In your opinion, which has no evidential value. You have no documentary, witness or other evidence of the Leichenkellers being used to delouse clothing.WW2History wrote: ↑Sun Apr 20, 2025 9:18 am ....
You Said
The Krakow Institute’s 1994 study (cited in Rudolf, Dissecting the Holocaust, p. 208) measured cyanide residues in Krema II at 0-640 µg/kg (max outlier), while Block 3’s dedicated delousing chambers hit 900-16,000 µg/kg. Leuchter’s 1988 report (Leuchter Report) reports similarly, low Krema traces vs. high delousing chamber levels.The use of the Kremas to delouse clothing does not align with any chemist who has studied the residues left. They all agree the residues are far lower than that found in the camp's delousing chambers. You have quoted Muller describing delousing in a delousing chamber, not a Krema.
Delousing chambers like Block 3 ran 10-20 cycles yearly with 5-7 kg Zyklon B per cycle (16 g/m³, 1-2 hours, Degesch specs), binding hydrogen cyanide (HCN) to walls. Kremas, handling clothes from disease-dead, saw fewer, smaller fumigations, quick 1-2 hour cycles with less HCN exposure, leaving lower residues (0-640 µg/kg). If Krema II gassed 1.1 million people, which was Piper’s estimate, that’s 400+ cycles (2,000 people/cycle, 90 g Zyklon B, 300 ppm). Rudolf (p. 208) calculates this should yield 1,000-3,000 µg/kg in walls. Krema II’s 0-640 µg/kg is too low for gassing but fits occasional delousing.
Low residues is consistent with gassings, rather than delousing. Gassings are evidenced to have happened, delousing is not.You assume low residues disprove delousing but at the same time ignoring that they also disprove mass gassing. Kremas weren’t industrial delousing hubs like Block 3 as I've already stated, they fumigated sporadically, matching the SS Hygiene Order (NO-021) for “available chambers.”
You have no evidence from witnesses or documents that proves Krema I was used to delouse clothing.“Clothing was taken to the disinfection block near Krema I, where it was treated with Zyklon B” (1942, Auschwitz I). “Near Krema I” shows proximity with Krema I, the camp’s only crematorium then. Pressac (Technique, p. 29) shows Krema I’s 1941 plans labeling a chamber as “Entlausungskammer” (delousing chamber) not a separate building. Delousing was part of Krema I’s function, used for clothes from morgue bodies. NO-021 (August 12, 1942) mandates “disinfection of all clothing and bedding” with Zyklon B in “available chambers.” Kremas, doubling as morgues, were logical spots for fumigating typhus-ridden gear (15,000 deaths, Hinsley, British Intelligence, p. 673). SS guard Joseph Erber confirms: “The gas chamber [in Krema I] was used to delouse clothing… no people were gassed.” This aligns with Müller’s “disinfection” near Krema I Zyklon B for typhus control, not murder.
NO-021 explicitly ties Zyklon B to delousing in “available chambers” you ignore it.
I would like you to link to the source of Erber's quote “The gas chamber [in Krema I] was used to delouse clothing… no people were gassed.”, since the location of Krema I is clearly not his words and there is suggestion of quote mining. Delousing in Krema I does not align to Mueller's "disinfection" near to Krema I. Near to Krema I is a different building to Krema I.
The evidence is that the Leichenkellers were used for gassings. Are you saying that room was used for delousing clothing, or storing corpses? I hav answered you other questions. Where is your document ordering the delousing of clothing in the Krema Leichekellers? Where is your evidence of the actual usage of the Leichenkellers?You Said
The morgues in Kremas II-V doubled as fumigation chambers to disinfect clothing from typhus-ridden corpses. The morgues were underground, cool, and spacious—ideal for holding corpses (Mattogno, Auschwitz: The Case for Sanity). With 52 muffles across Kremas II-V (max 360 bodies/day, per Prüfer’s specs), it's obvious storage was a necessary step when deaths outpaced burning capacity. Where’s your document ordering gassing in Kremas II-V? Where’s your 1,000 µg/kg HCN residue for 1.1 million gassed? Where’s your 29,700 tons coke or 176,000 tons wood?What do you say the Kremas II to V were each used for 1943-4? You jump about all over the place.
Christopherson did not work at Birkenau, let alone inside a Krema. He is not a witness.You Said
I know it's quite sad how all your arguments have been dismantled one by one, but a link I can't control is your only "Gotcha!" you can muster, but hey, I think at this point you deserve at least something as a win, after what's been happening to you in this debate. You didn't even bother to search the end of the link?Another link to nothing "Oops! That page can’t be found." No wonder, when you are clearly struggling to produce any of the many witnesses you claim saw the Kremas being used to delouse clothing.
https://openlibrary.org/books/OL14641908M/Auschwitz
https://archive.org/details/1979auschwi ... stophersen
You use a doctored quote from Eber, which adds Krema I as the location and misses out part of what he said. I am calling you out as lying about there being lots of witnesses who worked inside the Kremas, who speak to clothing being deloused. Got ya!Additional confirmation comes from Jürgen Graf’s The Giant with Feet of Clay (2001), which references Erber’s testimony (p. 112) as evidence that Krema I’s gas chamber was used for delousing, not executions. The testimony aligns with Jean-Claude Pressac’s findings in Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers (1989), where he documents gas-tight doors with peepholes in delousing facilities (pp. 425, 486, 500) and admits 95% of Zyklon B was used for delousing (p. 15).
