Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Discussions
User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jul 10, 2018 11:04 am

True, I was so astonished that he seemed to think I'd written anything about the topic that I missed that. I continue to find it odd that after asking a legitimate question about the transports-arrivals-selections end of things, he now dismisses the topic as, er, a mere detail of history ("in the weeds," "overly quibble about what you believe the influx to have been").

”Pixie dust" is also as vile as, probably worse than, Jim Rizoli's obnoxious, dismissive use of "bug spray."

I do think you've summed up well why he became unhinged. Eichmann suggests anger management.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Darren Wilshak
Regular Poster
Posts: 755
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:16 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Darren Wilshak » Tue Jul 10, 2018 1:33 pm

Not enough amtsprache or advanced inverted comma theory. That seems to shield them from their emotions and their complexes and their fear of being exposed as the total wastes of time on this subject that they are abidingly doomed to be.

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Tue Jul 10, 2018 9:17 pm

Darren Wilshak wrote:Ugh. Never heard of Zyklon B being compared to pixie dust, I know its trivia but how repellent deniers are in the way that they debase themselves in free debate and allow themselves to think when they put shun inducing ideas like that down, all in an attempt to appear to be clever and knowledgable, instead of being possessed of inferior thoughts.

Instead of stupid...

To be fair to Blake though, he did lose the plot under the stress of having to fess up to still not understanding what he professes to be an expert on. EDIT. Or if not an expert, someone who knows their onions.

I always think that given enough solid refutations that sooner or later, the realities will settle in for our brothers and sisters and at the very least these deniers will feel ashamed to be showing themselves as fools when they show up to defend this deranged ideological detritus and feel finally that moment when their tails go between their legs.

Asses!

Mmm., to me the vile pixie dust thing was almost as sick inducing as Gerdes and his choice phraseology before he started to try to become respectable.


This genius that my comparison of a person's understanding of corpse incineration to magical pixie dust story has something to do with Zyklon B! And then he claims that it is I "not understanding" things!

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1791
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Tue Jul 10, 2018 9:27 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:
Balsamo wrote:
Sergey_Romanov wrote:Balsamo: > This is also my conclusion actually and the only solution basically. Now i don't enough on the topic to look for proofs, but it seems that there were Depot lager in sector BII, as well as the sector BIII, and that there is this german term "gesondert untergrebracht" which quite fit with the need.
Now i know that HC has concluded that it was just another way to express "to kill", but well, maybe, just maybe...it only mean what it actually says, that is "specially (gesondert having the same meaning than in SB, only while Treatment means death, Untergebracht means lodged until put to death... Just an idea.
---

It's not simply what we "concluded", it's what the documents and the Nazis say. Your hypothesis is thus baseless.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... hwitz.html



Yes i have read this article, but then i do not pretend that "gesondert untergebracht" means "nicely settle in proper accomadation" as would a denier.
In my hypothesis, it means "delayed killing". So Perry Broad would not be wrong is saying that it meant "killing" ...well at some point...
This is why the term "gesondert is used" so that there would be no confusion...
I am not dismissing the witnesses here, but where there in the position to really check?
Granted those designated under those terms had to be considered as dead...but just like an execution squad, the squad would only kill X at the time, those who had been condemned to the same fate, would be kept alive until their turn come.

In the HC article you give some example, the first being:

Subject: Transfer of 5022 Jews from Theresienstadt
Reference: Your telex from 17.2.43 no. 1023
Overall number of arrivals on 21.1.43 2,000 Jews, from them selected for labor deployment 418 = 254 men and 164 women = 20.9%. On 24.1.43 2029 Jews, of them for labor deployment 228 = 148 men and 80 women = 11.2%. On 27.1.43 993 Jews, of them for labor deployment 284 = 212 men and 72 women = 22.5%. Separately accommodated [gesondert untergebracht] on 21.1.43 1582 = 602 men and 980 women and children, on 24.1,43 1801 = 623 men and 1178 women and children, on 27.1.43 709 = 197 men and 512 women and children. The special accommodation [Sonderunterbringung] of the men was due to too much frailty, that of women because most were children.


Sorry, but it can be understood at those women and children and frail men would be killed...between the next day and a week...not just upon arrival...that is something as "as soon as possible".

Concentration camp Auschwitz reports Jew-transport from Berlin. Arrival on 13.3.43. Total strength 964 Jews. For labor deployment came 218 men and 147 women. The men were transferred to Buna. Separately accommodated were 126 men and 473 women and children


I am not sure about the translation which says "separately"... But again, it could just mean that those selected will be killed at the first occasion, as soon as possible.

I am not saying that the term G.U has not a fatal meaning, just a different one than "special treatment".
So i was wondering if this term could be found in documents of the crucial period we are discussing about. That is it.

Now, after checking Van pelt, he just dismissed the term because something like there is no proof that such accommodation existed...Sorry that is a bit light to me.


1. The shooting of the Russians was immediate, not delayed, which negates your hypothesis. It was also synonymous with SB in these docs.

2. Specifically the language "The special accommodation [Sonderunterbringung] of the men was due to too much frailty, that of women because most were children" does not fit your hypothesis. If "special accommodation" was a necessary temporary holding facility due to inadequate extermination capacities, then the reason for special/separate accommodation would be "since the crematoria are now full" or something like that. The reason that is given is a reason for murder itself. Moreover, there is no reason that WVHA would need to know about such nuances as to whether the victims were temporarily held or not - so this term in your meaning would be out of place in such a telex in the first place.

3. There is zero support for your hypothesis in the testimonies of men who knew it personally, for example Stark:

Dann stand ich hinter der Kommission beziehungsweise seitlich von der Kommission und übernahm die Häftlinge zur Arbeit, die ich zu registrieren hatte. Gesamtzahl minus Arbeitsfähige würde dann rein rechnerisch die Zahl der »gesondert Unterzubringenden« ergeben. Diese Zahl durfte ich aber nicht allein rechnerisch ermitteln, sondern mußte sie mir auch bestätigen lassen.
[Das Verfahren: 153. Verhandlungstag (03.05.1965). Der 1. Frankfurter Auschwitz-Prozeß, S. 32781 (vgl. AP316.007, S. 0)]


Wenn ein Transport angekommen war, die Selektion stattgefunden hatte, habe ich meistens am nächsten Tag ein Fernschreiben etwa folgenden Inhalts nach Berlin abgesetzt, nachdem es durch den Abteilungsleiter unterzeichnet war:

Ich berichtige, der Abteilungsleiter hat das Fernschreiben abgesandt, ich habe es nur inhaltlich vorbereitet.

Ein solches Fernschreiben sah beispielsweise so aus (Daten, Namen und Zahlen sind willkürlich gewählt):
(Opper)

(Hans Stark)

(Leonhardt)

»Am 1. August 1942 kam in Auschwitz ein Transport mit 500 jüdischen Personen aus Lodz an. Hiervon wurden 200 Personen gesondert untergebracht.«

Daraus ergab sich für die Hauptstelle in Berlin auch die Anzahl der noch im Lager als arbeitsfähig vorhandenen Personen dieses Transportes.

Vorhalt des Gerichts:

Ich hatte also festzustellen die Anzahl der arbeitsfähig Selektierten und die Anzahl der »gesondert Untergebrachten«, um dieses Fernschreiben vorbereiten zu können. Meistens erfuhr ich diese beiden Zahlen auf dem Selektionsplatz selbst und fuhr dann unmittelbar mit dem Motorrad ins Büro zurück. Manchmal mußte ich aber diese Zahl erst bei den Gaskammern feststellen, und zwar habe ich das nicht selbst getan, sondern die Zahl wurde mir von einen Angehörigen des Begleitkommandos gesagt. Auch in diesen Fällen habe ich mich dann mit dem Motorrad ins Büro zurückbegeben.
[Das Verfahren: Vernehmungsprotokolle der Angeklagten. Der 1. Frankfurter Auschwitz-Prozeß, S. 4581-2 (vgl. Blatt 1588, S. 0)]

Nach der Vergasung wurde durch die Politische Abteilung gemeldet, wie viele Personen vergast und wie viele ins Lager gebracht worden waren.
Die Meldung habe ich vorbereitet, Grabner hat sie - glaube ich - unterschrieben. Auf der Meldung wurde die »Vergasung« mit »gesondert untergebracht« bezeichnet.
[Das Verfahren: 7. Verhandlungstag (16.01.1964). Der 1. Frankfurter Auschwitz-Prozeß, S. 4823-4 (vgl. Blatt Stark-7, S. 35)]

Ich blieb jeweils bis zum Schluß dabei, da ich die Erschießungen dieser Personengruppe bestätigen und an das Reichssicherheitshauptamt in Berlin berichten mußte. Die Berichte über die Erschießungen wurden jeweils nach Durchführung schriftlich dem RSHA gemeldet, und zwar unter der Deckbezeichnung, daß »soundso viel Personen gesondert untergebracht« worden seien. Diese ganze Aktion richtete sich hauptsächlich gegen Personen der jüdischen Rasse und wurde »Sonderbehandlung« genannt. Hierzu war vom RSHA bereits zu Beginn des Rußlandfeldzuges ein Befehl herausgegeben worden, der uns Angehörigen der Politischen Abteilung mündlich bekanntgegeben wurde.
[Das Verfahren: Vernehmungsprotokolle der Angeklagten. Der 1. Frankfurter Auschwitz-Prozeß, S. 4534 (vgl. Blatt 946, S. 0)]



Fair enough, and thanks for those testimonies. So i can throw the term "gesondert untergebracht" in the bin. At first, i was wondering if this term could be found somewhere as used during the Hungarian aktion... Your information show that it would not have been the case.

