acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1658
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Moderator » 5 years 9 months ago (Sun Feb 09, 2014 4:54 pm)

Bob, I see subtlety is not your forte.
You continue to post antagonistic content, now towards me. So until you debate in good faith your posts will be ..., well you know.
The continuance of such behavior may well lead to you being deactivated. No one is special here.
M1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Hannover » 5 years 9 months ago (Sun Feb 09, 2014 6:07 pm)

Furthermore, in actuality, Mattogno supports my point, i.e. in addressing Pressac.
Let us recapitulate: when the Birkenau ovens were in operation, the chimneys of the crematoria smoked continuously. This could not be avoided, because ....
Taken from: http://vho.org/tr/2004/1/Mattogno73-78.html
Sorry, continuously means, well, continuously, and the photos, aerial and ground, which are quite numerous never ever show such smoke. We do see photos of chimneys with a little soot, but as I have stated, the causes were irregular and hardly "continuous". The rest of Mattogno's 'smoking chimneys' points become superfluous.
Mattogno's and Bob's logic would have us believe that the cremation process was stopped every time a photo was taken. I rather think not. The normally impeccable Mattogno falters here. Besides, there are simply endless other factors which demolish Pressac and the impossible 'gassings then cremations' storyline.

Mattogno says:
... because the aerial photographs known to him (which show no smoke coming from the chimneys) were taken at a time when mass gassings and incinerations were supposed to have taken place and thus the crematoria could not, under any circumstances, have been inactive.
Again, there is no smoke which Mattogno claims always occurred during cremations at Auschwitz/Birkenau ... regardless of whether one accepts the exterminationist position or the Revisionist position. If one buys Mattogno's line of thought we should be seeing smoking chimneys in either case, we do not.
All the nonsense from "eyewitnesses" about volcano-like chimneys is also refuted by the simple fact that no smoke can be shown have been regularly emitted from the cremation chimneys at Auschwitz/Birkenau.

Why was this photo altered by the Wiesenthal Center if there were 'continuously smoking chimneys'?
Image vs. Image

Mattogno has done a great service in addressing the impossible 'holocaust' storyline, he has done nice work in debunking the 'flaming chimneys' nonsense in this same cited link, but he apparently has stumbled with his 'continuously smoking chimneys' point.

The tide is turning

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

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

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Werd » 5 years 8 months ago (Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:40 pm)

Perhaps I am being the devil's advocate here, but is there not a possibility of a reconciliation? A middle ground?

We have witness statements that the chimneys were smoking and spewing fire. Constantly even. But Hannover you have stated that on the sole issue of flames coming out of chimneys Mattogno's work on Auschwitz's crematory ovens are correct in proving that it would been impossible for flames to rise that high and for so long. Especially considering how very few bodies could actually fit in the ovens at once - whereas at least one witness laughingly claims eight corpses could be fit into one muffle at a time. :lol: The aerial and ground photos prove that the witnesses are lying because they claim the chimneys were ALWAYS spewing fire. Well they had to say that to make it seem like thousands of bodies were burned every day; only this statement uttered to gullible people could make the four million number believeable. But the capacity to burn that many bodies daily simply was not intrinsic to the crematory ovens in Auschwitz-Birkenau. So Mattogno is correc there I feel.

Now on the issue of smoke coming from chimneys. It is fair to say that it stretches the bounds of induction to think that Nazis were so sneaky and omniscient as to stop the cremations every time an aerial photo or ground photo was being taken so as to attempt to conceal the flames coming out of the chimneys. But since flames can not come out of a chimney of an Auschwitz crematory oven, it seems to me to be a dead issue and not worth arguing over. So all that is left is the issue of smoke. If we grant that the nazis were not burning thousands of bodies a day, is it not conceivable to think that the only reason they burned bodies was to stop the spread of disease? In fact Mattogno cites document after document about SS officers trying to come up with ways to deal with the mortality rate from diseases in the camp. So if THIS was the ONLY reason to burn bodies, and after a few rounds of battles with typhus or whatever, they had the problem relatively under control. And therefore, they would not actually be having to burn that many bodies that very often. Thus, why would it be insane to think that the crematory ovens were so non regular in their activity (for burning bodies to stop diseases from spreading), that they of course would not be showing smoke when photographed in the air or from on the ground?

