ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 4:37 pm
I looked at this section. If I am understanding correctly, Dr. Bailer argued that the Prussian Blue in the delousing chambers was likely painted on the walls. Rudolf makes arguments against that. Richard Green argued that while it might have been paint, he still doesn't agree that Prussian Blue would have formed.
https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-his ... affweb.pdf
Green adds that he doesn't agree that Bailer was definitely right, but he thinks Bailer's hypothesis is "plausible". He still believes that it is "highly improbable that Prussian blue would have formed with reasonable efficiency in the gas chambers."
I know Confused Jew has been banned, and so this won't get a reply but i feel it's worth a response anyway. What CJ has said above is narratively correct, and it's hilarious that the meaning here is lost on him, or perhaps not lost but he is obfuscating it.
Markiewicz omitted the Prussian Blue from the sampling because he didn't know what it was. Dr Bailer being a little more clever realised the bind, and opined it was paint and therefore should be omitted. On a strictly scientific level, both of these eventualites (were we to believe these men) are not necessarily problematic.
On Markiewicz's part (not being a chemist) it's perfectly acceptable to not understand a chemical process, but when performing an exercise to quantify and analyze X-Chemical, and use ignorance to ignore X-Chemical rather than study it in good faith, then he was clearly operating from either incompetence or malice. To quote Rudolf:
"Has anyone ever heard that the non-understanding of a phenomenon is a reason
for not examining it?" On Dr Bailer's part, were the blue splotches indeed paint, then this
could also be a viable reason to gather samples
around the paint, or chisel it away etc. However it is
very clearly not paint! To the point that even a layman can tell this is not paint.
So what we have are two very very different explanations given as to why the PB was omitted from the samples were omitted: 1) I don't know what it is and 2) its paint.
This leaves Dr Green fumbling because he cannot underscore either of them. He invents
his own reason why it was omitted.... "
that it was unlikely to form". This is not the reason why PB was omitted as per Markiewicz, because he admits he doesn't know how PB would form, so his opinion (had he held it) that it was unlikely, is moot.
So we have three reasons why it was omitted:
1) I don't know what it is,
2) It's paint, and
3) It was not likely to form.
Confused Jew, and modern Holocaust enjoyers have tethered their boat to reason 3 above, given that Dr Green had more time to work and tidy up the mess that Markiewicz had created. This is despite, that was never the reason why the authors of the paper chose to omit them.
Green argues that there were 3 key differences in the conditions of the delousing and homicidal chambers:
1) The gas chambers were washed with water after gassing.
2) The residence times of HCN in the delousing chambers were much longer than in the gas chambers.
3) van Pelt estimates that 350,000 people were killed in morgue 1 which would have been about 175 gassings for 117 hours of exposure, not all at the maximum exposure because of the decrease owing to ventilation. In contrast, delousing chambers BW5a had a minimum of 450 gassings of approximately 16 hours each for a total of 7200 hours most of which was at the full concentration.
This is why each of those reduced the likelihood that Prussian Blue would form.
1. Hosing would remove soluble cyanide species and precursors from wall surfaces reducing the likelihood of later accumulation of insoluble iron–ferrocyanides (Prussian blue) on those surfaces.
2. Brief homicidal gassings (on the order of minutes per operation instead of hours or days) give far less time for ferrocyanide complexes to nucleate and “migrate” into plaster. So heavy blue staining in delousing rooms but not in homicidal chambers is expected.
3. Cumulative dose-time strongly favors visible iron-blue in delousing rooms.
1) Already asked and answered. The earliest available time the walls could be washed after a gassing is after all the bodies were loaded out. If 1 body were removed every 30 seconds on average, this would take 16 hours for a full unload and the walls could be washed. Beside, as has been previously demonstrated, HCN has an extremely high diffusion capacity, allowing deep penetration into masonry extremely quickly. Washing the surface of a wall hours after HCN had penetrated deeply into the capillaries would do nothing except allow for further absorption on subsequent gassings, as the surface is now more damp than before. Finally samples taken from the ceiling which almost certainly would not have been hosed down, are exactly the same as the walls.
2) Already asked and answered. Confused Jew admitted in a previous thread (Forensic Chemistry) that he doesn't see it as a big deal if the pellets fell through the bottom of the introduction columns and lay offgassing indefinitely. This is how three Sonderkommandos described the process. This means, that during the entire load out (or at least until 3/4 the way through until 3/4s of the bodies are removed**) the pellets will be offgassing this entire time. This is 12 hours. A far cry from the "20 minutes" cited by CJ, and alot more reasonable.
This flawed line of reasoning also equates "execution time" with "reaction time". As i have demonstrated above, HCN is extremely diffusive - so even under perfect conditions, were the chamber to be evacuated immediately of all bodies and gas at 20:01 after the introduction of the pellets, this still means the HCN had 20 minutes to diffuse deeply to the interior of the masonry where it can continue reacting irrespective of whatever is happening or not happening in the room.
3) Agreed, and given everything detailed above, had these buildings under gone hundreds of gassings in this manner as described, we would expect to see staining on the order of the delousing facilities.
- Hans Hill,
Layman and lawn enthusiast
**Edit
To clarify why i use 3/4 of the bodies is because there were 4 supposed introduction columns, meaning you have to clear up to 3/4 of the bodies to retrieve those pellets from the last of the columns, presumably one of the ones at the back depending on which way they were cleared.