Nevertheless, the issue still remains. And i still think that some kind of "waiting room" had to have been put in place in order to deal with the numbers provided by Hans.
What about the Hungarian camp (BIIe) or the BIII sectors?
According to the pictures, it seems that the Hungarian Jews selected as able to work were processed through the regular channels, and sent to the appropriate sector of the camp. There are also testimonies from survivors who mention the presence, almost invasive, arrival of Hungarian Jewish children at Monowitz...
So i stand by the idea that something is missing here.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jul 10, 2018 9:50 pm

Balsamo >> "the issue still remains. And i still think that some kind of "waiting room" had to have been put in place in order to deal with the numbers provided by Hans."

What is your view of Hans' and Sergey's points regarding the cremation pits at V and the bunker - you seem to disagree with them?

Hans: 1. "In terms of body disposal, the most dense and critical period was from 25.5 to 31.5.1944 with 9,600 assumed victims in average. Whatever is taken for the capacity of the crematoria, several thousands of people had to be cremated in the open, as is established by numerous evidence on outdoor cremation in Auschwitz in that period" 2. "If crematoria 4 & 5 did not achieve these figures (because of less corpses per cycle, slower cycles or because of breakdown), the numbers would shift towards open air cremation. . . . The more the crematoria could dispose, the less was left to the open cremation sites." 3. "Because of the large cremation area and volume (compensating the lower efficiency compared to the crematoria ovens). We are talking here about at least 5 trenches some 16 - 25 m long, 3 - 6 m wide and 3 m deep. I suggest to consult Roberto's writings on outdoor cremation to check if this volume appears to be sufficient for 3,500 - 5,500 corpses on the peak days as suggested by testimonies, demographics and the considerations above."

Sergey: 1. "> 'It looks like you require open air cremations practically EVERY day for the first month. Is this your contention?' I think this has always been the default assumption supported by witness evidence." 2. "I don't think anyone can tell you the more exact numbers for Q1 [number burnt in ovens] &2 [number burnt in pits], except maybe very ballpark - what would be the sources?"

Also curious, as no one has mentioned it, about your views on the "4756" number. Hans has, I think, indirectly addressed this.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

blake121666
Poster
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby blake121666 » Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:11 pm

Let's just recap and conclude:

1. I wanted to get your narrative of how the incineration of corpses was performed given the large numbers that were bunched up for periods extending for days - I claimed something like over 11,000 per day at times. I was under the mis-impression that the oven incineration rate was more important to this question than you apparently think it was. But nevertheless, this was the reason for specifically looking at the rate of influx of, in particular, the Hungarian Jews during that operation.

2. You supplied me with a list of what you believe to have been that daily rate of influx. Your list is more or less as I had characterized the situation. But for some reason or other you wished for me to quibble over the list. Or you think you had proved me wrong or something. I simply am at sea on the windmills you think you've defeated with whatever your contentions about the list are - and what you conceived of my reason for asking for this list.

3. In your strange misconception of whatever the whole issue was with the list, you quoted my post about my observation that viewing the corpse incineration in cremation ovens in physically impossible ways does not help your counter-arguments to "deniers". Somehow or other this statement of mine was shown dumb or ironic or who knows what because of the list "win" you achieved - which I don't see as anything other than you giving me your damned list - which is as I described it beforehand. If you had shown me some bogus list of a uniform 5,000 per day with isolated days of about 10,000, then there WOULD have been contention. But such was not the case in the list you produced. So WTF is your issue with the list? Are you all insane or something? What is your conception of this whole list issue? Don't answer; I actually couldn't care less.

The end result is that we are not dealing with my initial desire to get your analyses of cremations at Birkenau for this particular period - most particularly the days of the bunching up in the list. You've somehow shown me the fool by producing the list - which ironically is as a characterized it beforehand. I think you all have loose marbles rolling around in your heads.

Then I ask what problem you have with my statement that you have physically impossible understandings about the oven cremations - pointing out that on the most basic and elementary energy considerations, you believe in physical impossibilities in this regard. The basics being:

1. Fixed facility incinerators (such as these cremation ovens we are concerned with at AB) are limited in their incineration rate of carcasses (or human corpses in the case of these cremation ovens). They operate in a somewhat maximally efficient way with an upper limit to the temperature in which they operate. This is pretty much the case for any load. And so the energy applied to incineration is upper-bound - the ovens cannot be run over about 1200C. This is a fact. You can speculate that the heat energy of the AB ovens was magically 4 times greater when incinerating 4 corpses concurrently versus incinerating one corpse; but your speculation would be absurd nonsense. The incineration rate with either one or many corpses in the oven would necessarily have to be about the same because you are limited by the temperature you can operate the oven. The rate is about 50 kg/hr. If you like, I'll allow that you could achieve somewhat greater than this. Let's say you could get 100 kg/hr if you like. You can't get 300 kg/hr - which would be the case for 4 corpses per hour.

2. So therefore, we are dealing with a stoking problem. You are stoking the oven at a rate to minimize the AVERAGE cremation time - but not the time to fully incinerate any one corpse (this is about the same - maybe a little less if you like - it actually is 1/3 less as a matter of fact - but no matter).

So with regard to someone such as your youtube denier in the OP. He claims that you need the energy to be able to evaporate the water out of a corpse before it can be incinerated. N corpses would require N times that energy. He is quite right. Over the whole length of time it takes to incinerate those N corpses, that much energy needs to be supplied to evaporate the water out of those N corpses. But you are not evaporating ALL the water out of the corpses and then incinerating them in a linear fashion. You are stoking the oven at the highest rate you can - based on the highest rate you can "combust" the corpses. The corpse is desiccated enough to ignite and combust - spitting out the innards and such. The remnants need to be arranged to free up enough space for the introduction of your next stoking. They most likely need to be transferred to the ash bin - such was the procedure for the Gusen oven manual. So you've freed up space for more corpses but the previous corpses have not been fully incinerated by any means. Those remnants need to individually go through the whole cremation process - which takes quite awhile. So if you think they designed some super-duper high-power ovens that are fully incinerating corpses in 1/4 the time you are just plain wrong in your conception. The corpses are cremating at the same rate, you are simply maximally utilizing the cremation SPACE for additional corpses.

The vast majority of you think about these things is physically impossible ways. In particular, Zimmerman does not handle things well - and simply doesn't understand what he is talking about in many instances. He simply does not get that the incineration rate is very limited because you CAN'T run the oven at the temperatures necessary for his implied incineration rates. He DIDN'T particularly disprove Mattogno or anything - the man didn't even comprehend what you think he somehow disproved. They talked past each other. Such is all that was done between Zimmerman and Mattogno.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:22 pm

@Balsamo: Excerpt from testimony of former Auschwitz prisoner no. 96239 Kazimierz Smolen (Polish prisoner who for a time worked as a clerk in the camp hospital):
It happened more than once that the gas chambers were so full that no more people could be poisoned. Then male Hungarian Jews were sent to the Gypsy camp, while women marked for the gas were placed in a special camp segment that was completely unfinished, that is segment III [Bauabschmitt III]. We called this segment Meksyk [Mexico], and the women there were not registered at all or designated with numbers.

Smolen then described conditions in Mexico and said that
There women waited for the gas chambers to be cleared, which lasted up to two months. Several times over the course of this period they were taken to the gas chambers and poisoned.

This testimony was given in the 1940s, at the Höss trial and an excerpt is found in the Auschwitz collection, Voices of Memory 9: Jews in Auschwitz, by Piper, p 95. This testimony is one I've read (I can't put my fingers on others just now) that fits with what Hans wrote earlier: "Another thing to consider is that the numbers of unfit people did not have to be cremated on the very same or the next day, but in principle they could have been hold back and liquidated later on days of lesser activity (there might be not much, if any evidence on this, but this could be so because there would be no survivors of such practice)."

(I've read other testimonies that may contradict Smolen on one point - the use of the Gypsy camp at this time for Hungarian Jews whom the Germans could not "process," whereas other testimonies imply that the area was reserved for Hungarian Jews selected for labor and awaiting transport from the camp. The two descriptions may not actually contradict each other, of course.)
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:24 pm

blake121666 wrote:Let's just recap and conclude:.

This summary is so disingenuous and deluded - the portions that I've been involved discussing - that my interest in replying to the claims blake makes reached nil. No need, in any event, as the counter-arguments have already been made, however blake chooses to characterize them.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Darren Wilshak
Regular Poster
Posts: 755
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:16 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Darren Wilshak » Tue Jul 10, 2018 11:12 pm

Pretty much and then he insults me in an incoherent manner. LOL Too far has this one invested in the stupid. I'm just pointing things out, I actually think Blake should be the next one to leave denial but he isn't quite yet. He's supplying the fantasy gas chamber operations manual guff again.

Yo science and the gas chamber obsessive.

Pixie dust...

No offence taken or meant Blake.

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2157
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balmoral95 » Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:22 am

Darren Wilshak wrote:Pretty much and then he insults me in an incoherent manner. LOL Too far has this one invested in the stupid. I'm just pointing things out, I actually think Blake should be the next one to leave denial but he isn't quite yet. He's supplying the fantasy gas chamber operations manual guff again.

Yo science and the gas chamber obsessive.

Pixie dust...

No offence taken or meant Blake.



I couldn't really follow the last post.

Hans
Poster
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Hans » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:59 am

blake121666 wrote:Let's just recap and conclude:



Blake, it is confusing that you only refer to "you" or "your" instead of naming who exactly you are addressing. I already explained you this on the first page of this thread, but now you continue this confusion, bad style and, in fact, fallacy.

