Did Germany Have an Infinite Gasoline Hack I am Unaware of?

[HansHill]

This is because he doesn't have any integrity, only a position.

+1

This also clearly indicates that these people are not truthseekers, but rather activists.

Has anybody noticed that while Nessie was busy posting in previous weeks (eg during the wire mesh sliders debacle) Bombsaway was on vacation, now Nessie is on vacation and Bombsaway has taken up the slack? Seems co-ordinated but what do i know, my IQ is only 75!

[Stubble]

Agreed.

Although, to be fair, I am an activist for the other side of the coin and must admit that over time I have grown a bias.

Ultimately though I would like the truth, whatever that may be.

So far as your IQ goes, I think you misspoke. Perhaps you mean 175...

[bombsaway]

Ok, we are going to highlight something with regard to the arguments put forth by Bombsaway.

It started with 'using purely liquid fuel was entirely possible for the Reich'.

but assuming it was all liquid fuels not beyond the capability of NS Germany.

Then we moved on to something else.

I go by witness testimony which states a mix of wood and liquid fuel was used, with the wood being soaked. I don't know the ratio.

You see, because the testimony doesn't align with the original supposition, there was a pivot, and a testimony was put forward.

Mathes on Treblinka burnings:

At that time SS Oberscharführer or Hauptscharführer [Herbert] Floss, who, as I
assume, was previously in another extermination camp, arrived. He was in charge of
the arrangements for cremating the corpses. The cremation took place in such a way
that railway lines and concrete blocks were placed together. The corpses were piled on
these rails. Brushwood was put under the rails. The wood was doused with petrol. In
that way not only the newly accumulated corpses were cremated, but also those taken
out from the graves.

After this pivot was brushed off when I informed him that he needed 'another testimony', Bombsaway didn't even blink.

This is because he doesn't have any integrity, only a position. Any testimony that vaguely eludes to a point he is trying to make is always put forward in isolation and disregarding the body of all witnesses in favor of what one witness has said about some particular Bombsaway feels supports his position.

It is incredibly slimy and dishonest, but, at least he is consistent about it...

The 'pure liquid fuel' hypothesis is ridiculous and unsupported, but, Bombsaway won't be swayed by small problems like facts...

I would say it is rather insane to believe that this statement "but assuming it was all liquid fuels not beyond the capability of NS Germany" means that I was offering that as a serious hypothesis. I think that if you look back at my posts you'll see that I've always stated I agree with witness testimonies that wood + other substances were used in cremation.

My only mistake, which I copped to immediately, was thinking Dresden was a pure gasoline job.

[bombsaway]

This is because he doesn't have any integrity, only a position.

+1

This also clearly indicates that these people are not truthseekers, but rather activists.

Has anybody noticed that while Nessie was busy posting in previous weeks (eg during the wire mesh sliders debacle) Bombsaway was on vacation, now Nessie is on vacation and Bombsaway has taken up the slack? Seems co-ordinated but what do i know, my IQ is only 75!

Actually when me and Nessie have been simultaneously posting on the board, I generally don't get replied to and he does so I take my leave. Why this is, idk, you tell me.

[Stubble]

Ok, we are going to highlight something with regard to the arguments put forth by Bombsaway.

It started with 'using purely liquid fuel was entirely possible for the Reich'.

but assuming it was all liquid fuels not beyond the capability of NS Germany.

Then we moved on to something else.

I go by witness testimony which states a mix of wood and liquid fuel was used, with the wood being soaked. I don't know the ratio.

You see, because the testimony doesn't align with the original supposition, there was a pivot, and a testimony was put forward.

Mathes on Treblinka burnings:

After this pivot was brushed off when I informed him that he needed 'another testimony', Bombsaway didn't even blink.

This is because he doesn't have any integrity, only a position. Any testimony that vaguely eludes to a point he is trying to make is always put forward in isolation and disregarding the body of all witnesses in favor of what one witness has said about some particular Bombsaway feels supports his position.

It is incredibly slimy and dishonest, but, at least he is consistent about it...

The 'pure liquid fuel' hypothesis is ridiculous and unsupported, but, Bombsaway won't be swayed by small problems like facts...

I would say it is rather insane to believe that this statement "but assuming it was all liquid fuels not beyond the capability of NS Germany" means that I was offering that as a serious hypothesis. I think that if you look back at my posts you'll see that I've always stated I agree with witness testimonies that wood + other substances were used in cremation.

My only mistake, which I copped to immediately, was thinking Dresden was a pure gasoline job.

Slimy.

We are literally half a dozen pages into you defending benzin as the fuel used. You have been putting this hypothesis up for literally years.

When you say you go by witness testimony, what you mean to say is you look for any single testimony you feel slightly supports whatever bullshit you are peddling at the time.

The most cited source says jewesses burn of their own volition, like witches...

jewesses were the fuel. Anything else, is a retcon.

Unfortunately for the main stream, that's a retarded supposition and is not congruent with physical reality.

[bombsaway]

Ok, we are going to highlight something with regard to the arguments put forth by Bombsaway.

It started with 'using purely liquid fuel was entirely possible for the Reich'.



Then we moved on to something else.



You see, because the testimony doesn't align with the original supposition, there was a pivot, and a testimony was put forward.



After this pivot was brushed off when I informed him that he needed 'another testimony', Bombsaway didn't even blink.

This is because he doesn't have any integrity, only a position. Any testimony that vaguely eludes to a point he is trying to make is always put forward in isolation and disregarding the body of all witnesses in favor of what one witness has said about some particular Bombsaway feels supports his position.

It is incredibly slimy and dishonest, but, at least he is consistent about it...

The 'pure liquid fuel' hypothesis is ridiculous and unsupported, but, Bombsaway won't be swayed by small problems like facts...

I would say it is rather insane to believe that this statement "but assuming it was all liquid fuels not beyond the capability of NS Germany" means that I was offering that as a serious hypothesis. I think that if you look back at my posts you'll see that I've always stated I agree with witness testimonies that wood + other substances were used in cremation.

My only mistake, which I copped to immediately, was thinking Dresden was a pure gasoline job.

Slimy.

We are literally half a dozen pages into you defending benzin as the fuel used. You have been putting this hypothesis up for literally years.

When you say you go by witness testimony, what you mean to say is you look for any single testimony you feel slightly supports whatever bullshit you are peddling at the time.

The most cited source says jewesses burn of their own volition, like witches...

jewesses were the fuel. Anything else, is a retcon.

Unfortunately for the main stream, that's a retarded supposition and is not congruent with physical reality.

Do you think that previously I was asserting that only liquid fuel was used in the killing centers, now no longer doing that, hence the slime?

[Stubble]

Then I guess bodies burn on their own, since Dresden was done exclusively using this method.

What was Dresden? 25,000 bodies? Did all the dead have to be cremated? So that was the total number of deaths at the Reinhardt camps? Welcome to the group, then.

I never said the same amount were burned, though likely Dresden burnings matched peak intensity of any Reinhardt camp in terms of fuel delivery.

They also show that it was possible to do burnings this way

This way = without wood, using liquid fuel.

Are you seriously going to stand there and try to deny literally the last 6 pages Sir? Or 2 years of history? Or leaning on Dresden and saying 'it was a pure liquid job'?

Yes, slimy.

Bonus post;

Yeah I posted the witness testimony saying liquid fuel was used on the first page.

You posted one statement saying the wood was doused in gasoline while almost all other witnesses omit this entirely. You give no process, no standard nor explanation for how this could have been done at scale (i.e. as a key fuel source requiring a firehose, thousands of tankers/deliveries, a specialized pump, manpower, and safety protocols) rather than simply as a starter (more common for mass pyres which are expected to burn primarily due to wood, given need for a constant burn), if/when used at all.

Here's another critical point you miss: the heat energy released from the gasoline in doused (or soaked) wood would release almost entirely within the first 1-2 minutes of burning, and would be much more explosive (a big, initial "whoosh"), leading to far more heat loss in outdoor cremation, given this forceful evacuation of heat is not contained, so only a fraction of it is transferred to the corpses. This also means that only the corpses initially on the pyre would be subject to the increased heat energy from the gasoline -- every other corpse added thereafter would be unaffected by it (your witness does not claim a continuous stream of gasoline onto the raging fires, which would undoubtedly lead to major incidents/explosions, if possible at all, due to the extreme size and intensity of these fires).

Let's give you as charitable of an interpretation as possible and assume ALL of the wood was HEAVILY doused (the firehose example) before the fire is ignited. Just how much more energy do you suppose this would add to the process overall? Please quantify it. If you don't, I will.

Are you claiming there is only one testimony? If you're saying wood is much more reflected in the record when talking about burnings, I think it's your job to produce testimony proving this

Why assume any wood was used? Calculate this using the Dresden burnings as a model, which were wood free.

[bombsaway]

What was Dresden? 25,000 bodies? Did all the dead have to be cremated? So that was the total number of deaths at the Reinhardt camps? Welcome to the group, then.

I never said the same amount were burned, though likely Dresden burnings matched peak intensity of any Reinhardt camp in terms of fuel delivery.

They also show that it was possible to do burnings this way

This way = without wood, using liquid fuel.

Are you seriously going to stand there and try to deny literally the last 6 pages Sir? Or 2 years of history? Or leaning on Dresden and saying 'it was a pure liquid job'?

Yes, slimy.

The only error I made was about Dresden, saying only liquid fuels were used there. If you think a mistake like this is indication of me being dishonest, I would say your brain is broken.

[Stubble]

depending on how soaked the biomass was.

And this is also why CF's questions were so important, if as his cartoon suggests it was merely hosed onto an open fire pit (LOL) as the fire is raging, there would be hardly soakage undertaken, and any fuel gains are short-lived.

To get "maximum soakage" would obviously require a process, something like entire pallets of dry wood being soaked and left for X-Weeks in a fuel pit / barn or some other process, then left to dry again. So a chop-dry-soak-redry process (!)

The latter of course only leads to more questions, rather than answers! What barn? Who did the soaking? For how long? Did the "soaking time" cause any throughput delays? Who did the drying?

So yes, all of this has completely backfired on Bombsaway.

And yet the uncomfortable fact is this was all done at Dresden without the use of any wood. Were a million liters, or 10 million, or whatever your number is, of gasoline expended to burn these bodies?

btw my position that large amount of liquid flammables were used is echoed by HC blog

Obviously uncomfortable with the notion that high amounts of liquid fuel were used in burning the corpses at the extermination camps, Mattogno quotes a slab from MGK’s Sobibór book in which he had referred to survivor witness Thomas Blatt’s assertion that "the pyre, sometimes more than three yards high, was then doused with kerosene and ignited", as supposedly showing that liquid combustible was used only for the ignition of the pyres. Yet the quoted statement says nothing about the amount of liquid fuel employed or the proportions of liquid versus solid fuel, which for all we know may have been like on the Dresden Altmarkt pyres.

you guys can throw whatever math or science you want at me, I don't have time or energy to do a deep dive here. Simply put what really happened at Dresden is "proof of concept" for me, overrules all your theoretical and likely delusional musings about things you think you know about but don't. Were people burning stacks of bodies at boy scouts?

Pure fucking slime.

[Archie]

Ok, we are going to highlight something with regard to the arguments put forth by Bombsaway.

It started with 'using purely liquid fuel was entirely possible for the Reich'.

but assuming it was all liquid fuels not beyond the capability of NS Germany.

Then we moved on to something else.

I go by witness testimony which states a mix of wood and liquid fuel was used, with the wood being soaked. I don't know the ratio.

You see, because the testimony doesn't align with the original supposition, there was a pivot, and a testimony was put forward.

Mathes on Treblinka burnings:

At that time SS Oberscharführer or Hauptscharführer [Herbert] Floss, who, as I
assume, was previously in another extermination camp, arrived. He was in charge of
the arrangements for cremating the corpses. The cremation took place in such a way
that railway lines and concrete blocks were placed together. The corpses were piled on
these rails. Brushwood was put under the rails. The wood was doused with petrol. In
that way not only the newly accumulated corpses were cremated, but also those taken
out from the graves.

After this pivot was brushed off when I informed him that he needed 'another testimony', Bombsaway didn't even blink.

This is because he doesn't have any integrity, only a position. Any testimony that vaguely eludes to a point he is trying to make is always put forward in isolation and disregarding the body of all witnesses in favor of what one witness has said about some particular Bombsaway feels supports his position.

It is incredibly slimy and dishonest, but, at least he is consistent about it...

The 'pure liquid fuel' hypothesis is ridiculous and unsupported, but, Bombsaway won't be swayed by small problems like facts...

This is bombsaway 101. He's been doing it for years. Another good example is the Kola thread where (among other things) he was trying to argue that the number of whole bodies that were buried was vastly lower than what is indicated in all the official sources. You see, Arad is merely a secondary source. BA is contrast is greatly superior scholar who uses primary sources, i.e., he cherry-picks little bits of testimony from websites and then wildly extrapolates, even if this contradicts all of the professional historians.

He doesn't want to argue the wood angle, so he threw out this liquid fuels thing as a deflection tactic.

[Archie]

This is because he doesn't have any integrity, only a position.

+1

This also clearly indicates that these people are not truthseekers, but rather activists.

Has anybody noticed that while Nessie was busy posting in previous weeks (eg during the wire mesh sliders debacle) Bombsaway was on vacation, now Nessie is on vacation and Bombsaway has taken up the slack? Seems co-ordinated but what do i know, my IQ is only 75!

Nessie is a compulsive. Whenever he's online, he's posting here. His superpower is that he is too thick to realize how bad he's doing in these exchanges. He's like a zombie. Most people get embarrassed when they lose a debate really badly, but is too oblivious. He legitimately believes in his own mind that he is mopping the floor with us. It is an impressive degree of delusion.

When Nessie is posting they've got at least one (very high volume) poster gumming up the works. This lessens the need for others to jump in. But if Nessie's away and no one else steps up, then we have an "echo chamber" which evidently makes some of these people nervous. I don't know that there's any formal coordination.

