Chelmno book released

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1093
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Werd » 7 years 11 months ago (Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:07 pm)

Roberto has a response. Here is a key part of it.

http:// r o d o h f o r u m . y u k u .com/reply/275647/A-message-to-Hannover-

Actually there's nothing about Jewish tombstones in Blobel's affidavit that mentions the burning of the corpses at Babi Yar. Hannover must have mixed up Blobel with Yakov Kaper, who described the arrangement to burn the corpses at Babi Yar as follows:

On one side, a furnace was being erected. First they brought stones taken from the Jewish cemetery. The tomb-stones bore the dates of those buried in the cemetery. Long railway rails were put on those stones, then iron fences also removed from the cemetery and then some logs with a little room in between to let air through when they started burning.Is there anything about this arrangement that you can demonstrate to be implausible, Hannover?

How about proving it actually happened, Roberto? You get a small concession but Hannover's point still stands that someone did claim tombstones were used at Babi Yar. So now it seems the issue is Yakov Kaper. Does Hannover have anything he can post about this man? I'd like to see. Or from anyone else for that matter.

Hannover
The matter is debunked by aerial photography at the exact time of the alleged process, and that's right, nothing of the sort is happening in the photography.

That's all? Big fucking deal. Sergey Romanov has made mincemeat of the Babi Yar aerial photography crap.


I would also stress that anything anyone may have to say in reply to the Babi Yar ariel photography stuff should stay out of this topic and put in another one. Let's just stick to Chelmno. Next one.
Hannover wrote:
But Blobel stated that due to the advancing Red Army, a lot of the alleged these mass graves went untouched. Oops! So, using basic logic, these graves should be available for excavation and viewing. They are not and cannot be shown, they do not exist and never did.

Basic logic is one thing, Hannover's pathetic hollering as he tries to convince himself of his own lies (the graves can be shown and have been shown in many cases, mainly by Soviet investigators but also by their more recent successors like Richard Wright and Father Desbois) are another.

So Roberto says the graves ARE there and HAVE been shown. He gives names but no specific links on this certain post. I can't help but wonder if he already has given them elsewhere. he certainly is a man of links.

Blah, blah, blah. As Hannover mentions Höss, by the way, can he explain why Höss had the cheek of telling his Polish interrogators where they could stick their 4 million Auschwitz figure? If the Poles tortured him into saying that, they must have been about as dumb as "Revisionists".

Here's a better question. Why did Piper admit on camera that the four million figure was too high? it clearly means that Hoess was lying. When we figure out that he was tortured, it's easy to put two and two together to see why he confessed to an impossible figure that even non-revisionists admit was too high while in British custody.

Roberto then quotes my long post and has this to say about Hoess.
The only issue I have with Werd for the moment relates to his comment about Höss. As Werd well knows, my argument always was that yes, Höss was tortured by the Brits (I remember that Werd/Drew J took issue with my having called it mistreatment instead of torture), but no, this doesn't mean that Höss' subsequent statements were extracted under torture. I can also agree that Höss might theoretically have been under fear of undergoing the same treatment again when he essentially confirmed at Nuremberg, as a defense witness for Kaltenbrunner, what he had told the Brits under torture, even though nothing indicates that Höss would have had any reason for such fear.

Seems like Roberto is being fair here but has his own personal convictions on Hoess. No problem here I guess.

However, what Höss told the Poles about the Auschwitz-Birkenau death toll (among other inconvenient statements one finds in his memoirs and the annexes thereto) does not fall in that category, as he not only expressly distanced himself from the exaggerated figure he had given at Nuremberg, but had the cheek of insisting that, if that figure had been too high, figures based on estimates made by inmates (he was no doubt referring to the 4 million figure that the Soviets had concluded on also on the basis of testimonies from inmates) were utter nonsense ("figments of the imagination" is how Constantine FitzGibbon translated his expression, see quote below). That must have been a bitter pill to swallow for the Poles, who were committed to the 4 million figure and would have wanted nothing more than to see it confirmed by the former camp commandant himself. So if the Poles had been inclined to extract anything from Höss by torture or another form of coercion, they would have made him confirm the 4 million figure. Höss was a tough guy but every man has his limits, and he had nothing to lose anyway as he would be hanged for the ca. 1 million deaths he confessed to just like for 4 million deaths, big deal. If he had been a softy trying to accommodate his interrogators lest it might occur to them to get rough, he would not have challenged them as he did.

Roughly, Hoess was taken in and tortured by the Brits and he admitted to four million. However the Poles also wanted this figure and they didn't get it out of him so Muehlenkamp concludes that Hoess wasn't tortured by the Poles because he confessed to four million and he wasn't in any danger anyway. But Muehlenkamp says that the free non coerced testimony that Hoess gave to the Poles includes the statements about what I think Ismer was allegedly involved in and that's why Roberto accepts this testimony. So it is my assumption that Muehlenkamp is attacking Hannover for failing to distinguish between two types of Hoess testimonies. One extracted under torture, the other, not. Even if Hannover was dumb enough to mix up Hoess's statements under British capture and Hoess' statements under Polish custody (which I don't think Hannver did for a second), however I can not side with Roberto for one simple reason. Hoess was no dummy. He knew that THEY KNEW the four million figure was too high, so the poles had no reason to try and force Hoess to say four million. They would lose credibility. However, the idea that the Poles wouldn't turn him over to someone else who would make him confirm EVERYTHING ELSE they wanted to hear about Chelmno is absurd. The Poles' fear of losing credibility over the SPECIFIC NUMBERS (and their simultaneous ability to give Hoess over to someone who would torture him AGAIN if he doesn't play ball)...doesn't preclude Hoess from being in fear of telling them what they want to hear regarding PEOPLE and VAGUE PROCESSES. And I think THIS is why Hannover takes issue with Hoess' testimony to the Poles. And that would be my reason too. So Roberto and I will have to just disagree on Hoess' testimony while in Polish custody.

Roberto also has a reply to MKK. I won't quote it because it's too long, but I recommend people read it.
http:// r o d o h f o r u m . y u k u .com/reply/275604/A-message-to-Hannover-#reply-275604
basically he does seem to have an answer about the weight of ghetto deportees and has links to studies showing how many people died before they could even be deported. He does seem to be scratching the surface and providing a strong guestimation about the average weight of deportees that managed not to starve in ghettos like some people unfortuantely did. And among the beefs he takes with Hannover, here is one I find interesting.

Hannover wrote:
Blobel's statements have already been shown to be self defeating for the likes of the irrational Muehlenkamp.


Where, in the crap shredded here? Delusions of adequacy seem to be one of Hannover's many problems. And apparently the guy is such a brain-damaged fool that he hasn’t yet realized that the criticism of Mattogno he quotes is not about Blobel’s statements or Blobel’s credibility at all.

I would say that is an issue that does count on a seperate plain. There is nothing wrong with checking a person's credibility and the circumstances of the utterance of their statements. But this is a minor quibble because Roberto is building something so let's let him finish.

It is about Mattogno’s bumbling (or dishonesty) in falsely claiming that Höss was the only witness to Blobel’s presence at Chełmno, when actually there are at least two other witnesses mentioning Blobel’s activity at that place, and these witnesses are moreover referred to in a source included in Mattogno’s bibliography.

Okay so let's say you win there Roberto. Let's say Mattogno omitted two other witnesses because they would harm his case. But then what if we do as Hannover wants to do with Blobel, and check the credibility of not only Blobel, but also the other ones as well. Ismer and Bauer. Roberto summarizes.

