AI Insights on the 'Holocaust'

[Callafangers]

oh boy

https://g.co/gemini/share/0d7bf8f44812

"oh boy", what, exactly?

USHMM censored the phrase "upon release" out of their translation completely. Why did they do this? And why would the concept of "release" be discussed here at all, if genocide is the focused intent of the entire discussion? Was it a decision between "release" versus "genocide" and nothing in between? Or was genocide the outlier, with less extreme (more adjacent) measures being compared? That is:

- Jews who had dropped out of the workforce, whether through injury/illness/etc. (aside from some significant or inevitable deaths), implicitly being released
- Jews of exceptional strength needing continued containment/imprisonment, indefinitely, even post-war

I made no assumption that "upon release" was necessarily hypothetical (as is the case with further, ongoing imprisonment). Your problem lies in the fact that only "release" (rather than imprisonment) and reduction (as it pertains to a hard labor workforce) is discussed at all, here. And, of course, in the fact that USHMM seems to prefer omitting certain key phrases.

In short:

• The relevant passage describes a plan to use Jews in forced labor for road construction.
• It anticipates that many will naturally drop out of the workforce due to the physical demands of the work.
• Those who remain are the most resistant and will require special handling or containment.
• There's a concern that if this resistant group were released, they might form the basis for a new, empowered Jewish community.

[bombsaway]

You should read the AI interpretation of the German original you provided, with a change from Jews to Germs

The sentence states that treatment is necessary because the remaining germs, if released ("bei Freilassung"), would act as the nucleus for a new population.

The key phrase is "bei Freilassung". This translates to "upon release" or "in case of release" or "if released".
It introduces a condition or a hypothetical circumstance.

The main point of the sentence is the necessity of treatment ("wird ... behandelt werden müssen"). This necessity is justified by the potential danger if a release were to happen.

[Therefore, the sentence does not state that the germs WILL be released. It describes the reason why the remaining resistant germs must be treated – specifically, to prevent the dangerous outcome that would occur if they were released. The release is presented as a potential eventuality or risk that the treatment aims to prevent, not a planned action.

It's pretty simple man. He's giving a reason for the Jews to be "treated accordingly". Actual release is counter indicated lol

[Nessie]

...

There is absolutely no mention that these Jews were going to be maintained where they were evacuated, no indications of resettlement proper.

It's comical revisionists see this as evidencing resettlement hypothesis.

It is indeed. Revisionists attack historian's use of euphemisms, and then claim words had euphemistic meaning. They attack the lack of reference to killing, but ignore the lack of reference to actual resettlement.

[Nessie]

...

In short:

• The relevant passage describes a plan to use Jews in forced labor for road construction.
• It anticipates that many will naturally drop out of the workforce due to the physical demands of the work.
• Those who remain are the most resistant and will require special handling or containment.
• There's a concern that if this resistant group were released, they might form the basis for a new, empowered Jewish community.

Therein lies revisionism's largest problem. The lack of evidence of the subsequent release of the millions of Jews the Nazis arrested 1939-44. If they were not killed, then in 1944, the Nazis would have been accommodating, feeding, clothing and guarding millions of Jews, which would leave a lot of evidence. Instead, there is none. Wannsee made no planning for the long term imprisonment of millions of Jews.

[Nessie]

I do not see an explicit call either, I see this "The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly...". Those not eliminated by work, will be eliminated by other means.

Wannsee goes into no detail about "the evacuation of the Jews to the East" and where they will go and who is responsible for their accommodation etc. There is no reference to any form of resettlement.

But that's not the story. The story is not that Jews would be sent for "labor in the East" (literal labor) and then those that survive would be eventually be dealt with. The story is that the Jews were killed upon arrival at the death camps before even leaving the General Government, especially the least able. There's no support for this at all in the Wannsee minutes.

It is the story according to so-called revisionists, who then fail to revise history and produce any evidence of mass resettlement in the east. There is no support for the massive logistical and organisation effort of mass resettlement in the Wannsee Minutes. The Minutes provide circumstantial evidence for the selection process described at every death camp, most significantly at A-B. Some Jews would be used for labour, the rest, not needed, and presenting a risk, had to be dealt with. Nothing is then said as to who would be responsible for and where the resources would come from, resettling, accommodating and guarding millions of Jews.

To establish what subsequently happened, we need to look elsewhere for evidence. At the time of Wannsee, the EG were sending back reports of mass shootings, which fits with the huge drops in the Jewish population recorded by the minutes, including Estonia being Jew free.

[Callafangers]

It's pretty simple man. He's giving a reason for the Jews to be "treated accordingly". Actual release is counter indicated lol

bombsaway, you clearly did not read (or not comprehend) what I wrote previously. Try again.

...

In short:

• The relevant passage describes a plan to use Jews in forced labor for road construction.
• It anticipates that many will naturally drop out of the workforce due to the physical demands of the work.
• Those who remain are the most resistant and will require special handling or containment.
• There's a concern that if this resistant group were released, they might form the basis for a new, empowered Jewish community.

Therein lies revisionism's largest problem. The lack of evidence of the subsequent release of the millions of Jews the Nazis arrested 1939-44. If they were not killed, then in 1944, the Nazis would have been accommodating, feeding, clothing and guarding millions of Jews, which would leave a lot of evidence. Instead, there is none. Wannsee made no planning for the long term imprisonment of millions of Jews.

So... are we able to talk about whether or not the actual words, here, explicitly indicate genocide (as is claimed)? Or are you giving that up and deferring to the 'convergence', instead?

[bombsaway]

It's pretty simple man. He's giving a reason for the Jews to be "treated accordingly". Actual release is counter indicated lol

bombsaway, you clearly did not read (or not comprehend) what I wrote previously. Try again.

...

In short:

• The relevant passage describes a plan to use Jews in forced labor for road construction.
• It anticipates that many will naturally drop out of the workforce due to the physical demands of the work.
• Those who remain are the most resistant and will require special handling or containment.
• There's a concern that if this resistant group were released, they might form the basis for a new, empowered Jewish community.

Therein lies revisionism's largest problem. The lack of evidence of the subsequent release of the millions of Jews the Nazis arrested 1939-44. If they were not killed, then in 1944, the Nazis would have been accommodating, feeding, clothing and guarding millions of Jews, which would leave a lot of evidence. Instead, there is none. Wannsee made no planning for the long term imprisonment of millions of Jews.

So... are we able to talk about whether or not the actual words, here, explicitly indicate genocide (as is claimed)? Or are you giving that up and deferring to the 'convergence', instead?

I was responding to this quote by you "Now, why on Earth would USHMM fail to mention that these prisoners were to be released, implying special measures (imprisonment, surveillance, etc.) applied thereafter?"

You were wrong to state the minutes suggested the "prisoners were to be released".

I never claimed there was explicit indication of genocide. There's no explicit mention of the fate of the non-working Jews. A few hints about evacuation is that sterilization is seen as preferable to it and also there's this

"In conclusion, there was a discussion of the various possible forms which the solution might take, and here both Gauleiter Dr. Meyer and Secretary of State Dr. Buehler were of the opinion that certain preparatory work for the final solution should be carried out locally in the area concerned, but that, in doing so, alarm among the population must be avoided."

What do you think fits here within your worldview, for "forms which the solution might take"? The part to take into account is the preparatory work seen as being required, and the need to not cause alarm among the population.

I don't think there's any other mention of what will happen to the evacuated Jews not chosen for labor.

My main argument with the protocols is it supports killing more so than maintenance, of non-employable Jews.

[Nessie]

It's pretty simple man. He's giving a reason for the Jews to be "treated accordingly". Actual release is counter indicated lol

bombsaway, you clearly did not read (or not comprehend) what I wrote previously. Try again.

...

In short:

• The relevant passage describes a plan to use Jews in forced labor for road construction.
• It anticipates that many will naturally drop out of the workforce due to the physical demands of the work.
• Those who remain are the most resistant and will require special handling or containment.
• There's a concern that if this resistant group were released, they might form the basis for a new, empowered Jewish community.

Therein lies revisionism's largest problem. The lack of evidence of the subsequent release of the millions of Jews the Nazis arrested 1939-44. If they were not killed, then in 1944, the Nazis would have been accommodating, feeding, clothing and guarding millions of Jews, which would leave a lot of evidence. Instead, there is none. Wannsee made no planning for the long term imprisonment of millions of Jews.

So... are we able to talk about whether or not the actual words, here, explicitly indicate genocide (as is claimed)? Or are you giving that up and deferring to the 'convergence', instead?

