were to guess why no t4 personnel were chosen to perform gassing that had experience with gassing, it would be because THERE WERE NONE.
This ironically was part of the problem the Kula Columns were fabricated to alleviate. The practical condition of "uniformity" of gaseous emissions within the chamber must be present to outpace a US execution. Hence 4 columns all emitted simultaneously.
Having now read the paper in full, it's worth commenting on.Wetzelrad wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 7:19 pm It is available online in full here:
https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-his ... asch-1941/
Their conclusion (now obvious) is that HCN has 100% efficacy at temperatures as low as 10 deg C, given a concentration of 10 g per m^3 and a 24 hour gassing period. However, they do also comment on outgassing.Normally it comes to pass that the major part of fumigation activities declines in the fall and winter months, which, given the special conditions in Russia, correctly raises the question as to whether, in respect of the expected low temperatures, the fumigation procedures are too much to expect. It is known that the efficacy of all gassing procedures on pests and their brood is to the greatest degree dependent upon the temperature, so that for example for T-gas procedures, the lower limit of +15°C and for tritox procedures, +6 to 8°C cannot be exceeded. At lower temperatures, the efficacy of these gases is doubtful.
This is surprising because it differs from Irmscher. Peters and Rasch did their tests in a barracks at measured temperatures of -4 to -8 deg C, comparable to Irmscher's -5 deg C curve posted above. The former found complete evaporation in one to two hours whereas the latter did at between three and four hours. Why the difference? It could be a difference in method, like how much Zyklon they used, how big the room is, or something else about its design. It could also be that Peters and Rasch were just wrong, because their data records the concentration continuing to climb until as late as the sixth hour. Perhaps whatever procedure they used to measure the pellets, like if they physically picked them up and carried them outside, caused them to finish outgassing prematurely.1. In all cases, the essential part of the disengagement of the gas is complete after one or at most two hours. (A control of the residues at the applicable times confirmed their complete degassing.) The evaporation of the prussic acid was therefore not significantly delayed by the low temperature.
Whatever limiting factor the temperature is having, the humidity in the room will be more important. While everyone is alive (and breathing) the offgassing will be impaired due to excess moisture. When they all die and stop breathing, this will allow for the offgassing to begin increasing again.Wetzelrad wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 9:41 pmHaving now read the paper in full, it's worth commenting on.Wetzelrad wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 7:19 pm It is available online in full here:
https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-his ... asch-1941/
The authors Peters and Rasch confirm that with the beginning of the war, the usage of Zyklon to combat pests came into use "[t]o a previously unimaginable extent", and that they anticipated still greater usage in the future.
The purpose of their paper was to determine the efficacy of and time required for gassing, not to measure outgassing time specifically. As they write:
Their conclusion (now obvious) is that HCN has 100% efficacy at temperatures as low as 10 deg C, given a concentration of 10 g per m^3 and a 24 hour gassing period. However, they do also comment on outgassing.Normally it comes to pass that the major part of fumigation activities declines in the fall and winter months, which, given the special conditions in Russia, correctly raises the question as to whether, in respect of the expected low temperatures, the fumigation procedures are too much to expect. It is known that the efficacy of all gassing procedures on pests and their brood is to the greatest degree dependent upon the temperature, so that for example for T-gas procedures, the lower limit of +15°C and for tritox procedures, +6 to 8°C cannot be exceeded. At lower temperatures, the efficacy of these gases is doubtful.
This is surprising because it differs from Irmscher. Peters and Rasch did their tests in a barracks at measured temperatures of -4 to -8 deg C, comparable to Irmscher's -5 deg C curve posted above. The former found complete evaporation in one to two hours whereas the latter did at between three and four hours. Why the difference? It could be a difference in method, like how much Zyklon they used, how big the room is, or something else about its design. It could also be that Peters and Rasch were just wrong, because their data records the concentration continuing to climb until as late as the sixth hour. Perhaps whatever procedure they used to measure the pellets, like if they physically picked them up and carried them outside, caused them to finish outgassing prematurely.1. In all cases, the essential part of the disengagement of the gas is complete after one or at most two hours. (A control of the residues at the applicable times confirmed their complete degassing.) The evaporation of the prussic acid was therefore not significantly delayed by the low temperature.
In any case it's an interesting data point that I had not seen before.
!!!ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 9:46 pm higher humidity from human presence, accelerating gas dispersion
The effect of humidity on offgassing can reduce HCN release rates and increase execution times, but the execution time was so quick that doubling it wouldn't have made a huge difference.HansHill wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 9:49 pm
Whatever limiting factor the temperature is having, the humidity in the room will be more important. While everyone is alive (and breathing) the offgassing will be impaired due to excess moisture. When they all die and stop breathing, this will allow for the offgassing to begin increasing again.
This is the exact opposite set of conditions that the exterminationist require to 1) minimize execution times and 2) minimize exposure times in a no-retrieval scenario.
You took the quote out of context by cutting off the first part of the sentence. The combination of higher temperature and humidity would have offsetting effects.HansHill wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 9:51 pm!!!ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 9:46 pm higher humidity from human presence, accelerating gas dispersion
This has me wondering, have there been any studies on the number of SS staff available for regular/repeated Zyklon-B introduction? 'Witnesses' seem to typically claim it was an actual SS man doing the pouring, so to your point above, with four men on staff at each 'gassing' for this purpose, were they pulled from other duties each time (every few hours?) to step onto the roof and crack open a can of Zyklon? Or were there dedicated staff for this specific purpose? If so, who?HansHill wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 9:41 pm
This of course invites its own issues as you highlighted - another being that all 4 columns must be engaged at the same time, so 4 SS men emptying 1 x full tin of Zyklon each, otherwise you have the rather embarrassing scene of an SS man running from hatch to hatch with the offgassing Zyklon blowing in his face.
It's not "suggesting a gradual release", it's proving it. No doubt Irmscher performed or relied upon a controlled experiment. Unlike you, he would not have just made up numbers, because he took this subject seriously.ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 9:46 pm The chart from Irmscher shows hydrogen cyanide evaporation from an Ercco carrier at temperatures from -18°C to 15°C under low humidity, suggesting a gradual release over hours.
I agree that the gas chamber hypothesis relies on a rapid release, but you can't start from the conclusion and work backwards. Frankly, this paragraph disproves the Holocaust, unless you think witness testimony trumps empirical data.ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 9:46 pm In contrast, gas chambers relied on Zyklon B pellets releasing HCN rapidly in cramped, unventilated spaces, likely warmer (ambient to elevated due to body heat) and with higher humidity from human presence, accelerating gas dispersion. Irmscher's study, designed for stable material testing, doesn't account for the chaotic, dense environment of a gas chamber, where HCN likely acted faster—killing within 20-30 minutes—than the chart's slow evaporation rates suggest.
What nonsense. It's true that there were different carrier materials for Zyklon B, but erco, far from being experimental, was the most common commercial formulation in the 30s and 40s. See links below, or just do a basic Google search before posting:ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 9:46 pm There is no definitive historical evidence that the Nazis used an Ercco carrier (gypsum with some starch) specifically for Zyklon B in gas chambers. Zyklon B, as employed at Auschwitz-Birkenau and other camps, was typically delivered as pellets or granules impregnated with hydrogen cyanide, using a diatomaceous earth or wood fiber-based carrier, produced by companies like Degesch. The Ercco carrier referenced in Irmscher's 1942 study appears to be a specific experimental material, likely not standard in operational gas chambers. Documentation, including survivor testimonies and Nazi records, focuses on the commercial Zyklon B formulation, not a gypsum-based carrier like Ercco.
Once again your AI invents completely new arguments that no Holocaust defender has tried before. I decided to hand this over to Grok which argues that actually the opposite is true. This is assuming the hypothetical that there even was a difference between Irmscher's Zyklon and Auschwitz's.ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Sun Aug 03, 2025 9:46 pm Gypsum's porous, moisture-absorbing nature might slow hydrogen cyanide release compared to the more inert, faster-dissipating diatomaceous earth, especially under the humid, warm conditions of gas chambers. Pellets are designed for rapid hydrogen cyanide release due to their porous, inert nature, enabling quick evaporation in 20-30 minutes under gas chamber conditions. Gypsum, being more moisture-absorbent and less porous, could retain HCN longer, leading to a slower release.
Porosity: Diatomaceous Earth (DE): 80-90%; Gypsum: 30-50%.
Moisture Absorption: DE: 100-150% by weight; Gypsum: 0.5-1% by weight.
Inertness: Both highly inert; DE slightly more resistant (solubility <0.1 g/L vs. Gypsum ~2 g/L).