The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Is this a joke? Look at that door lock assembly, look at it. Now, ask yourself if that would hold in 2,000 people being gassed with hydrogen cyanide gas...

I had always assumed these doors were made from timbers as well. Such is not the case. It is a thin wooden face covering a hollow door filled with dry concrete and insulation...

These timbers are only slightly thicker than paint sticks.

Why am I always asked to believe the absurd, only to find that what I already thought was absurd didn't even reach the level of absurdity expected? Why is that a consistent theme with the Holocaust Narrative? This happens time and time and time again.

This is almost as bad as when Keen told me to compare the Kola Study to the Mazurek Study at Sobibor, and I did...(I was defending the Kola Study, because, why would the guy lie about, that, it's already so damaging to the orthodox narrative)

Spoiler

https://www.auschwitz.org/en/stop-denia ... -chambers/

Although made of wood, these doors were solidly built. They included two layers of wooden boards, reinforced with metal fittings, and in between them, there was an insulation layer made of suprema (a mixture of wood shavings and cement). Felt seals lined the door’s edges to ensure gas-tightness. The photograph shows the cross-section of the gas-tight door from crematorium V. Collection of Dr. Igor Bartosik.

Sorry, the Auschwitz Museum doesn't want anyone sharing the picture. I can't even select the thing.

For some strange reason pictures of the famous wooden doors in Auschwitz I have become more difficult to find:



Those I found here using BING:
https://auschwitz-2012.blogspot.com/201 ... amber.html

Ah, but this wooden door is the 'ruse' Herr Hektor. The one you have provided a picture of is the one that is easily debunked and thus became prominent as 'the' wooden door.

This doesn't change the fact that the wooden doors in the Kremas said to have been used for the homicidal gas chambers are woefully inadequate for purpose. They are of a hollow type construction and built with light tack nails. Further, look at the 'locks'. You kick that door, they are going to bend like fucking taffy.

another angle

That white model of a door is Robert Jan van Pelt's creation. It's a close copy of a delousing door which Pressac previously wrote about. Take note of the original door's unmissable "poison gas!" warning sign. Van Pelt had to remove that sign from his model for obvious reasons. (See Eric Hunt's video on this.) Van Pelt must have also changed the latching mechanism, because the design is visibly different. On the original door, it looks like the small rotating latch would have merely shut the door, and then the two horizontal bars sealed it. It makes perfect sense for delousing. Van Pelt in his design changed the two bars into locks, which I suspect would not achieve an airtight seal.

[EDIT: I could be wrong about the latching mechanism. Exactly how the door latches worked is still unclear to me. Looking more closely at the photos I have, Van Pelt's design may be faithful or close enough. Pressac also described (here) an additional screw mechanism used to seal all doors of this type, delousing and homicidal alike.]

That close-up photo of the door's internals I had not seen before. It's basically a cross-section view. It looks far from adequate in my layman's opinion. Little surprise it's falling apart while the various camps' steel doors are still in-tact.

The absurdity of thinking these wooden doors could hold back a panicking crowd of people fighting for their lives was highlighted by Germar Rudolf in this video. Watch from timestamp 26:28 to 29:21.



The Heysel Stadium disaster is far from the only incident where a wall collapsed under crowd pressure. Some other examples I find comparable are the Ayresome Park tragedy in which sports fans toppled a two-meter-high brick wall and gate, the Shawfield Stadium disaster in which a supposedly well-built brick barrier was destroyed by crowd excitement, or the 2017 Sengal stadium collapse wherein a concrete wall was destroyed. Or maybe Auschwitz is closer to the Burnden Park disaster, since in that case it was only metal that held the barrier up, and it was the metal itself that gave way.

This is something which is probably worth testing in real life or with physics modelling. Exactly how much or little force would it take to break the latches or to breach the door's seal? From a few quick websearches, all descriptions about modern solid core doors indicate that they can withstand only a few hundred pounds at most.

Waiting for the museum to show the door with the peephole that Piper told Cole existed in the field.

Van Pelt's door is supposed to be agreed. Note, this photograph;

May 1945. Judge Jan Sehn inspecting a gas-tight door found in the ruins of crematorium V in Birkenau. Source: Archives of Auschwitz Museum

So far as a 'mock up' I must say we are in agreement Wetzelrad. This would be the best way. After showing the Van Pelt door around, consensus seems to be the door would be open in 3 kicks.

I also think it bears repeating just how weak those hinge pins are. This set up is not panic proof at all.

For the benefit of all, here is a list of wooden doors. Including only those which (1) are of this specific design of a plank door with the triple latch mechanism, (2) were found in Auschwitz, and (3) were photographed.

Door with no peephole.
Found near Crema V.
Damaged on one side.
https://www.auschwitz.org/gfx/auschwitz ... 1c2d13.jpg
Close-up video from many angles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dd16xmeQwew
Notably, this seems to be the only door the museum is concerned about preserving.

Black door.
Dark in color as if painted black.
Also identifiable by the number 8 written on it twice.
Reportedly found in the building materials yard.
https://www.historiography-project.com/ ... tz/486.php
https://www.historiography-project.com/ ... itz/50.php

"Giftige Gase!" door.
Prominent warning sign just below the peephole.
Where it came from is unknown.
https://www.historiography-project.com/ ... itz/49.php

Missing sign door.
This one has a square silhouette where the warning sign should be.
From a delousing chamber located in Kanada I.
https://www.historiography-project.com/ ... itz/46.php

Building 164 door.
Also located in Kanada I.
https://www.historiography-project.com/ ... itz/48.php
https://www.historiography-project.com/ ... itz/49.php

Building 5a door.
Instead of a peephole, this one has a large rectangular window.
Stained blue on the bottom.
Photograph at 23:54 in Rudolf's video above.

Auschwitz I block 1 door.
For the disinfestation chamber.
Similar but not identical to the Birkenau doors.
Small rectangular window in place of a peephole.
https://www.historiography-project.com/ ... itz/28.php
https://www.historiography-project.com/ ... itz/29.php

It hardly needs to be said, but the similarity of all these doors suggests they were all made for the same purpose. Broadly speaking, the ones which are said to have come from homicidal gas chambers are not made with superior materials, "locks", peepholes, or other features that might hint at their different purpose. From this set of facts, the conclusion naturally arises that these doors may all have been attached to delousing chambers.

Hektor wrote: ↑Wed Mar 04, 2026 6:41 pm For some strange reason pictures of the famous wooden doors in Auschwitz I have become more difficult to find:



Those I found here using BING:
https://auschwitz-2012.blogspot.com/201 ... amber.html

Honestly I’m surprised people would even cite this door as a gotcha on this forum? That’s some old ass David Cole shit. I guess things have not progressed since then. Auschwitz museum openly admits this door was related to a botched soviet reconstruction. Auschwitz does not claim that this was a door used on a gas chamber.

mengelemyth wrote: ↑Fri Mar 20, 2026 1:47 pm ...
Honestly I’m surprised people would even cite this door as a gotcha on this forum? That’s some old ass David Cole shit. I guess things have not progressed since then. Auschwitz museum openly admits this door was related to a botched soviet reconstruction. Auschwitz does not claim that this was a door used on a gas chamber.

Yes, you are right: That was their cop out, when they got caught out that what they are showing to tourist as 'in original state' actually isn't. Amateur Historian David Cole did some decent job in exposing all those gimmicks the Auschwitz museum did try to fool them with.

"I guess things have not progressed since then"
You are right, they still haven't forensically proven that those facilities have been used as homicidal gas chambers as alleged.

Anyway, given that you are new here: Welcome to the codoh forum.

So where did the original doors go or is this another one of those things where we have to believe them and trust what they say? Odd that whenever questions are asked about the gas chambers and other key parts of the fable they wriggle and get shirty about the lack of evidence and cannot answer simple and most legitimate questions.

It's a con and a badly set up one at that and cannot, has not and will not be substantiated. Still it makes the fake zionist jews feel self righteous and able to slaughter Palestinians at will...

mengelemyth wrote: ↑Fri Mar 20, 2026 1:47 pm Honestly I’m surprised people would even cite this door as a gotcha on this forum? That’s some old ass David Cole shit. I guess things have not progressed since then. Auschwitz museum openly admits this door was related to a botched soviet reconstruction. Auschwitz does not claim that this was a door used on a gas chamber.

It hasn't been cited as a gotcha, has it? But it is cited, and the stated reason is because Google restricts its search engine from returning results on this specific door. This is a fact well worth noting, especially because at least one other search engine does not have this artificial restriction.

The Auschwitz Museum does not very "openly admit" anything about this door. If they were truly open, there would be a sign in the room explaining in full detail all the various alterations that they made to its design, including their destruction of the wall of the supposed gas chamber and their poking holes in the ceiling. They could also avoid some confusion by explaining that this doorway in 1942 was between rooms then called "laying out room" and "washroom". Instead, some time around the late 90s, the Museum put a sign outside the building that is anything but clear about these problems. It's unlikely that even 1 out of 100 visitors to the Museum understands why this door is in the supposed gas chamber today.

That sign was also erroneous in some aspects. It was replaced with one more accurate, but I'm not convinced even the current one is without error. See comparison photos on page 18 of this presentation: https://odysee.com/@Ziffel2923:e/Auschw ... oria-One:a

In the museum's defense, they do have the diagrams on a pedestal outside Krema I, though, how many notice, read or understand it, I don't know.

They even labeled the urn room on the diagrams outside.

The discussion of the door leads in to hole placement discussion, this leads in to the 'recreation' and how outlandish it is that anything was 'reconstructed'.

The holes were measured off the walls as they exist today and not how the morgue was constructed or how it looked in 1942.

Going back to 'wooden doors' in general, it is my opinion, the door we are talking about is presented as it is easily debunked and that 'poisons the well' of discourse when someone chooses to belive the hype and gets corrected, thus shutting them down early before they even really get a good understanding of what the actual problems are, like, the fact that the homicidal gas chamber doors are indeed claimed to be flimsy wood doors.

Wetzelrad wrote: ↑Fri Mar 20, 2026 7:38 pm the stated reason is because Google restricts its search engine from returning results on this specific door. This is a fact well worth noting, especially because at least one other search engine does not have this artificial restriction.

Google puts an artificial restriction on it? I managed to find it quite easily.

Auschwitz does not claim that this was a gas chamber door, so citing this photo is a straw man argument.

If Auschwitz were actually engaging in a coverup they would've removed the door. But they're leaving the reconstruction in place, and stating "this is a reconstruction". Good on David Cole for pushing them to correct this.

Stubble wrote: ↑Tue Mar 03, 2026 4:48 am ask yourself if that would hold in 2,000 people being gassed with hydrogen cyanide gas...

Argument from incredulity aside, it didn't need to hold back the force of 2,000 people collectively.

Stubble wrote: ↑Tue Mar 03, 2026 4:48 am You kick that door, they are going to bend like fucking taffy

Except fit men were sent to camps for labour. How are children, the elderly, and women gonna kick down a robust door?

I think this is a reasonable response to the 'door pressure' argument: https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... orpressure.

And why was there a heavy peephole protection grid on the inside of the door...?