The CODOH Revisionist Forum

HansHill wrote: ↑Sat Aug 02, 2025 10:38 pm

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sat Aug 02, 2025 10:29 pm

HansHill wrote: ↑Sat Aug 02, 2025 9:47 pm

Robert Jan Van Pelt has entered the chat



https://uwaterloo.ca/architecture/robert-jan-van-pelt

Did Van Pelt claim it looked exactly like this? I don't see how, without a time machine.

Are you arguing Van Pelt should have consulted you instead of Michal Kula for an accurate model?

Bombsaway does in fact think that he knows better than the professional Holocaust historians. Van Pelt is a "secondary source" and therefore worthless. He prefers to make up his own version based on "primary sources" (the ones can he can find on Google).

(He hasn't figured out yet that the primary sources are all over the place and that harmonizing them into a single coherent story is not a simple task.)

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=1475&#p1475

Archie wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2024 8:04 am

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2024 6:09 am

fireofice wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2024 5:29 am
The USHMM seems to be the only source for the October date (which is what Wikipedia cited). All other earlier sources put it on November at the earliest. Do you have any other sources that say it was October? If not, it seems like this was just made up by the USHMM.

One issue you guys have is deferring to secondary sources like historians on what the story is. This is not how history works. Whenever possible, the primary sources take precedent. At best you're making a critique of historiography, which is important, but that's barely relevant to the debate. Historians are often wrong, you're just showing that Holocaust history is no exception.

Burning of bodies is evidenced in August of 1942. The extent of the burning is unclear, but it is evidenced.


...

Arad and other historians, in theory, have already reviewed the primary sources and carefully weighed and synthesized them. I guess you are saying you think Arad did a bad job?? Interesting concession.

Generally speaking, the official story comes from the literature, i.e., secondary sources, not random primary sources which have countless inconsistencies. Reder says 3,000,000 bodies. That's a primary source. It's also not generally accepted. You seem to want to shop miscellaneous sources and pull out whatever bits you find convenient in the moment, ignoring how it would fit in with everything else. THAT'S not how history is done.

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2024 8:22 am

Archie wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2024 8:18 am

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2024 8:15 am

Reder's statements are contradicted by better sources, like the deportation records to Belzec (from which Arad got his 600k figure, and then later the Hofle telegram, which was the Nazis own numbers).

It's absolutely typical in history to defer to written records over individual testimonies (of compromised people no less). Reder was compromised due to the brutality he was subjected to, and also his lack of access to what was happening, he was a prisoner, and not directly involved in transporting corpses, etc. Historians would be utterly foolish to take his numbers as sacrosanct, esp when they are not corroborated elsewhere.

And still no response to my question about the ash layers. Did Nazgul do the best job here, should I examine his explanation?

That process of weighing out the sources is what historians are supposed to do. And they publish their work in secondary sources.

You're talking to me, not some distant personage, maybe dead (like Arad). The history isn't so complex that I can't grasp it and tell you why trusting Reder on the number killed is wrongheaded from the perspective of someone doing proper history.

The history apparently IS too complex for Van Pelt and Arad. But not for bombsaway!

Stubble wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 3:40 pm
Parts in bold. Pan out and look at whom, exactly, walked your thread into the weeds. You necessarily need to extract the pellets to get a lower exposure time which you claim explains the lack of iron blue. You started posting AI generated slop that indeed referred to publicly available documents but claimed they said things that they did not say, and you got caught out on it. Rather than accepting that, you are now claiming derailment.

/shrug

That's a separate issue from the Markiewicz report but it is relevant to the forensic chemistry. It is possible that we don't know for sure how long it took for the gas to fully disperse or how it was removed from the chamber but that still wouldn't be proof.

I also haven't yet figured out how long the exposure needed to be in order for Prussian Blue to form. It is also possible that you could have them degas in the chamber for 3 hours each cycle and it still wouldn't reach the necessary threshold to form Prussian Blue.

This needs to be investigated from different angles. It's possible that the answer to your question wouldn't even matter for the formation of PB.

Why do you think that it would have taken more than 30 minutes to degas to levels that would have been safe to enter with a gas mask? Where is that assumption coming from?

Because the pellets would have continued to outgas for 15 hours and held enough HcN to kill 3,000 people. I thought Luftl made that very clear.

Stubble wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 6:19 pm Because the pellets would have continued to outgas for 15 hours and held enough HcN to kill 3,000 people. I thought Luftl made that very clear.

We're on page 12 of this thread. And there were all these other threads as collated by Wetzelrad - one of them was 23 pages, another was 27 pages....

and he still doesn't understand the offgassing problem he is in. Remarkable

Wetzelrad wrote: ↑Wed Jul 30, 2025 10:02 pm
This post from May is where ConfusedJew first brought up the blue staining argument:
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=8138#p8138

This 11-page thread "A Request to Confused Jew" is where he was asked to explain the absence of Prussian Blue in the Birkenau gas chambers, with reference to Markiewicz:
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=360

This 23-page thread "Forensic Chemistry" was CJ's attempt to confront some of the same arguments, often invoking Markiewicz:
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=450

HansHill wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 9:33 pm

Stubble wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 6:19 pm Because the pellets would have continued to outgas for 15 hours and held enough HcN to kill 3,000 people. I thought Luftl made that very clear.

We're on page 12 of this thread. And there were all these other threads as collated by Wetzelrad - one of them was 23 pages, another was 27 pages....

and he still doesn't understand the offgassing problem he is in. Remarkable

Wetzelrad wrote: ↑Wed Jul 30, 2025 10:02 pm
This post from May is where ConfusedJew first brought up the blue staining argument:
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=8138#p8138

This 11-page thread "A Request to Confused Jew" is where he was asked to explain the absence of Prussian Blue in the Birkenau gas chambers, with reference to Markiewicz:
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=360

This 23-page thread "Forensic Chemistry" was CJ's attempt to confront some of the same arguments, often invoking Markiewicz:
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=450

Further, he thinks it is derailment.

/shrug

It doesn't really matter, because the problem will exist in Kremas I, IV and V regardless. Yet here we are, wresting with this single thing, this bullshit story of Kula's Columns and how gassing potentially may have been not only possible in LK-1 at Kremas II and III, but, didn't leave a fucking trace.

Absolutely ridiculous.

I explain this in the other thread. The installed powerful ventilation in the "gas chambers" was meant to quickly recycle the air and the gas has very high vapor pressure and would evaporate very quickly anyway in those conditions which was confirmed by an executive at Degesch and Greene.

What you guys still haven't been able to explain is how these HCN residues appeared in the gas chamber and not the barracks which were deloused or other areas of the camp where you would expect there to be similar potential for "contamination".

You guys have to start getting real already.

So, the ventilation was running during the gassing operation, thus, the room wasn't sealed, got it. I was under the impression the room was, gas tight, with the door and the butterflies for the ventilation shut, silly me.

With your 8,000m^3-10,000m^3 ventilation estimate, you need to show your work. These numbers appear to be inaccurate.

Even assuming them, with the ventilation running, during the gassing operation (to outgas the pellets rapidly, as you say), what's the concentration you figure?

You don't have to worry about the humidity any more, I'll give you that.

You are ignoring the witnesses, the plans, and to a degree physics (your ventilation numbers) though...

I will address greens rebuttal of Luftl later in a new thread. They make some assumptions about variables...he directly mentioned humidity, in the report...

The work order for the ventilation is available in the Pressac book, also in the other thread. I'm not really ignoring much. I don't have the answers to everything but there are so many questions and pieces of evidence that I have presented that are received really lame excuses.

ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Tue Aug 05, 2025 2:13 am The work order for the ventilation is available in the Pressac book, also in the other thread. I'm not really ignoring much. I don't have the answers to everything but there are so many questions and pieces of evidence that I have presented that are received really lame excuses.

That's all well and good, when you aren't lying about ventilation capacity, but, you are.

So far as 'lame excuses', well, I'm going to have to disagree with you and mention that you lack rigor in your investigation, for example, you cite 'Pressac', but, he flatly mentions that the ventilation system was designed for, a morgue, and was not some super duper uber system. Beyond that, you have the architects trial in Vienna going over this, specifically, and I linked it, and you roundly ignored it.

Such is life I suppose.

I couldn't help but notice you can't understand Mr Hill's posts at this point, and that makes me remember a line...

Sometimes I stood there, thunderstruck...

He doesn't mention that the ventilation was designed for a morgue, rather the opposite.

And there was a work order for 10 gas detectors.

HansHill's most recent comments are moot because there are more fundamental issues that haven't been addressed.

You can say that I'm not rigorous if you want, that's subjective and most would disagree, but rigor doesn't always lead to the right decisions anyway.

ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Tue Aug 05, 2025 2:37 am You can say that I'm not rigorous if you want, that's subjective and most would disagree,

Ah yes, our vast audience is cheering you on, ConfusedJew! You're really showing these filthy goyim what a proud Jew can achieve with a bit of pilpul. Stunning and brave.

Just answer the questions. Please explain how they were able to find residue of cyanide in the "morgue". Something that a normal person might believe is possible.

ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Tue Aug 05, 2025 2:37 am He doesn't mention that the ventilation was designed for a morgue, rather the opposite.

>checks notes<

The supposed “gas chamber” rooms of Kremas II and III did have ventilation systems, Pressac writes, but concedes that these were clearly “designed for a cool morgue, not for a warm gas chamber.” pp. 224, 285, 289.

https://ihr.org/journal/v10p231_Weber.html

Now, let's look at the pages, shall we?