The crematoria at Auschwitz and the use of their facilities in operation

[Stubble]

Nessie has been telling me that there is a lack of consensus regarding the crematoria at Auschwitz and their operations.

Firstly, I'll posit my opinion. 1 corpse cellar was to house the recently deceased. There was space to sanitize the bodies/clothes with the use of zyklon beta. The bodies were then moved to the other cellar until they could be raised up the elevator and put into one of the muffles.

Regarding multiple body cremation, with the exception of 1 oven in crematoria 1, all of the ovens had multiple muffles. So, 3 bodies in 1 oven is a completely accurate statement. 3 bodies in 1 muffle on the same litter is just demonstrably false.

Now, what I've said here makes complete sense to me. Why is Nessie talking about laundry, showers and lines of people in and out of the crematoria? What have I missed? Where am I 'losing the story'?

Were there supposed to be throngs of people going in to and out of the crematoria? If so, why were they polite enough not to trample the grass into a trail? And how?

The idea perplexes me.

[Archie]

Not sure if you've encountered Nessie before, but, as you've no doubt realized by now, he rarely knows what he's talking about. Although he has been fighting revisionism for over a decade, his understanding of the subject remains poor, he is not well read, and worst of all he lacks the faculties needed to engage in coherent debate. And he has so little self-awareness that he thinks he is an authority n history, forensics, and logic, the last being especially amusing.

First of all, this whole argument, which Nessie repeats ad nauseam, is based on an argument from ignorance. "Unless you can prove exactly what happened in these rooms, then we have to believe they were gas chambers." Under Nessie logic, if I accuse you of drowning puppies in your bathtub, you are guilty unless you can prove "what really happened in your bathtub." That is incorrect because there may not be sufficient documentation to state precisely what was done in a given room 24/7 over several years. Can we prove that food was prepared in the kitchen, that people s*** in the latrine, or that they took showers in the shower room? Even if there were insufficient documentation to prove it, this would not prove that something extraordinary occurred in any of those locations just because someone says so later on.

Krema I
The revisionist view is that this was ... a crematorium. Documents indicate that was decommissioned in 1943 and converted into an air raid shelter in 1944.

The holocaust promoters admit that. They just claim in addition that there were some gassings (~10,000 victims, small potatoes by Holocaust standards) in the morgue of Krema I. This is based ENTIRELY on witnesses. There are no documents at all, not even Pressac-style "criminal trace" documents supporting gassings. No documentary proof at all of any plan to convert the room into a gas chamber or no record of this being done. There are Zyklon holes in the roof, but these were made after the war which is admitted by the museum and there is photographic evidence.



The evidence for gassing in this building is very thin, and it collapses entirely when you consider 1) the poor quality of the testimonies, and 2) the technical reasons why the room was almost certainly not a gas chamber.

Krema II
The revisionist view is that the crematorium was ... a crematorium. LK1 is described as a "Leichenkeller" which means "corpse cellar," i.e., a morgue. Furthermore, since a crematorium would need a place to store bodies, if this wasn't a morgue, you would then need to explain what room was used for corpse storage. There is also some documentary evidence for the cellars being used a morgues. See, Mattogno, "The Morgues of the Crematoria at Birkenau in Light of Documents."

Note that practically speaking, the traditional story preclude the LKs from being used as morgues at all (since presumably you would not want dead bodies in the "gas chamber.") Given the documents however they will usually say something like "well, okay, they did use them as morgues, they just made sure to keep it clear for gassings."

Now then we get to some points of disagreement. There was a Nuremberg document that mentions a "Vergasungskeller" or "gassing cellar" in connection with Krema II. Later Pressac published additional documents mentioning gas-tight doors and things like this. The disagreement among revisionists has been over the interpretation of these secondary "gas" related functions. Samuel Crowell argued that most of the gas-tight doors etc were common features of air-raid or gas shelters. Mattogno argued that the traces were related to potential delousing functions while the Central Sauna was still under construction. Because there is not sufficient documentation, it is necessarily a matter of some conjecture. The arguments invovled are complex and I assure you Nessie has nothing interesting to say on the matter since his arguments on all topics amount to little more than circular assertions that the Holocaust is true.

Witnesses

Often Nessie will express this in terms of "witness tallies." There are X number of gas chamber witnesses and zero for alternative explanations (not actually true). Therefore, they were gas chambers. The problem here is that it ignores the context in which the witness statements were collected. When you have the Allied prosecution conducting the investigations and looking only for witnesses they find useful, obviously that will skew the witnesses statements. Also, given that they have never stopped hunting for war criminals even to this day, the incentive is to keep you head down, not to invite prosecution by pointing out that you "were there."

[Stubble]

Looking at the draft of 3 and 4, it is obvious to me that the gas room was for sanitation. I presume that the bodies were also deloused by washing when there was an overrun of death (like what happened in '42 and would have been fresh on the mind) and corpses had to be stored for day, weeks or maybe even months as the crematoria burned.

In such a case, apparently, the engineers from the manufacturer state that the coke usage is reduced by 1/3rd. I posit that would depend on the time of the run start to finish and the attendance and attention of the tenders.

It's like it taking more fuel to start your car than to leave it running, sure, that can be true, but, if you leave it running long enough, you should have just turned the engine off. I think you get my point. The efficiency gain from not starting the furnace will yield a diminishing return by volume the longer the runtime of the facility is.

It seems from your post that my concept of what happened in the crematoria is not at all controversial. Bodies were stored, disenfested and cremated there. Clothing was also disenfested. Like it says on the paper.

One concern left unaddressed is, were there reports that throngs of people were marching into the crematoria? I mean to say, that is actually asserted to have happened, and backed up with 'a preponderance of evidence'? I'm supposed to entertain this idea?

[Archie]

One concern left unaddressed is, were there reports that throngs of people were marching into the crematoria? I mean to say, that is actually asserted to have happened, and backed up with 'a preponderance of evidence'? I'm supposed to entertain this idea?

That is the story, but there's no proof of that beyond testimonies. There are transport records, including some photos, but no proof that a majority of them were sent to the crematoria. Of those who arrived at Auschwitz, some were registered and some were there only temporarily before being sent off elsewhere. Viktor Frankl, the author of Holocaust bestseller Man's Search for Meaning, was later determined to have been in Auschwitz for only 3 days. He would be an example of someone who was transited through.

[Stubble]

One concern left unaddressed is, were there reports that throngs of people were marching into the crematoria? I mean to say, that is actually asserted to have happened, and backed up with 'a preponderance of evidence'? I'm supposed to entertain this idea?

That is the story, but there's no proof of that beyond testimonies. There are transport records, including some photos, but no proof that a majority of them were sent to the crematoria. Of those who arrived at Auschwitz, some were registered and some were there only temporarily before being sent off elsewhere. Viktor Frankl, the author of Holocaust bestseller Man's Search for Meaning, was later determined to have been in Auschwitz for only 3 days. He would be an example of someone who was transited through.

Near as I can tell, it is freely admitted that not all detainees were serialized and marked with a tattoo and given an individual record. Some detainees were simply contained in a group record. Like Irine Zisblatt.

Now, that Irine Zisblatt is not dead speaks to the fact that non serialized detainees were not immediately gassed upon reception. The young were not immediately gassed as proofed by the alleged testament provided by Anne Frank. Of course, to rely on this dubious material is speculative, but, if you are in the orthodoxy, this writing is gospel, sacrosanct.

In 'Night' the author talks about being given medical care for his foot. This speaks to the injured not being immediately gassed, as claimed. He also never mentions homicidal gas chambers. Also, just like Anne Frank, he talks about going on the 'Salvation March' (not his words) to escape the Soviet forces. This leaves me with a question, why did these people elect to remain under the control of the German Authority when they could have simply stayed to be liberated?

I'll grant that 1 or 2 books and 1 example of an individual case isn't particularly expansive. These cases are however regarded highly by the orthodoxy and things that are missing are as striking as what is contained there in.

People being marched off of trains into a corpse hold and gassed with a delousing agent, in the absence of foot paths in the grass, period correct testimony to that effect and the correspondent supply of fuel and chemical gives me doubts as to the validity of claims made post war.

[TlsMS93]

One concern left unaddressed is, were there reports that throngs of people were marching into the crematoria? I mean to say, that is actually asserted to have happened, and backed up with 'a preponderance of evidence'? I'm supposed to entertain this idea?

That is the story, but there's no proof of that beyond testimonies. There are transport records, including some photos, but no proof that a majority of them were sent to the crematoria. Of those who arrived at Auschwitz, some were registered and some were there only temporarily before being sent off elsewhere. Viktor Frankl, the author of Holocaust bestseller Man's Search for Meaning, was later determined to have been in Auschwitz for only 3 days. He would be an example of someone who was transited through.

Near as I can tell, it is freely admitted that not all detainees were serialized and marked with a tattoo and given an individual record. Some detainees were simply contained in a group record. Like Irine Zisblatt.

Now, that Irine Zisblatt is not dead speaks to the fact that non serialized detainees were not immediately gassed upon reception. The young were not immediately gassed as proofed by the alleged testament provided by Anne Frank. Of course, to rely on this dubious material is speculative, but, if you are in the orthodoxy, this writing is gospel, sacrosanct.

In 'Night' the author talks about being given medical care for his foot. This speaks to the injured not being immediately gassed, as claimed. He also never mentions homicidal gas chambers. Also, just like Anne Frank, he talks about going on the 'Salvation March' (not his words) to escape the Soviet forces. This leaves me with a question, why did these people elect to remain under the control of the German Authority when they could have simply stayed to be liberated?

I'll grant that 1 or 2 books and 1 example of an individual case isn't particularly expansive. These cases are however regarded highly by the orthodoxy and things that are missing are as striking as what is contained there in.

People being marched off of trains into a corpse hold and gassed with a delousing agent, in the absence of foot paths in the grass, period correct testimony to that effect and the correspondent supply of fuel and chemical gives me doubts as to the validity of claims made post war.

Why wasn't the Jewish woman Bernile Nienau gassed to death in a camp but died of polio in a Munich hospital at the height of the Holocaust?

I asked the AI ​​about this and it said that this pattern of behavior was an anomaly within the regime.

Are they going to use Honorary Aryan's letter?

[Archie]

See this thread for documents indicating the cellars were in fact used as morgues.

https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=134

[Stubble]

See this thread for documents indicating the cellars were in fact used as morgues.

https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=134

Now, this is supposition on my part, but, if I were a guessing man, primary delivery of bodies would be to the non vented cellar and after disinfection, the corpse would be moved to the vented cellar so that the decomposition gasses would not build up in the cellar. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure it reeked of putrefaction if the bodies were stagnant for any considerable length of time, but, one would want to vent away what one could from the cellar.

[Hektor]

See this thread for documents indicating the cellars were in fact used as morgues.

https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=134

Funny how we have to convince the Holocaustians that the technical documents almost certainly meant what they actually said... And that there is a way to read them without any sinister after thought. Now I get that cremation facilities can be rather macabre, but rational grownups should be able to converse about this. But I noticed that the Holocaust Lobby will use piety to advance their agenda or silence critiques / get them muted.

[TlsMS93]

See this thread for documents indicating the cellars were in fact used as morgues.

https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=134

Funny how we have to convince the Holocaustians that the technical documents almost certainly meant what they actually said... And that there is a way to read them without any sinister after thought. Now I get that cremation facilities can be rather macabre, but rational grownups should be able to converse about this. But I noticed that the Holocaust Lobby will use piety to advance their agenda or silence critiques / get them muted.

Then comes the codeword letter. Historians say that the Nazis were the first Holocaust deniers by hiding their own extermination program from each other in bureaucracy.

[Stubble]

Why is there no roof on corpse cellar 1 for krema II or krema III in this image?

[Hektor]

See this thread for documents indicating the cellars were in fact used as morgues.

https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=134

Funny how we have to convince the Holocaustians that the technical documents almost certainly meant what they actually said... And that there is a way to read them without any sinister after thought. Now I get that cremation facilities can be rather macabre, but rational grownups should be able to converse about this. But I noticed that the Holocaust Lobby will use piety to advance their agenda or silence critiques / get them muted.

Then comes the codeword letter. Historians say that the Nazis were the first Holocaust deniers by hiding their own extermination program from each other in bureaucracy.

Heinrich Himmler was a Holocaust Denier according to Norbert Masur: https://archive.org/details/norbert-mas ... er-english

[Stubble]

They have a roof in January, a few days before being demolished.



They don't have one in December though. So, work was done to repair them. There must be a record.

[TlsMS93]

Funny how we have to convince the Holocaustians that the technical documents almost certainly meant what they actually said... And that there is a way to read them without any sinister after thought. Now I get that cremation facilities can be rather macabre, but rational grownups should be able to converse about this. But I noticed that the Holocaust Lobby will use piety to advance their agenda or silence critiques / get them muted.

Then comes the codeword letter. Historians say that the Nazis were the first Holocaust deniers by hiding their own extermination program from each other in bureaucracy.

Heinrich Himmler was a Holocaust Denier according to Norbert Masur: https://archive.org/details/norbert-mas ... er-english

Masur's statement is typical of the ongoing psychological warfare hysteria.

[Hektor]

Then comes the codeword letter. Historians say that the Nazis were the first Holocaust deniers by hiding their own extermination program from each other in bureaucracy.

Heinrich Himmler was a Holocaust Denier according to Norbert Masur: https://archive.org/details/norbert-mas ... er-english

Masur's statement is typical of the ongoing psychological warfare hysteria.

Still interesting that he appears to have presented the Himmler Statements fairly accurately. I get that this is from memory and got its own biases... But essentially he says that despite the lack of any advantage from it, Himmler "Denied the Holocaust"...