Mueller's near Krema I, is not Krema I. He never speaks to delousing inside Krema I in his testimony, only gassing people. His over estimation of how many people were gassed and underestimation of the time it took, is normal witness behaviour.You are using Mueller, a witness who speaks to homicidal gassings inside Krema I, and Christopherson, who was not at the Kremas, as evidence clothing was deloused in a building, that Rudolf and Leuchter both state cannot have been used for delousing, let alone gassings!
Despite numerous requests, you cannot link to, name and quote an eyewitness, who worked inside Kremas I to V, who states that clothing was deloused inside the building whilst he was working there.
This is a blatant strawman fallacy. My claim doesn’t rely on Müller or Christophersen asserting delousing inside Krema I; it uses Müller’s specific reference to a “disinfection block near Krema I” (p. 33) to support my argument, corroborated by Erber’s direct testimony and Pressac’s blueprints. I cited Müller’s statement about Zyklon B disinfection near Krema I, not his entire narrative. His claim of homicidal gassings is riddled with contradictions (e.g., 3,000 people per chamber, cremation in “a few minutes,” p. 95, 102) and conflicts with forensic evidence. His disinfection reference aligns with 1942’s typhus epidemic, when Zyklon B was used for sanitation (Pressac, p. 15; Glücks, 1942). Erber explicitly states Krema I’s gas chamber was used for delousing, not gassings. Pressac’s 1941 blueprints confirm this function.
Both Leuchter and Rudolf affirm Krema I’s unsuitability for homicidal gassings but support its potential for delousing, aligning with Erber’s testimony and Pressac’s blueprints.
https://archive.org/details/three-years ... s-chambers
Erber is not as explicit as you suggest. The Krema I blueprints do not evidence delousing.
Loftus & Palmer confirm what I have said about witness estimations. You assert the errors are too vast, but provide no evidence of that.You Said
The physical and technical implausibility of rapid gassings. You are not citing specific studies, authors, or methodologies, which renders your claim a baseless assertion. Here's why they are wrong:Yes. Multiple studies of witnesses, memory, recollection and estimation, explain why witnesses overestimate how many people were gassed and under-estimate how long it took.
Degesch manuals and Rudolf show HCN release takes 10–15 minutes, and uneven distribution in a 300 m³, crowded Leichenkeller delays lethality. Müller’s 5–10 minute timeline is not a minor misjudgment but a physical impossibility, as 300 ppm wouldn’t be uniformly reached in that time.
NI-4473’s ventilation data confirms HCN lingers, contradicting claims of rapid clearance. Witnesses like Müller and Venezia claiming “a few minutes” for ventilation are off by an order of magnitude (15–20 minutes, per Rudolf, p. 199).
Müller’s 3,000-victim estimate exceeds Leichenkeller’s capacity. Pressac (p. 287) gives 210 m² (30 m x 7 m); at 14 people/m² (maximal crowding, per Rudolf, p. 201), ~2,940 fit, but this assumes no movement or ventilation loss. Cohen’s 750 or Nadjari’s 2,500 are also inconsistent with wild exaggeration, not slight memory errors.
Memory studies such as Loftus & Palmer, 1974, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior show witnesses can misjudge time or numbers under stress, but the discrepancies here, 5–10 minutes vs. 1–2 hours, 750 vs. 3,000 victims are too vast to be mere errors. Sonderkommando testimonies were often given years later, under post-war pressure or coercion (Höss’s tortured confession). These witnesses were incentivized to align with the orthodox narrative, as seen with Pery Broad’s bought testimony (Tesch Trial, “Critique of Matt Cockerill”). Uncoerced witnesses like Maria van Herwaarden (1942–45) saw only delousing showers, no gassings, despite being at Auschwitz during alleged peak operations.
https://www.open.edu/openlearn/mod/ouco ... §ion=1
"Research suggests that, generally, we are not very accurate in our estimates of how long something lasts (temporal duration) or of distance. We may overestimate the length of events of short duration, sometimes by as much as 500%."
Only a proportion of messages were decoded, and much of Bletchley's work concentrated on the U-boats and D-Day. Events in the east were not their issue, especially camps and the British were not about to share decloding intelligence with the Soviets.Sure, some records were destroyed, significant documents remain though. Intercepted German communications (spring 1942–January 1943) report no gassings at Auschwitz, only disease deaths, shootings, or hangings (Hinsley, British Intelligence in the Second World War, Vol. 2, p. 673). These were secure transmissions, not intended for Allied eyes.We do not have reliable sources of how many were gassed and how long it took, since, if the Nazis did keep records, they destroyed them. Hence, we have to rely on witness estimations.
Name someone who arrived at A-B on a Hungarian transport, who was not registered to work at the camp, who shows up ina death book. You ignore Sanders evidence as to how the ovens were heated.Auschwitz Death Books were released by the Soviets in 1989, they record ~69,000 deaths, ~30,000 Jewish, mostly from typhus, with no mention of gassing. Soviet archives also show ~2,188 tons of coke delivered to Auschwitz, sufficient for ~80,000 cremations (27 kg/body, Topf specs), not millions.
You are again using witnesses who gave evidence that gassings happened!Prüfer’s memos and Bischoff’s June 28, 1943, letter confirm 52 muffles’ realistic capacity at ~360 bodies/day, which is far below Müller’s 6,000. A July 22, 1942, radio message from General Glücks authorizes “gas for gassing” to combat typhus, not for murder.