The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Archie; this whole post belongs in the Hall of Fame!

When two scientific theories compete, with one stating gassings were possible and another stating they were not, there is a blindingly obvious way to find out which theory is correct. Ideally, experiments would be run, but the mass gassing of any animal in a room replicating the conditions in the Leichenkeller, would be impossible. We do not know what the exact conditions were and it would be too controversial to contemplate. That leaves evidence of usage.

So-called revisionist attempts to evidence usage are so weak, that they cannot form a consensus. The historian evidenced chronology has a consensus and it is very well evidenced, despite so-called revisionist lies it is not. That means the chemists, who state gassings were possible, are correct.

Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Sep 30, 2025 9:24 am When two scientific theories compete,

Green doesn't have a scientific theory. He begins from the position of re-asserting the claims, and works backwards to how they can hold up.

This is not a scientific theory.

HansHill wrote: ↑Tue Sep 30, 2025 9:42 am

Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Sep 30, 2025 9:24 am When two scientific theories compete,

Green doesn't have a scientific theory. He begins from the position of re-asserting the claims, and works backwards to how they can hold up.

This is not a scientific theory.

How so? So-called revisionists assert no gassings and work backwards to how they cannot hold up. At least Green starts from an evidenced position. The so-called revisionists do not.

Rudolf - Lets test the validity of the claims by stripping everything back and see do the physical and chemical realities support them.

Green - Lets find ways of supporting the claims and construct the physical and chemical realities around the claims.

HansHill wrote: ↑Tue Sep 30, 2025 10:48 am Rudolf - Lets test the validity of the claims by stripping everything back and see do the physical and chemical realities support them.

Green - Lets find ways of supporting the claims and construct the physical and chemical realities around the claims.

Rudolf is using a sophisticated argument from incredulity, claiming that because he, a qualified chemist, cannot work out how gassings could leave so little residue, therefore there were no gassings. Despite his access to the camp and the evidence it provides, he still cannot evidence a usage other than gassings.

Green knows what the evidence of usage is, so he looks to see how the chemistry fits with that evidence. Mass gassings, which are proven by the evidence to have happened, do leave less residue than would probably be expected. Green seeks an explanation as to why that is, which means his position is not unreasonable. Green was also responding to Rudolf, so it would be more accurate to describe his position as an explanation why Rudolf is wrong.

Fellas?

HansHill wrote: ↑Tue Sep 30, 2025 11:23 am Fellas?

You cannot refute my points.

You have been thoroughly refuted across these 35 pages and any number of other multi-page threads. You simply lack the cognitive horsepower to process the refutations.

HansHill wrote: ↑Tue Sep 30, 2025 11:52 am You have been thoroughly refuted across these 35 pages and any number of other multi-page threads. You simply lack the cognitive horsepower to process the refutations.

You are wrong, for the simple reason that you cannot prove usage. When usage is proven by the evidence to have been mass gassings, what is left of the Kremas that can be tested, for reasons we do not fully understand, because we do not have accurate details about the conditions inside the Kremas, tests lower than expected.

Your inability to work out how that can be, is not a good enough reason to discount all the evidence for gassings.

Pellets cannot be put into the room
Pellets cannot be removed from the room
Pellets demonstrably not present inside the room

Tragic!

HansHill wrote: ↑Tue Sep 30, 2025 12:52 pm Pellets cannot be put into the room
Pellets cannot be removed from the room
Pellets demonstrably not present inside the room

Tragic!

There was a documented devise and witness descriptions of how the pellets were introduced and removed;

https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-his ... 0430.shtml

"4 wire mesh introduction devices"

https://www.zapisyterroru.pl/dlibra/sho ... nt?id=3894

"The locksmith’s workshop was responsible for manufacturing, among other things, fake showers for the gas chambers and net posts to dump the contents of the Zyklon cans into the gas chambers. They were about three-meter tall posts with a square cross-section (about 70 cm). Such a post was made of three nets placed one inside the other. The outer net was made of wire (3 mm in diameter), strengthened on square timbers (50 mm by 10 mm). Such square timbers were placed in all corners of the post. They were joined on the top and on the bottom with the same square timber. Each mesh in the net was about 45 sq mm. The second net was constructed in the same way and placed inside the first one, about 150 mm apart. Each mesh in that net was about 25 sq mm. In the corners, the two nets were connected with iron bars. The post was empty inside, made of a thin zinc sheet, whose cross-section was about 150 sq mm. It had a cone-shaped ending on the top and an even, square base on the bottom. Square metal bars were soldered onto thin posts made of sheet metal, about 25 mm from the edges of the post. A finely meshed net (one mesh was about 1 sq mm) was spread on the metal bars. The net ended at the base of the cone. From there upwards, it transitioned into a sheet metal frame that reached the top of the cone. The contents of the Zyklon can were dumped from above onto the distribution cone. That allowed for an even distribution of the Zyklon on all four walls of the post. After the gas had dissipated, the whole middle post was taken out and the silica was removed. The air ducts of the gas chamber were hammered into the walls of the chamber. The vents were covered with zinc sheets, which had circular holes in them."

This has all been explained multiple times before, but I appreciate the platform to repeat these clarifications for new readers, lurkers and anybody new to this topic.

1) The item Nessie is referring to, is not listed on the inventory sheet for the "gas chamber". Rather it is listed against a different location, with a very different, very innocuous, very mundane purpose (the undressing room). This means before going anywhere else, our good friend Nessie here is asking us to purposely and dishonestly misinterpret the document as written, and apply an interpretation contrived to suit his own needs. Very dishonest, very manipulative, very pathetic.

2) Despite these items not being what he needs them to be, Revisionists have addressed them at great length. See here my prior reply to this topic: https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=3526#p3526

3) The entire point of the "Kula Columns" were to secure, retain and retrieve the pellets during and after a gassing. Sonderkommandos who's "job it was" in the gas chamber, describe a device that does not secure, does not retain, or does not retrieve the pellets during or after a gassing. Therefore they are not describing a Kula Column.

Thank you for your attention to this matter!

HansHill wrote: ↑Wed Oct 01, 2025 9:01 am This has all been explained multiple times before, but I appreciate the platform to repeat these clarifications for new readers, lurkers and anybody new to this topic.

1) The item Nessie is referring to, is not listed on the inventory sheet for the "gas chamber". Rather it is listed against a different location, with a very different, very innocuous, very mundane purpose (the undressing room). This means before going anywhere else, our good friend Nessie here is asking us to purposely and dishonestly misinterpret the document as written, and apply an interpretation contrived to suit his own needs. Very dishonest, very manipulative, very pathetic.

Quote the location please.

2) Despite these items not being what he needs them to be, Revisionists have addressed them at great length. See here my prior reply to this topic: https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=3526#p3526

3) The entire point of the "Kula Columns" were to secure, retain and retrieve the pellets during and after a gassing. Sonderkommandos who's "job it was" in the gas chamber, describe a device that does not secure, does not retain, or does not retrieve the pellets during or after a gassing. Therefore they are not describing a Kula Column.

Thank you for your attention to this matter!

Quote the witnesses please.

1) JC Pressac, Technique and Operation of the Gas Chamber, Part 2, Chapter 8, page 429



2) Shaul Chazan:

[Greif] Did the grid column through which the gas was dropped reach all the way down to the floor?

[Chazan] Nearly to the floor. One had left a space which made it possible to clean there. One poured water out and brushed up the remaining pebbles.”

G. Greif, Wir weinten tränenlos… Augenzeugenberichte der jüdischen “Sonderkommandos” in Auschwitz, Böhlau Verlag, Cologne/Weimar/Vienna 1985, p. 237.

Filip Muller

When some room had been made behind the
door, the corpses were hosed down. This served to neutralize any gas
crystals still lying about, but mainly it was intended to clean the dead
bodies.

Muller - Auschwitz Inferno, p 117