What am I missing? Perhaps I need to go back through Mattogno's collection of witness statements, see if I can find any dates for claims of cremation FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE of stopping the spread of disease (remember as already established, any specific dates given by witnesses for flaming chimneys are a dead issue) and then line THOSE up with the dates of any ariel or ground photos of the crematorium. If someone has already done THAT, I would like to know the article and book.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Hannover » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 12:35 pm)

Werd:
Thus, why would it be insane to think that the crematory ovens were so non regular in their activity (for burning bodies to stop diseases from spreading), that they of course would not be showing smoke when photographed in the air or from on the ground?
AFAIK cremations were rather regular due to the persistence of the typhus problem. Naturally there would have been periods of higher volume as the typhus problem ebbed & flowed.

The tide is turning.

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

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

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Werd » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:44 pm)

Found an old thread.
Smoke from crematorium chimneys in aerial photos
I cite: "however if there is no example where the aerial photos show smoke from a chimney it becomes uncertain whether aerial photography was able to detect the amount of smoke which the kremas produced."

And
I think there may be a misunderstanding. I was not saying it called into question the fact that the chimneys produced smoke; I said it called into question the idea that the smoke would be visible on the aerial photographs. (I tend to think it would, but only on the sharper ones; however if there is no example where the aerial photos show smoke from a chimney it becomes uncertain whether aerial photography was able to detect the amount of smoke which the kremas produced.)

That is an interesting issue. Because as this article demonstrates,
http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/ ... chwitz.php
there are problems with some of the photos and there is now at least one fully documented example of defects in the photographs being mistaken for a puff of smoke. However, the above quote from the old thread I think strikes at the heart of the issue here. Especially since that article also states, "Although I do not wish to argue here that coke-fired crematory chimneys of that era did not emit smoke, I will show in the following that Mattogno’s air photo evidence is flawed." In my view so far, we seem to be fighting over nothing. Chimneys smoke when there is combustion going on. Mattogno has demonstrated this.
http://vho.org/tr/2004/1/Mattogno73-78.html
That article was even posted here before and assent was even given to it.
New!! Flames & Smoke from Chimneys of Auschwitz-Birkenau
So as for the claim that cremations to stop the spread of disease were regular and were going on even when the ariel photos were being taken, but that the crematoria do not emit smoke because they are not detected in the photos flies in the face of what mattogo wrote (and what was agreed with previously), and also ignores the question of the low level quality of some of the photographs. So I think here, we should not be attacking Mattogno, but the inability of the photographs to capture the smoke that was active during the cremations to stop typhus. But attacking a photograph does nothing. It's just a piece of paper, or in this day an age, a digital image that was once a piece of paper before it was scanned into a hard drive.

So in my view, Bob and Hannover, you two are arguing about the wrong thing. Because Mattogno has proven that flames could not have risen out of those chimneys in the Birkenau ovens, all testimony about what days the ovens were active to cremate the bodies of gassing victims are to be DISCARDED since there were no gas chambers. So with Carlo Mattogno's article proving that flames could not have come out of chimney's we can know for sure that Tauber was a communist liar.

Carlo Mattogno. Auschwitz: The Case For Sanity.

10.2.10. Flaming chimneys

Tauber states (p. 134):

“But there were also cases when we put a greater number of bodies
into the muffle. Eight Muselmänner also found space in a muffle. We burned these greater loads during air raids, unbeknown to the crematorium Kapo: we did this so there would be larger flames coming out of the chimney and the aviators would notice this.”


This tale is absurd on two counts. First of all, as I have pointed out elsewhere (2003c, pp. 386-391), the appearance of flames on the chimneys of the Birkenau crematoria as an effect of their use was technically impossible.

Flames are physically impossible. Smoke however, is not.
http://vho.org/tr/2004/1/Mattogno73-78.html

That was my earlier point, which I am restating again. The only true and valuable testimonies about the oven activity is cremating the bodies to cull the spread of disease. Couple that with admitting that the photographs likely were incapable of capturing smoke during said cremations to stop disease, I think there is very little to argue over anymore.

That is my view on the subject.

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

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Werd » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:39 pm)

The undressing room and the gas chamber were covered first with a concrete slab then a layer of soil sown with grass. There were four small chimneys, the openings through which the gas was thrown in, that rose above the gas chamber. These openings were closed by concrete covers with two handles.

