Wooden Doors

[Wetzelrad]

If Auschwitz were actually engaging in a coverup they would've removed the door.

They have literally removed two of the doors to the gas chamber, at a minimum. That which led to the washroom and that which led to the furnace room. Will you now admit that this was a coverup?

But they're leaving the reconstruction in place, and stating "this is a reconstruction".

No, they aren't. Try using a real quote.

Google puts an artificial restriction on it? I managed to find it quite easily.

Yes. I'm sure you don't need me to tell you this. It's common knowledge that Google suppresses politically incorrect websites and ideas. On this topic, Google delists and downranks results which show the actual doors at Auschwitz. For example:

Auschwitz does not claim that this was a gas chamber door, so citing this photo is a straw man argument.

CODOH posters do not claim that Auschwitz claims that this was a gas chamber door. You have created a straw man argument.

End of my remarks on this matter. I would prefer to discuss something substantive.

[mengelemyth]

“Google delists and downranks results which show the actual doors at Auschwitz”

Theres plenty of factors that determine which images show up in Google searches. Images from domains with high search rank and lots of backlinks will come first. This is basic SEO knowledge.

It’s not a surprise that photos of a wooden door with a window don’t show up when they’re only listed on fringe blogs and forums. Yandex has it's own algorithm to determine results.

And more importantly, the Google results aren’t even showing what are presented to be the actual gas chamber doors at Auschwitz (i.e. the door presented by Van Pelt, and the door included in Pressac’s book). If Google were actively engaged in a 'coverup' you'd think they'd also forcibly show the 'real' door.

[Stubble]

ask yourself if that would hold in 2,000 people being gassed with hydrogen cyanide gas...

Argument from incredulity aside, it didn't need to hold back the force of 2,000 people collectively.

You kick that door, they are going to bend like fucking taffy

Except fit men were sent to camps for labour. How are children, the elderly, and women gonna kick down a robust door?

I think this is a reasonable response to the 'door pressure' argument: https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... orpressure.

And why was there a heavy peephole protection grid on the inside of the door...?

Sir, welcome to the forum.

Personally I think a demonstration is in order as you consider my assessment simply incredulity and not based on experience working with wood and iron.

Regarding crowd pressure, for that we should be looking at the wall, which was composed of, how many row of brick? I don't think that is an argument you want fo have.

The facility was not 'panic proofed' at all. The door is absolutely insufficient for purpose and the locks are a joke.

Regarding the peephole cover, this was standard for an air raid shelter door and is part of code. Doors are to open outward because of blast pressure, there is to be a peephole so that emergency personnel can rapidly inspect a shelter for occupancy and the peephole is to have a mesh cover to prevent high velocity glass being shot into the shelter in the event of a failure.

There's a video of a German hospital from ww2 floating around on the forum, I'll see if I can find it. Many of the doors are gastight, have a peephole and that peephole has a mesh screen.

Found it;

Spoiler

viewtopic.php?p=2560#p2560

A 6 year old could kick that door open. A mother would probably mule kick it into next week if you were trying to gas her children. You seem to intentionally underestimate the stakes involved in this proposition. These people should not be expected to have been compliant in their own murder.

[mengelemyth]

Regarding the peephole cover, this was standard for an air raid shelter door and is part of code. Doors are to open outward because of blast pressure, there is to be a peephole so that emergency personnel can rapidly inspect a shelter for occupancy and the peephole is to have a mesh cover to prevent high velocity glass being shot into the shelter in the event of a failure.

I'm happy to debate points like this, and this is information worth taking into account... if it is true.

You seem to intentionally underestimate the stakes involved in this proposition.

Then you guys always have to ruin it. "Intentionally" underestimate? Why does everything have to involve others 'intentionally' behaving in bad faith to ignore your arguments? I have good faith interpretations and disagreements.

[Stubble]

Regarding the peephole cover, this was standard for an air raid shelter door and is part of code. Doors are to open outward because of blast pressure, there is to be a peephole so that emergency personnel can rapidly inspect a shelter for occupancy and the peephole is to have a mesh cover to prevent high velocity glass being shot into the shelter in the event of a failure.

I'm happy to debate points like this, and this is information worth taking into account... if it is true.

You seem to intentionally underestimate the stakes involved in this proposition.

Then you guys always have to ruin it. "Intentionally" underestimate? Why does everything have to involve others 'intentionally' behaving in bad faith to ignore your arguments? I have good faith interpretations and disagreements.

You know what, you raise a valid point, I will see if I can 'strike through' the word 'intentionally' as I should certainly be lending the benefit of charity in accordance with the forum rules.

Regarding air raid and gas shelter code for 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔗𝔥𝔦𝔯𝔡 ℜ𝔢𝔦𝔠𝔥 I'm going to assume you want period German documentation, not modern code. This will take some time, but, I assume it is extant. The standards haven't actually changed all that much since ww1, with the exception of ventilation and filtration requirements.

I will start by looking here;
https://catalog.archives.gov/search-within/6920041

[mengelemyth]

The video you provided indeed has a grid, but the design is significantly different and smaller. It's unclear from the video if it is behind the glass, or integrated into the glass.

This is a problem, because as Pressac also shows on p 46 of his book, one of the doors on a delousing chamber has a grid. However, the grid itself is much smaller, is integrated into the glass, and looks closer to the one seen in the video you cite. These looks like they were designed to prevent glass shattering and imploding inwards.

But in photos of the surviving (alleged) door recovered from an (alleged) gas chamber, the protection grid around the peephole is large, and is separated from the glass itself: https://4.bp.blogspot.com/--donjKUBwbA/ ... 1%255D.jpe

This does not strike has something that would be useful at preventing glass from flying in due to an external blast. It looks like glass would fly through it! The metal looks to me like it was designed to prevent persons inside from damaging the glass... the fact it "looks" this way does not mean I am correct though.

If it were merely to prevent glass explosion for its dual use as a bomb shelter, we should have near identical 'large' grids on plenty of other bomb shelter doors? I don't think thats ever been demonstrated. I think this suggests this grid was uniquely designed as to be 'human proof' from the inside.

[Stubble]

So, you are incredulous because you think they would knock out the 8mm glass, but, at the same time think those 'locks' would hold? And that this particular setup couldn't just be ripped off the door?

I understand the setup is 'non standard' and it isn't a 'factory' door with a 'factory' screen on a 'factory' peephole. It was certainly not built in a factory however.

Look, the timbers are thin, the 'locks' are a joke, and the screen on the peephole doesn't seem to be for 'panic proofing'. If it were, it would not be setup in such a way for it to potentially be ripped off the door.

I'm eager to mock one of these doors up so it can be kicked by an elderly woman or a child so you can see how flimsy the 'lock' setup is.

[mengelemyth]

I am unsure, I am not an engineer. I will say I don't think anybody would have room to kick the door if it's being rushed by a crowd of people at once.

And then you've got mesh gas columns and visible openings on top of the chamber itself... it's just a few too many lines of evidence going on for me to to start theorizing that the door must've been too weak. If it were really just a delousing chamber or bomb shelter, why did Poles steal the film negatives showing the openings in the roof of the chamber, and bury them? Could it be that they were aware that gassings were occurring and wanted to preserve evidence?

Anyway, I am obviously veering off topic. It's not like you haven't heard this argument before.

As far as I am aware, revisionists have not attempted to do any serious technical analysis related to doors (I think?). I don't think "mocking" up a door would really be the way to do it, unless you could source some German firm to do it exactly how they did in the day.

[Hektor]

If Auschwitz were actually engaging in a coverup they would've removed the door.

They have literally removed two of the doors to the gas chamber, at a minimum. That which led to the washroom and that which led to the furnace room. Will you now admit that this was a coverup?

But they're leaving the reconstruction in place, and stating "this is a reconstruction".

No, they aren't. Try using a real quote.

Google puts an artificial restriction on it? I managed to find it quite easily.

Yes. I'm sure you don't need me to tell you this. It's common knowledge that Google suppresses politically incorrect websites and ideas. On this topic, Google delists and downranks results which show the actual doors at Auschwitz. For example:

Auschwitz does not claim that this was a gas chamber door, so citing this photo is a straw man argument.

CODOH posters do not claim that Auschwitz claims that this was a gas chamber door. You have created a straw man argument.

End of my remarks on this matter. I would prefer to discuss something substantive.

"Google suppresses politically incorrect websites and ideas" - That's indeed the case and well known. So I got no idea why the notion is challenged. That it doesn't help when sites don't have a lot of backlinks is of course true as well.


The point of the doors was that they were shown to pilgrims on Auschwitz tours and they were brought under the impression that the facilities were 'in their original state'.

The details aren't as important neither. What is important is that the museum tours and accompanying literature are set up to induce impression and motive into audiences. And they then mostly think that the peddled narrative is well researched and doesn't have any relevant problems (when in fact it does).

[Archie]

Except fit men were sent to camps for labour. How are children, the elderly, and women gonna kick down a robust door?

People fall back on this "women and children" argument all the time to resolve a variety of seeming mysteries. The lack of resistance, the incredible fuel economy, the doors. But I question whether this argument is justifiable based on the demographics.

According to USHMM, about 1.5M of the Holocaust victims were children, i.e., about 25%. That leaves around 2.25M adult women, and 2.25M adult men. If 37.5% were adult men, you have to kill those men somehow. These deaths can't be among registered prisoners because those deaths were only a few hundred thousand.

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/ ... -holocaust

Bottom line, I don't think the numbers work unless you assume a good number of Jews were gassed without much "selection."

If about 3M of the 6M were gassed, that's 50%. There were 2M shootings, but you can't assume these were all men because most of these would have been in the east and would therefore have reflected the approximate population mix.

[Stubble]

Archie,

When death is on the line, people are capable of incredible feats anyhow. Mothers have lifted cars off of their children, for example.

I'm not saying that these feats defy physics or anything, just that most people underestimate what they are capable of, and when the adrenaline hits, and the nerves fade that tell you 'don't do that, it will hurt', you can rip a muscle off the bone firing it really, really hard.

Even with that to the side however, the life span of this rather flimsy door would have been next to no time. It is not uncommon for people to kick in a metal door in a metal frame. Granted, they aren't barefoot, but, it also isn't life or death...

The idea that these people were complicit in their own murder, spitting in the face of the Germans and singing 'international' while walking in, is just utterly ridiculous.

Another point, unless I'm mistaken, a crowd of around 75 people should have been sufficient to push the brick wall out into the vestibule, even if you grant the door is made from impossibilityum.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 750600008X

[...]When crushing occurs, the high pressures developed within the crowd, which can bend steel barriers or push down brick walls,[...]

[mengelemyth]

Archie notes that ~ 2.2m males were estimated to have been killed in the holocaust.

Of course, we don't have to believe ~2m men died behind such a door in a gas chamber... because that isn't what historians claim.

I'm answering as somebody who is somewhere around David Cole's stance. I think we can safely get to around 4.5m total deaths using documentary evidence, so the number of men killed might be less than the claimed 2.2m.

Deducting the ~1m or 1.5m killed in mass shootings, and then take into account that camps like Majdanek had a metal door (which could suggest a similar design at the Reinhardt camps), then we're only speculating about men killed behind this particular door at Auschwitz then. So this door design concerns perhaps a few hundred thousand male victims (assuming this door design was the same on all chambers at Auschwitz).

By the time jews arrived at Auschwitz most of them were already thinning out due to significant calorie deficits.

Fit men selected for work were weakened overtime due to work and calorie deficits. They're not going to be kicking down doors, if they were later sent to be gassed.

The men immediately selected for gassing were already deemed unfit for work. I.e. they were elderly. If you are too weak to work, you probably wouldn't be busting down doors.

And then you have to take a few thing into account: they were naked, not wearing work boots. And soon as the gas entered the chamber, those closest to gas columns died immediately. In the midst of 1000-2000 suffocating and gasping for air, I find it really implausible that one or more of them would figure out how to bust down a door while wearing no shoes.

It would also be pitch black in the chamber! How are you going to establish the necessary clearance/balance required to get a good kick on such a door, when you've got a bunch of other people pushing/clamouring/falling onto you? All the while you are suffocating and being rendered unconscious by the gas.

You both talk about all of this happening with no resistance. We do know that Jews with knowledge of what was occurring staged uprisings at Treblinka, Auschwitz, and Sobibor.

I think the details that revisionists hyper focus on are worth hearing out. However, ultimately I found revisionists had no explanation for more important questions... like where the millions of Jews transported east ended up. Eric Hunt apparently never received a good answer on that front – which caused his belief system to self destruct. Of course, he appears to be unmedicated and back into the 'hoax' mindset. His focus on 'mini hoaxes' about Mengele are clearly correct.

So I guess I just don't find arguments about doors worth focusing on.

[Fred Ziffel]

Yes Majdanek room does have steel doors
Now
Find me a ceiling hole in the blue stained room with steel doors
if you want to discuss alleged CO use, we can. But let's get through Zyklon B first.

[mengelemyth]

Yes Majdanek room does have steel doors
Now
Find me a ceiling hole in the blue stained room with steel doors
if you want to discuss alleged CO use, we can. But let's get through Zyklon B first.

Except you are citing Carlo Mattogno's response to a Soviet 1944 report on alleged gas chambers?

The Majdanek Museum openly discusses how several structures, once purported to be 'gas chambers', are clearly not https://www.majdanek.eu/en/pow/gas_cham ... ajdanek/57

I'm not extremely familiar with Majdanek, so perhaps I'm missing something... Is this still a claimed chamber? If so, aren't there opening in walls? Anyway I guess we are veering off the wooden doors topic now.

[Fred Ziffel]

There are two 25cm holes,
Heater air intake and Heater output
Majdanek Museum still holds the claim that this room is a CO gas chamber. Thomas Kranz, the museum head of research and Museum Curator states it is "Soley" for CO gassings
Feel free to return to subject, thanks