I don't think anyone claims those words explicitly indicate genocide. I have certainly made no such claim. Those words also do not explicitly indicate a massive resettlement programme. Of course we have to defer to the evidence as to what took place, to determine what the Nazis at Wannsee were referring to. There is zero evidence of a mass resettlement programme. There is evidence of mass murders, therefore they were talking about killing those not needed, or suitable for work.

[WW2History]

Firstly, what do you believe of the Holocaust? What's the death count to you? How did it function? You seem to try to stick to the traditional holocaust narrative, but you are struggling to actually stay within it in light of evidence, especially where this debate started, where you generalized the SS torture stuff.

You said

I do not see an explicit call either, I see this "The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly...". Those not eliminated by work, will be eliminated by other means.

Wannsee goes into no detail about "the evacuation of the Jews to the East" and where they will go and who is responsible for their accommodation etc. There is no reference to any form of resettlement.

“The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because this, representing a natural selection, would, if released, act as a seed of a new Jewish revival.” You say “treated accordingly” means “eliminated by other means” for those surviving work. That’s a leap, a brutal one, and it’s unsupported.

The full context: “Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labor in the East. Able-bodied Jews, separated according to sex, will be taken in large work columns to these areas for work on roads, in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.” “Natural causes”—starvation, exhaustion, disease (typhus)—not gas chambers.

The “final remnant” bit follows—no method specified. If “treated accordingly” meant gassing, why not say it? This was a closed-door meeting—Heydrich, Eichmann, top brass—no need for coyness. Earlier, it lists 11 million Jews for “evacuation”—logistics, not liquidation. Your “other means” is speculation—typhus fits “natural causes” better, no extermination order needed.

Your gripes that Wannsee lacks details on “evacuation to the East”—no destinations implying it’s a death sentence, not relocation, is just utterly false. The protocol’s a framework, not a travel itinerary. It says:

“The evacuated Jews will first be sent, group by group, to so-called transit ghettos, from which they will be transported to the East.”

Transit ghettos—like Minsk or Riga—exist in records (e.g., Einsatzgruppen reports, EM No. 92, Mallmann 2011, p. 545). Rail documents (Fahrplananordnung) show trains from Auschwitz to subcamps (Blechhammer) or eastwards movement, not mass graves. No “resettlement” details? It’s a 90-minute meeting. The Höfle Telegram logs 1.27 million to AR camps—arrivals, not deaths. If “East” meant “kill,” why labor columns? Why ghettos? Typhus explains losses—20-50% mortality (Red Cross, 1943) without gassing. Your “no resettlement” claim assumes extermination; when it is quote clearly deportation with natural attrition.

I'm glad you concede no “explicit call” for gassing—because there isn’t one. The protocol’s obsessed with numbers—11 million Jews, country breakdowns—no methods beyond “natural causes” and “treated accordingly.” Krema construction (Krema II, March 1943) and Zyklon B use (19 tons, NI-9912) ramp up later—Wannsee’s 1942 labor plan predates the gassing narrative’s timeline. Höss’s “400+ gassings” and Piper’s 1 million clash with Wannsee’s deportation focus typhus deaths (15,000, 1942 logs) need no chambers, just ovens. Most chambers were delousing—Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (see the blueprints), HCN traces (Krakow 1994, 0-640 µg/kg) dwarfed by delousing’s 900 µg/kg. Cremating typhus dead 50-100 daily, 52 muffles (Topf specs) perfectly fits Van Herwaarden’s “smoking chimneys” (IHR), not 25,000. TII’s 800,000 needs 240 million kg wood, which is unseen. Wannsee’s “natural causes” aligns with disease, not gas. Substantiate your position in your own words.





You said

http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org ... rt101.html

"Sonderkommando 4a in collaboration with Einsatzgruppe HQ and two Kommandos of police regiment South, executed 33,771 Jews in Kiev on September 29 and 30, 1941."

That was everyone. No one was spared.

"In the period covered by the report, the towns of Nikolayev and Kherson in particular were freed of Jews."

They were wiping out entire populations, such that in January 1942, Wannsee reported that Estonia was already free of Jews.

Report No. 101 claiming Sonderkommando 4a killed 33,771 Jews at Babi Yar, Kiev, on September 29-30, 1941. Absolute nonsense. The report dated October 2, 1941 comes from Einsatzgruppen operational logs (Nuremberg Doc. NO-3157), but it’s a raw number, not a census.

Kiev had 175,000 Jews pre-war (Soviet 1939 data); 100,000+ fled before the German advance (Yad Vashem estimates). That leaves maybe 60,000-70,000. Killing 33,771 in two days—half the remainder—means plenty survived. “Everyone”?

Laughable, tens of thousands stayed, worked, or hid (e.g., Dina Pronicheva, a survivor, testified at Nuremberg, IMT Vol. 7, p. 395).

Executions happened—brutal reprisals after Soviet bombings, but “no one spared” is a wild leap. Reprisals also arne't a war crime. Shooting 33,771 in 48 hours—700 per hour, 12 per minute—needs 500-1,000 men (Sonderkommando 4a had ~100, Police Regiment South added ~300, per Longerich’s Einsatzgruppen). Machine guns, ammo (50,000+ rounds), and body disposal. Headland’s Messages of Murder (p. 97) admits commanders exaggerated kills for glory. No forensic dig confirms 33,771—Soviet 1943 reports (NKVD) claim “tens of thousands,” but no bones match that precision.


Report No. 101: “the towns of Nikolayev and Kherson in particular were freed of Jews,”. Wrong—read the full report:

“In the period September 16 to 30, 1941… 22,467 Jews and Communists were executed.” That’s across a region, not just two towns. Nikolayev had 20,000 Jews pre-war (1939 census); Kherson, 15,000. Many fled German Einsatzgruppen hit late 1941, post-evacuation. “Freed” means cleared of “threats”—Jews, partisans, communists—via shootings or deportation, not every soul dead. Report No. 88 (August 1941) notes Jews moved to ghettos or labor (Mallmann 2011, p. 403) execution wasn’t total. Headland (p. 92) admits these reports are “chaotic,” numbers unreliable, 22,467 isn’t “entire populations” either.


This blog is a mess. The index lists documents such as Wannsee Protocol, Höss confessions, Krema blueprints (e.g., “Vergasungskeller”). You think this nails gassings? Did you even see the evidence? Wannsee talks “evacuation to the East” and “natural causes”—labor, starvation, disease—no gas chambers. Höss’s “400+ gassings” (1946 memoir, Krakow trial) claims 2.5 million dead—coerced under torture, debunked by Piper (1-1.5 million, Auschwitz: How Many Perished).

“Vergasungskeller” (Krema II, March 1943 letter, NI-4473)? Means fumigation—Zyklon B delousing needed ventilation (Degesch specs, 10 air changes/hour), not murder. Rail logs (Fahrplananordnung) show outbound trains—Blechhammer, Minsk, not death pits.

19 tons of Zyklon B (1942-44, NI-9912) for delousing—camp records (Majdanek & Auschwitz) log lice control. Crematoria burned disease dead, 15,000 in 1942 (death books).

Tauber’s 5-7 minutes per corpse (Krakow 1945, Pressac, p. 481)? Is literally Physics defying 60-90 minutes/body, ovens max 360 daily (Topf specs, 52 muffles), not 25,000. Müller’s 3,000 per gassing (Pressac, p. 183).

Joseph Burg Interviewed Krema workers, no gassing, just disease cremations. Van Herwaarden (IHR, 1980s)? “Smoking chimneys,” no gassing—fits sporadic burns.

They are not contradictions, they are differing versions of the same event, and different witnesses will give different versions. A contradiction would be witnesses who say the opposite of each other, not who agree in the main part, but vary in the details. Two witnesses who say Zyklon B was dropped into the chambers agree. If they then vary as to how the Zyklon B was dropped in, that is a variation, a difference, not a contradiction.

That’s a dodge dude. Your own earlier standard was “a contradictory witness is one who says something that is opposite to the given narrative.”

You say agree on Zyklon B, so no contradiction. They’re opposite on essentials unreconcilable with a uniform process.

• Location: Müller, Tauber, Nadjari, Venezia: fake shower room. Cohen: next to it. Gassing outside the disguise contradicts the deception.

• Holes: Tauber: four (fits narrative). Nadjari, Venezia: one. Cohen: one every 8 meters. Opposite—fewer or variable holes can’t coexist with four fixed openings.

• Gas Insertion: Nadjari, Venezia: directly. Müller: sheet metal pillars. Cohen: pierced plates. Tauber: three-layer mesh. Opposite, direct drop vs. structured pillars isn’t a minor “how”; it’s a clashing mechanism Pressac says pillars (Pressac, p. 487).