Over the undressing room, the ground was higher than the level of the yard and perfectly flat. The ventilation ducts let to the [air extraction] pipes and the chimneys located in the part of the building above the corridor and undressing room. I would point out that at first the undressing room had neither benches nor clothes hooks and there were no showers in the gas chamber. These fittings were not installed until autumn 1943 in order to camouflage the undressing room and gas chamber as a bathing and disinfestation facility. The showers were fitted to small blocks of wood sealed into the concrete roof of the gas chamber. There were no pipes connected to these showers, from which no water ever flowed.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=82890

Oh yea sure they were Mr. Tauber. I'm also sure we can believe the original document to be geunine or at least not written and signed under threat of torture because god knows German soldiers were never put through that kind of stuff. :lol:

Carlo Mattogno. Auschwitz: The Case For Sanity pages 221-222.

Pressac publishes the document in question, drawn up in German; our translation is as follows:345
“Part of a report rendered by SS Sturmbannführer Franke- Gricksch on a trip through the General Government on 4 to 16 May 1943. [This heading is typed in English in Lipmann’s typescript]

R e s e t t l e m e n t – A c t i o n
of the Jews
A special task in the arrangement of the Jewish question has
[been given to] the A u s c h w i t z camp. The most modern
measures enable the Führer order to be carried out within the shortest
possible time and without major commotion.
The so-called ‘resettlement action’ of the Jews takes place in the
following manner:
The Jews arrive, toward nightfall, in special trains (freight-cars)
and are being routed on special tracks into dedicated enclosed areas
of the camp. There, they are unloaded and examined, first of all, by
a medical commission in the presence of the camp commander and
several SS officers to determine their fitness for work. Here, all
those who can be integrated into the work process in any way, will
go[346] into a special camp. The temporarily sick are moved immediately
to the hospital camp and made healthy again by special food,
the basic rule being: to maintain any kind of manpower for work. The former way of ‘resettlement action’ is refused in its entirety, as
one cannot afford to continually destroy important work energies.
Those unfit go into a larger house, into the basement rooms
which have access from the outside. One goes down 5-6 steps and
enters a longish, well built and aerated basement room which is
equipped with benches on its right and left sides. It is brightly lit and there are numbers above the benches. The prisoners are told that,
for their new tasks, they will have to be disinfected and cleaned and
must therefore undress completely to be bathed. In order to avoid
any kind of panic or commotion they are ordered to fold their
clothes properly and place them below the numbers they have been
assigned in order to find them again after the bath. Everything
proceeds in utter calmness.
Then one passes through a small passage
and enters a large basement room which is similar to a showerbath.
In this room, there are three large columns. From outside the
basement room one can lower certain agents into these columns.
Once 300-400 people are assembled in this space, the doors are
closed and the containers with the substances are lowered into the
columns. As soon as the containers touch the bottom of the column
they generate particular substances which put the people to sleep
within one minute. A few minutes later, the door at the other end
which leads to a lift opens. The hair of the corpses is cut and other
experts (Jews) break out the teeth (gold teeth). One has come to
know that the Jews keep hidden in hollow teeth jewels, gold, platinum
etc.
After that, the corpses are loaded into elevators and are taken to
the first upper floor. There, there are 10 large crematorium ovens in
which the corpses are burned. As fresh corpses burn particularly
well, only ½ – 1 metric hundredweight [Zentner] of coke are needed
for the whole procedure. This work is carried out by Jewish detainees
who will never leave this camp.
Output of this ‘resettlement action’ to date: 500,000 Jews.
Present capacity of ‘the resettlement action’ ovens: 10,000 in 24
hours.
[Handwritten note:] I affirm, that this [is] a true copy of the original
report.
Eric M. Lipmann”


Leaving aside the certainly not irrelevant question of the origin and
the authenticity of the document – a retyped copy, appearing as late as
1976, of the carbon copy of an original that was never found, the carbon
copy having been discovered at an unknown location and transmitted to
an unknown person, with the carbon copy then disappearing as well –
we will pass on immediately to Pressac’s critical comment (p. 239):

