own conclusions and not blindly follow a biased source. Just read Wiernik's book.
Nope, doesn't work that way Nessie. ....
You have just admitted that you are incapable of independent thought.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3073
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Nessie » Sat Sep 15, 2018 8:59 pm

VFX wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote:
VFX wrote:The moisture within a leg of lamb or a human body is mainly contained within the cells. The average weight of a human being is 71kg which means that 48kg of water needs to be evaporated before any incineration will start. Water boils at 100 degrees, the internal part of that corpse will not rise above 100C until all of the water is gone. Since it takes two to four hours at temperatures ranging from 1,400 and 2,100 F, or 760 and 1,150 C, the estimated energy required to cremate one body is roughly equal to the amount of fuel required to drive 4,800 miles, or 7,725 kilometers.
It takes the same amount of energy whether the bodies are in a fire pit or an oven. With less than perfect burnings it will take about 25kg of coke per cadavar at oven operating temperatures.
To suggest that water can burn by itself is total nonsense.
Garbage.
Your lack of scientific knowledge is only surpassed by your ignorance of the written language. If you have scientific data then show it otherwise shut up.
There is no such data. No one has tried to accurately replicate the mass cremation of hundreds of bodies at a time, as reported at the AR camps and the pyres as described. Therefore, all you have is speculation and an argument from ignorance and incredulity, which is not scientific at all.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

montgomery
BANNED
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 4:30 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by montgomery » Sat Sep 15, 2018 10:31 pm

VFX wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote: This subforum is full of relevant discussions and has a search function, use it. You know how it works, right?
I have the relevant information on cremation. It would seem what is here is garbage. A cremator needs to operate at 760-1150C for 75 minutes per cremation and it's easy to see how much energy is required. In fact, a cremator uses about 285 kiloWatt hours of gas and 15kWh of electricity on average per cremation - roughly the same domestic energy demands as a single person for an entire month.
This is 300 megajoules in comparison to my calculated 84 megajoules per corpse at Auschwitz or elsewhere.
Auschwitz used less than a third of the energy , though would still take about 40 mins, using 25kg of coke as at Gusen.
I can vouch for your figures. And I think it's not likely that anybody is going to challenge them. However, that's what I'm here for.

But I think that somebody needs to try because we're left sitting with information that can't just be shrugged off.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27466
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Location: sometimes

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by scrmbldggs » Sat Sep 15, 2018 10:38 pm

Why yes, it can.
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26360
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Sep 16, 2018 6:51 am

Nessie wrote:
montgomery wrote:
Nessie wrote:.....

Take one eye witness and quote them where you think they are bogus.
........
I have provided a link in the OP of this thread and in that there is a list of witnesses being presented. If you consider any of those witnesses to be credible then name him or them. If you consider any of them to be bogus then name him or them. That has nothing to do with whether or not you like Mattogno.

I've put the same question to the book-kid so we'll see how he handles it too.

Fwiw, I have to insist that any witness that makes up tall tales is not to be considered credible and must be discarded. I'm not talking about small errors in the telling, I'm talking about stuff on the scale of the lobster-like steaming whopper.
The list of witnesses is;

a - Grossman, journalist, not a witness at an AR camp
b - Auerbach, writer, not a witness at an AR camp
c - Lukaszkiewicz, judge, not a witness at an AR camp
d - Blumental, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
e - Mushat, soldier and lawyer, not a witness at an AR camp
f - Steiner, novelist, not a witness at an AR camp
g - Marczewska & Waźniewski, historians, not witnesses at an AR camp
h - Gray, claimed to have escape Treblinka, dismissed as a hoaxer
i - Sereny, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
j - Wojtczak, author, not a not witness at an AR camp
k - Rückerl, German prosecutor, not a witness at an AR camp
l - Donat, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
m - Polish Commission
n - collective of authors
o - Lanzmann, film maker, not a witness at an AR camp
p - Arad, historian, not a witness at an AR camp
q - Czarkowski, a prisoner!!!! But at TI labour camp, not TII AR camp.
r - Gumkowski and Rutkowski, historians, not witnesses at an AR camp
s - Benz, German author, not a witness at an AR camp
t - Glazar, an eye witness who was at TII!!!!
u - Pressac, historian, not a witness at an AR camp

You have clearly not made any effort at all to read the book. Now, go find an eye witness and we can discuss them.
Which is evidence you are not a sceptic, you are a denier.
That proclamation or accusation is not in character for you, but it does indicate that you are slipping into the same mold as the others. If that's your choice then I will deal with you accordingly. I suggest you come back to the high road with me.
No, it is because you are evidenced to be a denier by your own words and you show no genuine scepticism.
Nessie, did Montgomery ever deal with his confusion about what a witness is?

Here’s a link replying to VFX’s “no evidence” illiteracy: viewtopic.php?f=39&t=29687&start=160#p662386 re AR; it focuses on Treblinka and belongs in this thread.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3073
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Nessie » Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:31 am

No, Monty, who does not know what a witness is, is now feigning expertise about cremation rates so as to vouch for figures VFX has copied.

There is an incredible arrogance amongst the deniers whereby they think they can cast doubt on what multiple witnesses report happened and what there is documentary and physical evidence for. Multiple corroborating pieces of evidence vs a biased opinion not backed by any experimentation nor expertise.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

VFX
BANNED
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:36 am

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by VFX » Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:40 am

At the end of the day it is what the working man thinks of this hoax that counts and it is this evidence that must be given to them. I am not casting doubt, I am saying it is almost a complete fabrication from people who had the power due to Military rule of law to change documents, perceptions, protocols or anything else at their disposal. War Governments have total dictatorial powers. You need to show the professional Cremation people how wrong they are kelpie. Please stop using your discredited witnesses etc. In the thread you started on documents, there is nothing sufficient to count as hard evidence that cannot be explained by how normal societies work.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26360
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:54 am

VFX wrote:At the end of the day it is what the working man thinks of this hoax that counts and it is this evidence that must be given to them.
That's just basically reducing the topic to agit-prop. It is nice to see you acknowledge that that's what you're about, I will admit. Agit-prop, however is an arena in which, you should be aware, your side has been losing - and whining about the losses - for decades. At the end of the day, however, it is not about agit-prop but about evidence and sources and an evidence-based narrative about what happened.
VFX wrote:I am not casting doubt, I am saying it is almost a complete fabrication from people who had the power due to Military rule of law to change documents, perceptions, protocols or anything else at their disposal. War Governments have total dictatorial powers.
You've now taken on the addition burden, which you will not doubt dodge and try weaseling out of, to prove this vast conspiracy.
VFX wrote: there is nothing sufficient to count as hard evidence that cannot be explained by how normal societies work.
So says the person still dodging discussion of witnesses, after three or four days, to events at Treblinka. No, sorry, Nazi-boy, we don't go by what you assert, no matter how loudly and often. Nor do scholars, who couldn't care less about your agit-prop, frustration, or Nazi dreams.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

VFX
BANNED
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:36 am

Re: The Action Reinhard Camps

Post by VFX » Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:02 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
VFX wrote:At the end of the day it is what the working man thinks of this hoax that counts and it is this evidence that must be given to them.
That's just basically reducing the topic to agit-prop. It is nice to see you acknowledge that that's what you're about, I will admit. Agit-prop, however is an arena in which, you should be aware, your side has been losing - and whining about the losses - for decades. At the end of the day, however, it is not about agit-prop but about evidence and sources and an evidence-based narrative about what happened.
VFX wrote:I am not casting doubt, I am saying it is almost a complete fabrication from people who had the power due to Military rule of law to change documents, perceptions, protocols or anything else at their disposal. War Governments have total dictatorial powers.
You've now taken on the addition burden, which you will not doubt dodge and try weaseling out of, to prove this vast conspiracy.
VFX wrote: there is nothing sufficient to count as hard evidence that cannot be explained by how normal societies work.
So says the person still dodging discussion of witnesses, after three or four days, to events at Treblinka. No, sorry, Nazi-boy, we don't go by what you assert, no matter how loudly and often. Nor do scholars, who couldn't care less about your agit-prop, frustration, or Nazi dreams.
Well many governments are squirming at the moment. The lies of the past were attempted this year alone and shown to be fabrications. Before the internet the crap on Douma and the Skripals would be believed: it is safe to assume the same lack of integrity and arrogance was used 70 or so years ago.