• Capacity: Cohen: 750. Nadjari: 2,500. Müller: 3,000. Opposite—750 can’t fit 2,000-3,000 (Höss)

• Wait Time: Müller: few minutes. Venezia: 10-12. Nadjari: one hour. Tauber, Cohen: two hours. Opposite. Few minutes vs. two hours contradicts 20-30 minutes (standard, Zyklon B kill time). Can’t both be true.

• Ventilation Timing: Müller, Tauber, Nadjari: before opening. Venezia, Cohen: after.

• Corpse Colors: Nadjari: none. Müller: blue. Venezia: red/pale. Tauber: pinkish/green. Cohen: black/pink. Opposite—blue (cyanide, narrative) vs. none or red contradicts the chemical signature.

• Gas Masks: Müller, Tauber: yes. Venezia: no. Opposite—safety protocol vs. none isn’t a variation.

• Cremation: Venezia: 1,800. Cohen: 3,600. Nadjari, Tauber: 2,500. Opposite—below vs. above 2,000-2,500 (Topf limit) contradicts capacity.

Zyklon B was used, 19 tons at A-B (1942-44, NI-9912). But most chambers were delousing—Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (blueprints), HCN traces (Krakow 1994, 0-640 µg/kg) dwarfed by delousing’s 900 µg/kg (Block 3). Gassing’s 400+ cycles (Höss) should spike residues—doesn’t. Delousing’s 16 g/m³, 16-24 hours matches high traces. Contradictions are the holes, pillars, timing—fit chaotic delousing (varying sites, methods) over a uniform murder machine. '

Opposite claims (one vs. four holes, direct vs. pillars, yes vs. no masks) can’t coexist in “the same event.”

If the Kremas had delousing chambers inside them, why do they not show Prussian blue staining as the actual delousing chambers at the camp show? Leuchter and Rudolf are certain they have proved the Kremas were never used for gassings, let alone delousing. Why build delousing chambers and then more delousing chambers inside the Kremas? Name a witness who worked inside a Krema who saw clothing being deloused there.

Krema chambers (Krema II/III’s Leichenkeller) lack Prussian blue staining iron-cyanide compounds from HCN exposure—unlike “actual delousing chambers” (e.g., Block 3, BW 5a/b). Prussian blue forms when HCN binds to iron in walls, favored by long, high-dose exposure—delousing used 16 g/m³ for 16-24 hours (Degesch manuals) to kill lice, leaving deep stains (900 µg/kg to 1,050 mg/kg HCN, Krakow 1994/Leuchter). Krema II’s traces? 0-640 µg/kg (Krakow), mostly 0-50—faint, no blue.

The difference comes down to usage. Delousing chambers ran near-daily, hours-long cycles—19 tons of Zyklon B at A-B (1942-44, NI-9912) fought rampant lice (1942-43 epidemics). Krema chambers like Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (see the blueprints) were multi-use: morgues, occasional delousing. Gassing claims (5-7 kg, 5-10 minutes, Höss) don’t need hours, short bursts leave less HCN to bind. Delousing in Kremas at smaller scale, clothes, gear from dead (typhus victims) No blue doesn’t mean no delousing; it means less intense HCN use.

Leuchter and Rudolf “proved” Kremas weren’t for gassing or delousing? They didn’t rule out delousing, you are twisting their work. Leuchter’s 1988 report (Zündel trial) found 0-8 mg/kg HCN in Krema II vs. 1,050 mg/kg in delousing rooms, arguing low traces nix gassing—delousing wasn’t his focus, but he noted high residues fit it. Rudolf (2003, Dissecting the Holocaust) refined this—Krema HCN (0-640 µg/kg, Krakow) is too low for 400+ gassings (Höss), but he allows occasional delousing—short exposures, no blue. Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (1941 plans, Pressac, p. 29) and Zyklon B logs (NI-9912) back me, delousing happened, Kremas included.


I'm glad to see you are free-thinking for once, when you ask "Why build delousing chambers and then more inside the Kremas?” The answer is quite simple, efficiency and corpse handling. A-B had dedicated delousing (BW 5a/b, Block 3) for mass clothing/bedding—16-24 hour cycles, high HCN (Degesch).

Kremas (I-V) were built for cremation—52 muffles (II-V) burned disease dead (15,000, 1942 logs). Dead prisoners’ clothes lice-ridden needed delousing before reuse or disposal (camp hygiene orders, 1942). Krema I’s gas-tight room (Pressac, p. 29) doubled as morgue and delousing site, small batches, quick cycles (1-2 hours). Krema II/III’s Leichenkeller was for storage, occasional HCN use, blueprints show ventilation (NI-4473), fit for fumigation. The separation was for redundancy, disease outbreaks (1942-43) hit hard, witnesses and even Himmler right about how it was killing both SS Guards and Jews alike.

Joseph Burg interviewed A-B crematoria workers post-war. Quote: “They told me the crematoria were for the dead from disease, not gas chambers… clothes were treated too.” He relayed workers’ accounts—but they worked inside Kremas (likely I or II), burned bodies, and processed gear.


200m x 100m disturbed soil but size doesn’t prove 800,000 dead (Höfle Telegram). Cremating 800,000 (1942-43, ~2,000 daily) needs 240 million kg of wood—300 kg/body, open pits (no ovens, Rajzman, IMT Vol. 8). That’s 2 acres of pits, WWI’s Somme (e.g., Thiepval, 70,000+ missing) or Verdun (130,000 unidentified in ossuaries) rival it in raw death, not area. TII’s pits held ash mixed, not “individually interred” but no forensic count hits 800,000. Soviet 1945 digs (Treblinka Commission) found “thousands” of fragments vague, not millions.

“no need to deforest” because Polish woodyards supplied wood by rail? A Cute theory with no evidence. Cremating 800,000 at TII—600,000 kg daily (2,000 bodies) means 200 truckloads (3-ton Opel Blitz) or 10-15 rail cars (40-ton capacity) daily for 400 days (1942-43). German rail logs (Fahrplananordnung) track coal, coke, prisoners, not mass timber to TII, a rural backwater.

Polish wood production (1940s) hit ~5 million cubic meters yearly (FAO stats)—600,000 kg daily is 219,000 tons/year, ~10% of output for one camp. No records—Treblinka survivor Wiernik (1944, A Year in Treblinka) mentions wood piles, not rail floods. A-B’s 30 tons coke/day (NI-11937) burned 50-100 bodies—25,000 needs 7.5 million kg wood daily. No woodyard or rail net hauls that, it's unproven.


A-B Kremas peaked during Hungarian (May-July 1944) and Lodz (August 1944) transports. Wrong use doesn’t prove gassing. Hungarian Jews, 437,000 deported (Veesenmayer reports) landed at A-B; supposedly 100,000 died (Piper, Auschwitz: How Many Perished), rest labored or transited (Bergen-Belsen, rail logs). Lodz ghetto had 60,000+ sent, and supposedly 10,000 gassed, still short of “high use” claims (25,000/day). Krema II-V (52 muffles) maxed at 360 daily—1-2 bodies/muffle, 1-2 hours, not millions. Cremation logs (1943-44, partial logs exist) spike, but coke supply (30 tons/day) caps it—15,000 kg wood/day extra? No rail proof.

Typhus waned by 1944 (vaccines, delousing), but starvation and dysentery are clear in 1944 death books, 50,000 dead, not gassed. Kremas burned disease/starvation dead—Höss’s 1.1 million, even Piper cuts to 1 million, mixed causes.

I’m “theorising, not investigating”? The blueprints (Krema I), Zyklon B logs (19 tons), HCN tests (Krakow), death records (15,000), and basic physics (muffle limits, wood needs). His TII 800,000? No bones, no wood trail, Höfle’s just a headcount. A-B’s 25,000/day? No fuel, no capacity. You are the one theorizing—big pits and Kremas = gassing, with no hard proof.

You said

The Nazis cremated the gassed. Gassing stopped at Auschwitz in January 1945, so Larson would never had been able to get a gased corpse to autopsy later on that year.

That’s a convenient dodge, but it doesn’t hold up when you look at the timeline and the numbers. The mainstream Holocaust narrative says Auschwitz-Birkenau (A-B) gassed 1-1.5 million people (Piper’s estimate), mostly in Kremas II-V, with gassing supposedly stopping in January 1945—months before liberation on January 27, 1945. Larson’s team rolled in around April-May 1945, hitting Dachau, which was liberated April 29 and other camps, doing autopsies on freshly dead or recently buried bodies—over 100 across twenty sites. If gassing was that massive and only stopped in January, you’d expect some trace of it somewhere, not a total wipeout by cremation.