A story from Tauber just wouldn't be believable without even the smallest detail being forged such as benches and numbered hooks in change rooms that are next to the gas chambers. And people wonder why there are holocaust skeptics? Wait I know why the dressing room with the benches was brightly lit. Not because of any lights, but because of the flaming chimneys in Birkenau. The smoke from the chimneys with just one or two bodies per muffle wasn't doing it, so you threw in extra bodies, sometimes four or five to create fire in the chimneys to signal to the allied planes flying overhead. Well you guys sure got those native Americans beat. They only did smoke signals but you managed to somehow suspend the laws of science and create fire signals. So if the laws of nature were suspended, then maybe God WAS with the Jews in the camps. Maybe you should explain that to all those rabbis who put God on trial for the holocaust. :lol:

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Hannover » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:45 pm)

So as for the claim that cremations to stop the spread of disease were regular and were going on even when the ariel photos were being taken, but that the crematoria do not emit smoke because they are not detected in the photos flies in the face of what mattogo wrote (and what was agreed with previously), and also ignores the question of the low level quality of some of the photographs. So I think here, we should not be attacking Mattogno, but the inability of the photographs to capture the smoke that was active during the cremations to stop typhus. But attacking a photograph does nothing. It's just a piece of paper, or in this day an age, a digital image that was once a piece of paper before it was scanned into a hard drive.

So in my view, Bob and Hannover, you two are arguing about the wrong thing. Because Mattogno has proven that flames could not have risen out of those chimneys in the Birkenau ovens, all testimony about what days the ovens were active to cremate the bodies of gassing victims are to be DISCARDED since there were no gas chambers. That was my earlier point, which I am restating again. The only true and valuable testimonies about the oven activity is cremating the bodies to cull the spread of disease. Couple that with admitting that the photographs likely were incapable of capturing smoke during said cremations to stop disease, I think there is very little to argue over anymore.
Of all the countless photos, none captured crematory smoke? Seriously? Given the vast numbers of photos, that is statistically impossible if there was crematory smoke to be seen.
And there are a few photo where smoke is seen, albeit not from a crematory chimney, a trash heap most likely, but smoke can be seen by the camera, obviously. So the 'these cameras could not see smoke' excuse doesn't fly.
quote below from: http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/ ... chwitz.php
Hence, as of this day there is not a single known air photo [or ground photo] of Auschwitz-Birkenau showing smoke coming out of any of the crematories. Yet there are several showing smoke billowing from a limited area in the yard of Crematory V, as for instance also on the one shot three days later, on Aug. 23, 1944, and on one taken on July 8 of that year. Aerial photography is unable to prove that witness statements of profusely smoking crematory chimneys at Auschwitz-Birkenau are accurate. In fact, the absense of smoke in these photographs suggests just the opposite.
The flaming chimneys claim, even without Mattogno's work, does not hold up to rational examination, never has. So Mattogno's work on that is in no way supportive for his "continuous" smoke claim. Crematory smoke is just not there to be seen because it just wasn't there ... except perhaps upon initial firing up, malfunctions, or perhaps unexpected moisture. We do see soot which could have been created by any of those, or all of those.

I'm willing to be wrong, but heretofore I have seen no smoking chimneys, yet I should according to "survivors", who also claim the laughable fire breathing chimneys
Mattogno, with whom I disagree with on this point, placed too much emphasis on what he thought was smoke in a picture, see previous quote.

Yes I did post the OP here:
New!! Flames & Smoke from Chimneys of Auschwitz-Birkenau
I stand by it on the fire issue, have come to disagree about the smoke.

In many ways this discussion is mere naval gazing. A side show. The 'gassings and resultant cremations' tale falls apart for endless reasons, regardless of whether there was continuous crematory smoke or not.

The tide is turning.

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

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

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Werd » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:15 pm)

Hannover wrote:Of all the countless photos, none captured crematory smoke? Seriously? Given the vast numbers of photos, that is statistically impossible if there was crematory smoke to be seen.

The issue to me seems not to be whether there was smoke at all coming from cematoria in Birkenau. I have seen no literatire that contradicts Mattogno's interpretation of the German literature that these ovens had no choice but to emit smoke. The question is were the pictures of high enough quality to be able to capture smoke accurately? And as that one article you recommended shows,
inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2012/volume_4/number_4/smoking_crematory_chimney_at_auschwitz.php
the answer is not necessarily. The author even said, " I do not wish to argue here that coke-fired crematory chimneys of that era did not emit smoke." To me that is interesting. Especially given photos in this old thread that allegedly did show signs of smoke. So maybe I need to back off the idea that no photo was good enough to capture it.
Smoke from crematorium chimneys in aerial photos

And there is an aerial photo where smoke is seen, albeit not from a crematory chimney, a trash heap most likely, but smoke can be seen by the camera, obviously. So the 'these cameras could not see smoke' excuse doesn't fly.

Okay fair enough. Can I see this photo? Also, here is what Mattogno said with the word "continuous" in it.

Let us recapitulate: when the Birkenau ovens were in operation, the chimneys of the crematoria smoked continuously. This could not be avoided, because...

In other words, the cematoria smoked when they were in operation. The inverse of that means that when there were not bodies being burned in the ovens, and thus nothing to combust, there would be no smoke. Seems pretty simple to me. So if a photo is able to show smoke, the ovens are on. If a picture from the same distance with the same clarity shows the same location and a different time but there is no smoke, then it is clear the ovens are empty and therefore not smoking. Let's say there is a photo of someone burning a trash heap taken from X feet aboe the ground and it captures the trash heap, and the smoke. We establish that a photo from X feet above the ground can capture smoke. Now assume that another photo was taken from X feet above the grouna and yet no smoke would be seen. Clearly it means there is no fire source anywhere at that different time.

I'm willing to be wrong, but heretofore I have seen no smoking chimneys, yet I should:
- according to "survivors", who also claim the laughable fire breathing chimneys

Liars of course. We can agree on that.

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

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Werd » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:32 pm)

During the incineration of such [not emaciated] corpses, we used the coke only to light the fire of the furnace initially, for fatty corpses burned of their own accord thanks to the combustion of the body fat. On occasion, when coke was in short supply, we would put some straw and wood in the ash bins under the muffles, and once the fat of the corpse began to burn the other corpses would catch light themselves. […] Generally speaking, we burned 4 or 5 corpses at a time in one muffle, but sometimes we charged a greater number of corpses. It was possible to charge up to 8 “Müselmanns.” Such big charges were incinerated without the knowledge of the head of the crematorium during air raid warnings in order to attract the attention of airmen by having a bigger fire emerging from the chimney.
http://www.whale.to/b/henryk_tauber.html


But Bob claims such an activity would / did give off smoke, see above. He then dodges the damning aerial photos by saying the crematorium were not active, which flies in the face of the timeline of the story. The photos were taken at the time of alleged 24/7 'massive industrial assembly-line gassings and cremations'. No smoke is visible in the photos, but according to Bob, smoke should be visible. Bob's position is not manageable.

Yes, and since there was no 24/7 assembly line killing machinations, it means the ovens were not always on. Which would explain why so many photos show an absense of smoke. BECAUSE THE REVISIONISTS ARE RIGHT AND HAVE ALWAYS BEEN RIGHT. NO 24/7 killing line means NO smoke always coming out of the ovens. The ovens were not on 24/7. But you seem to be saying they were on a lot Hannover due to the attempt to stop typhus and a need to cremate the corpses. Well where are the German documents indicating such? Why should I believe the typhus epidemic was so scary and contagious that bodies were being burned all the time so much that smoke would be seen in the photos, except for the alleged fact these ovens did not emit smoke? What is documented about the severity levels of the typhus epidemic and the corresponding activity of the ovens to try and fight it?

I have seen a few German documents quoted by Mattogno stressing the need for more ovens and/or repairs to be done for sure. But I will have to go back and find them, check the dates and get a rough estimate of the week or two weeks they were having a problem containing typhus and then cross reference them with known, properly dated photographs. We might find some photograph dates showing smoke matching with the timeline of a document talking about fears about the spread of typhus. We might not. But things like that would settle this issue once and for all I feel.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Hannover » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:40 pm)

As requested, smoke 'captured accurately':

Image
more here:
http://vho.org/tr/2004/4/Rudolf444f.html

Werd:
"Let us recapitulate: when the Birkenau ovens were in operation, the chimneys of the crematoria smoked continuously. This could not be avoided, because..."
In other words, the cematoria smoked when they were in operation. The inverse of that means that when there were not bodies being burned in the ovens, and thus nothing to combust, there would be no smoke. Seems pretty simple to me.
You are going around in circles. I have already stated that given the large typhus problem, cremations were rather regular, so given all the photos that exist, statistically some at least should have captured crematory smoke if the smoke was present during normal operation. To say there were no cremations when the all of these photos (aerial and ground) were taken simply defies the fact that typhus abatement cremations were quite frequent.
I have seen no literatire that contradicts Mattogno's interpretation of the German literature that these ovens had no choice but to emit smoke.
I have seen no official literature stating that the Auschwitz/Birkenau crematories routinely gave off smoke. Please show us this German literature for review.

The tide is turning.

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

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

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Werd » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:05 pm)

http://vho.org/tr/2004/4/Rudolf444f.html
In January of 2004, the international news media announced that Keele University has now indeed opened a website offering access to some of its air photos, accessible at www.evidenceincamera.co.uk. Unfortunately, however, only the British air photos seem to be offered for public access, but not the German negatives.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

As could be expected, the media hype generated around this “discovery” – a discovery made possible because of the selfless efforts of just one almost unknown revisionist – was filled with the usual lies. The German news magazine Der Spiegel, for example, headlined on Jan. 19, 2004, “Five Million Pictures of Horror” and quoted the British news Agency Reuters:

Image
Picture as published by Spiegel magazine. Below: section enlargement with explanatory captions.
Image

“Burning Corpses in the concentration camp [...] concentration camp Auschwitz on August 23, 1944: white clouds of smoke from burning corpses. [...] One of the photos shows the concentration camp of Auschwitz at the climax of extermination madness. On this picture, a white cloud rolls over the country. According to the National Archive, it stems from a mass grave and not from the chimney of a crematorium. In 1943 and 1944, some 430,000 Hungarian Jews were murdered in Auschwitz – too many to be cremated in the cremation ovens of the extermination camp. [...] ‘The pictures moved my very much,’ says Allan Williams of the British Aerial Reconnaissance Archives at Keele University. ‘To my knowledge no other reconnaissance photos of Auschwitz of that time exist.’”

That is of course wrong, since the U.S. published some of the photos of that camp, taken by U.S. and Canadian airplanes, back in 1979,2 and John C. Ball published his analysis of many air photos of the U.S. National Archives relating to alleged Holocaust crimes scenes back in 1992.3

I checked the Spiegel article and I found no small picture with captions like above. So those captions and that enlarement are those of Rudolf's. The date given is August 23 1944. Rudolf continues.

From this series of newly released British photos, one copy found particular attention: a photo of the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp of Aug. 23, 1944 (see illustration and the mentioned Spiegel article). It shows smoke coming from an small area north of crematorium V, that is, from the same area where a little smoke is also seen on a photo of May 31, 1944, as it was published and analyzed by Ball, and another photo taken by a German plane on July 8, 1994 (see illustration).

Image
British air photo of Auschwitz, Aug. 23, 1944, section with smoke close to crematorium V. Lines added to trace back location and size of fire.

So this is the same photo, just in a better resolution.
But before shrieking “This is the proof for the gas chambers, for the extermination, for mass murder, for the Holocaust,” I may remind the reader that this picture shows smoke coming from an area measuring perhaps some 100 square meters or less. According to witness claims and to the established version of the ‘Holocaust,’ however, the pits, in which ten thousand of Jews were allegedly incinerated, were located outside of the camp’s immediate perimeter, close to the so-called Bunkers, and they would have covered an area of many tens of thousands square meters, if they really had been able to incinerate that many bodies. In addition to this, we would expect not only to see smoke in this pictures, but also other obvious traces of: pits, mounds of excavated earth, piles of woods as fuel, a wide area around these items marked by massive human activity (i.e., transporting of corpses, fuel, ashes, etc.), leading to the destruction of the vegetation in this area.

Nothing of this can be seen on this or other photos taken between May and September 1944.

Image
German air photo of Auschwitz of July 8, 1944, section with smoke close to crematorium V.4 Lines added to trace back location and size of fire.
Though this one photo of the Royal Air Force indicates that a moderate size fire burned north of crematorium V on August 23, 1944, it does not show exactly what burned in this fire. But this photo clearly refutes claims of mass extermination with subsequent mass incineration in huge pits – just as similar air photos taken by Canadian and American reconnaissance planes. This very air photo, which is published all over the world as evidence allegedly proving the Holocaust in Auschwitz, actually proves exactly the opposite: the Holocaust is a lie, and the media continue to lie about this topic.

So we have August 23 1944 from the British and July 8 1944 from the Germans. So the question becomes, what was burning in these photos? Nobody knows apparently. But in the British photo the smoke is apparently coming from something north of Krema V, and is not coming from Krema V itself. So if these pictures are going to capture smoke, then smoke was able to have been captured in film. So if there is a place where smoke is absent, that must mean there is no source for smoke. But you say the ovens did not give off smoke because if they did, more smoke would show up in more photos. But that assumes a lot of cremation was going on to stop typhus at the time those photos were taken. But again, how do we know this for sure? How can you prove that around the dates these photos with no smoke were taken, that the ovens were working to burn corpses riddled with typhus? Matching dates are needed.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Hannover » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:18 pm)

Almost forgot this.
Werd:
Well where are the German documents indicating such? Why should I believe the typhus epidemic was so scary and contagious that bodies were being burned all the time so much that smoke would be seen in the photos, except for the alleged fact these ovens did not emit smoke? What is documented about the severity levels of the typhus epidemic and the corresponding activity of the ovens to try and fight it?
The document deluxe would be the German death registries which show that 69,000 people died during the dates of these books, some volumes are curiously 'missing in the Russian archives', of course. :roll: One could extrapolate from these numbers an estimated total number. And that's not so good for the 'holocaust' Industry.
see:
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p265_Weber.html
Do the math for number of deaths vs. number of days, and there you go, a lot of cremations on so many,many days.

The tide is turning.
- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Hannover » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:29 pm)

Werd:
I checked the Spiegel article and I found no small picture with captions like above. So those captions and that enlarement are those of Rudolf's.
Yes, so what? Rudolf clearly stated:
Below: section enlargement with explanatory captions.

Werd:
So we have August 23 1944 from the British and July 8 1944 from the Germans. So the question becomes, what was burning in these photos? Nobody knows apparently. But in the British photo the smoke is apparently coming from something north of Krema V, and is not coming from Krema V itself. So if these pictures are going to capture smoke, then smoke was able to have been captured in film. So if there is a place where smoke is absent, that must mean there is no source for smoke. But you say the ovens did not give off smoke because if they did, more smoke would show up in more photos. But that assumes a lot of cremation was going on to stop typhus at the time those photos were taken. But again, how do we know this for sure? How can you prove that around the dates these photos with no smoke were taken, that the ovens were working to burn corpses riddled with typhus? Matching dates are needed.
I've already explained, please read what I post.
Perhaps you need matching dates, I do not.
What was burning is irrelevant, the visible smoke captured on film is relevant.

The tide is turning.

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

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

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Werd » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 11:20 pm)

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p265_Weber.html
Do the math for number of deaths vs. number of days, and there you go, a lot of cremations on so many,many days.

3 cases of typhus mentioned. That ain't much. Many days does not equal all days. Also Graf seems to think that the chimenys of Auschwitz emitted smoke.

Hence, considering the historical context, the meaning of the term
special treatment/Sonderbehandlung in the Aktenvermerk of January 29,
1943, can only be an extension of its hygieno-sanitary significance
mentioned above, i.e. the “available machines” would still have allowed,
even under restricted circumstances, a cremation satisfactory
from the point of view of sanitation and hygiene, that is to say a complete
(incineration) and not only partial (carbonization) cremation.
The importance of the forced-draft units and of the furnace blowers
to achieve an irreproachable cremation derives also from other sources.
Prüfer himself, during his interrogation by the Soviet captain Shatanovski,
declared (Graf 2002, p. 404):

“In the civilian crematoria preheated air is injected by means of
special bellows, causing the corpse to burn more quickly and without
smoke. The design of the crematoria in the concentration camps
is different; it does not allow any preheating of air, which causes the
corpse to burn more slowly and with production of smoke. A ventilation
is used to reduce the smoke and the smell of the burning
corpse.”


To reduce the production of smoke, it was believed in the 1940s that
a better draft of the chimney (hence the inclusion of devices to increase
the draft) and a higher combustion air feed (hence the installation of
blowers for the muffles) were needed. The importance of the presence
of these blowers is borne out by a Topf letter dated June 6, 1942, in
which the company asked the Auschwitz ZBL to ship to Buchenwald “a
blower with motor,” otherwise it would not have been possible to start
up the triple-muffle crematorium oven which had just been built.298 As I
have explained above, Bischoff’s request for 10 gas flue analyzers (Gasprüfer) for the crematoria ovens fits precisely into this context. The
meaning of Swoboda’s words, therefore, is that, even though the essential
equipment for the cremations could be used only in a limited way, it
was still possible to achieve an irreproachable incineration from the hygieno-
sanitary point of view.

197-8. Auschwitz: The Case For Sanity


But with this example...
It is clear, though, that the wisp of smoke from the northern yard of
crematorium V cannot have escaped the attention of Nevin Bryant. This
means that Shermer and Grobman as well as van Pelt preferred, in fact,
not to mention it – obviously because they realized that such a minute
open-air cremation activity was at variance with the declarations of all
the members of the so-called “Sonderkommando”!
Van Pelt also keeps quiet about another important point connected
with the aerial photographs: the question of smoke coming from the
crematorium chimneys. Polemicizing against Germar Rudolf, van Pelt
devotes half a page of his book to the demonstration that the chimneys
of the crematoria at Auschwitz-Birkenau always belched smoke during
the cremations. He writes, i.a., the following (2002, p. 504):

The Proceedings of the Associations of American Cemetery Superintendents provided ample evidence of continuous search by crematory
engineers to control the smoke, and that only by 1940 was
the problem solved by a combination of practices that included using
oil and gas instead of coke as fuel, inserting the corpse into a cold instead of a preheated oven,[478] slowing down the incineration, installing
afterburners and air-pollution control scrubbers, and establishing
procedures for maintenance. None of these practices applied
to the Auschwitz crematoria.”


Hence, while cremations went on, the chimneys always smoked.
This is perfectly true. As late as 1945 the problem of smoke haunted
even the civilian crematoria,479 all the more so the installations at Auschwitz,
both because of the absence of recuperators to preheat the
combustion air and because of the inefficient operation of the ovens
which precluded the control of individual muffles. Van Pelt, however,
has avoided to draw the inevitable conclusions from this state of the
matter. In the whole series of aerial photographs taken in 1944 (May 21,
June 26, July 8, August 20, 23 & 25, September 13) and showing the
crematoria of Birkenau, smoke from crematoria appears only on one
such photo, that of August 20, and only over the chimney of one crematorium
(no. III). This photograph is of particular importance, because
besides the chimney of crematorium III it shows smoke also over the
northern yard of crematorium V. On that day, however, according to D.
Czech’s Kalendarium (1989, pp. 855f.), no homicidal gassing was carried
out and hence the open-air incineration could not have had a nefarious
cause. Besides, if all of the Birkenau crematoria were operational,
why should any open-air cremations be carried out at all?480

Actually, in the light of what has been said above, the absence of
smoke over the crematorium chimneys is proof of their inactivity. This
refutes once and for all the testimonies of all the witnesses who assert,
in a chorus of false statements, that the crematoria at that time operated
all out, day and night. The small-scale cremations outside in the courtyard
of the crematorium V probably resulted from the frequent failure
of the crematoria or from lack of coke.

309-310. Auschwitz. The Case For Sanity

While this is a shot in the heart of the mass cremations of gas chamber victims story, you would take this and say this is a shot in the heart of the claim that the ovens emitted smoke during cremations of people dead from sickness whose corpses could spread disease - because of how many bodies apparently needed to be cremated. But I am guessing Bob would say that frequent failure of crematoria may explain why they are not seen smoking as often as should be expected. I don't know what he thinks, so I guess I will just have to wait for him to respond after he reads all this other stuff that has been added since his last post.

Edit:
Apparently he can't post in this topic or his posts didn't get moderation approval and so he just gave up.
Bob, I see subtlety is not your forte.
You continue to post antagonistic content, now towards me. So until you debate in good faith your posts will be ..., well you know.
The continuance of such behavior may well lead to you being deactivated. No one is special here.
M1

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

Re: acclaimed "eyewitness" Henryk Tauber redux

Postby Werd » 5 years 8 months ago (Fri Feb 21, 2014 11:28 pm)

Also, given that Tauber is a liar and the muffles were not stocked with corpses beyond its capacity, the cremations wouldn't take very long in a daytime. An hour or two of cremations a day with all available ovens allegedly working all the time to apparently deal with masses of typhus victims. Two hours versus how many other hours of daylight a plane could have flown overhead and captured the smoke but it was too late? Or too early? The numbers here don't make sense to me. Hell it would not surprise me if the planes took pictures on a day where there actually wasn't the need to fire up all those ovens because not enough corpses had accumulated in the corpse cellars (Liekenkellars) to warrant a cremation on a particular day.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests