prominent Believer 'Cortagravatas' ripped /gassing-cyanide
http://www.air-photo.com/forum/viewtopi ... 1011bbb78a
of the "Air Photo" forum (which he refuses to leave and doesn’t let me enter either because he’s too scared of me) the moderator Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis wrote:
The mentioned thread contains a post of mine, after which there is one by "Cat Scan" and another by "Karl". Hargis would obviously like to conclude from the absence of my response to what these gentlemen wrote that I considered my arguments to have been bested by theirs.see the prominent True Believer 'Cortagravatas' attempt to refute Revisionist studies about laughable 'gassings' & cyanide residue at the former CODOH bbs....very informative.
Follow his post & the one afterwards, start here:
http://www.codoh.org/dcforum/DCForumID7/438.html#9
- Hannover
Which of course is wishful thinking, like so much else that goes on in Mr. Hargis' mind.
I have looked up my records of the mentioned discussion on the extinct Codoh forum and found that, to the post written by "Cat Scan" (= Ralph Marquardt, former moderator of the Codoh forum and one of the more reasonable and knowledgeable "Revisionists", a far cry from the sorry Mr. Hargis from whose equally sorry forum he is conspicuously and understandably absent) on Jun-25-01, 02:19 PM, I responded as follows:
The above message was posted on the threadCortagravatas wrote: 1. The claim that the walls were washed subsequent to gassings comes from eyewitnesses. Eyewitnesses are an acknowledged source of forensic evidence. The only other imaginable source would have been statements from perpetrators.
2. This is what the eyewitnesses stated:
Henry Tauber:
“The water tap was in the corridor and a rubber hose was run from it to wash the floor of the gas chamber...”
Filip Müller
“Normally the concrete floors in the gas chamber as well as in the changing room were damp: today they were carefully dried....”
Nyszili:
“The Sonderkommando squad, outfitted with large rubber boots, lined up around the hill of bodies and flooded it with powerful jets of water. This was necessary because the final act of those who die by drowning or by gas is an involuntary defecation....”
Daniel Bennahmias:
“Once the gas chamber had been cleared, it must be hosed free of all traces of blood and excrement - but mainly blood - and then it must be whitewashed with a quick drying paint. This step is crucial, and it is done each time the gas chamber is emptied, for the dying have scratched and gouged the walls in their death throes. The walls are embedded with blood and bits of flesh, and none on the next transport must suspect that he is walking into anything other than a shower. This takes two or three hours.”
Whether the walls or the ceiling were washed is without importance. What matters is that the hosing of the gas chambers increased the level of humidity in the chambers so much that the equilibrium concentration of CN- ions necessary to the formation of blue staining, if reached at all during the gassings, turned into a concentration too low to allow for the formation of iron blues. According to Alich et al, the formation of Prussian blue from dilutions of iron and iron cyanide took 2 days and addition of as little as 13% water (by volume) caused the complex from which iron blues could form to decompose.
3. The washing of the walls is only one factor inhibiting the reaction that produces iron blues. Others were the comparatively small quantity of HCN not inhaled by the victims and the reduction of pH due to the exhalation of CO2, as explained. Still another conditioning was the suitability of the brickwork to the formation of HCN.
4. The accuracy of Nyiszli’s statement that the bodies and floor were washed immediately after gassing (whether the walls and the ceiling were is irrelevant, see above) have not been questioned by any serious historian or criminal justice authority that I know of. If he had incorrectly observed another detail that doesn’t mean he could not have correctly registered the one in question.
5. As the formation of Prussian blue takes a certain time (two days, according to Alich et al) during which the reaction is susceptible to being hindered by a number of factors, it is irrelevant whether the bodies were taken out of the chamber for burning immediately after gassing. According to Szlama Dragon, who worked in Krema V, the bodies were taken through a corridor to the undressing room and then through another corridor to the crematoria ovens. In the first corridor the hair of the women was cut off, in the second dentists tore out gold teeth. Drawings of the various crematoria show the undressing rooms to have had roughly the same size as the gas chambers, which means that the bodies could be removed from the chambers rather quickly and that lack of storage room was not an impediment. As to Krema II, Prüfer’s letter or 29.01.1943 and Bischoff’’s letter of the same day mention two rooms, the “Leichenkeller 1” which Bischoff carelessly called by its proper name “Vergasungskeller”, and the “Leichenkeller 2”. A drawing of the Krematorium II from the Zentralbauleitung actually shows three “Leichenkeller” ( LK) roughly the same size, plus a rather huge corridor (“Gang”) and an anteroom to LK 1. Another drawing shows LK2 to have been roughly the same size as LK1 and LK3, the anteroom and the area in front of the crematoria ovens together to have been roughly the same size as LK1. which means that bodies could comfortably be stored in the three rooms while awaiting burning even if LK2 was not used for this purpose. Thus the removal of bodies from the gas chambers was not restricted by the cremation capacity.
The above leads us to the conclusion that there is every reason to believe that bodies were moved from the gas chambers long before burning.
6. Cremation didn’t take 1 hour per person, but actually only a quarter of that time, ca. 15 minutes per body, because the bodies were not in coffins and several bodies were introduced simultaneously into each oven, according to the testimonials of various witnesses – a rather plausible practice according to scientific assessments. Mieczyslaw Morawa, a worker in the crematoria, testified that tests done on the Birkenau crematoria before they became fully operational showed that three bodies could be simultaneously burned in a period of 40 minutes in each of the 15 ovens in Krema II. He stated that these tests were conducted with a stopwatch by the SS.
This means that cremation of all the bodies would take no more than 33 hours, 15 hours less than the time required for the formation of Prussian blue according to Alich et al. This in turn means that, even if the bodies were removed from the gas chamber only as fast as they could be burned and the hosing of the chamber was only performed after all bodies were out, the excess moisture created by the hosing would impede the reaction leading to the formation of Prussian blue. As we have seen, it was neither necessary nor practical to take the bodies out of the chamber only at the pace at which they could be immediately burned, which means that the chamber would be clear some time before the last body had been cremated. This in turn leads to the conclusion that, even if hosing took place only after removal of the bodies and not before as Nyszili tells us, it would have occurred only a few hours after the end of the gassing – the time it took to move to bodies to the anteroom of LK1, LK3 and the anteroom of the crematoria ovens in Krema II or via the undressing room to the Krema ovens in Krema V. The procedure in the latter actually makes it seem likely that hosing was performed before and not after removal of the bodies, in accordance with Nyszili’s description, so as to avoid soiling the undressing room.
7. As we have seen, the conditions in the gassing chambers were unfavorable to the formation of Prussian blue not only due to the hosing after the gassings. Another factor was the CO2 exhaled by the victims and the resulting reduction of pH inhibiting the reaction and leading to a greater dilution of the CN- ions at the outset. Another was the fact that, even if the amounts used for both gassing and delousing were roughly equal, most of the gas would be absorbed by the victims in the former case. According to the statements of both perpetrators and surviving witnesses, only those standing next to the introduction columns inhaled a quantity of Zyklon B high enough for immediate death, whereas the others took up to 15 or 20 minutes to die, trying to scramble away from the places where the gas accumulated, climbing on top of each other to reach the higher areas where the gas would arrive last and thus prolong their lives for a few minutes, breathing heavily all the time and thus inhaling high amounts of gas before dying. What gas was left between the bodies would leave the chamber when the doors where opened or be ventilated out. Altogether, the gas not absorbed by the victims would be in contact with the walls for an hour at most, and only such HCN that melted into the moisture during that time would have a chance to from iron blues at all – a reaction inhibited by several factors, as we have seen. In the delousing chambers, conditions for formation of Prussian blue were unequally better. Much less of the gas was absorbed by the insects, which do not inhale, and the rest – i.e. most of the gas introduced – was in contact with the walls for up to 24 hours at a time. Moisture is likely to have been just enough to allow for an equilibrium concentration of CN-, there was no hosing after the gassings, and there was no CO2 to reduce the pH level and thus to inhibit the reaction. Thus it is not surprising that Prussian blue stains formed in the delousing chambers but not in the homicidal gas chambers.
8. The Polish investigators deliberately excluded samples with Prussian blue from their investigation for the reasons explained. Where Prussian blue formed in a building exposed to hydrogen cyanide, it would remain present at high concentration while other compounds of cyanide would gradually weather away. This means that samples with Prussian blue originally exposed to the same amount of HCN as samples without Prussian blue would necessarily contain a much higher concentration of cyanide residues than the latter and that comparing one and the other could therefore provide no telling results as to the extent to which either had been exposed to HCN. An apples and oranges comparison that the Polish investigators cleverly avoided by excluding samples with Prussian blue from their investigations.
9. The samples of the 1990 study were taken from parts of the ruins that had been very much exposed to weathering conditions - rinsed rather thoroughly by a column of water at least 35 m in height, according to the IFRC study – and from which all traces of hydrogen cyanide had consequently disappeared. These samples, however, were inadequate for comparison with samples from the delousing chambers because the latter had been exposed to altogether different conditions – the chambers being intact, the samples had been much less exposed to the weather. For their second experiment, Markiewicz et al accordingly chose to collect samples from such parts of the ruins that had been most sheltered from the weather and where conditions similar to those of the delousing chambers had therefore prevailed. No scientific fraud here, only an improvement of methodology.
10. The samples collected in 1990 had zero values due to the reasons explained above. The samples from buildings used for neither delousing nor gassing had zero values due to other reasons – they had been exposed to HCN only once if at all, during a disinfestation in the course of the 1942 typhus epidemic. Oddly enough, Leuchter falsely attributed the residues he detected in the gassing chambers to that very disinfestation.
11. The higher the concentration of HCN to which a wall was exposed for a longer period of time, the more HCN is likely to remain after 45 or 50 years under given conditions. The key finding made by Markewiecz et al in their 1994 experiment was that the samples taken from the ruins of the homicidal gas chambers showed concentrations of CN- ions not much lower than those samples from delousing facilities that were exposed to similar if somewhat but not much more favorable conditions of weathering – those without Prussian blue. It being undisputed that the delousing facilities were exposed to high amounts of HCN over a longer period of time, this means that the homicidal gas chambers were exposed to equally high or not much lower amounts. Exposure to HCN on one or two occasions would not have led to such concentrations – to argue this calls for an explanation why, then, the samples from the delousing chambers showed CN- concentrations not much higher than those from the gassing chambers. If the gassing chambers had been exposed to the same quantities of HCN as the delousing chambers for a similar period of time (i.e. up to 24 hours in a row) they would have shown even more similar concentrations of HCN but no blue stains, due to the reasons explained above. As it was, the gassing chambers, unlike the delousing chambers, were never exposed to massive concentrations of cyanides for over 24 hours a day – we have seen that the gas remained in the chambers for about an hour during and after the gassings. This, together with the somewhat stronger exposure to weathering of even the most sheltered parts of the ruins, explains why the residues found in the gassing chambers were not as high as those found in such parts of the delousing chambers exposed to similar conditions before and after.
12. So the situation we have is that the barely detectable traces of cyanides in the homicidal gas chambers are in the order of magnitude of the also barely detectable traces found in those parts of the delousing chambers without blue stains. This means that the gassing chambers were exposed to similar quantities of HCN as the delousing chambers – quantities compatible with the knowledge drawn from other conclusive evidence that over one million people were gassed at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
http://www.codoh.org/dcforum/DCForumID7/438.html
on 26-06-2001 at 19:46 Portuguese continental time.
It was retained by the moderator and again posted on 27-06-2001 at 08:54 Portuguese continental time.
It was again retained by the moderator and again posted on 27-06-2001 at 15:24 Portuguese continental time.
It was once more retained by the moderator and posted a last time on 28-06-2001 at 09:12 Portuguese continental time.
After the fourth attempt, I decided that Mr. Marquardt obviously didn’t want to discuss the issue with me any further. Why he took this decision I don’t know, but the quality of my arguments makes me feel comfortable that it was because, skillful propagandist though he is, he had run out of counter-arguments or realized that he sooner or later would, thus (horrors!) having to leave the last word in a discussion on a "Revisionist" forum to a critic of "Revisionism". Although the forum belonged to an organization that calls itself the "Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust", the moderator obviously decided to sacrifice the open debate and free speech that his host promised to making believe that "Revisionism" had once again triumphed over "Orthodoxy" (or whatever they call the elementary reason and logic that keeps their opponents from adhering to their articles of faith), even though the outcome would have been at least very uncertain if the debate had been allowed to continue. Needless to say, I didn’t bother to respond to "Karl" after this censorship experience. I didn’t have the time to work for the ether.
Such censorship, contrary as it is to the proclaimed goals and principles of Codoh, was applied against me not once but on numerous occasions before and after the one mentioned above, about which I will tell our audience on appropriate occasions. This makes poor Mr. Hargis’ attempts to exhibit threads from the extinct Codoh discussion forum as showpieces of "Revisionist" triumph seem rather grotesque and suggests that the fellow, apart from being a miserable coward and an altogether disgusting character, also possesses a somewhat limited intelligence. Whoever has opposed "Revisionism" on the Codoh and/or the Air Photo discussion forums, like our former forum host Hans, our fellow poster Richard Murphy and myself, knows that the "Revisionist" keepers of the Faith can prevail in a discussion against knowledgeable opponents only by stifling them through censorship and/or banning. Without deleting inconvenient opposition posts and/or banning the "offenders", no such forum would remain a realm of "Revisionist" gospel for very long – an intolerable situation for the followers of a quasi-religious sectarian movement.
My invitation to Mr. Hargis to try selling his convictions on a forum where open debate is not just a hollow phrase, already expressed on the thread
Shysters
http://opendebate.netfirms.com/cgi-bin/ ... 1;t=000005
of Hans' RODOH forum and on several threads of this forum, is herewith repeated.
Will the spider come out to play?
I’m sure that my old friend Scott "I thought this was worth sharing" Smith will consider this thread worth sharing with his fellow true believers on the Air Photo forum.
