Nessie wrote: ↑Mon Jun 16, 2025 4:19 pm
The argument is why is it missing from Krema I and the small part of Krema II that can be seen. When Markiewicz said "It should be added that this blue coloration does not appear on the walls of all the delousing rooms.", he will be referring to delousing at A-B. If you look back at the photo of the delousing chamber at Majdanek, one wall is discoloured up to about half way, another less than that and one side of the end wall is more discoloured than the other. The ceiling has little to no discolouration. If the part of the Leichenkeller at Krema II that could be accessed, was a part that had little to no discolouration, that does not mean none of it has. It may be that other parts were obviously discoloured, as found at Majdanek.
It could be that both Markiewicz and Rudolf are wrong and it did form inside the gas chambers, but not consistently across all the walls, giving the false impression it left little residue.
I am pointing this out, because, as I have argued from the beginning, we just do not know. All we know is that people were gassed inside the Kremas and farm houses and why the two buildings that can be accessed, albeit one only partially, do not show Prussian blue staining like delousing chambers do, is unknown. Various chemists have postulated their reasons as to why that is. It is possible they are all wrong.
You are off your meds if you think this example supports your position.
"If you look back at the photo of the delousing chamber at Majdanek, one wall is discoloured up to about half way, another less than that and one side of the end wall is more discoloured than the other."
The room you have shown is "Gas Chamber III from Barrack 41" in Majdanek. The existence of this room in fact discredits your argument, not supports it. This room was fitted to a heating system and so therefore was demonstrably warmer and drier than Krema II in Birkenau. It is also alleged that this room was used for CO gassings and only infrequent Zyklon fumigations.
Chamber No. III, with an area of 36.3m2 and a volume of 79.8m3, was simi-
larly designed for poisoning human beings with carbon mo-
noxide, as indicated by its construction and by the heating system and
gas pipe which comprised its equipment. This chamber could also have
been used to disinfest the clothing of the poisoned victims, but not to disinf-
est the clothing of people washing themselves in the Shower, since it is not
connected to the Shower; it is a detached building and is separated from
the Shower by a barbed wire barrier.
Mattogno, citing Polish-Soviet investigations - HH Vol 5
Futhermore:
Key points here: the heating system in this room, and the seemingly infrequent exposure to Zyklon B (remember, your whole argument about Chamber III is that it used CO gas as it's murder weapon, meaning HCN exposure were infrequent at best).
Given that PB formation is most strongly influenced by moisture & dampness, what this actually demonstrates is that PB formation is observable
even under less-than-ideal circumstances.
Therefore, given Krema II had no heater, was damper, less dry and cooler than Chamber III and allegedly exposed much more frequently than Chamber III, the conclusion here is that, if we observe PB in the more
unlikely place (Chamber III) we should also expect it in the more
likely of places (Krema II)
I know you don't understand any of these arguments but I want to check in on CJ as that is what the entire purpose of this thread is about.
CJ based on everything you have learned about PB formation from myself, this thread, other threads and the literature I have given you, do you understand why Nessie's argument here is an own-goal? Would you like to explain anything further to him?
