The Mystery of Krema I Roof vents (Updated)

[Fred Ziffel]

No one knows if there were even any holes,
sorry about the repeat

[Booze]

These are novice questions that might not belong in this thread...

When was this building originally built?
What was the interior layout of the walls?
Was there any plumbing at all in the original building?
What was the original building for?
How do we know that the answer to those questions is true, are there blueprints and/or photos?

Also:
Is it true that the oven flues run underground to the chimney stack?

[Eye of Zyclone]

The location of Z1 makes no sense in a gas-chamber perspective.

[Booze]

floor drain final2.png

Hopefully someone can help me out here. The story as I recall is that this was simply a storage building before the Germans arrived.

The floor slab doesn't show evidence of the building being retrofitted for plumbing unless someone is going to claim that the entire floor slab was removed then re-poured.

Plumbing fixtures don't make sense for a storage building.
So then, what was this building originally used for?
And knowing that this might sound stupid, what is the evidence for this building existing before the war?

[Booze]

Forgot to address the rebar issue. And this is a feature at the Birkenau site also.

The presence of rebar alone demonstrates that they were not zyklon insertion holes and were cut away after the war in a sloppy attempt at post-war fabrication of evidence. In the case of Birkenau this is even more strongly demonstrated as the rebar is bent back seemingly by hand, and would be a physical impediment to the secure fastening of the non-existent Kula columns.

I always looked at the rebar issue as proof positive that the story is fabricated until I saw a video of a tour guide saying that the building predates the war and the Germans converted it into a gas chamber. Which tended to nullify the whole issue with the rebar.
Up until seeing that video I was of the belief that the building was built under German occupation, but in hindsight I can't say why.

[Wetzelrad]

Hopefully someone can help me out here. The story as I recall is that this was simply a storage building before the Germans arrived. [...]

And knowing that this might sound stupid, what is the evidence for this building existing before the war?

According to Auschwitz: 1270 to the Present by Dwork and Van Pelt, the Auschwitz I camp began as a "migrant worker village" in or after 1910 (p.59). It was taken up by Polish troops in 1920 because of its ample housing space. The authors do not go in to any detail as to the construction of what they term the "ammunition depot" other than to say that it was "built by the Polish army in the 1920s" (p.322). Then they provide this German survey drawing of the site from December 1939 (p.325), which should be an accurate representation of how the Poles left it. The ammo depot is visible in the lower left.



Pressac's Auschwitz describes it as "The former powder magazine, or according to other sources, victualling store, of the Austro Hungarian and subsequently Polish barracks" (p.129). He follows this up with a photo he took of a German handwritten list of numerous drawings of construction work to convert the building into a crematorium.

I think the evidence is satisfying enough, and I see no reason to question it. At the same time, it does not very much clarify what the building was before the German occupation. However, one of the listed drawings is titled as "Entwässerung [drainage] des Krematorium." This could correspond to the construction of the drain or drains in question.

[Booze]

Thank you, I had to satisfy my curiosity on this.

[Booze]

Not that it means much but, regarding the holes in the ceiling that are filled in, one or more could have been for vent stacks for plumbing fixtures,

[Booze]

Photos of the 'patched up holes' from the paper.

Note the more circular shape and very visible rebar.

Figure 32a looks like a perfect match for a plumbing vent stack, I wonder if there are any indications of plumbing fixture(s) having been located nearby.

[HansHill]

I always looked at the rebar issue as proof positive that the story is fabricated until I saw a video of a tour guide saying that the building predates the war and the Germans converted it into a gas chamber. Which tended to nullify the whole issue with the rebar.
Up until seeing that video I was of the belief that the building was built under German occupation, but in hindsight I can't say why.

What difference would it make that the building predates the German occupation? I think this misses the point. The argument here isn't that the Germans laid the rebar then cut through it, undoing their own work. The argument is that the rebar was cut through at all in such a sloppy manner. Sloppiness and workmanship aside, this is problematic as the whole point of the rebar is to reinforce structural integrity of the concrete ceiling in the first place.



From an LLM. The LLM then goes on to advise that structural engineers should assess the structure for viability, producing a report with recommendations for additional support to be installed. The below screenshot technically is about the 4 other holes (ventilation holes) but the point remains that structural integrity would be compromised for the four larger ones also



The Germans absolutely would not have done it this way.

[Booze]

I didn't do well in explaining my point, which is if the Germans designed and built this building as a gas chamber from the start, (which is what I somehow believed when first taking an interest) then the issue with the rebar is proof positive of a hoax.

I do understand your point, and I agree with you.
The other side would argue that believing that the work wouldn't have been done this way by the Germans is just a presumption.

But it's definitely still an issue to be raised. Rational people are going to realize that if the Germans hired a contractor to make holes for 'introduction shafts' they aren't going to accept work like this, which compromises the integrity of the slab and are unnecessarily oversized.

Why would these large shafts be their solution to begin with?
As many have said, all that is needed is a 4-6 inch diameter hole for a pipe with a threaded cap. No need to destroy any rebar.

[Booze]

I'm sure that where I got this idea from is when David Cole asked a tour guide if those holes were original and she said they were.
I mistakenly assumed it to mean that the holes were part of the original construction of the building, therefore the building itself was constructed under German occupation.

[HansHill]

I'm sure that where I got this idea from is when David Cole asked a tour guide if those holes were original and she said they were.
I mistakenly assumed it to mean that the holes were part of the original construction of the building, therefore the building itself was constructed under German occupation.

Very fair. And I'm with you, I have always found Krema I to be a complete mess. I'm not even that interested in Krema I anymore, I'm more interested in Birkenau, where incidentally the rebar issue is somewhat more pronounced.

[Fred Ziffel]

Am I missing something here of what Germar wrote in his book? This "Hole 4" being in the was in the washroom. Is he sure about that?
See attachments

[HansHill]

Yes Mr Ziffel - My screenshot is from the section on discussion on the 4 small circular ventilation holes, not the Zyklon insertion holes.

My apologies for muddying the water, but my point was to address the integrity / rebar issue of the structure, which is present in these holes, and thus therefore, a consideration for the rebar issue on the Z-holes.

EDIT

My point ultimately being, if you tamper with rebar like this, you invite structural integrity issues such as is seen with the ventilation holes becoming cracked and compromised.