Bombs I think is much more aware of how weak many of his arguments are. His specialty is to try to draw people into excruciating dialectics (usually where he makes an endless list of demands while presenting basically nothing himself). These discussions don't go anywhere but he hopes it will be enough to look like he's putting up a fight for the lurkers.

[bombsaway]

This is because he doesn't have any integrity, only a position.

+1

This also clearly indicates that these people are not truthseekers, but rather activists.

Has anybody noticed that while Nessie was busy posting in previous weeks (eg during the wire mesh sliders debacle) Bombsaway was on vacation, now Nessie is on vacation and Bombsaway has taken up the slack? Seems co-ordinated but what do i know, my IQ is only 75!

Nessie is a compulsive. Whenever he's online, he's posting here. His superpower is that he is too thick to realize how bad he's doing in these exchanges. He's like a zombie. Most people get embarrassed when they lose a debate really badly, but is too oblivious. He legitimately believes in his own mind that he is mopping the floor with us. It is an impressive degree of delusion.

When Nessie is posting they've got at least one (very high volume) poster gumming up the works. This lessens the need for others to jump in. But if Nessie's away and no one else steps up, then we have an "echo chamber" which evidently makes some of these people nervous. I don't know that there's any formal coordination.

Bombs I think is much more aware of how weak many of his arguments are. His specialty is to try to draw people into excruciating dialectics (usually where he makes an endless list of demands while presenting basically nothing himself). These discussions don't go anywhere but he hopes it will be enough to look like he's putting up a fight for the lurkers.

No I believe this as well, call it delusion, but subjectively 100% confirmed by ridiculous claims you're making like here viewtopic.php?p=17312#p17312

and of course the gross hypocrisy about resettlement

the biggest deterrent from me posting more other than time and energy is that I view most of you as lost causes, the best evidence I have of this is the constant claims about me being dishonest. Well I know what I am, so I have to disagree.

[bombsaway]

Ok, we are going to highlight something with regard to the arguments put forth by Bombsaway.

It started with 'using purely liquid fuel was entirely possible for the Reich'.

but assuming it was all liquid fuels not beyond the capability of NS Germany.

Then we moved on to something else.

I go by witness testimony which states a mix of wood and liquid fuel was used, with the wood being soaked. I don't know the ratio.

You see, because the testimony doesn't align with the original supposition, there was a pivot, and a testimony was put forward.

Mathes on Treblinka burnings:

After this pivot was brushed off when I informed him that he needed 'another testimony', Bombsaway didn't even blink.

This is because he doesn't have any integrity, only a position. Any testimony that vaguely eludes to a point he is trying to make is always put forward in isolation and disregarding the body of all witnesses in favor of what one witness has said about some particular Bombsaway feels supports his position.

It is incredibly slimy and dishonest, but, at least he is consistent about it...

The 'pure liquid fuel' hypothesis is ridiculous and unsupported, but, Bombsaway won't be swayed by small problems like facts...

This is bombsaway 101. He's been doing it for years. Another good example is the Kola thread where (among other things) he was trying to argue that the number of whole bodies that were buried was vastly lower than what is indicated in all the official sources. You see, Arad is merely a secondary source. BA is contrast is greatly superior scholar who uses primary sources, i.e., he cherry-picks little bits of testimony from websites and then wildly extrapolates, even if this contradicts all of the professional historians.

He doesn't want to argue the wood angle, so he threw out this liquid fuels thing as a deflection tactic.

lol it would be insane for anyone to ignore the Hoefle telegram and use instead the much more speculative estimates people were going with before.

[Callafangers]

The 'pure liquid fuel' hypothesis is ridiculous and unsupported, but, Bombsaway won't be swayed by small problems like facts...

[...]
He doesn't want to argue the wood angle, so he threw out this liquid fuels thing as a deflection tactic.

lol it would be insane for anyone to ignore the Hoefle telegram and use instead the much more speculative estimates [of 'missing Jews'] people were going with before.

The stuff in green is related and relevant. The one in red is... not.

bombsaway is so completely destroyed that his tangents/deflections aren't even in the same ballpark anymore. Not even the same town.

Oof

[Stubble]

He doesn't want to argue the wood angle, so he threw out this liquid fuels thing as a deflection tactic.

I would have thought he would have leaned on 'exotic solid fuel' and kicked back on Morgen.

/shrug

Problem with saying they used exotics like magnesium and aluminum is that the people who say they made the pyres, don't mention working with measured quantities of basically thermite...

That shouldn't have stopped Bombsaway though, he's not usually deterred by such a simple problem.

It was around the time we were arguing about lime wash that this fact really sunk in for me, just watching him pivot and somersault and duck and dodge to say, well, it wasn't 'impossible'...He even went so far as to say the Germans used a 'sealer' (that would be another invention to credit to the 3r, along with the self cleaning oven).