A-B’s 52 muffles could burn 360 bodies a day max—1-2 per muffle, 1-2 hours each (Topf engineer Prüfer’s limit). Even at peak, like the Hungarian transports (May-July 1944, ~100,000 dead), that’s nowhere near 25,000 daily (Höss’s inflated claim, later cut by Piper). Cremating 1 million+ from 1942-1945—say, 1,000 a day—takes 30 tons of coke daily (NI-11937 logs), A-B’s full supply, leaving no fuel for anything else. Bodies piled up per survivor accounts (Wiernik at Treblinka) and liberation photos show unburned corpses. Not everything was cremated, Larson had plenty to work with.

Larson’s team visited Dachau, Buchenwald, and twenty other camps, autopsying over 100 bodies. In Crime Doctor (1970s), he’s clear: no signs of poisoning, cyanide (Zyklon B) or otherwise. Cyanide leaves marks—bluish skin, lung damage, blood chemistry shifts (HCN binds hemoglobin), even days later in fresh corpses. Liberation was April-May 1945; gassing at A-B allegedly stopped January 1945—four months max. Twenty camps, 100+ bodies—no poison. That’s not “all cremated”; that’s no gassing. Liberation footage from January 27 shows stacks of unburned dead and 7,000 survivors, thousands of corpses (Soviet counts). Larson’s 100+ autopsies included fresh or shallow-buried remains—four months isn’t enough to erase all cyanide traces, especially in cold Polish winter.

Buchenwald (liberated April 11), Dachau—no late gassing claims, yet no poison there either. Your “stopped in January” only covers A-B—it doesn’t explain Larson’s zero across twenty sites. Delousing deaths—accidental HCN leaks—would show poison; they don’t. Shootings, starvation, disease? No cyanide needed, Larson’s findings match that.

You are guessing “they cremated the gassed” with no proof. I’ve got Larson’s autopsies: 100+ bodies, no poison, just disease and starvation. A-B’s HCN traces? 0-640 µg/kg in Kremas (Krakow 1994), 900 µg/kg in delousing (Block 3)—lice, not people. Cremation limits 360/day means bodies lingered; 15,000 disease dead fit sporadic burns (Van Herwaarden’s “chimneys,” claim).





You said

The only corpses that would have been available for him to autopsy, had died months after all gassing operations had ended. You clearly have no idea about chronology.

“died months after gassing ended” is a flimsy excuse, Larson actually autopsied bodies from January-April 1945 deaths, close enough to catch cyanide if it was there. A-B’s unburned dead, twenty camps, no poison. I’m not clueless on chronology, your “months after” dodge ignores the mess Nazis left, bodies Larson saw weren’t all post-gassing stragglers. Nazis didn’t cremate everything, Dachau’s barracks had fresh dead (See April 29 footage); A-B’s pits held late burials. Your “all gassing ended” doesn’t cover why twenty camps showed no trace. Delousing fits, gassing doesn’t.



You said

They prove the Kremas had gas chambers built inside them. Your delousing claims are contradicted by Leuchter and Rudolf and the lack of Prussian blue staining. There are documents recording the construction of gas tight doors and a ventilation system. Witnesses also speak to such. The witness, documentary and forensic evidence support mass gassing of people. You cannot prove anything else took place.

“Vergasung” means fumigation. Delousing chambers like Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (1941 blueprints, Pressac, p. 29)—needed the same: gas-tight seals and vents to handle Zyklon B safely (Degesch manuals, 16 g/m³, 1-2 hour cycles). Krema II’s setup fits that. Morgues doubled as delousing spots for clothes from the dead (camp hygiene orders, 1942). Gassing 2,000-3,000 people (Höss’s claim) needs more showerheads, pillars, yet blueprints show vents and doors. Doors and vents exist (Krema II/III plans), they’re standard for delousing too (Read Degesch specs). Tauber (1945, Pressac, p. 481) says Zyklon B in Krema II—5-7 minutes/body—impossible (60-90 minutes, cremation science). Docs and testimony show Zyklon B use—19 tons (NI-9912)—but delousing (Block 3’s 900 µg/kg) fits better.

Krakow 1994’s 0-640 µg/kg in Krema II. Compare that to 900 µg/kg in delousing with 5-7 kg Zyklon B should leave more—300 ppm kills fast, 400+ cycles bind HCN to walls. Delousing’s higher traces match, Krema’s don’t show genocide. Cremation couldn’t hide 25,000 daily, no wood (7.5 million kg) or rail proof.

You said

Tauber did not say it took 5 to 7 minutes to entirely cremate a corpse.

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

"In continuous operation, we could burn two charges per hour. According to the regulations, were supposed to charge the muffles every half hour. Ober Capo August explained to us that, according to the calculations and plans for this crematorium, 5 to 7 minutes was allowed to burn one corpse in a muffle."

Two charges an hour, so 30 minutes for the first corpses in the top oven. They then fall, get raked through the grill to the bottom part of the oven and the next set of corpses is introduced and so on every 30 mimutes. That means between top and bottom over, the corpses spend at least 30 minutes being cremated. The 5 to 7 is an average per corpse, where 4 to 5 corpses are being introduced every half hour.

You lean on this forum quote to say Tauber didn’t mean 5-7 minutes to “entirely cremate” a corpse—it’s an “average” in a 30-minute cycle? Problem is, the full context of Tauber’s testimony (May 24, 1945, Krakow, cited in Pressac’s Auschwitz: Technique and Operation, p. 481-502) doesn’t back your gymnastics. Tauber says:

“The cremation of a single corpse took 5 to 7 minutes according to the plans”—not an average across a batch, but a per-corpse claim tied to design specs. His “two charges per hour” (30-minute reload) and “4 to 5 corpses” per muffle come later, describing operation, not contradicting the 5-7 minute figure. If 4-5 corpses take 30 minutes total, that’s 6-7.5 minutes each, but Tauber’s phrasing isn’t “average”; it’s a standalone rate from “Ober Capo August.” You are twisting Tauber’s intent—5-7 minutes is the cremation speed.

Corpses burn in a “top oven,” fall through a grill, get raked to a bottom, and new ones load every 30 minutes? What a joke, that is pure fiction. Topf’s triple-muffle design (See Krema II/III, blueprints, NI-7179) has no such flow. Each muffle—0.7m wide, 0.6m high, 2m deep—has one chamber with a clay grate; bodies burn on top, ash drops below after full combustion. No “top oven” tier loading’s manual, via carts (Tauber, Pressac). Cremating 4-5 bodies, then “falling” in 30 minutes? Bones don’t vanish that fast, raking half-burned corpses jams the grate (Topf manual warns of clogging). Your conveyor-belt dream needs 30-50 kg coke/muffle/hour (According to Topf specs), which is not enough for 160-200 kg of flesh in half an hour.

You said

That is the theory, but you have no witnesses and the circumstantial evidence does not fit, such as high Krema use when there was no typhus epidemic, but there were mass arrivals. Your delousing theory also does not fit with other revisionist claims about use, that include showers and bomb shelters.

I’ve already named Joseph Erber, a guard who worked near Krema I (1981 interview, Die Auschwitz-Lüge by Thies Christophersen). Erber said: “The gas chamber there was used to delouse clothing… no people were gassed in it.” Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (1941 blueprints, Pressac, p. 29) backs him, built for fumigation. Then there’s Filip Müller—Sonderkommando darling—whose Eyewitness Auschwitz (1979, p. 33) mentions “disinfection” of prisoner gear near Krema I, showing Zyklon B’s real job. Mass arrivals spiked deaths starvation (1944 rations: 1,300 calories/day), dysentery (camp logs), shootings (SS execution records) Kremas burned those.

I’m not married to every revisionist, my evidence stands alone. Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” and 19 tons Zyklon B (NI-9912) scream delousing, HCN at 900 µg/kg in Block 3 (Krakow 1994) vs. 0-50 µg/kg average in Krema II fits lice, not murder. No pipes in Krema II/III (blueprints, NI-7179) delousing needs none. Gas-tight doors (NI-4473) work for HCN containment—10 air changes/hour (vent specs) match Degesch’s 1-2 hour cycles. Other theories don’t debunk mine.

I welcome any Revisionist to say otherwise.

You said

You said "When you say something, do as I do and provide a source or link." Where is your source or link for the Krema worker statements? I want to read them.

I cited Joseph Erber, an SS guard near Krema I, saying it was used to “delouse clothing… no people were gassed in it.” That’s from his 1981 interview in Die Auschwitz-Lüge. You can find it archived online—check the Institute for Historical Review (IHR) site, where they’ve got excerpts: http://www.ihr.org/books/christophersen/. Erber was at A-B in 1942-43, worked near Krema I, and saw Zyklon B used on uniforms, not bodies. Krema I’s blueprints (Pressac, Technique, p. 29) list an “Entlausungskammer”—delousing chamber—built in 1941, matching his story. No gassing setup there—just fumigation gear.

Next, Filip Müller—Sonderkommando poster boy. I said his Eyewitness Auschwitz (1979, p. 33) mentions “disinfection” of prisoner gear near Krema I. Grab the book—ISBN 1-56663-271-4, or check this link:

https://books.google.com/books?id=8QoaXbC7Q7oC. Page 33: “Clothing was taken to the disinfection block near Krema I.”

He’s obsessed with gassing tales elsewhere (Krema II, 3,000/cycle), but this ties Zyklon B to delousing, 19 tons shipped (NI-9912)—not mass murder. His gassing claims? 5-10 minutes for 3,000 (p. 80) which if you had any knowledge of physics, it's clearly wrong.

You demands links but you've given squat you previously said “high Krema use, mass arrivals” yet had no docs, no numbers. Hungarian transports (437,000, NG-2263)? 100,000 dead over months—1,666/day, over Krema’s 360. Lodz (60,000)? 10,000 max—333/day. No coke surge, no wood trains. You got Tauber’s 5-7 minutes (in which you linked forum.axishistory.com) of which I already debunked.

[Nessie]

Firstly, what do you believe of the Holocaust?

The history as taught at universities. Schools and the media have too simplistic histories.

What's the death count to you?

5 - 6 million.

How did it function? You seem to try to stick to the traditional holocaust narrative, but you are struggling to actually stay within it in light of evidence, especially where this debate started, where you generalized the SS torture stuff.

I am not sure what you mean by that.

You said

I do not see an explicit call either, I see this "The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly...". Those not eliminated by work, will be eliminated by other means.

Wannsee goes into no detail about "the evacuation of the Jews to the East" and where they will go and who is responsible for their accommodation etc. There is no reference to any form of resettlement.

“The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because this, representing a natural selection, would, if released, act as a seed of a new Jewish revival.” You say “treated accordingly” means “eliminated by other means” for those surviving work. That’s a leap, a brutal one, and it’s unsupported.

The full context: “Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labor in the East. Able-bodied Jews, separated according to sex, will be taken in large work columns to these areas for work on roads, in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.” “Natural causes”—starvation, exhaustion, disease (typhus)—not gas chambers.

The “final remnant” bit follows—no method specified. If “treated accordingly” meant gassing, why not say it? This was a closed-door meeting—Heydrich, Eichmann, top brass—no need for coyness. Earlier, it lists 11 million Jews for “evacuation”—logistics, not liquidation. Your “other means” is speculation—typhus fits “natural causes” better, no extermination order needed.

Your gripes that Wannsee lacks details on “evacuation to the East”—no destinations implying it’s a death sentence, not relocation, is just utterly false. The protocol’s a framework, not a travel itinerary. It says:

“The evacuated Jews will first be sent, group by group, to so-called transit ghettos, from which they will be transported to the East.”

Transit ghettos—like Minsk or Riga—exist in records (e.g., Einsatzgruppen reports, EM No. 92, Mallmann 2011, p. 545). Rail documents (Fahrplananordnung) show trains from Auschwitz to subcamps (Blechhammer) or eastwards movement, not mass graves. No “resettlement” details? It’s a 90-minute meeting. The Höfle Telegram logs 1.27 million to AR camps—arrivals, not deaths. If “East” meant “kill,” why labor columns? Why ghettos? Typhus explains losses—20-50% mortality (Red Cross, 1943) without gassing. Your “no resettlement” claim assumes extermination; when it is quote clearly deportation with natural attrition.

I'm glad you concede no “explicit call” for gassing—because there isn’t one. The protocol’s obsessed with numbers—11 million Jews, country breakdowns—no methods beyond “natural causes” and “treated accordingly.” Krema construction (Krema II, March 1943) and Zyklon B use (19 tons, NI-9912) ramp up later—Wannsee’s 1942 labor plan predates the gassing narrative’s timeline. Höss’s “400+ gassings” and Piper’s 1 million clash with Wannsee’s deportation focus typhus deaths (15,000, 1942 logs) need no chambers, just ovens. Most chambers were delousing—Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (see the blueprints), HCN traces (Krakow 1994, 0-640 µg/kg) dwarfed by delousing’s 900 µg/kg. Cremating typhus dead 50-100 daily, 52 muffles (Topf specs) perfectly fits Van Herwaarden’s “smoking chimneys” (IHR), not 25,000. TII’s 800,000 needs 240 million kg wood, which is unseen. Wannsee’s “natural causes” aligns with disease, not gas. Substantiate your position in your own words.

The Wannsee Conference was in January 1942, when the main actions against the Jews, was the mass shootings by the EG. Hence the minutes record Estonia as Jew free and huge drops in the populations of Latvia and Lithuania. As you say, there was no explicit call for gassings, but AR had yet to start and Chelmno was still a small scale operation. Those drops in population are inconsistent with a resettlement policy, of which the conference has nothing to say about.

The planning involved in resettling millions of Jews would be enormous, a huge drain on resources, yet Wannsee, "the Final Solution of the Jewish people" has nothing. The "so-called transit ghettos", which you identify as Riga and Minsk, took in Jews, but there is no evidence they were they tranisted and resettled anywhere else. The Riga and Minsk ghettos had closed in October 1943, which leaves the question, "where did all those Jews go?", unanswered by revisionists, or so-called revisionists, as they cannot revise the history and produce evidence of resettlement.

You dispute all you want that Wannsee included planning for murder, it certainly included no planning for resettlement. That the senior Nazis present, did not want to be associated with the murders, is hardly surprising. The dirty work was left to more junior SS.

[Nessie]

....
You said

http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org ... rt101.html

"Sonderkommando 4a in collaboration with Einsatzgruppe HQ and two Kommandos of police regiment South, executed 33,771 Jews in Kiev on September 29 and 30, 1941."

That was everyone. No one was spared.

"In the period covered by the report, the towns of Nikolayev and Kherson in particular were freed of Jews."

They were wiping out entire populations, such that in January 1942, Wannsee reported that Estonia was already free of Jews.

Report No. 101 claiming Sonderkommando 4a killed 33,771 Jews at Babi Yar, Kiev, on September 29-30, 1941. Absolute nonsense. The report dated October 2, 1941 comes from Einsatzgruppen operational logs (Nuremberg Doc. NO-3157), but it’s a raw number, not a census.

Kiev had 175,000 Jews pre-war (Soviet 1939 data); 100,000+ fled before the German advance (Yad Vashem estimates). That leaves maybe 60,000-70,000. Killing 33,771 in two days—half the remainder—means plenty survived. “Everyone”?

Laughable, tens of thousands stayed, worked, or hid (e.g., Dina Pronicheva, a survivor, testified at Nuremberg, IMT Vol. 7, p. 395).

Executions happened—brutal reprisals after Soviet bombings, but “no one spared” is a wild leap. Reprisals also arne't a war crime. Shooting 33,771 in 48 hours—700 per hour, 12 per minute—needs 500-1,000 men (Sonderkommando 4a had ~100, Police Regiment South added ~300, per Longerich’s Einsatzgruppen). Machine guns, ammo (50,000+ rounds), and body disposal. Headland’s Messages of Murder (p. 97) admits commanders exaggerated kills for glory. No forensic dig confirms 33,771—Soviet 1943 reports (NKVD) claim “tens of thousands,” but no bones match that precision.

Are you denying Babi Yar and the mass shootings by the EG? If so, please evidence where the Jews of Kiev were in 1942.

Report No. 101: “the towns of Nikolayev and Kherson in particular were freed of Jews,”. Wrong—read the full report:

“In the period September 16 to 30, 1941… 22,467 Jews and Communists were executed.” That’s across a region, not just two towns. Nikolayev had 20,000 Jews pre-war (1939 census); Kherson, 15,000. Many fled German Einsatzgruppen hit late 1941, post-evacuation. “Freed” means cleared of “threats”—Jews, partisans, communists—via shootings or deportation, not every soul dead. Report No. 88 (August 1941) notes Jews moved to ghettos or labor (Mallmann 2011, p. 403) execution wasn’t total. Headland (p. 92) admits these reports are “chaotic,” numbers unreliable, 22,467 isn’t “entire populations” either.

OK, evidence the number of Jews in Nikolayev and Kherson in 1942. You seem to think investigation is what did not happen, whereas it is normally about what did. Unless you start to present evidence of what the EG were doing and what happened to the Jews they arrested, you cannot be called a revisionist, you are just a denier.

[Nessie]

....
This blog is a mess.

I presume you are referring to this;

https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... ce-on.html

The index lists documents such as Wannsee Protocol, Höss confessions, Krema blueprints (e.g., “Vergasungskeller”). You think this nails gassings? Did you even see the evidence? Wannsee talks “evacuation to the East” and “natural causes”—labor, starvation, disease—no gas chambers. Höss’s “400+ gassings” (1946 memoir, Krakow trial) claims 2.5 million dead—coerced under torture, debunked by Piper (1-1.5 million, Auschwitz: How Many Perished).

“Vergasungskeller” (Krema II, March 1943 letter, NI-4473)? Means fumigation—Zyklon B delousing needed ventilation (Degesch specs, 10 air changes/hour), not murder. Rail logs (Fahrplananordnung) show outbound trains—Blechhammer, Minsk, not death pits.

19 tons of Zyklon B (1942-44, NI-9912) for delousing—camp records (Majdanek & Auschwitz) log lice control. Crematoria burned disease dead, 15,000 in 1942 (death books).

Explain how the Kremas were used as delousing chambers when;

- there is no sign of Prussian Blue staining as seen at actual delousing chambers
- traces of the use of HCN are lower than at the actual delousing chambers
- there are no witnesses to delousing taking place.

Tauber’s 5-7 minutes per corpse (Krakow 1945, Pressac, p. 481)? Is literally Physics defying 60-90 minutes/body, ovens max 360 daily (Topf specs, 52 muffles), not 25,000. Müller’s 3,000 per gassing (Pressac, p. 183).

You have quote mined and misunderstood context. Tauber describes corpses being cremated for at least 30 minutes.

Joseph Burg Interviewed Krema workers, no gassing, just disease cremations. Van Herwaarden (IHR, 1980s)? “Smoking chimneys,” no gassing—fits sporadic burns.

You constantly refuse to link to, name and quote any of the workers. You are lying.

They are not contradictions, they are differing versions of the same event, and different witnesses will give different versions. A contradiction would be witnesses who say the opposite of each other, not who agree in the main part, but vary in the details. Two witnesses who say Zyklon B was dropped into the chambers agree. If they then vary as to how the Zyklon B was dropped in, that is a variation, a difference, not a contradiction.

That’s a dodge dude. Your own earlier standard was “a contradictory witness is one who says something that is opposite to the given narrative.”

The narrative is of gassings. The details vary as to how many were gassed etc, but they are consistent there were gassings and no witness contradicts that.

You say agree on Zyklon B, so no contradiction. They’re opposite on essentials unreconcilable with a uniform process.

• Location: Müller, Tauber, Nadjari, Venezia: fake shower room. Cohen: next to it. Gassing outside the disguise contradicts the deception.

• Holes: Tauber: four (fits narrative). Nadjari, Venezia: one. Cohen: one every 8 meters. Opposite—fewer or variable holes can’t coexist with four fixed openings.

• Gas Insertion: Nadjari, Venezia: directly. Müller: sheet metal pillars. Cohen: pierced plates. Tauber: three-layer mesh. Opposite, direct drop vs. structured pillars isn’t a minor “how”; it’s a clashing mechanism Pressac says pillars (Pressac, p. 487).

• Capacity: Cohen: 750. Nadjari: 2,500. Müller: 3,000. Opposite—750 can’t fit 2,000-3,000 (Höss)

• Wait Time: Müller: few minutes. Venezia: 10-12. Nadjari: one hour. Tauber, Cohen: two hours. Opposite. Few minutes vs. two hours contradicts 20-30 minutes (standard, Zyklon B kill time). Can’t both be true.

• Ventilation Timing: Müller, Tauber, Nadjari: before opening. Venezia, Cohen: after.

• Corpse Colors: Nadjari: none. Müller: blue. Venezia: red/pale. Tauber: pinkish/green. Cohen: black/pink. Opposite—blue (cyanide, narrative) vs. none or red contradicts the chemical signature.

• Gas Masks: Müller, Tauber: yes. Venezia: no. Opposite—safety protocol vs. none isn’t a variation.

• Cremation: Venezia: 1,800. Cohen: 3,600. Nadjari, Tauber: 2,500. Opposite—below vs. above 2,000-2,500 (Topf limit) contradicts capacity.

Zyklon B was used, 19 tons at A-B (1942-44, NI-9912). But most chambers were delousing—Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (blueprints), HCN traces (Krakow 1994, 0-640 µg/kg) dwarfed by delousing’s 900 µg/kg (Block 3). Gassing’s 400+ cycles (Höss) should spike residues—doesn’t. Delousing’s 16 g/m³, 16-24 hours matches high traces. Contradictions are the holes, pillars, timing—fit chaotic delousing (varying sites, methods) over a uniform murder machine. '

Opposite claims (one vs. four holes, direct vs. pillars, yes vs. no masks) can’t coexist in “the same event.”

They universally agree, gassings took place, there is no contradiction.

If the Kremas had delousing chambers inside them, why do they not show Prussian blue staining as the actual delousing chambers at the camp show? Leuchter and Rudolf are certain they have proved the Kremas were never used for gassings, let alone delousing. Why build delousing chambers and then more delousing chambers inside the Kremas? Name a witness who worked inside a Krema who saw clothing being deloused there.

Krema chambers (Krema II/III’s Leichenkeller) lack Prussian blue staining iron-cyanide compounds from HCN exposure—unlike “actual delousing chambers” (e.g., Block 3, BW 5a/b). Prussian blue forms when HCN binds to iron in walls, favored by long, high-dose exposure—delousing used 16 g/m³ for 16-24 hours (Degesch manuals) to kill lice, leaving deep stains (900 µg/kg to 1,050 mg/kg HCN, Krakow 1994/Leuchter). Krema II’s traces? 0-640 µg/kg (Krakow), mostly 0-50—faint, no blue.

The difference comes down to usage. Delousing chambers ran near-daily, hours-long cycles—19 tons of Zyklon B at A-B (1942-44, NI-9912) fought rampant lice (1942-43 epidemics). Krema chambers like Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (see the blueprints) were multi-use: morgues, occasional delousing. Gassing claims (5-7 kg, 5-10 minutes, Höss) don’t need hours, short bursts leave less HCN to bind. Delousing in Kremas at smaller scale, clothes, gear from dead (typhus victims) No blue doesn’t mean no delousing; it means less intense HCN use.

Leuchter and Rudolf “proved” Kremas weren’t for gassing or delousing? They didn’t rule out delousing, you are twisting their work. Leuchter’s 1988 report (Zündel trial) found 0-8 mg/kg HCN in Krema II vs. 1,050 mg/kg in delousing rooms, arguing low traces nix gassing—delousing wasn’t his focus, but he noted high residues fit it. Rudolf (2003, Dissecting the Holocaust) refined this—Krema HCN (0-640 µg/kg, Krakow) is too low for 400+ gassings (Höss), but he allows occasional delousing—short exposures, no blue. Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (1941 plans, Pressac, p. 29) and Zyklon B logs (NI-9912) back me, delousing happened, Kremas included.


I'm glad to see you are free-thinking for once, when you ask "Why build delousing chambers and then more inside the Kremas?” The answer is quite simple, efficiency and corpse handling. A-B had dedicated delousing (BW 5a/b, Block 3) for mass clothing/bedding—16-24 hour cycles, high HCN (Degesch).

Now evidence delousing taking place inside the Kremas, with witness who were working there, or documents recording the delousing of clothing.

Kremas (I-V) were built for cremation—52 muffles (II-V) burned disease dead (15,000, 1942 logs). Dead prisoners’ clothes lice-ridden needed delousing before reuse or disposal (camp hygiene orders, 1942). Krema I’s gas-tight room (Pressac, p. 29) doubled as morgue and delousing site, small batches, quick cycles (1-2 hours). Krema II/III’s Leichenkeller was for storage, occasional HCN use, blueprints show ventilation (NI-4473), fit for fumigation. The separation was for redundancy, disease outbreaks (1942-43) hit hard, witnesses and even Himmler right about how it was killing both SS Guards and Jews alike.

Joseph Burg interviewed A-B crematoria workers post-war. Quote: “They told me the crematoria were for the dead from disease, not gas chambers… clothes were treated too.” He relayed workers’ accounts—but they worked inside Kremas (likely I or II), burned bodies, and processed gear.

This is getting repetitive. Quote and name a worker, or else I am calling you out as a liar.

200m x 100m disturbed soil but size doesn’t prove 800,000 dead (Höfle Telegram). Cremating 800,000 (1942-43, ~2,000 daily) needs 240 million kg of wood—300 kg/body, open pits (no ovens, Rajzman, IMT Vol. 8). That’s 2 acres of pits, WWI’s Somme (e.g., Thiepval, 70,000+ missing) or Verdun (130,000 unidentified in ossuaries) rival it in raw death, not area. TII’s pits held ash mixed, not “individually interred” but no forensic count hits 800,000. Soviet 1945 digs (Treblinka Commission) found “thousands” of fragments vague, not millions.

“no need to deforest” because Polish woodyards supplied wood by rail? A Cute theory with no evidence. Cremating 800,000 at TII—600,000 kg daily (2,000 bodies) means 200 truckloads (3-ton Opel Blitz) or 10-15 rail cars (40-ton capacity) daily for 400 days (1942-43). German rail logs (Fahrplananordnung) track coal, coke, prisoners, not mass timber to TII, a rural backwater.

Polish wood production (1940s) hit ~5 million cubic meters yearly (FAO stats)—600,000 kg daily is 219,000 tons/year, ~10% of output for one camp. No records—Treblinka survivor Wiernik (1944, A Year in Treblinka) mentions wood piles, not rail floods. A-B’s 30 tons coke/day (NI-11937) burned 50-100 bodies—25,000 needs 7.5 million kg wood daily. No woodyard or rail net hauls that, it's unproven.


A-B Kremas peaked during Hungarian (May-July 1944) and Lodz (August 1944) transports. Wrong use doesn’t prove gassing. Hungarian Jews, 437,000 deported (Veesenmayer reports) landed at A-B; supposedly 100,000 died (Piper, Auschwitz: How Many Perished), rest labored or transited (Bergen-Belsen, rail logs). Lodz ghetto had 60,000+ sent, and supposedly 10,000 gassed, still short of “high use” claims (25,000/day). Krema II-V (52 muffles) maxed at 360 daily—1-2 bodies/muffle, 1-2 hours, not millions. Cremation logs (1943-44, partial logs exist) spike, but coke supply (30 tons/day) caps it—15,000 kg wood/day extra? No rail proof.

Typhus waned by 1944 (vaccines, delousing), but starvation and dysentery are clear in 1944 death books, 50,000 dead, not gassed. Kremas burned disease/starvation dead—Höss’s 1.1 million, even Piper cuts to 1 million, mixed causes.

I’m “theorising, not investigating”? The blueprints (Krema I), Zyklon B logs (19 tons), HCN tests (Krakow), death records (15,000), and basic physics (muffle limits, wood needs). His TII 800,000? No bones, no wood trail, Höfle’s just a headcount. A-B’s 25,000/day? No fuel, no capacity. You are the one theorizing—big pits and Kremas = gassing, with no hard proof.

All you are doing is denying, you are not revising. Your incredulity and inability to work out how gassings, cremations and burials took place has no evidential value. You are lying that I am theorising, all the evidence from the AR camps themselves proves gassings, cremations and burials.

[Nessie]

...

You said

The Nazis cremated the gassed. Gassing stopped at Auschwitz in January 1945, so Larson would never had been able to get a gased corpse to autopsy later on that year.

That’s a convenient dodge, but it doesn’t hold up when you look at the timeline and the numbers. The mainstream Holocaust narrative says Auschwitz-Birkenau (A-B) gassed 1-1.5 million people (Piper’s estimate), mostly in Kremas II-V, with gassing supposedly stopping in January 1945—months before liberation on January 27, 1945. Larson’s team rolled in around April-May 1945, hitting Dachau, which was liberated April 29 and other camps, doing autopsies on freshly dead or recently buried bodies—over 100 across twenty sites. If gassing was that massive and only stopped in January, you’d expect some trace of it somewhere, not a total wipeout by cremation.

You are jumping about. Provide a camp where Larson did an autopsy, that had gas chambers and was not cremating the corpses that had been gassed. Otherwise, you have explained why he found no evidence of gassing.

A-B’s 52 muffles could burn 360 bodies a day max—1-2 per muffle, 1-2 hours each (Topf engineer Prüfer’s limit). Even at peak, like the Hungarian transports (May-July 1944, ~100,000 dead), that’s nowhere near 25,000 daily (Höss’s inflated claim, later cut by Piper). Cremating 1 million+ from 1942-1945—say, 1,000 a day—takes 30 tons of coke daily (NI-11937 logs), A-B’s full supply, leaving no fuel for anything else. Bodies piled up per survivor accounts (Wiernik at Treblinka) and liberation photos show unburned corpses. Not everything was cremated, Larson had plenty to work with.

Not when the corpses were being cremated after the gassings, as was the case at A-B.

Larson’s team visited Dachau, Buchenwald, and twenty other camps, autopsying over 100 bodies. In Crime Doctor (1970s), he’s clear: no signs of poisoning, cyanide (Zyklon B) or otherwise. Cyanide leaves marks—bluish skin, lung damage, blood chemistry shifts (HCN binds hemoglobin), even days later in fresh corpses. Liberation was April-May 1945; gassing at A-B allegedly stopped January 1945—four months max. Twenty camps, 100+ bodies—no poison. That’s not “all cremated”; that’s no gassing. Liberation footage from January 27 shows stacks of unburned dead and 7,000 survivors, thousands of corpses (Soviet counts). Larson’s 100+ autopsies included fresh or shallow-buried remains—four months isn’t enough to erase all cyanide traces, especially in cold Polish winter.

Buchenwald (liberated April 11), Dachau—no late gassing claims, yet no poison there either. Your “stopped in January” only covers A-B—it doesn’t explain Larson’s zero across twenty sites. Delousing deaths—accidental HCN leaks—would show poison; they don’t. Shootings, starvation, disease? No cyanide needed, Larson’s findings match that.

You are guessing “they cremated the gassed” with no proof. I’ve got Larson’s autopsies: 100+ bodies, no poison, just disease and starvation. A-B’s HCN traces? 0-640 µg/kg in Kremas (Krakow 1994), 900 µg/kg in delousing (Block 3)—lice, not people. Cremation limits 360/day means bodies lingered; 15,000 disease dead fit sporadic burns (Van Herwaarden’s “chimneys,” claim).

Evidence any of the camps he went to, had gassing operations in 1944-5 and that they were burying those corpses.

You said

The only corpses that would have been available for him to autopsy, had died months after all gassing operations had ended. You clearly have no idea about chronology.

“died months after gassing ended” is a flimsy excuse, Larson actually autopsied bodies from January-April 1945 deaths, close enough to catch cyanide if it was there. A-B’s unburned dead, twenty camps, no poison. I’m not clueless on chronology, your “months after” dodge ignores the mess Nazis left, bodies Larson saw weren’t all post-gassing stragglers. Nazis didn’t cremate everything, Dachau’s barracks had fresh dead (See April 29 footage); A-B’s pits held late burials. Your “all gassing ended” doesn’t cover why twenty camps showed no trace. Delousing fits, gassing doesn’t.

This is again getting repetitive. You have failed to evidence a camp with gassing operations, that buried its dead, that Larsen went to. A-B cremated the dead, in its Kremas.

You said

They prove the Kremas had gas chambers built inside them. Your delousing claims are contradicted by Leuchter and Rudolf and the lack of Prussian blue staining. There are documents recording the construction of gas tight doors and a ventilation system. Witnesses also speak to such. The witness, documentary and forensic evidence support mass gassing of people. You cannot prove anything else took place.

“Vergasung” means fumigation. Delousing chambers like Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (1941 blueprints, Pressac, p. 29)—needed the same: gas-tight seals and vents to handle Zyklon B safely (Degesch manuals, 16 g/m³, 1-2 hour cycles). Krema II’s setup fits that. Morgues doubled as delousing spots for clothes from the dead (camp hygiene orders, 1942). Gassing 2,000-3,000 people (Höss’s claim) needs more showerheads, pillars, yet blueprints show vents and doors. Doors and vents exist (Krema II/III plans), they’re standard for delousing too (Read Degesch specs). Tauber (1945, Pressac, p. 481) says Zyklon B in Krema II—5-7 minutes/body—impossible (60-90 minutes, cremation science). Docs and testimony show Zyklon B use—19 tons (NI-9912)—but delousing (Block 3’s 900 µg/kg) fits better.

Krakow 1994’s 0-640 µg/kg in Krema II. Compare that to 900 µg/kg in delousing with 5-7 kg Zyklon B should leave more—300 ppm kills fast, 400+ cycles bind HCN to walls. Delousing’s higher traces match, Krema’s don’t show genocide. Cremation couldn’t hide 25,000 daily, no wood (7.5 million kg) or rail proof.

You are using evidence of gassings, to claim there were no gassings. You leap about from camp to camp, witness to witness, without any sense of chronology or connection. You have a similalr style of presentation as Mattogno, who leaps about thrown evidence around, with no sense of cohesion.

You said

Tauber did not say it took 5 to 7 minutes to entirely cremate a corpse.

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

"In continuous operation, we could burn two charges per hour. According to the regulations, were supposed to charge the muffles every half hour. Ober Capo August explained to us that, according to the calculations and plans for this crematorium, 5 to 7 minutes was allowed to burn one corpse in a muffle."

Two charges an hour, so 30 minutes for the first corpses in the top oven. They then fall, get raked through the grill to the bottom part of the oven and the next set of corpses is introduced and so on every 30 mimutes. That means between top and bottom over, the corpses spend at least 30 minutes being cremated. The 5 to 7 is an average per corpse, where 4 to 5 corpses are being introduced every half hour.

You lean on this forum quote to say Tauber didn’t mean 5-7 minutes to “entirely cremate” a corpse—it’s an “average” in a 30-minute cycle? Problem is, the full context of Tauber’s testimony (May 24, 1945, Krakow, cited in Pressac’s Auschwitz: Technique and Operation, p. 481-502) doesn’t back your gymnastics. Tauber says:

“The cremation of a single corpse took 5 to 7 minutes according to the plans”—not an average across a batch, but a per-corpse claim tied to design specs. His “two charges per hour” (30-minute reload) and “4 to 5 corpses” per muffle come later, describing operation, not contradicting the 5-7 minute figure. If 4-5 corpses take 30 minutes total, that’s 6-7.5 minutes each, but Tauber’s phrasing isn’t “average”; it’s a standalone rate from “Ober Capo August.” You are twisting Tauber’s intent—5-7 minutes is the cremation speed.

Corpses burn in a “top oven,” fall through a grill, get raked to a bottom, and new ones load every 30 minutes? What a joke, that is pure fiction. Topf’s triple-muffle design (See Krema II/III, blueprints, NI-7179) has no such flow. Each muffle—0.7m wide, 0.6m high, 2m deep—has one chamber with a clay grate; bodies burn on top, ash drops below after full combustion. No “top oven” tier loading’s manual, via carts (Tauber, Pressac). Cremating 4-5 bodies, then “falling” in 30 minutes? Bones don’t vanish that fast, raking half-burned corpses jams the grate (Topf manual warns of clogging). Your conveyor-belt dream needs 30-50 kg coke/muffle/hour (According to Topf specs), which is not enough for 160-200 kg of flesh in half an hour.

Tauber said;

"In continuous operation, we could burn two charges per hour. According to the regulations, were supposed to charge the muffles every half hour. Ober Capo August explained to us that, according to the calculations and plans for this crematorium, 5 to 7 minutes was allowed to burn one corpse in a muffle. Because with that quantity we were obliged to work without interruption, for as soon as the last muffle was charged, the contents of the first had been consumed. In order to be able to take a pause during the work, we would charge 4 or 5 corpses in each muffle. The incineration of such a charge took longer, and after charging the last muffle, we had a few minutes' break until the first one was again available."

Stop quote mining and altering the order he gave his testimony. He is clearly stating it was 30 minutes in the oven for corpses, before more corpses were added. Capo August gave an average of 5 to 7 minutes.

You said

That is the theory, but you have no witnesses and the circumstantial evidence does not fit, such as high Krema use when there was no typhus epidemic, but there were mass arrivals. Your delousing theory also does not fit with other revisionist claims about use, that include showers and bomb shelters.

I’ve already named Joseph Erber, a guard who worked near Krema I (1981 interview, Die Auschwitz-Lüge by Thies Christophersen). Erber said: “The gas chamber there was used to delouse clothing… no people were gassed in it.” Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” (1941 blueprints, Pressac, p. 29) backs him, built for fumigation. Then there’s Filip Müller—Sonderkommando darling—whose Eyewitness Auschwitz (1979, p. 33) mentions “disinfection” of prisoner gear near Krema I, showing Zyklon B’s real job. Mass arrivals spiked deaths starvation (1944 rations: 1,300 calories/day), dysentery (camp logs), shootings (SS execution records) Kremas burned those.

Still waiting for someone who worked inside the Kremas, so not Erber, who states his job was delousing clothing. Or a document about the delousing. Muller speaks to the gassing of people insdie the Kremas, so your use of him as a witness is odd, to say the least.

I’m not married to every revisionist, my evidence stands alone. Krema I’s “Entlausungskammer” and 19 tons Zyklon B (NI-9912) scream delousing, HCN at 900 µg/kg in Block 3 (Krakow 1994) vs. 0-50 µg/kg average in Krema II fits lice, not murder. No pipes in Krema II/III (blueprints, NI-7179) delousing needs none. Gas-tight doors (NI-4473) work for HCN containment—10 air changes/hour (vent specs) match Degesch’s 1-2 hour cycles. Other theories don’t debunk mine.

I welcome any Revisionist to say otherwise.

Leuchter and Rudolf would completely disagree with you. Others argue the Kremas were used to store corpses, as bomb shelters or mass showers, totally contradicting your claims.

You said

You said "When you say something, do as I do and provide a source or link." Where is your source or link for the Krema worker statements? I want to read them.

I cited Joseph Erber, an SS guard near Krema I, saying it was used to “delouse clothing… no people were gassed in it.” That’s from his 1981 interview in Die Auschwitz-Lüge. You can find it archived online—check the Institute for Historical Review (IHR) site, where they’ve got excerpts: http://www.ihr.org/books/christophersen/. Erber was at A-B in 1942-43, worked near Krema I, and saw Zyklon B used on uniforms, not bodies. Krema I’s blueprints (Pressac, Technique, p. 29) list an “Entlausungskammer”—delousing chamber—built in 1941, matching his story. No gassing setup there—just fumigation gear.

The link you provided goes to and IHR site that states, "This page does not exist !". Link to where I can read the quote.

Next, Filip Müller—Sonderkommando poster boy. I said his Eyewitness Auschwitz (1979, p. 33) mentions “disinfection” of prisoner gear near Krema I. Grab the book—ISBN 1-56663-271-4, or check this link:

https://books.google.com/books?id=8QoaXbC7Q7oC. Page 33: “Clothing was taken to the disinfection block near Krema I.”

So not a Krema, a different place. How does that help your claim the Kremas were used?

He’s obsessed with gassing tales elsewhere (Krema II, 3,000/cycle), but this ties Zyklon B to delousing, 19 tons shipped (NI-9912)—not mass murder. His gassing claims? 5-10 minutes for 3,000 (p. 80) which if you had any knowledge of physics, it's clearly wrong.

Being wrong is not the same as lying. If you had any knowledge of witnesses and estimating time, you would know he was unlikely to be accurate.

You demands links but you've given squat you previously said “high Krema use, mass arrivals” yet had no docs, no numbers. Hungarian transports (437,000, NG-2263)? 100,000 dead over months—1,666/day, over Krema’s 360. Lodz (60,000)? 10,000 max—333/day. No coke surge, no wood trains. You got Tauber’s 5-7 minutes (in which you linked forum.axishistory.com) of which I already debunked.

Hungarians and Lodz arrivals here;

http://www.deathcamps.org/occupation/glaser.htm

There was no typhus epidemic and the high volume arrivals explain the high use of the Kremas. You have misunderstood and quote mined Tauber, who was referring to anther person's estimated average. Tauber clearly states at least 30 minutes for the corpses.

[Nessie]

If 4-5 corpses take 30 minutes total, that’s 6-7.5 minutes each

If 4-5 corpses are put in an oven and left for 30 minutes, before more corpses are put into the oven, then those corpses have all spent 30 minutes in the oven, not 6-7.5 minutes each.

[Stubble]

If 4-5 corpses take 30 minutes total, that’s 6-7.5 minutes each

If 4-5 corpses are put in an oven and left for 30 minutes, before more corpses are put into the oven, then those corpses have all spent 30 minutes in the oven, not 6-7.5 minutes each.

If 4 or 5 corpses are put into a cremation oven, it takes 4 or 5 times as long to complete its operation.

/shrug

If 1 corpse takes 1 hour (it takes about an hour give or take), then 4 bodies will take four hours. Period.

Go talk to a cremation technician.