2. You supplied me with a list of what you believe to have been that daily rate of influx. Your list is more or less as I had characterized the situation.


Perhaps I have a linguistic misunderstanding, but when you talked about "extended periods" I had in mind periods of at least several weeks to few months (like the entire period of deportations of Hungarian Jews). According to the list I provided there were five days in a row with > 10,000 assumed victims (thereof three > 11,000) and maximum 14 days in a row with 9,600 in average. If that's what you understand with "extended periods", you should consider a different wording the next time to avoid people think you talk about much longer times.

By the way, as far as I can see you have not commented yet on here. It looks somewhat odd that you repeatedly rant about the (merely linguistic or perhaps also conceptual) simplefication of the physico-chemical process of cremation as technical cremation procedure, as if it were of prime importance if the cremation of all parts of a selected corpse is physico-chemically completed after the 1st, 2nd or 3rd reloading, or reducing the whole process further to an effective cremation rate, but you seem to ignore your own rather serious flaw of arguing with HCN concentrations without considering the actual exposure time.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:21 am

>> If that's what you understand with "extended periods", you should consider a different wording the next time to avoid people think you talk about much longer times.

The way blake presented this aspect of the Hungary operation had the effect of exaggerating and generalizing the supposed problem he's been trying to create. It wasn’t clear from his posts if he were simply overstating the numbers by mistake or through sloppiness or trying to muddy the waters. We’ve gone over this a number of times, yet blake still insists that an effort to establish a fact-based, clear timetable for Hungarian Jews arriving to Auschwitz and being selected is nothing but pedantic quibbling.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1791
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:28 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Balsamo >> "the issue still remains. And i still think that some kind of "waiting room" had to have been put in place in order to deal with the numbers provided by Hans."

What is your view of Hans' and Sergey's points regarding the cremation pits at V and the bunker - you seem to disagree with them?

Hans: 1. "In terms of body disposal, the most dense and critical period was from 25.5 to 31.5.1944 with 9,600 assumed victims in average. Whatever is taken for the capacity of the crematoria, several thousands of people had to be cremated in the open, as is established by numerous evidence on outdoor cremation in Auschwitz in that period" 2. "If crematoria 4 & 5 did not achieve these figures (because of less corpses per cycle, slower cycles or because of breakdown), the numbers would shift towards open air cremation. . . . The more the crematoria could dispose, the less was left to the open cremation sites." 3. "Because of the large cremation area and volume (compensating the lower efficiency compared to the crematoria ovens). We are talking here about at least 5 trenches some 16 - 25 m long, 3 - 6 m wide and 3 m deep. I suggest to consult Roberto's writings on outdoor cremation to check if this volume appears to be sufficient for 3,500 - 5,500 corpses on the peak days as suggested by testimonies, demographics and the considerations above."

Sergey: 1. "> 'It looks like you require open air cremations practically EVERY day for the first month. Is this your contention?' I think this has always been the default assumption supported by witness evidence." 2. "I don't think anyone can tell you the more exact numbers for Q1 [number burnt in ovens] &2 [number burnt in pits], except maybe very ballpark - what would be the sources?"

Also curious, as no one has mentioned it, about your views on the "4756" number. Hans has, I think, indirectly addressed this.


No, i do not contest the cremation capacity, at all, and i agree that the outdoor cremation could solve any issues in this regards. My point being that it was the actual killing that could not have followed such a rhythm. The main problem i have is that the killing process is being reduced to statistics without any visualization of what it meant. It is easy to propose a density of 10.7 people a square meter...on paper...on backed by the so called Provan demonstration...But it is such an abstraction, if you know what i mean.

It is just too "mechanical"... :D

The more i read about it, the less i understand the focus on the cremation capacities, as if the killing of all those people - victims kind of lost in those number games - was just a data in the equation.
So yes, when Hans - despite all the respect he deserves - just throw numbers like "well there was 900m2 available so 9600 people could be gassed in 24h"...it is so cold and surrealistic that no one even try to think of what 9600 people and 9600 corpses represent, in volume, weight, flesh and bones, packed in awful masses of interlaced and agglomerated bodies that ridigidy would kind of frozen after a couple of hours making their removal even harder...The Sonder Kommando - not that i have much sympathy for them as you know - are turned into kind of subhuman robots able to carry 125 tons of human flesh into ovens or pits as if there were machines used in such a systematic harmony that the killing capacity would fit with the cremation capacity in such a perfect way that it could be replicated every day without a single flaw.
We don't even listen to a dragger when he tells how difficult it was to extirpate the bodies among this mess, because everyone is focused on Tauber claiming he was burning 2500 bodies per 24h. So by silly conclusion, the rest must have followed fluently.

To a point that there are thousands of pages written about cremation, but yet to date not a single one reconstitution of how the killing process, that is taking into consideration time difficulties challenges etc, took place. Nothing. As if it was of no interest at all.
And the worst in this is that everyone who would try to substantiate this process would conclude that those numbers are just beyond human - even evil ones - capabilities.

So we can just ignore all this, and feel fine letting Deniers a last bone to chew, but in the end what is the point in defending indefensible figures?

Again, my disagreement is not about cremation but with Hans saying:
9600 people per day (the average, assumed figure for the most dense period) required about 900 m² of gassing space. Crematorium 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 had 210 + 210 + 240 + 240 = 900 m²


Well, first i admit that it is the first time that i read that Krema 4 and 5 had a greater killing capacity than krema 2 and 3. Usually, it is said that they could handle half the people krema 2 and 3 could deal with.
It gives a density of 10.7 people/m2.

So that would give a theoretical capacity of 2247 for each krema 2 and 3. That would leave 5106 people to be killed in the 3 facilities left, or 1702 each. I personally don't remember any testimonies mentioning so many people killed in krema 4 and 5 or at Bunker I
I could accept that it could be reachable one time, but not that it could be duplicate every 24h for a long period of time.
Anyway, i agree that krema 4 and 5 had less issues, but in order to achieve a result of 9600 krema I and II have to follow the path. And krema 2 and 3 could not be helped by the pits which is why i focused on them.

Can Hans described how he sees the process from the point where 2250 people are gathered in front of the krema until the time the gas chamber is ready to be used again. A time frame and show that everything could be done in less than 26h.

Here is what i proposed in another thread:
MONDAY 8h; arrival...introduction of the victims in the undressing room, undressing and leading to the gas chamber.
testimonies talks about a duration between 30 min to 2 hours. Let's assume 1h or 1h15.
(which is fairly optimistic.)
9h15: the victims are gassed.
here too duration estimates differ. But the most common is about 40 minutes (ventilation included), let's make it 45.
10h: the real work can start - the shift has 10 hours left - the first bodies are extracted and send to the ovens.
10h30: the first 30 people are burning. The first shift has 9h30 left.
From here, let's assume a cremation capacity of 4/hours per muffle. (this can be challenged of course) but it seems already quite a performance that the SK can provide 60 bodies upstairs each hour.
20h: at the end of the first shift 600 bodies are cremated.
A new SK is brought in... (both teams have to pass a roll call)

MONDAY 20h30: the new team start to work, and at the same path would deal with 690 additional bodies.
TUESDAY 8h30: at the end of the second shift, there are still 960 bodies in the gas chambers.

24h have already passed since the victims were forced into the gas chambers.

Same rhythm after the 3rd shift that is the 690 bodies.
Tuesday 20h30 there are still 270 bodies to be disposed of.
A rapid calculation shows that the 4th shift will finish the job in about 4h30...We are already Wednesday after midnight.
We can some time for cleaning the mess...But everything should then be ready for a new convoy in the morning...could be earlier that 8h30 though, so the whole killing process would, in this model, last anywhere between 42 and 48 hours for 2250 victims, hence a killing capacity of 47 and 53 bodies an hour, that is below the cremation capacity of 60. But on the other hand, it makes a use of the gas chambers on Tuesday impossible.

PS: I use 690 insead of 720 in order to reflect the two "lunch breaks" granted to the SK.


Of course, it is a hypothetical model and is open to critics. I have tried to take most of the lower end estimates, the fist step, that is to make the victims enter the gas chambers might very well be closer to Venezia 2 hours, but just let's remember that Venezia told that the whole process could last up to 6 shifts, so...
60 bodies delivered per hour correspond to one body put on the elevator at ground level every 28 seconds, "mas or menos", which considering that they had to be dragged to the hair cutters, then forwarded to the "dentists" then loaded on the elevator. So considering that 28 seconds represent an average TO BE RESPECTED no matter what during all the shifts...

What i wanted to show, whether one accepts or rejects this model, is that there are much more behind the killing process that just capacity based on density per square meters or cremation capacities of the ovens.

Hence my conclusion that it HAD to be a kind of "reservoir" in order to optimize the killing rate. Just to throw victims as they come to the gas chambers as soon as they arrive, one transport after the other when there were like 4 of them on the same day, would have resulted in a very messy chaos which is precisely what the Nazis wanted to avoid.

Again, i insist: with a smart and organized use of the killing facilities, 23.000 people could be killed weekly without challenging the cremation capacities and more important without creating any unmanageable chaos.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1791
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:45 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:@Balsamo: Excerpt from testimony of former Auschwitz prisoner no. 96239 Kazimierz Smolen (Polish prisoner who for a time worked as a clerk in the camp hospital):
It happened more than once that the gas chambers were so full that no more people could be poisoned. Then male Hungarian Jews were sent to the Gypsy camp, while women marked for the gas were placed in a special camp segment that was completely unfinished, that is segment III [Bauabschmitt III]. We called this segment Meksyk [Mexico], and the women there were not registered at all or designated with numbers.

Smolen then described conditions in Mexico and said that
There women waited for the gas chambers to be cleared, which lasted up to two months. Several times over the course of this period they were taken to the gas chambers and poisoned.

This testimony was given in the 1940s, at the Höss trial and an excerpt is found in the Auschwitz collection, Voices of Memory 9: Jews in Auschwitz, by Piper, p 95. This testimony is one I've read (I can't put my fingers on others just now) that fits with what Hans wrote earlier: "Another thing to consider is that the numbers of unfit people did not have to be cremated on the very same or the next day, but in principle they could have been hold back and liquidated later on days of lesser activity (there might be not much, if any evidence on this, but this could be so because there would be no survivors of such practice)."

(I've read other testimonies that may contradict Smolen on one point - the use of the Gypsy camp at this time for Hungarian Jews whom the Germans could not "process," whereas other testimonies imply that the area was reserved for Hungarian Jews selected for labor and awaiting transport from the camp. The two descriptions may not actually contradict each other, of course.)


Thank you very much, Stat...

@Blake...would this satisfy you as a proof you asked me for on rodoh?

One thing:
This testimony is one I've read (I can't put my fingers on others just now) that fits with what Hans wrote earlier: "Another thing to consider is that the numbers of unfit people did not have to be cremated on the very same or the next day, but in principle they could have been hold back and liquidated later on days of lesser activity


It is probable indeed...but only for krema 4 and 5 and the Bunker...
In krema 2 and 3, the gas chambers could not be used until the last body had been removed...
OUps, you confused me because you used cremated instead of gassed...But then of course, my point being that it was the only solution.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:31 am

Balsamo wrote:So yes, when Hans - despite all the respect he deserves - just throw numbers like "well there was 900m2 available so 9600 people could be gassed in 24h"...it is so cold and surrealistic that no one even try to think of what 9600 people and 9600 corpses represent, in volume, weight, flesh and bones, packed in awful masses of interlaced and agglomerated bodies that ridigidy would kind of frozen after a couple of hours making their removal even harder.

I think, from my knowledge of Hans' writings, that this is grossly unfair. Hans has a very strong knowledge of process and procedures, along with the evidence base, but that in no way works against his being, not merely "cold and surrealistic" as you put it, but realistic and detailed - and he well understands what 9600 murders means (and entails). There are, however, advantages to writing in a less emotional, less hot style in discussion of these difficult matters, and Hans has indeed mastered such an approach. That approach tends to make crystal clear what the issues and procedures are and has been a part of why Hans is so respected.

Balsamo wrote:We don't even listen to a dragger when he tells how difficult it was to extirpate the bodies among this mess, because everyone is focused on Tauber claiming he was burning 2500 bodies per 24h. So by silly conclusion, the rest must have followed fluently.

Although Tauber made that claim, he also wrote about the difficulty of the coerced tasks, how SK members managed to get breaks in the work, variations to the routine or ideal case, the way burning corpses seemed to reach to the sky, Moll's sadism, why and how the "stretchers" were improvised and introduced, how the corpses blistered and intestines burst. David Olere's artwork gives a sense of the horror, the grotesquery, and the difficulties of the work. Gideon Greif, and, yes, I know what you think of him, listened at length to SK members describe the details of their travails, and so on. In this thread Aaron has written (and you agreed with him) about the way in which victims suffocated in the crowded chambers, a detail outside the specs and also recorded by Tauber.

Balsamo wrote:So we can just ignore all this, and feel fine letting Deniers a last bone to chew, but in the end what is the point in defending indefensible figures?

Sorry, I don't follow this . . .

Balsamo wrote:Again, my disagreement is not about cremation but with Hans saying:
9600 people per day (the average, assumed figure for the most dense period) required about 900 m² of gassing space. Crematorium 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 had 210 + 210 + 240 + 240 = 900 m²


Well, first i admit that it is the first time that i read that Krema 4 and 5 had a greater killing capacity than krema 2 and 3. Usually, it is said that they could handle half the people krema 2 and 3 could deal with.
It gives a density of 10.7 people/m2.

Hans may want to reply - I didn't read his comment as you did but perhaps I misread it.

Balsamo wrote:Hence my conclusion that it HAD to be a kind of "reservoir" in order to optimize the killing rate. Just to throw victims as they come to the gas chambers as soon as they arrive, one transport after the other when there were like 4 of them on the same day, would have resulted in a very messy chaos which is precisely what the Nazis wanted to avoid.

Deniers typically underestimate "bootstrapping" and "bricolage" in such matters - such as Smolen describes - and write as though we possess detailed, complete, unambiguous records today - we don't - of the kind which Tauber mentioned; they argue that if we do not have a kind of primer on every aspect of the work and process, then we can't conclude much of anything based on extant sources. OTOH deniers have beaten the drum of the claim of a lack of capacity - so it makes sense for people knowledgeable in the technical and other details to respond. Their doing so doesn't imply that they don't understand the actual work or that they don't think of the messy, brutal, difficult reality of mass murder. Paying some heed to area, densities, concentrations, etc doesn't mean reduction of the issues to those factors.

As to the maths, I fail to understand how to find what X is equal to when X = A + (B + C), where A is the number of corpses which the SS had to cremate in the ovens, B is the cremation done at the bunker and C is the cremation done at V - and B and C are simply not known. We could add a term for D (the Smolen number), also unknown, to make X further “fuzzy.” That is why I am comfortable with the way Sergey and Hans (the latter calling out specifically that some issues will always have some "uncertainty" around them, the former stating the "exact numbers for" pit cremations vs oven cremations can't be obtained) have answered questions in this thread. There are limits to what we (can) know.

Balsamo wrote:Again, i insist: with a smart and organized use of the killing facilities, 23.000 people could be killed weekly without challenging the cremation capacities and more important without creating any unmanageable chaos.

So you challenge the "4756" letter on oven cremations, and by implication Hans' range of 3500-5500 per day, using basically blake's lower numbers (in your case, 3386 per day), correct? (As noted, without knowing B + C + D, I don’t know how to figure out what A must be.)
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2157
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balmoral95 » Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:13 am

Seems to me that for our purposes a dispassionate approach is called for, nay necessary.

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu Jul 12, 2018 5:33 am

> I typically read of extended periods of time (weeks) of 12,000+ Hungarian Jews per day sent to Auschwitz.

> I typically read historians claiming that about 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day were sent to Auschwitz for many consecutive days - 90% of whom were immediately killed and cremated.

> So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau.

> You've misrepresented what I meant, here. I was referring to peaks.

> Your list is more or less as I had characterized the situation.

One can probably cure even stupid, but one can't cure dishonest.

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2157
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balmoral95 » Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:15 am

Sergey_Romanov wrote:> I typically read of extended periods of time (weeks) of 12,000+ Hungarian Jews per day sent to Auschwitz.

> I typically read historians claiming that about 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day were sent to Auschwitz for many consecutive days - 90% of whom were immediately killed and cremated.

> So even the rate documented and accepted by me does not clear up the problem of what happened to the extended periods of over 12,000 Hungarian Jews per day entering Birkenau.

> You've misrepresented what I meant, here. I was referring to peaks.

> Your list is more or less as I had characterized the situation.

One can probably cure even stupid, but one can't cure dishonest.



As to points 1,2,3, I think some of the numbers as above might be misapprehended from "The Auschwitz chronicle" in which, iirc, Czech gives some very "robustly optimistic" figures for what Eichmann, et al, thought they could process through a reorganized/improved/renovated Birkenau prior to the actual Aktion.

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:18 am

Czech has barely any info on the Hungarian killings.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:22 am

I think someone's picked up Braham's 12,000+ a day for the first period through 8 June and applied it to the entire operation (IIRC Wikipedia for example), from whence blake got this notion; blake "improved" on this overstatement, which fit his biases and needs, by adding that 90% of the arriving Hungarian Jews were "immediately killed and cremated" (blake also used 11,000 per day for extended or sustained periods). This 11,000 killed per day became for blake an idée fixe, despite his protestations to the contrary. (Also, I doubt that blake has read Braham or Stark, who "fixed" some of the problems and gaps in Braham's study.)

One can see blake's original exaggeration and repetition of it as ill-informed or lazy; but I agree with Sergey that his then, after being corrected, insisting that "You've misrepresented what I meant, here. I was referring to peaks" and "Your list is more or less as I had characterized the situation" is outright dishonesty, although I would add that it comes with the customary dollop of buffoonish Rodohian arrogance and attempted face-saving.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2157
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balmoral95 » Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:47 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:Czech has barely any info on the Hungarian killings.



Right. Now I'm not sure what I was thinking of. Senility will do that... :?

Hans
Poster
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Hans » Thu Jul 12, 2018 5:22 pm

Balsamo wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Balsamo >> "the issue still remains. And i still think that some kind of "waiting room" had to have been put in place in order to deal with the numbers provided by Hans."

What is your view of Hans' and Sergey's points regarding the cremation pits at V and the bunker - you seem to disagree with them?

Hans: 1. "In terms of body disposal, the most dense and critical period was from 25.5 to 31.5.1944 with 9,600 assumed victims in average. Whatever is taken for the capacity of the crematoria, several thousands of people had to be cremated in the open, as is established by numerous evidence on outdoor cremation in Auschwitz in that period" 2. "If crematoria 4 & 5 did not achieve these figures (because of less corpses per cycle, slower cycles or because of breakdown), the numbers would shift towards open air cremation. . . . The more the crematoria could dispose, the less was left to the open cremation sites." 3. "Because of the large cremation area and volume (compensating the lower efficiency compared to the crematoria ovens). We are talking here about at least 5 trenches some 16 - 25 m long, 3 - 6 m wide and 3 m deep. I suggest to consult Roberto's writings on outdoor cremation to check if this volume appears to be sufficient for 3,500 - 5,500 corpses on the peak days as suggested by testimonies, demographics and the considerations above."

Sergey: 1. "> 'It looks like you require open air cremations practically EVERY day for the first month. Is this your contention?' I think this has always been the default assumption supported by witness evidence." 2. "I don't think anyone can tell you the more exact numbers for Q1 [number burnt in ovens] &2 [number burnt in pits], except maybe very ballpark - what would be the sources?"

Also curious, as no one has mentioned it, about your views on the "4756" number. Hans has, I think, indirectly addressed this.


No, i do not contest the cremation capacity, at all, and i agree that the outdoor cremation could solve any issues in this regards. My point being that it was the actual killing that could not have followed such a rhythm. The main problem i have is that the killing process is being reduced to statistics without any visualization of what it meant. It is easy to propose a density of 10.7 people a square meter...on paper...on backed by the so called Provan demonstration...But it is such an abstraction, if you know what i mean.

It is just too "mechanical"... :D

The more i read about it, the less i understand the focus on the cremation capacities, as if the killing of all those people - victims kind of lost in those number games - was just a data in the equation.
So yes, when Hans - despite all the respect he deserves - just throw numbers like "well there was 900m2 available so 9600 people could be gassed in 24h"...it is so cold and surrealistic that no one even try to think of what 9600 people and 9600 corpses represent, in volume, weight, flesh and bones, packed in awful masses of interlaced and agglomerated bodies that ridigidy would kind of frozen after a couple of hours making their removal even harder...The Sonder Kommando - not that i have much sympathy for them as you know - are turned into kind of subhuman robots able to carry 125 tons of human flesh into ovens or pits as if there were machines used in such a systematic harmony that the killing capacity would fit with the cremation capacity in such a perfect way that it could be replicated every day without a single flaw.
We don't even listen to a dragger when he tells how difficult it was to extirpate the bodies among this mess, because everyone is focused on Tauber claiming he was burning 2500 bodies per 24h. So by silly conclusion, the rest must have followed fluently.

To a point that there are thousands of pages written about cremation, but yet to date not a single one reconstitution of how the killing process, that is taking into consideration time difficulties challenges etc, took place. Nothing. As if it was of no interest at all.
And the worst in this is that everyone who would try to substantiate this process would conclude that those numbers are just beyond human - even evil ones - capabilities.



Balsamo, your point about just throwing numbers without "even try to think of what 9600 people and 9600 corpses represent" seems strange, as I have actually thought and posted about the clearing process, for instance here (section The Elevators at Crematoria 2 & 3) and here (section Dragging of Corpses).

I did consider the logistics in the basements of the crematoria when preparing the rebuttals of Mattogno and denierbud, and I did arrive to the conclusion that the bottleneck was still the cremation. The limit set by the crematoria ovens is of spatial and physico-chemical nature, the size of the muffles and the combustion process. The loading cycles were 20 - 30 min (roughly corresponding to the dehydration rate) with 3, 4 corpses. Hence, they did not need more than 80 - 130 corpses per hour at the ovens. Now, suppose they only get 50 per hour because it was such a sluggish and hard work. Then the SS (or Kapos) would have increased the number of corpse carriers. The clearing rate could have been adjusted by man power (up to some limit when flow rate through the doors and elevator transport rate are the problem).

There is no doubt that the corpse carriers in the SK had to do the most terrible and hard work, but that does not answer if they got the number of corpses per hour to the ovens that was needed to provide a smooth operation. There is no reason why the SS/Kapos should have assigned too few men to this commando, so that even when they worked to extreme exhaustion, the Sonderkommando prisoners at the ovens had to wait for further corpses.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1791
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Thu Jul 12, 2018 11:54 pm

Statmec:
There are, however, advantages to writing in a less emotional


You are 100% right, and apologize...Unfortunately it is not the first time i lose temper, and probably not the last, but i am well aware that i should avoid it.
It should not been taken as a lack of respect though. I am very open to be proven wrong, like Sergey did with the "GU". It is a good way to learn.
I have read most article written by Hans. I quoted the very lines i was disagreeing with. And if he can prove me wrong i will thank him.

Sorry, I don't follow this . . .


Well as long as we keep pouring huge numbers, like 9600 killed per 24 hours, without a proper demonstration how practically it could been done. It is still the most active thread on rodoh...and gives them occasion to pretend being scientific, lol...

Statmec
Gideon Greif, and, yes, I know what you think of him, listened at length to SK members describe the details of their travails,


From your post in the SK thread:

he replied to my question about the labor process and time involved (...)
Greif outlined the steps of the extermination process in Kremas II/III in some detail. He used a variety of visuals to help with this. Starting with the undressing room, he highlighted six different SK teams. As he finished up the process, he commented, "within four hours, nothing remained of the people who had been brought there." I asked about this, whether I had heard correctly that from entry into the undressing room, say 2,500 people brought in in maybe three or four groups, to grinding of their cremains, took just four hours. Greif said that I'd misunderstood: that four hours was "from arrival on the ramp to total destruction." Greif said that Saul Chazan, a Greek Jew whose interview is one in his book, had told him that directly.

Great answer from him...4 hours because Chazan said so...
It is a pity actually as no one was in a better position to clarify this issue than him...had he asked better questions.

As to the maths, I fail to understand how to find what X is equal to when X = A + (B + C), where A is the number of corpses which the SS had to cremate in the ovens, B is the cremation done at the bunker and C is the cremation done at V - and B and C are simply not known.


Again, these issue are about cremation capacity.
B and C may not be known exactly, but i agree with those who concludes that they could cope with the extra charges.
But in order to cremate you have to kill first. This is actually what i tried to point out...Both could not be done simultaneously. And again, Pits only helped Krema 4, 5 and the Bunker.

So you challenge the "4756" letter on oven cremations, and by implication Hans' range of 3500-5500 per day, using basically blake's lower numbers (in your case, 3386 per day), correct? (As noted, without knowing B + C + D, I don’t know how to figure out what A must be.)


Nope again, i do not challenge cremations.
I focused on how many people could been killed during a week without posing any logistical issues.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Jul 13, 2018 12:15 am

Balsamo wrote:Great answer from him...4 hours because Chazan said so...
It is a pity actually as no one was in a better position to clarify this issue than him...had he asked better questions.

Sigh, we've been through this before, Greif's talk was hardly the venue to clarify or resolve such an issue. Clearly, in his book Greif "invites" the SK members to talk at length on the process, issues that they felt were important, and what their work was like - whether or not he always took from them what you think he should have. In any event, I was referring to Greif's interviews, not to the talk I heard and not to his book introduction. Specifically, those interviews stand in stark contradiction to your notion that no one has shown an "interest" in the work these men did and your writing that "We don't even listen to a dragger when he tells how" the work was done. I just don't think that's true, and Greif's interviews are a case of years of listening - and the product of Greif's listening exists for us to absorb, parse, debate, and understand.

Balsamo wrote:Again, these issue are about cremation capacity.

I realized this morning in reading your exchange with Hans that you had answered a slightly different question to the one I meant to ask about the "4756" letter! OTOH when I wrote about A through D I wasn't really referring to cremation capacity alone but to cremations done - and I was thinking of blake's "gibberish" more than anything. I think I phrased it as "cremations done" or something. I believe that Hans has responded to your objection about this as well.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1791
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Fri Jul 13, 2018 1:38 am

Hans...

My apologize if i gave the impression to be rude. Not intentional.

Balsamo, your point about just throwing numbers without "even try to think of what 9600 people and 9600 corpses represent" seems strange, as I have actually thought and posted about the clearing process, for instance here (section The Elevators at Crematoria 2 & 3) and here (section Dragging of Corpses).


Please keep in mind that i am not Mattogno.
And thanks for the links...i have read them of course.
But given that i am not Mattogno, i am not arguing that the elevator was too small or could carry only 300 kg...which is silly enough.
Mattogno pretends to use technical issues he invents to prove a negation, while i am trying to make things possible...quite a difference.
Actually, i also would like to remind all of you that i started to look into this feasibility issue after having read Venezia, not a Denier with an Ugly voice, but a SK who, and as far as i know he is still the only one who has been asked this question and provided an answer without an hesitation, speak about 6 bloody shifts...And given that he arrived like the other Greeks right for the Hungarian Aktion, we can just ignore him or take into consideration what he says. I have noticed that none of you has ever mentioned him in your answers...Anyway...

So while i do give a 28 second per corpses, it is not assuming that it could not be done in less. But the number being a AVERAGE to be respected for 24 hours, one should be prudent.
The example i give is when you make a trip with a car from point A to B on country roads (that is not motorways). You can drive 110 km/h most of the time, you will not cover 110 km within one hour...Passing through a village, even for 5 minutes, and having to slow down at 40km/h during this 5 minutes, destroys the average. A redlights make things even worse. In the end, maintaining a speed average of 70 km/hour is already an average.

Now you might have noticed that my starting point, ironically given my declared stance, still is a cremation rate of 4 bodies per hour per muffle, which is what is stated in the German documents.

As for the trip, i considered a small 5 to 10 seconds (not 60 minutes). In the model i gave, i chose 5 sec per trip.
I consider the elevator performance like the cremation rate, a non issue.

But the results should also take into consideration that while putting the first layers of corpses is easy, it is getting more difficult if you have to keep piling up...so depending of we chose to believe Cohen's 15-20 bodies per load, or Gabbai 10-15, or Venezia (haircutter) 7-10 or Chazan 6 to 8 (actually he was in charge at the elevator at krema 3)...have an effect on the results. Now, i made test and it would have been faster to use small loads instead of big once, given that the trip had only 2.6 m to cover. While putting the 17 or 18th bodies on the pile would have required unnecessary effort, and a bit more time.

Another to keep in mind, if one considers that 28 sec per corpses is too generous, is that this paths had to be respected at every steps. There are some ugly description of how difficult it became to open the mouths after a couple of hours, having to use wrenches, then check for gold and in case remove them...Again, considering the 28 sec has to be a average, it seems quite reasonable to me.

The loading cycles were 20 - 30 min (roughly corresponding to the dehydration rate) with 3, 4 corpses. Hence, they did not need more than 80 - 130 corpses per hour at the ovens. Now, suppose they only get 50 per hour because it was such a sluggish and hard work. Then the SS (or Kapos) would have increased the number of corpse carriers. The clearing rate could have been adjusted by man power (up to some limit when flow rate through the doors and elevator transport rate are the problem).


First remarks, if you rise the number to 100/hours, it would reduce the time at the elevator steps - i use it as a countable steps - to 18 sec per corpses. As for manpower, i think, that contrary to krema 4 and 5, there was a limit of how useful manpower could be used, given the limited working space. Of course, turn around of staff was used, but it always implies some time lost, and when the average is down to 18 seconds...And that would be for 100/ hours...i did not even calculate what would have been needed for 130 corpses/hour...less that 14 seconds?
But as a matter of fact, 100 corpses an hour, that is 18 sec per bodies, is what would have been needed to do the job in time, but only so so...


There is no doubt that the corpse carriers in the SK had to do the most terrible and hard work, but that does not answer if they got the number of corpses per hour to the ovens that was needed to provide a smooth operation. There is no reason why the SS/Kapos should have assigned too few men to this commando, so that even when they worked to extreme exhaustion, the Sonderkommando prisoners at the ovens had to wait for further corpses.


Indeed they had the hardest work, and i think Venezia explained that they needed to rest and be replaced on a regular basis... Olere shows them working with cane, when in fact they needed huge fork after a while, while the distance grew the more the gas chamber was being emptied...And again, the working space available limited the utility of having a too large team for the job...And if i may add, having been involved in construction, i know that more workers does not systematically means faster...As you said, all the bodies had to pass through one door, be "treated in a not so big room" and disposed on a "not so big elevator"...
But turn over was indeed used...Fresh people from the "clothing team" could replace the exhausted draggers, Venezia said he would often changed his duty of cutting hair because one of the draggers was simply just too exhausted...He would be given some rest, some food...which confronts me that it was just not such a mechanical industrial chain that could keep a perfect path during the whole shift...

To conclude, my humble model is based on 4 corpses per muffle per hour, requiring a rhythm of 28 second per corpses, which i insist is to be considered as an average for the whole shifts...a small smoke breaks, a couple of minutes lost at the "lunch breaks", a discussion between two SK, one just having to rest a couple of minutes, all these added within a 12 hours shifts would have hurt the Average...
Considering that i reach 3 shifts...Venezia proposition, based on the same cremation capacity, only speaks of an average of 56 seconds per corpses... Presented like this, it does not even looks like unreasonable...even though i am kind of skeptics.

But the treatment of 2000 bodies per 20 hours requires the perfect scenario, the perfect coordination of the chain without any incident within 12 hours, or actually with any of the shifts...
Note that i also only gave 1h15 for 2250 people to enter the gas chambers.
Here too, if reduced to calculation, it is a very short time. For example, Venezia testimony that it could take two hours for bigger transports, would actually also affect the whole time table. It is obvious that not all the 2250 were introduced at the same time, some testimonies, most of them, says that women and children were introduced first, and that in some cases there were problems with the undressing...Which means that the crowed of victims had to be organized, that women and children were introduced in manageable groups, Grieff talked about 3 to 4, well i would say 5 to 6, that reduce the time to 10 minutes per group if one chooses 1 hours as i did...10 minutes to undress groups of 300 or 400 and lead them to the showers is not that much.

As i said, the main problem we have is the lack of representation of what this nightmare actually took place...there are limits to imagination. And i admit that the last time i was into all this, i really needed a break. We are dealing with unbearable images and visions, so i hope you will forgive my sometimes emotional attitude.

Thanks for your answers.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:13 am

Balsamo wrote:I have noticed that none of you has ever mentioned him in your answers

Oh, come on, we've discussed Venezia at length in another thread and many of us know one another's views on his estimates quite well. And Venezia, a latter day writer, is hardly the only witness name "missing" in this thread. More to the point, Hans elsewhere has presented and analyzed for us, systematically, the core witness testimonies and documents concerning aspects of Auschwitz including the Kremas. Not relying on a single witness. FSS.

Balsamo wrote:But the treatment of 2000 bodies per 20 hours requires the perfect scenario [etc]

And . . . ?
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:56 am

That a few thousand may have had to wait before the gassing in some enclosure a few times is not something that we have to break our spears over. Could have happened quite easily, esp. during the peaks. If that happened say 10 times, we can't expect such a secondary detail to have been mentioned in the testimonies. So why not? It's a possibility.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1791
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:53 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Balsamo wrote:I have noticed that none of you has ever mentioned him in your answers

Oh, come on, we've discussed Venezia at length in another thread and many of us know one another's views on his estimates quite well. And Venezia, a latter day writer, is hardly the only witness name "missing" in this thread. More to the point, Hans elsewhere has presented and analyzed for us, systematically, the core witness testimonies and documents concerning aspects of Auschwitz including the Kremas. Not relying on a single witness. FSS.

Balsamo wrote:But the treatment of 2000 bodies per 20 hours requires the perfect scenario [etc]

And . . . ?



I do not remember having discussed Venezia in length, as he was just dismissed as ..."being one witness", even though he is the only one to have actually made a statement about this specific point. Why? because he was the first to be asked such a specific question. Hey, didn't you confirm that Grieff was basically unable to answer this very single question?

I have read everything Hans wrote about the topic, at least everything available on HC. I have not critics regarding how he rebuttes Mattogno. But again, Mattogno being Mattogno, he tries to play the smart guy contesting technical issues using pseudo scientific arguments...

As you might have understood, my complain is that, despite the opportunities, we still are left unknown about what should have been basic questions: ( of course, if Hans or anyone has the answers it would be good news)
Here few examples:
How was the ususal 85 members of the SK spread through the various steps? That is : how many outside, how many in the undressing room, how many were in charges of the ovens, how many were dentists at the same time, how many draggers?

Instead of asking the very same questions again and again...how many corpses in each ovens for how long...or how long did it take for the people to die, how many people were put in the gas chambers...to all of them, it never occured to ask : "how many were in charge at the ovens"?

Because, it also means that a bodies has to be put in an oven every 18 seconds, in the end...Olere drawings shows 4 people with like 16 bodies next to them, and the same amount on the elevator.

What do you mean by " AND ?"
Not only a perfect almost robotic scenario for 12 hours straight, but for almost 18 days in a row...that is 36 times 12 hours, with not a single delay at every minutes...not a single crisis, twist or incident for 432 hours in a raw.
And we really should be fine with it?

You do know what an average is made of, right? It is pure mathematical. Even if theoretically possible, practically impossible. Just to give an example:
To make it simple: in order to make the job within 24 hours, the SK downstairs have to ship 3 bodies per minutes upstairs, there the same 3 bodies per minute have to be disposed in the oven.
Now imagine the perfect scenario with two twist within the first 10 minutes:
3+3+3+3+3+1+3+3+3+1 = 26 bodies in 10 minutes... And there you have a -16% delay on schedule.
For the next 10 minutes, the sk are more concentrated and make it almost perfect:
3+3+3+3+3+3+3+1+3+3 = 28 bodies.
For the 20 minutes, 54 bodies have been disposed of... still 6 short of target.
Even if the next 10 minutes are perfect, that is
3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3 = 30 bodies, one would still be 6 bodies short (-6.6%)...and behind schedule so to spèak.
Imagine the crisis, if with all those 36 shifts, the "lunch breaks" last just a couple of minutes longer than forecast...let's say 5 minutes.
You would have a following line like
0+0+0+0+0+3+3+3+3+3 = 15 bodies, and now there are 21 bodies short... within 50 minutes...
You realize what it takes to recover that loss?

Sorry for this.
But what i mean by perfect scenario is to maintain a formula like
(((3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3)*6))*11.5))*36) without a single glitch, and assuming that the introduction phase never lasted more than 1h15, that the mess could be cleaned up for next convoy even faster, as everything had to be done within a 24h deadline.

Take it as you want, it is just improbable.
Therefore, as i said, something is missing.

And that is for 100 per hour, but Tauber who of course has to be listened to, speaks of about 2500/24 hours, which adds an additional charge of 8% or so...
But then, why not the "And?"

I am not going to address the points Hans made in his article if he is not willing to speak about.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1791
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:54 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:That a few thousand may have had to wait before the gassing in some enclosure a few times is not something that we have to break our spears over. Could have happened quite easily, esp. during the peaks. If that happened say 10 times, we can't expect such a secondary detail to have been mentioned in the testimonies. So why not? It's a possibility.


Of course, although it had to be more than a few thousands just parked in some enclosures. And this is the whole issue, actually, it HAD to have happened. What i was wondering is if there were possibilities to dig in further in that issue. Is there something in the archives? Such questions...

I feel obliged to quote a bit of Venezia here, although Statmec would consider it a waste of time. Given the way he was interviewed, he gives information that cannot be ignored and that are not related to purely technical consideration.

Here are a couple:
" Once the room had been emptied, it had to be thoroughly cleaned, since the walls and the floor were all dirty, and it was impossible to get new people in without their panicking at the sight of the traces of blood and all the rest on the walls and on the ground. We first had to clean the floor, wait for it to dry, and then whitewash the walls. The ventilators continued to clean the air(...)"


"
It took at least an hour or an hour and a half for them to get undressed. Sometimes as much as two hours. It depended on the people, the more elderly people, the longer it took"


But most important is this one:

" On average, the whole process in which a single convoy was eliminated was supposed to last 72 hours. Killing them was quick; the thing that tool such a long time was burning the corpses. That was actually the Germans' main problem."


Actually this last quote was basically just dismissed in the other thread, and why not.
Nevertheless, even taken into consideration that the interviewed was made in Italian, then translated in French for the original book, and then in English, what stroke me at the time was that there was such a thing as a "time allowed" - a form of planing not based on hazard.
Even if the time frame is exaggerated, the idea that there was a planing, an organized task given to each facilities, in this case krema 3, seemed to me a good conceptual alternative which would have resulted in an optimized way of dealing this the murderous operations, that is the Nazis knowing exactly what facilities was available or soon to be at any new arrival, and therefore could handle the operations with much more certainties.
For example, if a convoy was led to Krema 2 on monday, then the Nazis would know that it would not be available until at best Wednesday morning, so that a new convoy would be directly led to let' say krema 4 and 5 which were more flexible. On tuedsay, Krema 3 and the bunker would be available that day, and on Wednesday Krema 2, 4 and 5 would be ready again. This kind of organization.

I admit that Venezia 72 hours on average is brutal, and i did not bother checking the feasibility. But i am not that sure that it could not have worked since the "vacancy of new transports" in July and August.

Nevertheless there are still a plenty of internet sites who still declared that 430.000 Hungarians Jews were killed within 9 weeks (not the most scientific ones i admit of course) . but this would be those where people like Blake will go fishing for elements for their argumentation.

And i completely agree with you, testimonies do not answer to every interrogations we have now, especially if those new questions are raised 60 years after the facts, especially if back then nobody was interested in the issue, the potential witnesses were just not asked the question i suppose.

The whole point being that it was not needed to kill 9600 Jews a day in order to annihilate the Hungarian Jews, so there is also no need to propose supernatural calculation in order to proof it was possible.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat Jul 14, 2018 12:10 am

>> Hey, didn't you confirm that Grieff was basically unable to answer this very single question?

No, if I am following you, I said that Greif made an odd statement and then gave an even stranger answer - which didn't make sense to me and which I couldn't explain - and that I wished I'd been in a more conducive venue where I could have followed up with Greif.

>> I feel obliged to quote a bit of Venezia here, although Statmec would consider it a waste of time.

Of course not. That I would not rely on one witness doesn't mean I want to ignore what any single witness reported. Hans has of course quoted from Shlomo Venezia, as would I if I were to make a systematic study of this. More to the point, Hans also posted in a blog piece where Lewenthal recorded, by date, transports arriving to and being dealt with often within 24 hours at Kremas II and III (during October 1944, with three entries for V).

(It was in May of last year we discussed Venezia.)
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Hans
Poster
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Hans » Sat Jul 14, 2018 7:31 am

Balsamo wrote:As you might have understood, my complain is that, despite the opportunities, we still are left unknown about what should have been basic questions: ( of course, if Hans or anyone has the answers it would be good news)
Here few examples:
How was the ususal 85 members of the SK spread through the various steps? That is : how many outside, how many in the undressing room, how many were in charges of the ovens, how many were dentists at the same time, how many draggers?


Clearing the undressing room: 15
Emptying the gas chamber: 15
Loading the elevator: 2
Unloading the elevator: 2
Hair cutting: 4
Extracting gold teeth: 2
Dragging corpses to ovens: 2
Coke generators: 2
Loading ovens: 10
Kapo's assistant: 4

(source: Henryk Tauber, Soviet interrogation of 28 February 1945, GARF, 7021-108-13, p.9)

IMO it is the exact other way around than you put it, Balsamo. The rate limiting and critical steps were the cremation and the elevator transport (in this order), not the corpse transport in the basement or the treatment and transport in the furnace room which was adjusted by manpower to fit (with buffer where necessary) those technical bottlenecks. If one corpse carrier failed of weakness, the SK prisoners loading the elevator first consumed the buffer, then the other corpse carriers had to compensate for him until he was replaced. But if an oven failed, there was no way to replace this and the whole process was slowed down.

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Sat Jul 14, 2018 8:03 am

Die provisorische Anlage I wurde bei Beginn des Bauabschnittes III des Lagers Birkenau abgerissen. Die Anlage II - später als Freianlage oder Bunker V bezeichnet - war bis zuletzt im Betrieb und zwar als Ausweichmöglichkeit bei Pannen in den Krematorien I [II] bis IV [V]. Bei Aktionen mit dichterer Zugfolge wurden die Vergasungen bei Tage in V durchgeführt, die nachts ankommenden Transporte in I bis IV. Die Verbrennungsmöglichkeit bei V war praktisch fast unbegrenzt, als noch Tag und Nacht verbrannt werden konnte. Wegen der feindliche[n] Lufttätigkeit ab 1944 durfte nachts nicht mehr gebrannt werden. Die erreichte höchste Zahl innerhalb 24 Stunden an Vergasungen und Verbrennungen war etwas über 9000 an allen Stellen außer III [IV] im Sommer 1944 während der Ungarn-Aktion, als durch Zugverspätungen anstatt der vorgesehenen 3 Züge 5 Züge innerhalb 24 Stunden einliefen und diese außerdem noch stärker belegt waren.

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7936
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby landrew » Sat Jul 14, 2018 9:24 pm

The only thing that stops me from engaging in the holocaust denial debate, is that you can't refute anything with them, either with data or ridicule.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:17 pm

As to Smolen's testimony quoted above: On p 220 of vol III of the Auschwitz Museum's camp history, Piper discusses unregistered Hungarian Jews held in BIIc (women), BIII (women with children), and BIIe ("Gypsy" camp - men) and says that selections in these sectors were carried out from time to time: "Some were sent to the gas chambers" whilst others were put to forced labor. These Hungarian Jews were separate to the "Durchgangs-Juden" held at Birkenau before being dispatched to other camps.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:39 am

Murder of the transit Jews is confirmed by the internal SB reports, which list SB (special treatment) of the transit Jews as a separate category.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jul 16, 2018 5:37 pm

Let's just recap and conclude: blake accused the vast majority of us of strange misconceptions and of thinking about these things in physically impossible ways. So grave, blake said, was our misunderstanding that he was compelled to ask, "Are you all insane or something?" - and to reply to his own question, "Don't answer; I actually couldn't care less." With that, blake, perhaps not wanting to deal with the answers that would be forthcoming, stopped posting in this thread.

Balsamo offered a model, which I confess not quite getting, for time frames in the cremation process to argue that transports must have been turned around on the order of every 72 hours, not quicker. He's not replied to Hans' or Sergey's latest posts showing that some of the gaps he alleges in the history actually do not exist, nor to Hans' blog posting of Lewenthal's contemporaneous list showing many transports in II-III turned around more quickly than Balsamo says they could have been. I would just comment that 30-36 hours is shorter than 72 hours.

Most of us, with the exception of weaseling blake, are of the view that not only must excess numbers of Hungarian Jews arriving at peaks have been held for later annihilation but also there is evidence long extant to that effect.

Perhaps we've reached the end of this discussion?
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2157
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balmoral95 » Tue Jul 17, 2018 4:18 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Let's just recap and conclude: blake accused the vast majority of us of strange misconceptions and of thinking about these things in physically impossible ways. So grave, blake said, was our misunderstanding that he was compelled to ask, "Are you all insane or something?" - and to reply to his own question, "Don't answer; I actually couldn't care less." With that, blake, perhaps not wanting to deal with the answers that would be forthcoming, stopped posting in this thread.

Balsamo offered a model, which I confess not quite getting, for time frames in the cremation process to argue that transports must have been turned around on the order of every 72 hours, not quicker. He's not replied to Hans' or Sergey's latest posts showing that some of the gaps he alleges in the history actually do not exist, nor to Hans' blog posting of Lewenthal's contemporaneous list showing many transports in II-III turned around more quickly than Balsamo says they could have been. I would just comment that 30-36 hours is shorter than 72 hours.

Most of us, with the exception of weaseling blake, are of the view that not only must excess numbers of Hungarian Jews arriving at peaks have been held for later annihilation but also there is evidence long extant to that effect.

Perhaps we've reached the end of this discussion?


Sad, really. He started seemingly to want to have a discussion for which he was totally unprepared to participate in, threw a seven when challenged, and pissed away into the night. Having read some of his subsequent postings at RODOH regarding American history, I can only conclude if you put his brain in a bird, it would try to fly backwards.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22165
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jul 17, 2018 10:12 am

ROFL
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Sergey_Romanov » Tue Jul 17, 2018 6:43 pm

I think anyone who knows my current ways with the deniers (see twitter) can appreciate that my remark about well though-through comments was a huge compliment and basically an outstretched hand. In the very next few replies Blake basically shat into that hand. For no reason at all. I won't repeat that mistake with this individual.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1791
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Technical gibberish spewed by deniers

Postby Balsamo » Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:05 pm

Hans:

Clearing the undressing room: 15
Emptying the gas chamber: 15
Loading the elevator: 2
Unloading the elevator: 2
Hair cutting: 4
Extracting gold teeth: 2
Dragging corpses to ovens: 2
Coke generators: 2
Loading ovens: 10
Kapo's assistant: 4


Thanks you.

Actually, i have asked this question to Statmec because this is the kind of information you cannot get from reading Grieff, or with a lot of difficulty. I understand it was not his purpose, but then.
I am glad as those numbers, those important to me, are confirmed by Venezia who actually was given the opportunity to explain the whole chain in one go without being interrupted by silly questions.
So Venezia confirms that the organization of krema III was identical to krema II (Brikenau I and II). 4 hair cutters (actually, it seems that they were working in teams of two, as Venezia writes that the scissors were huge and had to be used with two hands, so could be interpreted as two teams (one holding the heads, the other cutting the hair), 2 dentists (although it seems that in Krema II where Tauber worked the dentists were working in the ovens room, after the bodies have been unloaded, while Venezia (krema III) (as on Olere drawing) locates them before the elevator downstair)

Hans
The rate limiting and critical steps were the cremation and the elevator transport (in this order), not the corpse transport in the basement or the treatment and transport in the furnace room which was adjusted by manpower to fit (with buffer where necessary) those technical bottlenecks.


The underscored part is what i still disagree with.

I maintain that the elevator is the limit as Venezia writes that it was loaded with 7 to 10 bodies, while Chazan (who actually was next to him and in charge of loading the elevator) said 6 to 8. So if we take an average of 7.5, on can easily calculate the number of trip needed and the time allowed for each load, and of course the median time per body. This time can also attribute to the dentists who would have had to work as fast.
The elevator is a purely technical step that manpower cannot help, while the oven had the capacity and the staff to deal with what was brought through the elevator.

So when Tauber says that they were able to burn 2500 bodies each 24 hours...Note that it would mean 26 or 27 hours after the entry of the victims in the undressing room - for example, as in my model, people starting to be introduced at Monday 8h, the first body would be introduced in the ovens at around 10h at best...24 hours from that point would lead us to Tuesday 10h at best... anyway, it would have required that 113 bodies to be brought every hour to the ovens room, and that would have required 15 elevator trip "ida y vuelta" (forgot the english word!) and in fine a rhythm of 1 body loaded every 15 seconds.

Now Tauber said that there were 15 in charge of cleaning the room, that does not change the fact that at the beginning it does not help much, given that the bodies had to be extirpated through the entrance door. But i agree that there should not have been a problem to provide 60 or more people to the next step... (although Pressac sees a potential bottleneck in that step) It is just that it was not only to drag a body from a point A to a point B over a couple of meters as you supposed in one of your HC article, it was also to extirpate, to separate the bodies in order for the hair cutters and the dentists to deal with them...given the descriptions given by those in charge, it was far from easy. And it is difficult to chronometer how long each body would take.

Sergey:
Die provisorische Anlage I wurde bei Beginn des Bauabschnittes III des Lagers Birkenau abgerissen. Die Anlage II - später als Freianlage oder Bunker V bezeichnet - war bis zuletzt im Betrieb und zwar als Ausweichmöglichkeit bei Pannen in den Krematorien I [II] bis IV [V]. Bei Aktionen mit dichterer Zugfolge wurden die Vergasungen bei Tage in V durchgeführt, die nachts ankommenden Transporte in I bis IV. Die Verbrennungsmöglichkeit bei V war praktisch fast unbegrenzt, als noch Tag und Nacht verbrannt werden konnte. Wegen der feindliche[n] Lufttätigkeit ab 1944 durfte nachts nicht mehr gebrannt werden. Die erreichte höchste Zahl innerhalb 24 Stunden an Vergasungen und Verbrennungen war etwas über 9000 an allen Stellen außer III [IV] im Sommer 1944 während der Ungarn-Aktion, als durch Zugverspätungen anstatt der vorgesehenen 3 Züge 5 Züge innerhalb 24 Stunden einliefen und diese außerdem noch stärker belegt waren.


You are lucky that i do read German... :lol:

Sorry, but who is saying that? Isn’t that Hoess? However this is precisely what I consider not being possible, but theoretically.
Even if we take his gassing capacity for Bunker II, that is 1200 (?)…given the size of the transports, it would have required 2 gassings (what if a transport had over 2400?), one each 12 hours…it actually multiply the problem per two, given that the gas chamber had 105 m2…1200 victims would require a density of 11.5 people per square meter. So within 12 hours, 1200 people had to undress, to be forced into the small gas chambers – it should have taken some time and a great use of violence, right? – then of course the gas introduced and the usual time spent before opening the doors, before the first bodies could be extirpated and dragged on a muddy soil to the pitch, placed into it, all this in at most 10 hours.

To pretend that Bunker 2 could handle all the day transports, while all the other 4 were dedicated to night transports, seems quite strange. Now my knowledge is quite limited, any information on how many transports were arriving during the day and how many during the night? When on take the example given in this text, that is 5 transport, it would suggest that only one transport would have arrived during day time and the four other during night time?

And again, this testimony whoever made it (although I assumed it’s Hoess) again insists only on the "unlimited" capacity of cremation, while ignoring the killing capacity of the small gas chamber there. I have no doubt that the pitch could handle the cremation, though.

Another question: when was the interdiction of night cremation issued?

Again, this 9000 capacity can simply not be demonstrated, as it would have required the full employment of all the killing installations on a daily basis within each of the 24 hours periods...and worse, the text seems to suggest that krema 4 was not used...Not serious, really.

Of course, one can chose to follow the first post war testimonies. But then if one trusts Pressac, one is forced to change the perspective – that is from “starting with the numbers and explained them through the means” or like Pressac “starting from the means to establish potential numbers”.
He is what he wrote:
“Somewhere between 15th and 20th June 1944, during the extermination of the Hungarian Jews, the three working Krematorien and Bunker 2/V established the unhappy record of between 4,000 and 5.000 people eliminated in a single day (the “emotional” figure put forward after the Liberation for this day was 25,000).”
(p. 253)

Landrew:
The only thing that stops me from engaging in the holocaust denial debate, is that you can't refute anything with them, either with data or ridicule.


You are right, and that is why i am having this discussion here. ;)

Statmec:
Balsamo offered a model, which I confess not quite getting, for time frames in the cremation process to argue that transports must have been turned around on the order of every 72 hours, not quicker.


Actually it is other way round.
I am trying to adapt to a new testimony - which has been proven quite reliable (as shown above his figure are confirmed by Tauber) - that is Venezia's.


For example, I came to ask me one simple question. Where were the SS during the dirty Job? Some SK declared that they were continuously threatened to be beaten if the work was too slow, while other said the contrary. But then who was in charge? Tauber (Hans’ number) speak of 1 kapo and 4 assistants, all Jews. Were those the ones who would have kept such a pace of 1 bodies per 18 seconds during the whole shift? Or were there a SS supervision? If so, by how many SS men?
Once again, it is not easy information to get from reading Grieff. I think Sackar mentioned 10 SS, but did those 10 SS stayed during the whole process? Were they exposed to the same fetid atmosphere than the SK while the gas chamber was being emptied? Quite hard to believe, actually.

Well this question was asked to Venezia, and here is his description:
“The Kapos in the crematoria were not like the other kapos in the camp. There were all Jews and they did not beat the prisoners, they didn’t use any sadistic violence on us(…)”

“There weren’t many SS in the Crematoria. Generally speaking there were two SS men to each crematoria: one on daytime duty, the other at night. There were more of them when a convoy arrived, but there were only two permanent guards. Most of the time, they stayed put in their little corner and didn’t come out until the convoys arrived and from time to time to keep an eye on us. But in principle they didn’t need to come and check very often, since that was the kapos job. If everything wasn’t finished in three days, it meant that we hadn’t worked hard enough. But the Kapos generally stepped in first.”

“The SK was a particular case. Overall, the SS who oversaw us left us alone. They didn’t fly off the handle with us, since our work was too important in their eyes and they didn’t try to undermine us. Apart from MOLL (…)


So first, we can read that even in a different context, Venezia stick to this 3 days’ timeframe, the same 72 hours. But even if one ignores it, still the situation is that basically the Sonderkommando was on its own to do the job, with a small crew of 5 SK people (1 Kapo and 4 assistants) checking the process. Are we supposed to believe that the 5 zealous prominent SK would stand behind the 50 SK men’s backs whipping them in order to maintain the 18 second per body pace? (note that if we take Tauber’s numbers this time is reduced to 15 seconds, and if we follow Hoess’, to 12.5 seconds)…

My point being that all those figures over 5000 within 24h are just impossible to demonstrate practically.

What you call” my hard to get model” is the result of taking those elements, along with many others, into consideration in order to produce an irrefutable modus operandi. It still reaches a killing capacity of 22-23.000 victims per week, but has the advantage to be immune to 99% of the last “Revisionsit’s pseudo-arguments”…
It is also important to keep in mind that Venezia insists on the time that was allowed to them to finish the job, it should therefore NOT be concluded that Krema III always needed 3 days, but that 3 days were actually the average time given to it, that is – in my interpretation – the time lapse taken into consideration by the killing organization, which of course could have profited from any “Good surprise”.

And although, his 3 days shift might seems impressive and disturbing…actually, it does not affect – at first glance – the killing capacity required to handle the Hungarian Aktion…It only, just like mine, implies that some of the executions were delayed or postponed to periods of low transports arrivals. It would still stand at the lowest killing capacity of 19.000 or so… or 988.000 a year. And that is the lowest figure I can propose from Venezia, mine standing at 23.000...


Return to “Holocaust, Genocide, and Mass Violence”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest