Markiewicz Report in 1994

[Stubble]

Here are some links from the CODOH Library that other readers may find relevant given the various unsubstantiated and false claims generated by AI and slipped on to the forum by one confused jew.
------------------------------------------------------
Below, do find a piece about the ventilation systems of Kremas II and III at Auschwitz Birkenau.

https://codoh.com/library/document/the- ... i-and-iii/

This work is based off of direct primary sources and at times references Pressac's 'Technique'. All in all this is the most robust write up of the ventilation of the Kremas and their operation as well as the hazards posed by the proposition of mass homicidal gassings in the morgues referred to as LK-1 I've ever seen. The orthodoxy seems very, very cavalier about the proposition of gassing people with hydrogen cyanide gas in an occupied building. Very little, if any attention has been paid to the safety considerations involved and the technical feasibility and limitations proposed by the idea. In my opinion, this article does a good job outlining many of the problems with that proposition.
------------------------------------------------------
Here is Germar's response to Green

https://codoh.com/library/document/dr-r ... -evasions/

Title should be self explanatory. This covers the chemistry side of things and ties directly into the nature of what this thread is supposed to be about. The 1994 Krakow study.
------------------------------------------------------
This is an article by Mattogno about Cremations

https://codoh.com/library/document/the- ... auschwitz/

This article is a summary of the 3 volumes by Mattogno. It is unfortunately very scant of depth. I had hoped it would be more. The titles are there however, and these can be downloaded directly from ARMREG here;

https://armreg.co.uk/product/the-cremat ... 3-volumes/

------------------------------------------------------
An article from Germar discussing the formation of iron blue in bricks

https://codoh.com/library/document/diff ... -hydrogen/
------------------------------------------------------
And of course, the Luftl Report

https://codoh.com/library/document/the-luftl-report/

[ConfusedJew]

Thanks for derailing this thread guys.

[Stubble]

Other than indulging a bit in your bet with Mr Hill, all I'm doing is wrestling with the best way to address you AI generated slop CJ.

There are so many errors and misrepresentations it is absolutely ridiculous.

Then, you just don't engage with correction and you also just restate your errors.

When you get called out too many times you run off and make another redundant threat and spout the same absolutely trash arguments that were previously addressed.

This isn't 'derailment'.

[TlsMS93]

I'm out of the loop, but what happened to Nessie? Dusche?

[Stubble]

I'm out of the loop, but what happened to Nessie? Dusche?

Tisha B'Av I think.

[TlsMS93]

Tisha B'Av I think.

But this is on the weekend now, he hasn't commented for a few days now or am I mistaken?

[Archie]

I'm not sure what your argument is here. How does this relate to the formation of Prussian Blue?

It's an important point in its own right, even apart from the Prussian blue issue. But it is relevant to the PB discussion as well because it means there would have been considerable lag time between the hypothetical gassing and the hypothetical wall washing. The longer this lag, the less compelling this is as an excuse.

First the ventilation. I have linked a prior ventilation thread for you multiple times but you have never acknowledged it. Let me give the highlights.

The ventilation capacity in Kremas II/III is pretty well documented. There are work orders saying what sort of fans were installed in those rooms. LK1 was set up to achieve around 10 air exchanges per hour which was standard for a morgue. The recommendation for fumigation chambers was 72 air exchanges per hour. The ventilation capacity in LK1 (the "gas chamber") was essentially the same as LK2 (the "undressing room") and most of the other rooms like the autopsy room. Already, this is strong prima facie evidence that this room was NOT intended to function as a chamber for Zyklon B. But it gets worse.

1) If the Zyklon B pellets remained in the chamber, obviously this would mean gas would continue releasing for potentially hours. This is why many have begun claiming they must have removed the pellets.

2) A room full of bodies would create air pockets and would obstruct air flow. This would greatly impede the ventilation. Under ideal conditions (perfect air circulation) you could achieve 99.9% fresh air replacement after 7 air exchanges. But if the air is not well-mixed it would be far worse than this.

3) The exhaust was near the floor which is the exact opposite of what you would want for a Zyklon chamber since HCN is lighter than air. The vent would also be obstructed with bodies. Moreover the fresh air intake and the exhaust were very close to each other (see the graphic in the linked thread) which means you would be extracting a disproportionate amount of fresh air instead of the old air.

Bottom line, this is the ventilation we would expect to see in a morgue because THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. Not in a million years would you design a Zyklon B chamber like this. If they had repurposed some other building and had to improvise, maybe would could excuse all of this, but these buildings were constructed in 1943, supposedly for the express purpose of executing Jews. It makes no sense.

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=162

Anyway, the point being is that because of these design flaws, there is no way that room full of dead bodies would be ventilated in 30 minutes. Total fantasy.

On top of everything above, we have the issue of the clearing out the bodies which was the point I originally raised. This would have taken a long time because of the elevator problem and the bottleneck with the cremation capacity. The reason that matters is because they would not have started washing the walls until the room was cleared.

[HansHill]

derailing

You bet against a Holocaust Revisionist board that key details of the story don't matter. In this instance, whether the pellets were inside or outside the room as they offgas. This impacts the Markiewicz study (the topic of this thread) immensely, along with Dr Green's defense of it. Not a derailment.

I begged you to start paying attention and take this seriously.

really tiny discrepancies

He's doubling down. The pellets being inside VS outside the room as they off-gas is not a "really tiny discrepancy".

Jesus Christ.

Please lay out those differences here and I'll tell you what I think of it. It seemed very pedantic at first but I will take a closer look.

Sure.

Model A: The pellets stay inside the column for the duration of the gassing, to be extracted via the same column after the gassing has completed*

Model B: The pellets fall through the column onto the floor and swept up**

This was in direct refutation of:

“Why did both survivors and SS officers describe the same gassing method independently if it never happened?”

* As per Pressac, Jan Van Pelt, Green
** As per Sonderkommandos, example below:

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

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

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

....they did not describe the same gassing method, at all.... For you to rationalise why there are differences after saying there were no differences, is beyond tone deaf, and again supports my suspicions that you are not engaged critically with this.

We can agree to disagree on this.

then you simply are not thinking critically, yet again, and you are sleepwalking into comical contradictions. This one detail is central to your entire position without you even understanding why.

Stubble has already mentioned it, but the example i gave of the two sonderkommandos is not a minor discrepancy. It points directly to a divergence of methodology. Consider the implications this introduces for you, and please think critically (even though i suspect you wont).....

.....This is NOT a minor discrepancy for you, and the fact you think it is, is yet again demonstrable you are not engaged, not thinking critically, and are simply not reading what is presented......

Finally, and not wanting to sound cruel - it seems like your blasé attitude towards data & information gathering, probablilites, forecasting and risk assessment, all explains the phrase in bold below:

I used to work as a stock market investor

Kindly acknowledge the bet you lost, I will DM you my Monero details and we'll have this all wrapped up in no time.

[ConfusedJew]

You didn't understand the bet, that I didn't even make.

I used to work as a stock market operator and left because I got bored and had enough money.

Whether or not the logistics of the Zyklon B practically mattered, my argument was that no reasonable person would care if a witness made a tiny mistake like that in terms of remembering a precise detail. They still wouldn't care. Somebody who endured torture and horrors and had no expertise in chemistry or industrial processes wouldn't be and shouldn't be expected to remember minute details such as how the process worked exactly. They probably would have had no idea unless they were directly involved in the execution. Go back and actually read what was discussed.

Please stop derailing this thread. Your involvement here has become very unserious but fortunately a couple others have stepped in to engage more seriously.

If you seriously think anybody would agree that a discrepancy like that provides "proof" that the entire account is false then you aren't worth engaging with on this issue.

[HansHill]

You didn't understand the bet

Then explain it to us. The context is: You asserted the witnesses describe a uniform gassing operation. This was challenged successfully in a way that is material to the entire operation.

The floor is yours.

[ConfusedJew]

Yes, they did describe a consistent gassing process. Was it identical? No. They do not all have photographic memories and some minor inconsistencies in their accounts are to be expected.

Witnesses in court—especially those recounting traumatic experiences—are not expected to provide perfect or flawless testimony. In fact, the legal system recognizes that trauma can impair memory, affect demeanor, and alter how events are recalled over time.

Psychological research and legal precedent recognize that traumatic memories are often fragmented or recalled non-linearly. Judges may instruct juries that inconsistencies do not necessarily mean a witness is lying, especially in emotionally charged cases.

Juries and judges consider multiple factors when evaluating a witness’s credibility, including:
Consistency over time: Not perfect consistency, but whether core details stay the same.
Corroboration: Whether physical evidence, documents, or other witnesses support the account.
Motive to lie or bias: Whether the witness has a personal interest in the case outcome.
Plausibility and detail: Does the testimony feel authentic and specific, even if not precise?
Demeanor and behavior: Whether the witness appears honest, even if nervous or emotional.

In some cases (especially involving assault or abuse), courts allow expert witnesses (e.g., psychologists) to explain how trauma affects memory and behavior to help juries understand why a witness might delay reporting, seem emotionally flat or erratic, have gaps or contradictions in memory.

Judges often give jury instructions cautioning them not to expect photographic recall and explaining how trauma can affect perception and recall.

You are complaining that a very non-core detail was inconsistent across testimonies. You can't explain why any of these witnesses would have a personal interest in lying. It is obvious why some of the victims might exaggerate, but the Nazis surely would want to lie or minimize the accounts and they still didn't. The core details are remarkably consistent. There's not a single person involved in the Holocaust as a victim or perpetrator that has refuted any core detail.

Seriously this thread is not meant to discuss the credibility and integrity of the witnesses. It's shocking to me that anybody can refute such powerful evidence, it makes me wonder how you would even function day to day. I created this thread specifically to talk about the physical evidence and arguments that was presented in the 1994 Markiewicz report and this has absolutely nothing to do with it. I never even bet you, I would feel bad taking your money.

[HansHill]

Yes, they did describe a consistent gassing process.

Pellets stay inside the room offgassing =/= pellets are ejected from the room to offgas

"muh eyewitnesses have imperfect memory"

People who were there describe the pellets laying between the bodies, to be removed (via sweeping or hosing) from between said bodies. Furthermore, the people who were there describe a process requiring them to sweep or hose the pellets away.

If a moderator thinks any of the above is incidental to the Markiewicz study, or trivial, i will drop the issue.

I would feel bad taking your money.

I don't join niche, information-dense communities and bet against their combined knowledge. So don't worry, you won't be getting any of my money.

[ConfusedJew]

It's an important point in its own right, even apart from the Prussian blue issue. But it is relevant to the PB discussion as well because it means there would have been considerable lag time between the hypothetical gassing and the hypothetical wall washing. The longer this lag, the less compelling this is as an excuse.

I see what you are trying to say. You are arguing that the ventilation would have taken a lot of time to clear cyanide gas which would have increased exposure time on the walls. This is an important factor, still not part of the Markiewicz report but I will entertain it because it is relevant.

First the ventilation. I have linked a prior ventilation thread for you multiple times but you have never acknowledged it. Let me give the highlights.

The ventilation capacity in Kremas II/III is pretty well documented. There are work orders saying what sort of fans were installed in those rooms. LK1 was set up to achieve around 10 air exchanges per hour which was standard for a morgue. The recommendation for fumigation chambers was 72 air exchanges per hour. The ventilation capacity in LK1 (the "gas chamber") was essentially the same as LK2 (the "undressing room") and most of the other rooms like the autopsy room. Already, this is strong prima facie evidence that this room was NOT intended to function as a chamber for Zyklon B. But it gets worse.

1) If the Zyklon B pellets remained in the chamber, obviously this would mean gas would continue releasing for potentially hours. This is why many have begun claiming they must have removed the pellets.

It seems reasonable that it would have taken a much longer time to let the gas disperse on the ground so it seems like they most likely removed the Zyklon B into the open air where it was safer to disperse in order to operate more efficiently. There were dozens of Sonderkommando working in each chamber so it is likely that some may have just assumed that they were responsible for removing the pellets. Logistically it seems impossible to let it happen on the floor but I also see that as a small technical detail that I wouldn't expect many to remember. Each person was just a cog in the machine and didn't know how the whole machine worked.

2) A room full of bodies would create air pockets and would obstruct air flow. This would greatly impede the ventilation. Under ideal conditions (perfect air circulation) you could achieve 99.9% fresh air replacement after 7 air exchanges. But if the air is not well-mixed it would be far worse than this.

3) The exhaust was near the floor which is the exact opposite of what you would want for a Zyklon chamber since HCN is lighter than air. The vent would also be obstructed with bodies. Moreover the fresh air intake and the exhaust were very close to each other (see the graphic in the linked thread) which means you would be extracting a disproportionate amount of fresh air instead of the old air.

I don't know about this, I will have to come back to it.

Bottom line, this is the ventilation we would expect to see in a morgue because THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. Not in a million years would you design a Zyklon B chamber like this. If they had repurposed some other building and had to improvise, maybe would could excuse all of this, but these buildings were constructed in 1943, supposedly for the express purpose of executing Jews. It makes no sense.

You would expect a morgue to have ventilation installed but not one with gas tight doors, peepholes, and exterior locking bars. You wouldn't expect introduction ports and columns for gas pellets or reinforced ceiling vents designed to distribute or extract toxic gases. And I think you wouldn't expect the same type of ventilators that were present. But I have to do some deeper work on this and come back to you because I am just hearing about the ventilation systems now.

Anyway, the point being is that because of these design flaws, there is no way that room full of dead bodies would be ventilated in 30 minutes. Total fantasy.

On top of everything above, we have the issue of the clearing out the bodies which was the point I originally raised. This would have taken a long time because of the elevator problem and the bottleneck with the cremation capacity. The reason that matters is because they would not have started washing the walls until the room was cleared.

It doesn't seem to me at this point like wall washing would fully explain the absence of Prussian Blue as I mentioned. I'm still working through the industrial output issue. These things require analysis from a bunch of different angles which takes time.

[ConfusedJew]

I don't join niche, information-dense communities and bet against their combined knowledge. So don't worry, you won't be getting any of my money.

My bet was not on your knowledge but whether people outside your forum would care and would believe that discrepancy materially altered the credibility of the witnesses. They most certainly would not. Please just drop this, it is a total derailment of this thread. You are welcome to make a new thread about what would be expected or not expected of witnesses who endured an atrocity like the Holocaust but this is not the thread for that discussion.

[HansHill]

I don't join niche, information-dense communities and bet against their combined knowledge. So don't worry, you won't be getting any of my money.

My bet was...

I thought you didn't make a bet?

that I didn't even make.

Please just drop this, it is a total derailment of this thread

Like I said, I'll defer to the mods. If they feel exposure time, removal of the pellets, the handling of the offgassing pellets and the treatment of conflicting models is irrelevant to our evaluation of the Markiewicz study, along with Confused Jew's refusal to confront the contradiction, I will be more than happy for the mods to intervene.