I’ll highlight my point so that even Hannover may realize what my argument is:

What is worse than these and other ongoing blunders (or falsehoods), as concerns Mattogno's scholarship, is that Mattogno continues peddling his claim that "the alleged activity of Blobel at Chełmno is not confirmed by any document, but only by a single testimony, that of Rudolf Höss, the commandant of Auschwitz (confirmed, long after the fact, by one of the architects of the Auschwitz crematoria, Walter Dejaco)" (section 8.2, page 76), conveniently omitting the testimonies of Fritz Ismer and Julius Bauer, which are mentioned in Hoffmann's book and in my blog Mattogno on Chełmno Cremation (Part 1). Got it now, Hannover?

So it would seem that Roberto is saying Mattogno omitted the fact that Hoess is not the only one to talk about Chelmno. Does Mattogno talk about Ismer and Bauer? Roberto is saying no. But the second prong of this counterargument from Roberto says that Mattogno knows about these other two and is igoring them because Roberto mentioned them long before Mattogno's Chelmno book was published. In other words, Muehlenkamp is accusing Mattogo of being a dishonest chicken. I will say that given the date of the publishing of this book (2011), the date of Roberto's blogs where he mentioned Ismer and Bauer (Mattogno on Chełmno Cremation (Part 1) Dec 31 2010). In other words, Mattogno, who KNOWS about Roberto given that he responded to Roberto at least once or twice on Belsec back in 2009, is know acting like he doesn't know who Roberto is, where his blog is, or that Roberto spends a lot of time making counter arguments that still need to be dealt with. This conspiracy theory doesn't look so absurd in my view. If we know that Mattogno knows who Roberto is, has responded to him, and knows where to find his work - which includes his work countering Mattogno's work, then it does seem reasonable to question why Mattogno forgot or either "forgot" to take into account Roberto's work on Chelmno which mentioned Ismer and Bauer - something Mattogno does not do. This strange behavior, or rather lack of behavior, does require an explanation.

So Hannover, anything on ismer and Bauer and the circumstances of their testimonies about Chelmno? If Hannover, you can shoot down Blobel, can you show us anything on Ismer and Bauer? I'm not being antagonistic, I'm just trying to summarize the main points, lay out what is what so that other people can know what the issues are and directly respond to them. I'm a little bit versed in revisionism but not so much about the Atkion Reinhard camps. That's why I'm asking you Hannover and others for counterarguments to read in conjunction with the first arguments.

So what's say you other codoh board members? Have I summarized things clearly? I hope my posts are coherent? Can we continue on knowing which names and people need to be talked about?

Edit: I highlighted the new (to me) names that came up in Roberto's last few posts.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9919
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Hannover » 7 years 11 months ago (Wed Dec 21, 2011 5:57 pm)

MuehlenkampThe Desperate said:
Actually there's nothing about Jewish tombstones in Blobel's affidavit that mentions the burning of the corpses at Babi Yar. Hannover must have mixed up Blobel with Yakov Kaper, ...

Then this puts Blobel's claimed 'affidavit' in even deeper do-do:
http://www.zchor.org/BABIYAR.HTM
"Starting August 18th 1943, the Germans headed by Blobel erased traces by removing the corpses and burnt them in furnaces made of the tombstones of the nearby Jewish cemetery. For 6 weeks a group of chained prisoners, Jews and Soviet prisoners of war, doomed to death as well, was forced to perform the operation."
- St. George, J. The Road to Babi Yar, London, 1967
Oops.

And as usual, gutter mouthed Muehlenkamp lies when he says:
That's all? Big fucking deal. Sergey Romanov has made mincemeat of the Babi Yar aerial photography crap.

No he hasn't. The aerial photography mentioned is even cited by 'holocaust' profiteers as being that of Babi Yar. Ouch.

The only ones being made mincemeat of are Sergey Romanov (search his posts at this site and see) and hapless Muehlenkamp*

What mass graves, Muehlenkamp? He, nor anyone else can show any excavations of alleged 'holocaust' mass graves. Not a single one.

As for the tortured Hoess, Muehlenkamp's position that Hoess had no reason to say anything other than the truth since he was supposedly no longer being tortured (which Muehlenkamp has no proof for in the first place) is classic 'Holocaust' Logic 101.
Once a person has been tortured it makes zero sense to say that this person would not expect further torture. That is the point of torturing someone in the first place, to get the tortured to say what the torturers want, whenever they want him to say it. Irrational Muehlenkamp somehow want's to separate the Brits from the communists Poles which is to ignore the fact that they were 'allies' with a common cause in this case. And we all know that the communists would never force 'confessions' from anyone, right. Whether it be actual torture, threats of torture, or a simple reminder of what the Brits had done to him, Hoess had no recourse other than to say what pleased the communists. Shabby Roberto, very shabby.

Fritz Ismer and Julius Bauer? Oh please. Muehlenkamp cannot even state what they supposedly said. He can present no verbatim court transcripts, no cross examination records, nothing. But to him they're saviours of his beloved 'holocaust' nonsense. Laughable.
Adding on more garbage simply begets more garbage. The alleged 'gas chamber' cannot be shown, an excavation of the alleged 'mass graves does not exist, and the alleged 'confessions' have been utterly debunked. There is no proof to confirm any of the supposed 'testimony'. There are no German orders, zippo.

The more points people like Muehlenkamp bring into the argument the worse it gets for them. You gotta wonder why some folks love the fantasy of 6M Jews being 'murdered. Send in the shrinks.

* For our new readers, here's more on shyster Roberto Muehlenkamp, aka 'Cortavagatas'. You should definitely not buy a used car from this desperate man.

follow this mercifully short thread from the former CODOH bbs:
http://forum.codoh.com/codoh/493.html

'gas chambers' were hosed down, so no cyanide'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=3706

'Those Prussian Blues Just Won't Wash'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=4600

'Roberto Muehlenkamp: no fuel required for Auschwitz ovens'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=3703

'Roberto Muehlenkamp shredded on 'gassings' & cyanide'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=224

'Roberto Muehlenkamp debunked on 3.5kg of coke cremations'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=420

'Cremation patent & 3.5 kg of coke per corpse debunked'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=88

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

Clem
Member
Member
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:23 am

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Clem » 7 years 11 months ago (Thu Dec 22, 2011 12:20 am)

Hannover

What mass graves, Muehlenkamp? He, nor anyone else can show any excavations of alleged 'holocaust' mass graves. Not a single one.


Roberto Muehlenkamp's lies about mass graves are being exposed here

http://revisionistworkshop.com/forum/vi ... 6131#p6131

* Deconstructing the alleged "jewish holocaust of World War II"

4 alleged "homicidal gassing" sites, 54 alleged "huge mass graves," 1 /3 of all the alleged "holocausted jews"
and the 1,404 simple questions about them that has the holohoaxers so terrified - they refuse to answer them!

The National Association of Forensic Historians ( http://nafcash.com/ )

challenges all the holohoaxers who espouse the orthodox version of the fraudulently alleged "jewish holocaust of WW II" to complete its "huge mass graves" questionnaire.

Do you believe the orthodox version of the fraudulently alleged “jewish holocaust of WW II,” which claims that the Germans buried the remains of - 1 / 3 - of all the fraudulently alleged six million “holocausted jews” in 54 “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor and Treblinka?

Do you believe the spurious claim that said alleged “jewish holocaust” is the most thoroughly researched, documented and “proven” historical event in all of human history?

If so, then please provide the so-called “proof” of this claim that you use to support your beliefs.

Note #1: A brief description of each alleged “huge mass grave” can be found here: http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p= ... count=2666

Note #2: Provide ONLY the information that each question asks for - NOTHING more - NOTHING less.

For each one of the 54 fraudulently alleged "huge mass graves" that are spuriously claimed to exist, please answer the following simple questions:


A - Is it known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “huge mass grave” actually / currently exists - Yes. - or - No. - ??

(Note: As even the dullest of morons knows and only a charlatan would pretend not to know; the definition of "grave" is a place of burial / any pit or trench dug in the ground or any structure built above ground that contains human remains.)

B - Has anyone ever claimed to have conducted a real / full excavation of this alleged “huge mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??

C - Has anyone ever claimed to have conducted a noninvasive geophysical investigation of this alleged “huge mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??

(Note: As even the dullest of morons knows and only a charlatan would pretend not to know; the definition of "conducted a geophysical investigation" is the use of geophysical surveying systems and software that non-invasively and non-destructively maps the subsurface and the features within it. The main geophysical methods employed in archeological work are: Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), Magnetrometry, Resistivity and Conductivity, which includes such things as EM61 High Resolution Metal Detection, GEM19 Overhauser GPS Magnetic Gradiometer, EM38 Terrain Conductivity Meter, Ground Penetrating Radar and GPS Mapping.)

(Also note: As even the dullest of morons knows and only a charlatan would pretend not to know; only a craven charlatan would play the dumb jew trick of pretending to not understand something as simple as a - Yes. - or - No. - question.)

D - Can you provide a photograph of the actual alleged "huge mass grave" itself that substantiates the claimed dimensions of this alleged “huge mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??

E - Has anyone ever claimed to have physically / tangibly located so-much-as ONE bullet from within this alleged “huge mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??

F - It is known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “huge mass grave” currently contains __?__ bullets?

G - Can you provide a photograph of a bullet that was extracted from the inside of this alleged “huge mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??

H - Has anyone ever claimed to have physically / tangibly located so-much-as ONE tooth from within this alleged “huge mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??

I - It is known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “huge mass grave” currently contains __?__ teeth?

J - Can you provide a photograph of a tooth that was extracted from the inside of this alleged “huge mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??

K - Has anyone ever claimed to have physically / tangibly located so-much-as ONE bone fragment from within this alleged “huge mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??

L - It is known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “huge mass grave” currently contains __?__ pounds of bone fragments?

(Note: As even the dullest of morons knows and only a charlatan would pretend not to know; the definition of "bone fragments" is bone fragments ONLY - nothing more - nothing less.)

M - Can you provide a photograph of a bone fragment that was extracted from the inside of this alleged “huge mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??

N - Has anyone ever claimed to have physically / tangibly located so-much-as ONE whole corpse from within this alleged “huge mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??

O - It is known - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “huge mass grave” currently contains __?__ whole corpses?

P - Can you provide a photograph of a whole corpse, or even part of a corpse, that was extracted from the inside of this alleged “huge mass grave” - Yes. - or - No. - ??

Q - Can you prove - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that this alleged “huge mass grave” currently contains the remains of at least 19 bodies - Yes. - or - No. ??

R - Has your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty huge mass grave proof” been posted on The Skeptics Society’s forum for Michael Shermer’s endorsement - Yes. - or - No. ??

(Note: As even the dullest of morons knows and only a charlatan would pretend not to know; the definition of "endorsement" is an explicit, categorical PUBLIC statement giving unequivocal approval and support of the claimed “proven with 100 % certainty huge mass grave proof.”)

S - Has Michael Shermer endorsed your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty huge mass grave proof” - Yes. - or - No. ??

T - Can you provide the name of a member of a skeptical organization who has endorsed your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty huge mass grave proof” - Yes. - or - No. ??

U - Can you provide the name of a professional forensic anthropologist who has endorsed your alleged “proven witT 100 % certainty huge mass grave proof” - Yes. - or - No. ??

V - Can you provide the name of an employee of Archaeology Magazine who has endorsed your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty huge mass grave proof” - Yes. - or - No. ??

W - Can you provide the name of a member of The American Academy of Forensic Sciences who has endorsed your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty huge mass grave proof” - Yes. - or - No. ??

X - Can you provide the name of a PHD professor - currently teaching forensic anthropology and / or archaeology classes at a university in the United States - who has endorsed your alleged “proven with 100 % certainty huge mass grave proof” - Yes. - or - No. ??

Y - Can you provide a copy of a legitimate scientific paper which details the laboratory analysis that forensically proved - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - that ANYTHING claimed to have been extracted from within this alleged “huge mass grave” is of human origin - Yes. - or - No. ??

(Note: As even the dullest of morons knows and only a charlatan would pretend not to know; the definition of "provide a copy of" includes giving information as to where such a paper or report can be found.)

Z - Of the 54 alleged “huge mass graves” claimed to exist at these 4 alleged "holocaust within the holocaust" sites, which one can you prove - WITH 100 % CERTAINTY - currently contains the most human remains?

Note #3: As even the dullest of morons knows and only a charlatan would pretend not to know; those who claim that these four fraudulently alleged “holocausts within the holocaust” really happened yet cravenly refuse to honestly and unequivocally complete this questionnaire in accordance to the explicitly specified instructions are tacitly admitting that they are charlatans and that the 54 fraudulently alleged “huge mass graves” are a criminal hoax.


If there really is proof of mass graves then why so afraid to complete a simple questionnaire?

Mkk
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 4:00 am

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Mkk » 7 years 11 months ago (Thu Dec 22, 2011 2:20 am)

I will say that given the date of the publishing of this book (2011), the date of Roberto's blogs where he mentioned Ismer and Bauer (Mattogno on Chełmno Cremation (Part 1) Dec 31 2010). In other words, Mattogno, who KNOWS about Roberto given that he responded to Roberto at least once or twice on Belsec back in 2009

Remember, Mattogeno is Italian. His Chelmno book came out in 2009, it took a while for it to get translated.

So Roberto says the graves ARE there and HAVE been shown. He gives names but no specific links on this certain post. I can't help but wonder if he already has given them elsewhere. he certainly is a man of links.

Roberto mentions Father Desbois. I believe that is the guy who claimed to have found some mass graves, and asked a handful of locals aswell. I quote Robert Faurisson:
“The alleged mass graves have not been dug open and never will be. […] The people
claiming to have discovered the ‘mass graves’ have not, in reality, carried out any excavations, hence no inventory of remains, no verification, forensic or physical or material certification of the standard, compulsory kind made in the inquest following the discovery of
even a single corpse or skeleton. No police or justice official has been to any of the sites to
do any examination whatsoever. […] Two Jewish associations […] have gone about gathering ‘testimonies’ […] Ukrainian villagers, mustered for the occasion, are filmed giving their accounts from which, subsequently, only choice bits will be picked. […] But, coming
back to those alleged mass graves, how is the value of testimony to be assessed if the material reality of the facts has not been established beforehand?”
"Truth is hate for those who hate the truth"- Auchwitz lies, p.13

derred
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 2:45 pm

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby derred » 7 years 11 months ago (Thu Dec 22, 2011 5:59 am)

Hannover wrote:Muehlenkamp said:
What is worse than these and other ongoing blunders (or falsehoods), as concerns Mattogno's scholarship, is that Mattogno continues peddling his claim that "the alleged activity of Blobel at Chełmno is not confirmed by any document, but only by a single testimony, that of Rudolf Höss, the commandant of Auschwitz (confirmed, long after the fact, by one of the architects of the Auschwitz crematoria, Walter Dejaco)" (section 8.2, page 76), conveniently omitting the testimonies of Fritz Ismer and Julius Bauer, which are mentioned in Hoffmann's book and in my blog Mattogno on Chełmno Cremation (Part 1).

Sorry, a long rebutal to Muehlenkamp's classic use of 'garbage in, garbage out' arguments.

[...]

But to unprincipled folks like Roberto Muehlenkamp; Blobel, Hoess, and Dejaco are proof of his beloved 'holocaust'.

This is too easy.

- Hannover


Dear Hannover,

You doesn't seem to have understood a single word from what Muehlenkamp said.

The claim "the alleged activity of Blobel at Chelmno is not confirmed by any document, but only by a single testimony, that of Rudolf Hoess" was a CITATION from Mattogno, which Muehlenkamp refuted by pointing out not only one, but two additional sources (Ismer and Bauer). This statement of Muehlenkamp (i.e. that NOT a "single" testimony exists, as claimed by Mattogno) has obviously NOTHING TO DO with the reliability of Hoess' testimony, so your discussion about it is entirely pointless.

Also, it was Ismer and Bauer who was shown as an example by Muehlenkamp, and not Dejaco and Ertl, so again, there is no point in discussing their trial, should you want to refute Muehlenkamp. In contrast you should have addressed Ismer and Bauer - the only thing you failed to do in your comment...

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1093
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Werd » 7 years 11 months ago (Thu Dec 22, 2011 4:01 pm)

Also Roberto has apparently shown Faurisson to be incorrect. Some mass graves mentioned by Debois have been located and in fact dug up. Muehlenkamp gave a link to a video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w96duzJp ... re=mh_lolz

he also had some video stills. here are just a couple.

Image

Image

Am I wrong on Roberto contradicting Faurisson? If so, then why? Anyone?

Clem
Member
Member
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:23 am

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Clem » 7 years 11 months ago (Thu Dec 22, 2011 4:48 pm)

Werd:

Am I wrong on Roberto contradicting Faurisson? If so, then why? Anyone?


I'm confused now. I have not read this book but I thought the claimed excavations at Chelmno were fraudulent.

When did Debois do this excavation? And if he did do it like Muehlenkamp says, then why hasn't Muehlenkamp or Debois or anyone else claimed the $5,000.00 N.A.F.H. reward money that is being offered for Chelmno?

There sure looks like the remains of more than 19 bodies in those photos to me.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9919
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Hannover » 7 years 11 months ago (Thu Dec 22, 2011 4:51 pm)

derred said:
Dear Hannover,
You doesn't seem to have understood a single word from what Muehlenkamp said.

The claim "the alleged activity of Blobel at Chelmno is not confirmed by any document, but only by a single testimony, that of Rudolf Hoess" was a CITATION from Mattogno, which Muehlenkamp refuted by pointing out not only one, but two additional sources (Ismer and Bauer). This statement of Muehlenkamp (i.e. that NOT a "single" testimony exists, as claimed by Mattogno) has obviously NOTHING TO DO with the reliability of Hoess' testimony, so your discussion about it is entirely pointless.

Also, it was Ismer and Bauer who was shown as an example by Muehlenkamp, and not Dejaco and Ertl, so again, there is no point in discussing their trial, should you want to refute Muehlenkamp. In contrast you should have addressed Ismer and Bauer - the only thing you failed to do in your comment...

Oh please. I understand him all too well.
It is Muehlenkamp who brought up the names Dejaco, Ertl, Bauer, & Ismer and got burned for it. His problem.
I addressed them all, you apparently did not read what I posted. I wonder why.
Muehlenkamp cannot produce the court documents to support his position on Ismer & Bauer which means there is nothing to support his position that they are critical to the Chelmno storyline, very simple.

When it comes to logic, the 'holocaust' storyline is in very short supply.

derred, since you seem to represent shyster Muehlenkamp, I can only hope that you enjoyed the links to the other spankings that Muehlenkamp has received at this forum. If you think you can help him out, then please post to those links and let's see what you have to say. We also have a number of links to Sergey Romanov's demolition at this forum if you want to participate in them. Romanov is mentioned in this thread.

Merry Christmas

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

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9919
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Hannover » 7 years 11 months ago (Thu Dec 22, 2011 5:06 pm)

Also Roberto has apparently shown Faurisson to be incorrect. Some mass graves mentioned by Debois have been located and in fact dug up. Muehlenkamp gave a link to a video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w96duzJp ... re=mh_lolz


There is absolutely zero proof that these remains are the result of German actions
There is absolutely zero proof that these remains are Jews.
There is absolutely zero proof that these remains are from the period of German occupation.
There is absolutely zero proof that they are civilians.
There have been numerous mass graves unearthed of communist atrocities, think Katyn for example, which were falsely attributed to the Germans.
There are verifiable mass graves galore which confirm the communist atrocities.

Only with the so called 'holocaust' are all mass graves now 'holocaust' mass graves.

Read as these graves just do not match up to the 'holocaust' tales:

Father Patrick Desbois' "Holocaust by Bullets"
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5410

French Catholic Priests travels to the Ukraine
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5193

It's commonly stated that a total of 2,000,000 Jews were supposedly shot into massive pits by the einsatzgruppen. So, is that:

- 100 graves of 20,000?
- 200 graves of 10,000?
- 400 graves of 5,000?
- 500 graves of 4,000?
- 1000 graves of 2000?
- 2000 graves of 1000?

The cash seeking 'holocaust' Industry cannot show us a single 'holocaust' mass grave as alleged, not one.

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

Clem
Member
Member
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:23 am

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Clem » 7 years 11 months ago (Thu Dec 22, 2011 10:08 pm)

Hanover

French Catholic Priests travels to the Ukraine
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5193

It's commonly stated that a total of 2,000,000 Jews were supposedly shot into massive pits by the einsatzgruppen.


I don't want to sound rude but it would help a lot if everone just talked about Chelmno and the new book on this thread. It's not that I don't want to learn about the einsatzgruppen but I want to find out what the new book says about the claimed mass graves at Chelmno. (Unless it is claimed that the einsatzgruppen were at Chelmno, but that's not my understanding.) Greg Gerdes and Roberto Muehlenkamp both say that there are 5 alleged mass graves there. From what I have read Roberto Muehlenkamp is the only one who claims he can prove the 5 graves exist but thats all he does is make the claim. When asked to put up or shut up he does neither. He refuses to complete the N.A.F.H. "huge mass graves" questionnaire or answer any other questionis and he refuses to accept the N.A.F.H. Crime Scene Investigation Challenge or any other challenge. His refusal to answer simple questions or accept simple challenges and claim an easy $5,000.00 says it all about his total lack of proof and integrity. With that said, could someone tell us what the author of this book says about the number of graves, actual and/or alleged that exist and/or are claimed to exist at Chelmno?

Hanover

The cash seeking 'holocaust' Industry cannot show us a single 'holocaust' mass grave as alleged, not one.



Thats my understanding as well.

I want to see proof and until I see it I don't believe it. As Greg Gerdes says

Orthodox historians claim that approximately two million bodies were buried at the four very small, precisely known locations of - Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor and Treblinka.

However:

It is a historical fact that not one grave that contains so much as - 1 / 1,000 of 1 % - of the alleged buried bodies has ever been located / proven to exist at any of the four sites - NOT ONE!

* * * * *

If you deny this historical fact, then where is the so-called “proof” and what are the names of the forensic experts who have endorsed it?

* * * * *

With modern forensic science / crime scene investigation techniques:

There is no such thing as an undetectable mass grave.

NO GRAVES = NO HOLOCAUST

Mkk
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 4:00 am

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Mkk » 7 years 11 months ago (Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 am)

Clem,

I posted the link for the download of this book in the beggining of this thread. There have been a few excavations in Chelmno, and Mattageno quotes them. one of the more interesting findings is that there were only one crematoria. The excavators do mention human bones and ash but aren't very specific. In 1988 a few samples were taken, with bones making up a "few percent". The map of the camp shows some mass graves, but the map seems to have been built on witness statements anyway so I don't know if these supposed mass graves are supported by the excavations. More excavations came in 2003-2004, but again no in depth Kola style paper has been published and their results should be taken skeptically. None of the mass graves have ever really been shown.

With that said, could someone tell us what the author of this book says about the number of graves, actual and/or alleged that exist and/or are claimed to exist at Chelmno?

To answer your question, it is very hard from the results, even if they are real, to get an idea of the area of the graves or what is in them. The only indication is, as I mentioned above, one sample had only a few percent of bones in it, although no conclusions can be drawn from this. If you want more, read the book.

As for the alleged mass graves of Father Desbois, I agree with Hannover. It's just another Holohoax mass grave. With massacares like Katyn, experts from several European countries were called in and some of the victims were identified. Not so with the Holocaust mass graves. They could contain anything, if they indeed even exist.
"Truth is hate for those who hate the truth"- Auchwitz lies, p.13

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9919
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Hannover » 7 years 11 months ago (Fri Dec 23, 2011 10:48 pm)

Clem says:
I don't want to sound rude but it would help a lot if everone just talked about Chelmno and the new book on this thread. It's not that I don't want to learn about the einsatzgruppen but I want to find out what the new book says about the claimed mass graves at Chelmno. (Unless it is claimed that the einsatzgruppen were at Chelmno, but that's not my understanding.) Greg Gerdes and Roberto Muehlenkamp both say that there are 5 alleged mass graves there. From what I have read Roberto Muehlenkamp is the only one who claims he can prove the 5 graves exist but thats all he does is make the claim. When asked to put up or shut up he does neither. He refuses to complete the N.A.F.H. "huge mass graves" questionnaire or answer any other questionis and he refuses to accept the N.A.F.H. Crime Scene Investigation Challenge or any other challenge. His refusal to answer simple questions or accept simple challenges and claim an easy $5,000.00 says it all about his total lack of proof and integrity. With that said, could someone tell us what the author of this book says about the number of graves, actual and/or alleged that exist and/or are claimed to exist at Chelmno?

It was Muehlenkamp via Werd who brought up people who were supposedly involved with the Einsatzgruppen (Blobel). By showing how ridiculous the accusations against Blobel are and the absurdity of his alleged statements, I have shown that by resorting to bringing in Blobel does nothing but discredit Muehlenkamp's fantasy about Chelmno. There is a complete lack of credibility in using Blobel to support the Chelmno claims. Same with Dejaco, Hoess, Bauer, Ismer. Muehlenkamp brought them up in relation to this thread and I have shown that they are not what has been erroneously claimed about them. Clem, I do realize that it was a circuitous route, but I felt it necessary since they were brought in to the thread. I certainly agree that care must be taken in staying on topic.

Thanks & welcome to the CODOH Revisionist Forum.

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

Toshiro
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 1:36 pm

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Toshiro » 7 years 11 months ago (Tue Jan 03, 2012 7:01 pm)

The holidays are over, so here's my reply to Roberto:

I had already got there when I wrote that removing the entrails might be helpful, but the question is: is this supposed to be the main factor that accounts for Lothes and Profé’s low fuel ratio? If so, one would have expected them to say so, something like "do by all means remove the entrails as otherwise you’ll spend a lot more fuel than we did". But Lothes & Profé’s article suggests that, while helpful, removing the entrails was not essential to the success of the cremation. They mentioned it but didn’t make a big deal out of it.

To answer your question; no, it is not the main factor.

So the only reason why decomposed people don’t burn as well as the hollow cows is that they don’t have so much fat?

Probably, yes.

Decomposed corpses may have less fat (it may have broken down into fatty acids during the decomposition process), but on the other hand they also have much less water than a cow without entrails, at least when they have been decomposing long enough to be completely dehydrated. With all water, 40 % of the fat and 12 % of the proteins gone (as in an example provided by MGK in their Sobibór book, discussed in the blog Mattogno, Graf & Kues on Aktion Reinhard(t) Cremation (2)) a corpse that when fresh had a heating value of 1,525.16 kCal/kg will have a heating value of 5,339.08 kCal/kg (see tables 3.5 and 3.6 in that blog).

True, but what would the heating value of a cow with all its fat be compared to a dehydrated or partially dehydrated human corpse?

Are we not? A great many of these corpses had been lying in the open graves for months before they were cremated, and according to my calculations in the aforementioned blog (which the smart-ass is free to check) would have lost most if not all of their water by the time they were cremated.

Of course not. We aren't talking about dry desert climates or Ötzi-esque frozen corpses. They were corpses in a humid European climate being exposed to rain on a regular basis. To claim they were "dehydrated" with all their water gone is completely dishonest and wrong. Your claim would be worth something if the camps under discussion were located in Egypt, but alas, they were not.

Looks like we have another of those sick "Revisionist" clowns here.

Excuse me for the grotesque joke, but where else would they constantly find these well-nourished "fat" corpses laying about? Were they digging through the heaps of bodies in search for fat corpses, or were the fat corpses thrown (stored) into a separate pit because the Germans knew they will one day need them as fire-starters? Or did they perhaps shoot a few on cremation days? Seems like an awful lot of fat Jews entered these camps. I think you need to re-calculate your average inmate weight and average corpse weight on behalf of these fat Jews who had to be used to kindle the skinny Jews at every Jew-burning session.

Yep, and guess what: as I first pointed out here, Lothes & Profé achieved precisely what Mattogno considered impossible, i.e. the complete combustion of carcasses in the open with very low amounts of fuel, which was duly noted at the time ("with wonderfully little expenditure of fuel if the carcass was placed on iron rails placed over the pit", see the excerpt from the Eighth Annual Report of the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture.

It is true they talk about complete combustion, but seeing as they never mention the weight of the remains, the "complete combustion" could very well be the complete carbonization of the corpse.

Complete combustion, incidentally, was more than the SS achieved when mass-incinerating corpses at their extermination camps. Eyewitnesses mention that large bones were not consumed by the fire and sometimes corpses or parts thereof retained their original shape after cremation and had to be laboriously crushed and ground, as I first pointed out in an earlier blog. So one can say that what the SS achieved was closer to "a more or less complete carbonization" than to complete combustion.

I'm glad you think so and not that they were reduced to ashes. So looking for ashes is pointless, since what we're supposed to be looking for are charred corpses and bones. You hear that, revisionists?

Really now, is coulda-should-woulda-dooda crap the best this Mattogno’s disciple can offer by way of argument, just like his incompetent master?

Responds Roberto after stating this:
open-air pits may have a better draft than the animal incinerators operating at the time of Heepke’s studies, which may have accounted for similar or lower fuel consumption in the former, even though Mattogno considers this "obviously impossible".

Tsk-tsk, Roberto.

First of all, animal incinerators have certain advantages over open-air cremation, namely as concerns controlling the environmental impact of incineration. These advantages may recommend their use regardless of whether or not they are more fuel efficient than open-air cremation.

Another advantage of industrial incinerators is faster cremation times and better fuel efficiency.

Second, as Lothes & Profé themselves pointed out (see the aforementioned excerpt) it had been thought impossible to destroy carcasses in an open fire prior to their experiments. I presume that industrial incinerators were already in place at that time, and their operators would hardly have risked losing their business by propagating the fact that carcasses could, after all, be burned with greater fuel-efficiency in the open, if only the correct method was applied.

Really? So how did people cremate animals and other people before we invented an industrial incinerator? You know, 200 years ago and even further back. I'd say open-air cremations, but that's just me.

"The marvel of cremation; mankind just recently discovered that one can, indeed, destroy a carcass in an open fire. This advancement in technology was made the same year the Wright brothers pioneered air flight."
Yeah, seems reasonable to me. Or maybe the moron that wrote that article was just, you know, a moron.

Third, recently applied carcass incineration procedures show that the lessons provided by Lothes & Profé have unfortunately been forgotten and carcass incineration these days is done less efficiently than it would be if L&P's method of burning on iron grids over or inside a pit were applied, as I also pointed out. This, however, doesn’t rule out the possibility that Toshiro’s Nazi heroes managed, after a number of experiments, to implement a method similar to that of Lothes & Profé as concerns fuel efficiency when mass-incinerating corpses.

Yes, they did. It's called incomplete cremation with carbonized remains.

Mattogno is as full of it as his smart-ass disciple, actually. Lothes & Profé were looking for a method to safely destroy anthrax bacilli, so it’s unlikely that "a more or less complete carbonization" would have satisfied them – as I also pointed out:
The carcass was reduced to a weakly smoking heap of ashes, and it is unlikely than any lesser result would have satisfied Lothes & Profé, considering that they were looking for a means to render harmless the carcasses of animals killed by anthrax. As the authors pointed out and in their article, anthrax bacilli can form extraordinarily resistant spores, which can remain in the soil for "years and decades". As experimentally demonstrated by Lothes & Profé, these bacilli are able to survive in dry spleen pulp and to pass with the help of water through strata six feet thick of very compact sand and gravel in about thirty hours. One therefore shouldn't take any chances with anthrax bacilli, but Lothes & Profé were confident of having developed a method whereby it would be possible to safely destroy anthrax carcasses with relatively limited means – and also in a rather short time, at least when applying the "double pit" burning method they recommended.

Anthrax is not a prionic pathogen like mad cow disease and will not survive a cremation or carbonization of the flesh where it is contained. Destroy the flesh and the bacillus is destroyed. The mad cow disease pathogen on the other hand can survive an almost complete cremation because its infectious agent was never alive to begin with. Their proteins can remain in the charred remains and continue to be deadly. Something like this was killing off the cannibals in Papua New Guinea after they were eating the cremated remains of their deceased.

Actually what I consider interesting about experiment IV is that it achieved its results without the addition of tar, which Toshiro made a big deal of in his previous post.

Nothing interesting in carbonizing a carcass.

Why not? The efficiency of incineration depends not only on the heating value of flammables but also on the arrangement of the pyre (on a properly arranged grate a carcass can be largely burned in a fire fed by its own fat, as Bruce W. Ettling demonstrated by an experiment) and on the draft, and Lothes & Profé’s method may well have provided for a better draft than this "professional animal incinerator", as I also pointed out.

Because it's not possible, that's why. Needless to say, there were charred remains, not merely ash. It's unfortunate they never mentioned the weight of the residues. Their outcome might have been better than Ettling's experiment due to the time factor, but it still wasn't a complete reduction to ash. As for Ettling's experiment; sheep, like cows, have a lot more fat compared to people. His experiment is irrelevant with cremating people, regardless if he said his experiment can apply "presumably for a human also." A very fat person, perhaps. An average inmate? Not in a chance. It's like claiming a mouse can burn on its fat alone. This is why the 3,5 kg of coal at Auschwitz is complete nonsense. Unless, all the inmates were obese? In which case, 5 corpses couldn't possibly fit into a single muffle.
Another thing about Ettling's experiment is the position of the carcass, which has to be suspended directly above the fire source. This means piling the corpses on one another would not be effective, except for the corpses at the very bottom. Further evidence to this and the absurdity of such mass cremations comes from the Field Manual of Wildlife Diseases:

Examples of correct and incorrect layering of carcasses for burning:
B36Fig4-13a_RSK.gif
B36Fig4-13a_RSK.gif (9.36 KiB) Viewed 3628 times

B36Fig4-13b_RSK.gif

As you can see, the bottom charred corpses would act like insulators and prevent the corpses piled above them from being incinerated.

What is the smart-ass trying to tell us here, that "vollständige Verbrennung" means something other than complete combustion, and that complete combustion means something other than reducing the carcass to ashes? If so, he failed to read L&P’s description of another of their experiments. From the Animal Carcass Burning blog:
What exactly is meant by "complete combustion" becomes apparent from the authors' detailed description of one of their experiments on 15 July 1902 (my translation, emphasis mine):
On 15 July the skinned carcass of a horse together with the viscera, weighing 12 cwt, was burned in an open fire. The fire was burning inside a pit about 1 meter deep. The carcass was placed on two iron T-carriers two meters long placed across the pit. Besides low amounts of straw 2 cwt of wood, 3 cwt of briquettes and 25 kg of coal tar served as burning material. At first a ½ cwt of wood and 1 cwt of briquettes were set on fire below the carcass drenched in tar, the remaining part of the burning material being gradually added as necessary. The whole thing was set on fire at 6 hours in the afternoon. In the following afternoon at 2 hours, that is 20 hours later, only a weakly smoking heap of ashes was left. The smoke developed was considerable only as long as the tar was burning. The costs were 2.40 marks for 2 cwt of wood (at 1.20 marks per unit), 2.10 marks for 3 cwt of briquettes (at 0.70 marks per unit) and 2.25 marks for 25 kg of coal tar (at 0.09 marks per unit), altogether 6.75 marks.

"A weakly smoking heap of ashes" (ein schwach rauchender Aschehaufen) should be a sufficiently clear precision of what L&P meant when they referred to complete combustion.

It means complete combustion, but that doesn't mean complete reduction to ashes. They mention a "heap of ashes" in experiment I only (after 20 hours), but not "complete combustion." In fact, nowhere in the article does it state that complete combustion means reduction to ashes.

And again, they achieved more than the SS at the extermination camps, where the result of cremation was obviously less than complete combustion, requiring much crushing work afterwards.

I'm glad you agree again. Do tell more about the crushing machines. Or was it done with hammers?

So I didn’t say anything like the MKCS managed to burn people managed to cremate an average body with 22 kilograms of wood, contrary to what the straw-man toting smart-ass apparently tries to make believe.

The ratios actually achieved – 1.43 to 1 with the "raised human size brazier", about 2:1 with the system as modified to gain acceptance from religion-minded hindus – are not so bad, though, even though they are not as good as what L&P achieved.

I never said you did. The ratio you wrote was "actually achieved," i.e., 100 kg per body is not that clear in the articles. In two of them, it says his first pyre used "about" 100 kilograms, which could be anything from 100 kg to 150 kg. In another, they say it "can" burn a body using 100 kg of wood. Why they use 150 kg instead of 100 kg is not "to gain acceptance from religion-minded Hindus," because the amount of wood used is not an issue for them. The issue they have is that this is not a traditional pyre. They use 150 kg simply because 100 kg is obviously not enough for a complete cremation. In other words, it leaves too much charred remains.

50,000 litres, big deal. The 24-hour turnover of the small gas station in the example I provided in this blog, where I also demonstrated that the Nazis had a lot of fuel to "waste" (usage for a top-priority state project would hardly be considered a waste) in 1942/43, and furthermore that

German authorities didn’t consider it a waste to spend 68,000 liters of gasoline within 13 days[149] to burn the bodies of civilian air raid victims at Dresden in February/March 1945, at a time when the Reich had lost almost all of its petrol resources and its war machine was bogging down for lack of fuel, and
The daily petrol requirements of a single armored regiment were higher than those of corpse cremation at Sobibór if carried out with petrol as the main combustion agent, and even the daily requirements of Treblinka shown in Table 3.23 would have been below those of the 21st Panzer Division[151].

A lot of fuel, yeah.

Looking at it from that perspective, the liquid fuel issue certainly doesn't look like a big deal at all. I was wrong.

Toshiro
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 1:36 pm

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby Toshiro » 7 years 11 months ago (Sat Jan 07, 2012 8:24 pm)

Reply to Roberto:

Would it be more than 5,339.08 kCal/kg (which is not so far below the heating value of coking coal), even though the cow still has a lot of water in it? I don't quite believe it, but I'm open to my opponent convincing me.

I don't know. The only way to find out would be with an experiment.

Anyway, thanks for confirming that MGK's calculation (which doesn't take weight loss into consideration) is worthless.

So is yours (due to an obviously lower average weight than in reality and the ridiculously low amounts of wood).

This doesn't look like Egypt to me:

At which stage do you presume the majority of the corpses were at? Initial decay, putrefaction, black putrefaction, butyric fermentation or dry decay? Most of them would be buried, either by earth or by other corpses. This lack of oxygen slows down decomposition. Rain would also seep through the earth and corpses, keeping them moist. It is very unlikely any of the corpses would be at the "dry decay" stage.

Besides, my calculations (here and here) are not based on the assumption that all bodies would have been completely dehydrated. Our wisecracking friend is invited to check the degree of dehydration/weight loss that I considered depending on how long the bodies had been lying in the graves, and propose any corrections that he should think are necessary, also taking into account that I considered no dehydration/weight loss at all for corpses that had been lying in the graves less than a certain time, even though some dehydration/weight loss must have taken place also in these.

Yet are wrong nonetheless. See above.

Who said anything about well-nourished or fat corpses? Ettling speaks of corpses "that appeared to contain some fat":

Who cares what Ettling said? Here's from Ettling's source (Jean-François Steiner, Treblinka, 1967, pages 258-259):
Herbert Floss then revealed his secret: all the bodies did not burn at the same rate; there were good bodies and bad bodies, fire-resistant bodies and inflammable bodies. The art consisted in using the good ones to burn the bad ones. According to his investigations—and judging from the results, they were very thorough—the old bodies burned better than the new ones, the fat ones better than the thin ones, the women better than the men, and the children not as well as the women but better than the men. It was evident that the ideal body was the old body of a fat woman. Floss had these put aside. Then he had the men and children sorted too. When a thousand bodies had been dug up and sorted in this way, he proceeded to the loading, with the good fuel underneath and the bad above. He refused gasoline and sent for wood.

No corpses that "appeared to contain some fat," but fat corpses. There were also fire-resistant and inflammable corpses. And looks like they did dig through the heaps in search for fat corpses which they then used as Brennstoff. My joke wasn't that far off.
I also take back what I said about the liquid fuel issue. Why that is we read on page 352 of the 1994 version of the book:
[...] gasoline was becoming increasingly scarce. A German army had surrendered in Stalingrad, and the rich oil fields of the Caucasus had vanished like a mirage.

So there. Liquid fuel obviously was an issue, that's why the expert, Herbert Floss, decided not to use it, but used more wood instead. This means we can exclude gasoline out of the equation, but we must add more wood.

Such corpses would be found even among a generally malnourished ghetto population, as even in the ghetto some people lived better (and others much worse) than the average. Women generally have more fat than men, as far as I know. Women who had lost all or a significant part of their water but still retained some of their fat (let's ignore the fact that fatty acids into which fat breaks down are also flammable) would thus be the ideal candidates for being placed at the pyre's bottom. The corpses taken from the graves or gas chambers were deposited by the burning grates, and the supervisors instructed the Jewish workers to place those that "appeared to contain some fat", especially corpses of women, at the bottom. In a population about equally distributed among males and females, this wouldn't require much "digging through the heaps" let alone our "humorous" friend's mumbo-jumbo.

As to recalculating average weights, I look forward to a demonstration that an average adult weight based on underweight but not severely malnourished persons doesn't allow for a sufficient number of corpses "that appeared to contain some fat" from among a population that also included a significant proportion of severely malnourished persons, followed by a substantiated proposal of the "correct" average weight to be considered.

And since we're not looking for "corpses that appeared to contain some fat," but fat corpses, it would be silly if on one hand they were underweight and on the other overweight (fat). What this means is that the average weight was obviously closer to Mattogno's calculation of 60 to 70 kg, not your ridiculous 30 kg.

A rather unlikely proposition, as L&P compared the results of their experiments including experiment I (which resulted in "a weakly smoking heap of ashes") without pointing out that combustion was more complete in experiment I than in the other five experiments. Either they were comparing apples with oranges and misleading their readers, "Revisionist" style, or the degree of combustion was the same in all six experiments.

It most certainly wasn't only a heap of ashes that was left, as even in industrial modern-day cremation ovens there are bones that remain, especially the head, which are then crushed or simply buried. This was a sloppy job of the authors who didn't include all the details, especially the weight of the remains. And yes, the degree of combustion was the same or similar in all their examples; with obvious residues (bones and/or carbonized tissue).
And since we both agree such (or even worse) was the case with Nazi cremations, that is, partially cremated corpses; and that gasoline was scarce, thus forcing the Nazis to use even more wood instead, the Lothes and Profé experiments with low amounts of wood become irrelevant, as the Nazis obviously didn't use low amounts of wood.

What I actually think is that some bodies or body parts were reduced to ashes and didn't require much subsequent crushing/grinding, whereas others required more post-cremation processing.

Yes, the limbs would probably get reduced to ash, the arms at least, of the "non-fire-resistant" corpses.

Someone should explain to our "humorous" friend what is meant by could-shoulda-woulda-dooda crap and that it is not the same as an argument about possible or likely causes of certain phenomena. I'll give him the benefit of assuming that he didn't mean to compare apples with oranges here.

It's all subjective.

Says Toshiro. Is there any evidence from the time of L&P's experiments he can show us?

Not really. But one would expect better results from an industrial incinerator with fans and whatnot than a regular pit cremation, regardless of year.

How did they cremate animals and people before L&P's experiments? Very inefficiently as concerns fuel requirements, like the Hindus do to this day (unless they are using the Mokshda system).

That's right. A lot of wood was/is needed.

Or then the author meant to say that it had been thought impossible to destroy a carcass in an open fire efficiently as concerns time and fuel requirements, as the context of his statement suggests, and the moron here is the author of the above-quoted remark.

The context suggests no such thing. It merely states it was thought "impossible to destroy carcasses at an open fire," not fuel-efficiently. The author should have expressed himself better instead of deceiving the readers.

Not what L&P claimed to have achieved, see above. I think our friend's only alternative is to call them liars who compared the results of an experiment in which they achieved complete combustion to ashes (# I) with the results of experiments in which combustion was less than complete.

Sloppy work of the authors. See above.

I'll accept that anthrax bacilli can be destroyed without complete combustion if Toshiro should provide a source that says so, but it won't change the fact that, unless L&P were cheating their readers, they achieved complete combustion (ashes) in all their experiments and not just in experiment I.

I don't have a source. It says in the report: "Instructions have been given in a previous report for burning anthrax carcasses." Perhaps there is something of value in a previous report, but it's impossible for me to find or read it. And it wasn't a complete reduction to ashes.

Interesting enough for comparison purposes even if that was what both L&P and Toshiro's SS heroes achieved, even more interesting if L&P achieved complete combustion but the SS did not manage to completely combust all corpses or corpse parts.

Nothing to add.

I'll need someting more than Toshiro's hollering and foot-stomping to accept that L&P cheated their readers about the outcome of their experiments II to VI.

How about thinking logically.

I'll also need something more than Toshiro's hollering, foot-stomping, unsubstantiated claims and changes of subject to accept that Ettling was wrong in recalling cremation at Treblinka as a real-life parallel to his experiment. He may start by substantiating his "a lot more fat" claim.

See above.

Whose burning would set on fire the bodies on top of them, the easier the less water these corpses had left.

...and prevent air circulation between them. That's why it's recommended to use a single layer.

That's not how I understand the caption, and we seem to be looking at bird carcasses here. Birds have feathers, feathers may contain water that hinders the corpses' burning, as in this case. Is there anything with carcasses of beef cattle, sheep or swine? Pictures like those below suggest that the folks burning hundreds of thousands of carcasses during the 2001 FMD epidemic in the UK couldn't afford the luxury of singe-layer pyres.
Image
Millions of animals were slaughtered during the outbreak
Image
A cattle carcass in the United Kingdom is lowered onto a pyre covered in slaughtered livestock to be burned in 2001 because of a foot-and-mouth disease outbreak. Millions of cows were killed and the economy was damaged.

How do you understand it? Feathers are water-resistant; they keep birds dry in the rain and in water. They are oily and make water run off them. I didn't find anything special about carcasses of animals with hair, but should be no different. It's hard to tell anything from the first picture. The second one still looks like they're burning them in a single layer.

What is more, at Dresden they also had multi-layered pyres and managed to burn the corpses to ashes, as mentioned by both Irving and Taylor (quoted here). How come?

The Dresden pyres had wood layers alternating with the body layers. Logs and other flammable material was placed/thrown between the corpses.

Except, of course, that the term "complete combustion" (vollständige Verbrennung) suggests reduction to ashes already (carbonization would be an unvollständige Verbrennung), that combustion of a carcass cannot be more complete than when the same is reduced to a "weakly smoking heap of ashes", and that the results of experiments II to VI must have been the same as that of experiment I unless L&P were cheating their readers by comparing apples with oranges, "Revisionist" style.

Sloppy work. See above.

From the interrogation of Pavel Vladimirovich Leleko on 21 February 1945:
The bodies were laid on the rails of the incinerator where the fire burned already. Some 800-1000 bodies were laid on the incinerator at one time. They continued to burn for some five hours. This incinerator functioned ceaselessly day and night. After the bodies had been burned, the prisoners belonging to the "working crews" passed the ashes and remains of the bodies through a sieve. The parts of the body that had burned but had preserved their natural shape were put into a special mortar and pounded into flour. This was done in order to hide the traces of the crimes committed. Later on the ashes were buried in deep pits.

Interrogated by SMERSH. Garbage.

Anything from 90 to 110 maybe, but anything from 100 to 150 is way too generous.

Not really. But then, we also don't know the weight of the corpse.

Actually what this article says is the following:
Estimating that it should only take about 44 pounds (22 kilograms) of wood to cremate the average body (as opposed to the excessive 880 pounds, or 440 kilograms, typically consumed in a 6 hour long formal Hindu cremation), he built his first pyre in 1993, an elevated brazier (i.e. a metal pan or cooking device) under a roof with slats to maintain the heat, which allowed air to circulate and feed the fire.

While seemingly a good idea (it only used about 100 kilograms of wood and reduced the process to 2 hours), nobody was buying it. This prompted Agarwal and his team to "get religion on our side." Following consultations with a diverse array of priests, environmentalists and bureaucrats, he decided to embellish his system by incorporating marble flooring and a statue of the god Shiva. He dropped any reference to the use of iron due to its association with "the dark force" and used a chimney that caught the particle matter produced by the fire and released cleaner emissions.

So the initial device, which could burn a body with about 100 kg of wood within two hours, had to be modified in order to gain acceptance among religiously minded hindus, and not - as Toshiro's fertile fantasy would have it - because it didn't combust the body completely.

I didn't say it was modified because it didn't cremate the body entirely. I said the load was increased because 100 kg didn't do the job perfectly. It clearly states how it was modified (to get religion on their side). The additional 50 kg are so the job gets done and not leave any unwanted remains. Use your logic.

SKcz
Member
Member
Posts: 107
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 10:17 am

Re: Chelmno book released

Postby SKcz » 7 years 11 months ago (Sun Jan 08, 2012 9:09 am)

I would like to corrrect Mattogno alleged estimate, he clearly stated regarding the weight of fresh corpse

"The data calculated in the previous chapter – the cremation of 90
bodies in 24 hours with a consumption of 7,750 kg of coal – are valid
for corpses with an average weight of 60 kg, which is that of the alleged
victims of gassing (see Graf/Kues/Mattogno 2010, pp. 130-133.)"

CHELMNO. A GERMAN CAMP IN HISTORY AND PROPAGANDA, Carlo Mattogno, 2009, 2011, p. 89


For example, for Belzec, he wrote

"If in Poland in 1931 the number of the children of 14 years of age and under made up 29.6% of the total population, that is little less than 1/3, and their medium weight was 35 kg, while that of an adult was 70 kg, then the medium weight of 3 persons (two adults and one child) would be ([70 + 70 + 35]: 3 =) 58,3 kg, giving a weight of 45 kg corresponding to a medium loss of 35% of the watery content due to desiccation."

Mattogno Response to R. Muehlenkamp
http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcgvhcrm.html

"The cremation of a corpse of 46 kg (average assumed weight, including allowance
for presumed children) requires about 160 kg of firewood."

BELZEC IN PROPAGANDA, TESTIMONIES, ARCHEOLOGICAL RESEARCH & HISTORY, Carlo Mattogno, 2004/2011, p. 84


So 58,3-60 kg for fresh body (including children) and 45-46kg for decomposed body (based on Belzec conditions)

As you can see here, quote from Treblinka (Mattogno/Graf, p. 145)

“The incredible complexity of the mass-grave problem frustrated the
Germans. Their dismay was legitimate. Treblinka’s soil contained 700,000
bodies – a volume of 69,000 cubic meters weighing 35,000 tons, the same
as a medium size battleship."

Konnilyn G. Feig, Hitler’s Death Camps. The Sanity of Madness, Holmes & Meier Publishers,
New York-London 1981, pp. 306f.


The estimates given by Mattogno are quite generous since even the Jewish historian assumed 50kg (35000000 / 700000) for decomposed body. End of controversy for me, these estimates sound plausible, to be generous I would personally subtract 5kg since I think that they were not that well fed and this makes cremations as alleged still absolutely impossible. So for me 54kg per fresh body and 40kg per decomposed body. These mine personal estimates don´t make Mattogno´s arguments less convincing and I agree with his estimates since the difference isn´t significant for final result.

Assumed weight of 30kg per fresh or decomposed body and other similar estimates, this sound absurd to me and without a basis, in the light of testimonies speaking about "fat corpses" which were used to burn bodies which were placed on them it sound even more absurd to me.

Even with 30kg per decomposed corpse, the amount of wood is still huge, I did quick estimates using data given by "controvesialists" (30kg per corpse, 1,3kg of wood per 1kg of flesh (no bones) for 870 resp. 152 thousands of vicitims) and get 68 hectares for Treblinka or 30 hectares for Chelmno (1,3kg wood is average from numbers which I saw from controvesialists since their estimates are a bit messy and i don´t know exactly their final number and also I am not expert regarding their claims). For timber production I used data provided in Mattogno´s books based on sources (Treblinka 500 tons of wood per hectare and 200 tons per hectare in Chelmno). Treblinka was cca 14 hectares and Chelmno cca 9 hectares, so area of harvested forest is really huge even with their estimate and don´t forget that wood wasn´t dry but fresh. I don´t know what they want to achieve since their estimates are still big problem for cremations. But as I said, these calculations are based on wrong data so I can´t agree with them.

Can someone provide me with more information regarding this quote?

Estimating that it should only take about 44 pounds (22 kilograms) of wood to cremate the average body

http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technol ... india.html


"estimating", "should" - so this actually never happened and they speak only theoretically? For me it sounds impossible to cremate average body with 22kg of wood. Average body (cca 75kg since we are talking about normal nourished adults and not children) 22 / 75 = 0,29kg of wood per kilogram? This sound impossible to me.

You can see here how much of a dry wood and how much of an additional flammable material is needed to cremate only one average fresh and clean dressed body in three to four hours. I think that this is the best what we can have regarding the open-air cremation of human corpse. No animal examples needed i think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMOJXPiz ... lated%3Cbr

Please, notice that the pyre is of different design which is much better than the alleged "rail pyre" design with several layers of corpes placed on the rails.

C04. I challenge anybody to provide me with proof that 0,3kg of wood is enough to cremate 1kg of flesh and bones.

C05. I challenge anybody to provide me with sources and proofs, from where they brought the needed wood for cremation of alleged number of victims of camp Chelmno.

C06. I challenge anybody to provide me with proofs of existence of mass graves which contain/contained alleged number of buried bodies/ashes/bones of alleged victims, I would like to see excavations, I want to see photos, videos, documented human remains and graves and witnesses to these excavations.


edit - corrected little mistake - no "distract 5kg", but "subtract 5kg" of course.
edit 2 - I added challenge numbers.
Last edited by SKcz on Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests