Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
joachim neander
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 3:39 pm

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby joachim neander » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Aug 30, 2010 9:39 am)

Kobus wrote:
joachim neander wrote:1) The body of an average, not totally emaciated, human being has enough chemical energy to even burn without supply from outside. See e.g. the cases of so-called "spontaneous combustion." .


Please mr. Neander, could your give some more information on this wonderful phenomenon of 'spontaneous combustion', and tell of some cases that you think are believable.
http://www.skepdic.com/shc.html

If the combustion was indeed "spontaneous" or not, how it could have happened or not, it still disputed, and I too don't know more than that which is told in the skeptic article you linked to. What cannot be disputed, however, is the fact documented in police protocols that a human body was able to burn without a significant energy (heat) supply from outside, i.e. that the internal chemical energy of an average human being is sufficient to maintain burning, once burning has started and loss of heat is prevented. This is the case in continuous corpse-burning, as proposed by the crematoria engineers for Birkenau (and as done, according to the witnesses).

grenadier
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 9:07 am

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby grenadier » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Aug 30, 2010 10:28 am)

Oh, Mr.Neander, spare us man! I remember once Neander was discussing open air cremations at rodoh and filled us with his immense knowledge of how green wood - as opposed to fire wood - produces excellent heat and could have been used to destroy the exhumed bodies all the same with great results. What a bunch of nonsense. :shock:

What about Hans, the old hand from rodoh, just regurgitating the same old and debunked stuff from Van Pelt, yawwnnn.
Carolyn is right, it does get boooring.

People, keep an eye out for the translation of Mattognos massive recent work re Auschwitz 'Le camere a gas di Auschwitz. Studio storico-tecnico sugli “indizi criminali” di Jean-Claude Pressac e sulla “convergenza di prove” di Robert Jan van Pelt'. I think it's supposed to come out in English at the end of 2010, I'll try to confirm this. It provides even more evidence refuting - overkill, i know - the hoaxters. Visit this link and scroll down for the table of contents to learn more(in English) http://www.revblog.codoh.com/2010/01/a- ... /#more-672

ps
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 174
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 11:29 am

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby ps » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:48 pm)

joachim neander wrote:ps said:
Herr Neander, stimmen Sie meinen Ausführungen zu und können wir gemeinsam ein Kommunique verfassen, in welchem dieser endgültige Beweis der Welt bekannt gemacht werden kann?

Sorry, I cannot follow your temperature-based calculations. Maybe you're right, maybe not, I cannot decide on it. I'm afraid, however, that there is an error in them. Otherwise I could not explain myself why the producers of Zyklon-B issued serious warnings about self-poisoning for those who had to handle the product at room temperature.


Automatic. transl.


You can not follow the calculation, but I suppose at a mistake? Perhaps you can find a professional with high school in your ranks, which is a significant error. I'm sure that there is no mistake!

Your concerns about the manufacturer are logically unfounded, as the cyclone was of course introduced at ambient temperature in the gas chamber roof into the Kula-tank. Otherwise, the gassings were not able to take place. You yourself have said it time and again. And now you already want to dispute the filling of the Zyklon B already? Has not someone made even a gas mask? So that you were going to deny the Holocaust all over, Mr. Neander!

This point should therefore be done, if you want to build our little communique not directly on this undeniable argument. Anyway, I'm not interested in a denial. I am only interested in the "1500 ° C" gas chamber temperatures. This must necessarily experience the world. At last we have found clear evidence that the cyclone gassings were possible after all.

At room temperature, namely gassings were not possible and that would have refuted the Holocaust perfect.


If you do not understand the simple statement, I can also open an extra topic, where I will introduce you to the free transfer of heat to a low level. Finally, the subject of the Holocaust is absolutely crucial.

You may be able to catch up in the meantime, the confirmation of some Jews that they are still 1000 ° C gas temperature chamber can hold out naked 30 minutes as well before 1945. Of course, without any Zyklon B, of course. We want to eventually kill any Jews. A documented experiment had to be very helpful. One could perhaps show at YT? Otherwise the world will probably not want to believe.

This means that the whole Holocaust be proved!


------------------


Sie können nicht der Berechnung folgen, aber vermuten bei mir einen Fehler? Vielleicht finden Sie einen Fachmann mit Abitur in Ihren Reihen, welcher einen nennenswerten Fehler findet. Ich bin mir aber sicher, daß es keinen Fehler gibt!

Ihre Bedenken wegen des Herstellers sind logisch unbegründet, da natürlich das Zyklon bei Umgebungstemperatur auf dem Gaskammerdach in den Kulabehälter eingefüllt wurde. Ansonsten hätten die Vergasungen gar nicht stattfinden können. Sie selbst haben das doch immer wieder behauptet. Und nun wollen Sie bereits das Einfüllen des Zyklon B bereits bestreiten? Hat das nicht jemand sogar mit Gasmaske gemacht? Damit würden Sie ja den ganzen Holocaust leugnen, Herr Neander!

Dieser Punkt dürfte also erledigt sein, falls Sie unser kleines Kommunique nicht direkt auf dieses leugnende Argument aufbauen wollen. Ich bin übrigens gar nicht an einer Leugnung interessiert. Ich bin nur an den "1500°C" Gaskammertemperaturen interessiert. Das muß die Welt unbedingt erfahren. Endlich haben wir einen eindeutigen Beweis gefunden, daß die Zyklonvergasungen doch möglich waren.

Bei Raumtemperatur waren Vergasungen nämlich nicht möglich und das hätte den Holocaust vollkommen widerlegt.


Wenn Sie die einfache Rechnung nicht verstehen, kann ich auch ein extra Thema eröffnen, wo ich Sie kostenlos in die Wärmeübertragung auf tiefem Niveau einführen werde. Schließlich ist dieses Thema für den Holocaust absolut entscheidend.

Sie können vielleicht in der Zwischenzeit die Bestätigung von einigen Juden einholen, daß sie auch heute noch 1000°C Gaskammertemperatur nackt 30 Minuten durchhalten können so wie auch vor 1945. Natürlich ohne jegliches Zyklon B, versteht sich. Wir wollen schließlich keine Juden töten. Ein dokumentiertes Experiment wäre auf jeden Fall sehr hilfreich. Man könnte es vielleicht bei YT zeigen? Ansonsten wird das die Welt wahrscheinlich nicht glauben wollen.

Damit kann der ganze Holocaust bewiesen werden!

Hans
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 178
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 2:44 am

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby Hans » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:54 pm)

The Warden wrote:If the cremations didn't need more heat for multiple burns (I suppose we're taking the word of the poster now?), anyone who has ever had a large group of people over on a holiday can tell you it takes a lot longer to cook two roasts in the oven than one. Bodies are no different. Either multiple burns need more heat to match the times claimed by Prufer (and only Prufer), or they need more time. You can't walk on both sides of the street.


Nobody is disputing that it needs additional heat. The point is that the additional heat required for the evaporation of the water was provided by the combustion of the fat of previous load of corpses. This requires that new corpses are introduced into the oven before the main cremation of the corpses already in the oven is finished, so that there is an overlap of the phases where heat is absorbed and where it is produced by the corpses. It is no miracle that in Auschwitz they achieved those high cremation rates and low coke consumption, it is just the result of intelligent loading of the muffles.

Why is it that Sonderkommandos have testified that they had to push in fresh corpses every 20 or 30 min? It is not because after this time the previous load was fully incinerated. At first glance one might think this was the case, but this was indeed impossible under those circumstances. The reason is that the previous load was now releasing it's energy, which contributed to remove the water from the fresh load.

The Warden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: 'Murica!

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby The Warden » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:24 pm)

Hans, how many cremations do you claim were performed during the existence of Auschwitz?
Why the Holocaust Industry exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A81P6YGw_c

The Warden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: 'Murica!

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby The Warden » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:36 pm)

joachim neander wrote:Who should make a photograph of ash-dumping into the river? For what purpose? And even if someone would have done it (such as the prisoner who took the pictures of open-air corpse burning at Birkenau) - would it not be suspect of forgery?


Every other aspect of the camp was captured on film from the orchestra to the swimming pool to the delousing chambers to the burning of clothing.

Don't you find it a little odd that the only elements of the major claim of the Exaggerationists (gas chambers and the resulting disposal claims) always seem to be missing? No photos of an operational gas chamber. No photos of jews being shoved into chambers. No photos of bodies being hauled out of chambers. No photos of bodies piled up in chambers. No photos of bodies piled up in morgues before cremation. No photos of the ash being hauled away. No photos of the ash being buried or dumped.

Of course it would be suspected of forgery if one was actually presented. Though we'll never know for sure.
For a lark, post a photo showing any one of these items.

Surely the Germans would've taken them to show the other prisoners to "motivate" them.
Or did they throw the photos in the river too?
Why the Holocaust Industry exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A81P6YGw_c

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9973
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby Hannover » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:44 pm)

Sorry Hans and Joachim Neander, you're again dealing in garbage in, garbage out. The entire gassing claim is laughable, and you cannot defend it or demonstrate to us how it worked, yet you absurdly attempt to defend the impossible cremations claim as advanced by the 'holocaust' Industry while not being able to prove your mythical 'gas chambers', the alleged murder weapon.
Here are some quotes from a few of my previous posts, which you ignore.
You support the likes of Henryk Tauber:
Henryk Tauber, an alleged crematorium worker is considered vital to the standard 'holocaust' story. Here are a few of his assertions:

- Tauber testified to the Soviet Commission (Nuremberg document USSR-008) of 1945 that 10,000-12,000 per day were cremated in the ovens of Auschwitz-Birkenau. An utter impossibility given the crematoria at Auschwitz/Birkenau.

- Tauber stated that a body could be cremated in 7-9 minutes, an impossibility today, let alone with 1940s technology.

- Tauber testified to skimming off boiling human fat from open air cremations. Impossible, the fat would have ignited.

- Tauber testified to reservoirs filled with this human fat that flowed from the burning corpses. (same as above)

- Tauber testified that he inserted & cremated 8 bodies at once, in one oven, in order to signal Allied aircraft with smoke . Physically impossible.

- Tauber stated:
"Ober Capo August explained to us that, according to the calculations and plans for this crematorium, 5 to 7 minutes was allowed to burn one corpse in a muffle." A lie, there were no "calculations and plans" in the records which would have reflected this.

As for SS Prufer,(who was the builder of the typhus abatement ovens at Auschwitz which were heavily used during the well known huge epidemics), you avoid what he really said:
Question: How many corpses would be cremated per hour in a crematorium in Auschwitz?
Answer: In a crematorium that had five ovens and fifteen muffles, one cremated fifteen corpses in an hour.

Also from SS Prufer:
I spoke about the enormous strain on the overused furnaces. I told Chief Engineer Sander: I am worried whether the furnaces can stand the excessive usage. In my presence two cadavers were pushed into one muffle instead of one cadaver. The furnaces could not stand the strain.

Hans, Joachim, you then avoid:
There was a total 52 muffles of Auschwitz, never used simultaneously.

- 38 is the most that were ever online simultaneously.

- The 6 at Auschwitz I were taken out of action as soon as the new ones at Birkenau came online. These were in turn liable to long periods of breakdowns and even idleness.

- If there was a program of mass extermination, the desperate need for cremation capacity is obvious. Why then put six muffles out of action?
- In August 1942, at the main camp, 9000 prisoners died. According to Believer & profiteer John Zimmerman, Auschwitz I would have had a cremation capacity of about 4,680 per month (26 per muffle daily on average, as at Gusen).
So the cremation capacity was about half of what it needed to be during the typhus epidemic.
At the same time, the camp was planned to hold an eventual inmate population of 200,000 (a seven-fold increase from August 1942, at less than 30,000).
Therefore, in August 1942, the very month that 'Auschwitz expert' van Pelt claims the homicidal adaptation of the crematoria was initiated, the Auschwitz Bauleitung authorities should have requested a crematoria construction program which should have produced capacities almost 14 times greater than the 6 muffles of Auschwitz I at the time. In 1943, when the camp population reached about 140,000, the number of muffles was just over 6 times greater than August 1942, because Crematorium IV broke down and was not repaired (mothballed) and Crematorium I at the main camp was converted into an air-raid shelter. There were 38 muffles.

- Why use exactly the same cremation techniques as in normal concentration camps, installing coke-fired ovens, even by the thirties a crude and primitive solution? More efficient gas-fired and electrical crematoria had by this time already been used for years in many countries, including my own. For the purpose the SS should naturally have sought out the most efficient answer they were able to find.

- If the extermination myth was true, the SS must from the start have had some idea of how many victims were to be gassed and burned. It's a simple matter of math, and then naturally founded on estimates made by the constructors, in this case Topf & Söhne. Why then not build the installations required. It doesn't make sense.

- There are no human remains to support the storyline.

and:
The Auschwitz ‘witnesses’ Dov Paisikovic, states that the cremation of one body took about four minutes!
-Léon Poliakov, Auschwitz, René Julliard, Paris 1964, p. 159 ff.

and:
There is a genuine, original document from the Nürnberg trials.
Interesting reading. It stated that 840,000 Russian POW's where killed in Sachenhausen and then the Germans cremated them in 4 portable ovens.
calculation on the numbers:
Experts in the business say it takes at least 1.5 hour to cremate one body today. Then it's 840,000 bodies x 1.5 hour =1,260,000 hours / 24 hours = 52,200 days / 365 days = 143.8 years / 4 ovens = 35.95 years, if the Germans where running it 24 hours per day. And people wonder why there's questions about the so called 'holocau$t'!!
Ref: IMT VII page 586

Now Hans, Joachim, what was that you were saying about 'gas chambers'?

This is too easy.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

joachim neander
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 3:39 pm

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby joachim neander » 9 years 5 months ago (Wed Sep 01, 2010 3:55 pm)

Hannover asked:
Now Hans, Joachim, what was that you were saying about 'gas chambers'?

As far as I am concerned: I did not say anything about gas chambers at this thread. Reading your post, I could return your GIGO argument, but I will not do so, I dislike ad hominem attacks.

But may I humbly ask you something? "How do you explain the fact that the local Poles, after the Germans had left Auschwitz, sifted the mounds of crematorium ashes that were still there, for gold from dentures, and this with considerable success? Where, in your opinion, did the ashes come from?"

The Warden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: 'Murica!

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby The Warden » 9 years 5 months ago (Wed Sep 01, 2010 4:26 pm)

No one denies cremations occurred. The idea that Poles were "sifting through piles to find gold" doesn't prove anything more than the fact that cremations occurred. It doesn't establish amounts, capacities, or even how the people died. Do you have some sort of dimensions on these piles? And what of the ashes being dumped in rivers and around farmland? Make up your mind. The Exaggerationist's story is Swiss cheese.
Why the Holocaust Industry exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A81P6YGw_c

User avatar
Älghuvud
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:58 am

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby Älghuvud » 9 years 5 months ago (Thu Sep 02, 2010 3:07 am)

I suggest that Hans and "joachim neander" should be permanently banned from this forum. They are constantly making abuse of the freedom of speech that is being granted here. Moreover they are now violating the rules of this forum by not sticking to the topic. Remember, the original subject was "Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz". So, what are they talking about ashes, fertilizers and gold denture?
"They can't prove I wrote it." said the Knave, "There's no name at the end."
"That only makes the matter worse." said the King, "You must have meant some mischief, or else you'd have signed like an honest man."

User avatar
Occam's Razor
Member
Member
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:45 pm

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby Occam's Razor » 9 years 5 months ago (Thu Sep 02, 2010 5:48 am)

Älghuvud wrote:
I suggest that Hans and "joachim neander" should be permanently banned from this forum. They are constantly making abuse of the freedom of speech that is being granted here. Moreover they are now violating the rules of this forum by not sticking to the topic. Remember, the original subject was "Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz". So, what are they talking about ashes, fertilizers and gold denture?



The best way to learn s.th. about a topic is to debate it with someone who disagrees with you. Without my discussions with believers on various websites I wouldn't know 1 percent of what I know about holocaust revisionism. It forces you to find good arguments and to read the relevant literature.
Without forum members like Hans or Mr. Neander the forum would have less members and less discussion. This forum would be boring. Who wants to debate a topic if everyone agrees? I don't.

Moreover they are now violating the rules of this forum by not sticking to the topic.


Most forum members do that, because the forum rules are very strict. Many have complained that they are too strict. They make a heated debate with believers almost impossible. Nobody prevents you from opening new threads for every single argument.

Remember, the original subject was "Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz".


According to the forum rules a new thread would have have to be created with every new argument. Unfortunately nobody does that. And that was to be expected.

No, I'm strongly against banning anyone. We can defend our beliefs with science and logic. We wouldn't be any better than those who throw others with whom they disagree in jail. It's believers who have to resort to such tactics. It's one of the best arguments against believers, their arguments are so ridiculous they have to resort to prison cells to defend their opinion. And besides that, Mr Neander and Hans are important contributors to this forum, even if they come to weird conclusions. Mr. Neander's translation skills are very helpful. And we need people like them to find flaws in our arguments, to get our arguments straight. There are enough internet revisionists who spread all kind of nonsense, simply because they are too lazy to read Mattogno, Rudolf, Butz, etc. People like Hans and Mr. Neander force us to learn and to become better.

nathan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:14 am

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby nathan » 9 years 5 months ago (Thu Sep 02, 2010 7:24 am)

In his dispute with Lohengrin, Hans seemed willing to defend the following argument from Pelt, which he quotes:
If we now fast forward to February 1943 -- a time that Birkenau was fully committed to play its central role in the Holocaust -- we see that the numbers have changed considerably. In February 1943 the projected inmate population of Auschwitz was 30,000, and of Birkenau 140,000, but the total incineration capacity which was by that time supposed to be available was 75 units [=52 muffles]. This brings the unit-per-inmate ratio to 1 : 2267. This means that, in comparison with Dachau or Buchenwald, Auschwitz has double the incineration capacity.



Pelt’s “unit” standardised differences in capacity between muffles; the normalisation “per inmate” standardises for differences in population between camps.

That Camp A had more than double the cremation capacity per inmate as camp B need not be strange, however. Its expected death rate might be more than twice as high.

The key calculation for precautionary planners would to predicted maximum number of daily deaths - daily, because diseased corpses would have to be burned at once. This calculation would depend not only on the predicted maximum population but on the predicted maximum daily death rate. Crematories are for dead bodies, not living populations. The unspoken presumption of Pelt’s calculations is that differential death rates would not matter. For him, an early letter concerning Buchenwald had established that one modern muffle would anywhere be appropriate to a population of about 8,000. For a projected population of 170, 000 would require about 22 muffles. Instead we find it had planned 52. More than double!

This reasoning only makes sense if differential death rates had no significance for planning. I find this extraordinary. Throughout the planning years 1942 and 1943 the monthly death rates in the eastern camps were up to ten times greater than the death rates in the western camps. In the second half of 42 Auschwitz alone accounted no less than half the ordinary deaths in the entire camp system. Hans has to explain why this would not have influenced the planners.

Hans also has to persuade us that that the six modern muffles additionally installed in Buchenwald in late 1942 had a smaller individual capacity as those installed in Birkenau in early 1943. I had thought they were on the same one-furnace-to-three muffle model.

Like Pelt we can “fastforward” to August 1943, for which we happen to have actual monthly data. Exam question: Camp A has four times the population of Camp B and five times its death rate. Camp B has (at least) six muffles. How many operating muffles has Camp B? Assume constant returns to scale.

Of course this is not a real-world question. We cannot assume linearity, nor safely extrapolate from one month’s data. More importantly, our concern is with planned and projected magnitudes, not the actualised ones. We all know that Auschwitz did not have 120 operating muffles. Nevertheless the burden of argument would be to explain why it had so few as 46.

(For the sake of argument I am accepting Pelt’s assumptions: that the projected maximum population for Auschwitz I and II was never greater than 170,000; that he had some reason not to mention Auschwitz III; that the planners originally intended permanent use for six muffles in the base camp. Some will inveigh against these assumptions, but I would like Hans to have a chance to defend the conclusions that Pelt has derived from them.



I am on Lohengrin’s side in this argument, but it is he, if anyone, who has gone off-topic. Expel everyone who goes off-topic and none of us would be here. Hans and Neander are among the most interesting contributors to this forum, precisely because they give us something to disagree with. They are both polite and well informed. And they not chant a party line.

nathan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:14 am

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby nathan » 9 years 5 months ago (Thu Sep 02, 2010 7:34 am)

I seem unable to notice my typos until after I have submitted them. My "exam question" should of course have been:

Exam question: Camp A has four times the population of Camp B and five times its death rate. Camp B has (at least) six muffles. How many operating muffles has Camp A? Assume constant returns to scale.

ps
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 174
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 11:29 am

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby ps » 9 years 5 months ago (Thu Sep 02, 2010 7:44 am)

Automatic. trans.

I would again like to remind you what it is about the Holocaust. This is often forgotten:

To murder and killing in gas chambers using Zyklon B, Auschwitz Birkenau locality in the two big "crematoria".

This is the only major point on the Holocaust! The "ashes" and the "gold teeth" are arguably only if the murder is proven! Previously, the ash, the coal consumption and the teeth are totally uninteresting!

What do you want to prove with these secondary issues anyway? 1000000 that only Jews were killed? Or only 100,000? Or 10000?

This is ridiculous! According to the rules of international law, already one Jew is as genocide if he is killed because of his Jewish being. Do you believe that you can push the coal consumption in a single Jew?

That even I can not!

But I can fill the gas chamber downsampling to zero people. Because at least a normal person can approach any door, behind which one to 1000 ° or 1500 ° C heated gas chamber is located!

That is the problem, not the removal of ash or coal consumption! The murder must have been only * possible *! And since the evidence claim 3 - minute gassing with Zyklon B and the time it just be possible only at extremely high temperatures, gas chamber, can be only once clarified, whether Jews in the gas chamber at all could go in! Normal people would have not been able fact. They had already two meters before the second gas chamber burns Grades suffered!

All Holocaust reduces to answering the question whether the Jews had to enter the gas chamber!

YES or NO.

If "YES" can be discussed further on the amounts of coal.

If "NO" there is no need any further discussion.


-------------------

Ich möchte noch einmal daran erinnern, worum es beim Holocaust geht. Dies wird immer wieder vergessen:

Um Mord und Tötung in den Gaskammern mit Hilfe von Zyklon B, Lokalität Auschwitz Birkenau in den beiden großen "Krematorien".

Dies ist der einzige wesentliche Punkt am Holocaust! Die "Asche" und die "Goldzähne" sind erst dann diskutierbar, wenn der Mord bewiesen ist! Vorher sind die Asche, der Kohleverbrauch und die Zähne vollkommen uninteressant!

Was will man mit diesen sekundären Themen eigentlich beweisen? Daß nur 1000000 Juden getötet worden sind? Oder nur 100000? Oder nur 10000?

Das ist lächerlich! Nach den Regeln des Völkerrechts gilt bereits 1 Jude als Völkermord, wenn er aufgrund seines Judenseins ermordet wird. Glaubt Ihr, daß Ihr den Kohleverbrauch auf einen einzigen Juden drücken könnt?

Das kann nicht einmal ich!

Aber ich kann die Gaskammerfüllung auf Null Menschen herunterrechnen. Weil zumindest ein normaler Mensch sich keiner Tür nähern kann, hinter der eine auf 1000° oder 1500°C aufgeheizte Gaskammer sich befindet!

Das ist das Problem und nicht die Beseitigung von Asche oder Kohleverbräuche! Die Mordtat muß erst *möglich* gewesen sein! Und da die Zeugenaussagen 3 - Minuten Vergasungszeit mit Zyklon B behaupten und dies eben nur bei extrem hohen Gaskammertemperaturen möglich sein kann, muß erst einmal eindeutig geklärt werden, ob Juden in diese Gaskammer überhaupt hätten hineingehen können! Normale Menschen hätten das nämlich nicht gekonnt. Sie hätten bereits 2 m vor der Gaskammer Verbrennungen 2. Grades erlitten!

Der ganze Holocaust reduziert sich also auf die Beantwortung der Frage, ob die Juden die Gaskammer hätten betreten können !

JA oder NEIN.

Bei "JA" kann weiter über die Kohlemengen diskutiert werden.

Bei "NEIN" erübrigt sich jegliche weitere Erörterung.

Jews in a hot chamber WITHOUT Zyklon B:
Image

Calculation:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5996&p=43261#p43261

isabelle
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 10:36 am

Re: Denial of the Holocaust and the genocide in Auschwitz

Postby isabelle » 9 years 5 months ago (Thu Sep 02, 2010 3:53 pm)

neander

"How do you explain the fact that the local Poles, after the Germans had left Auschwitz, sifted the mounds of crematorium ashes that were still there, for gold from dentures, and this with considerable success? Where, in your opinion, did the ashes come from?"

"No photos of the ash being hauled away. No photos of the ash being buried or dumped."

you mean bones dont you neander

warden

"And what of the ashes being dumped in rivers and around farmland?"

you mean bones dont you warden

hans

"It is not because after this time the previous load was fully incinerated."

cremation is not incineration hans

where are all the bones


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests