You're right, 'gassing cellar' would be the correct translation, which would also align it with actual delousing facilities in the camp that also started with 'Vergasungs-'.
Here you argue it cannot have been used as a gassing cellar, for delousing, or any other form of gassing;
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue May 27, 2025 8:53 am
Please evidence its use as a morgue 1943-4 and explain why others claims it was a delousing chambers, shower, bomb shelter, corpse store.
Leichenkeller is a morgue. This is true a priori, by definition. A morgues primary purpose is to serve as a temporary storage space for bodies of the recently deceased. Bodies are kept at the morgue if an autopsy needs to be done. As bodies decompose quickly, the gases emitted can be hazardous, so they are kept as cool as possible. Morgues are temperature controlled. Autopsies are also held in morgues. A corpse store is a morgue.
Any underground building can function as a bomb shelter, though in Birkenau the guards had trenches to lie in.
Omnia transibunt. Oblivione erimus imperia surgent et cadunt, sed gloria Romae aeterna est!
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue May 27, 2025 8:53 am
Please evidence its use as a morgue 1943-4 and explain why others claims it was a delousing chambers, shower, bomb shelter, corpse store.
Leichenkeller is a morgue. This is true a priori, by definition. A morgues primary purpose is to serve as a temporary storage space for bodies of the recently deceased. Bodies are kept at the morgue if an autopsy needs to be done. As bodies decompose quickly, the gases emitted can be hazardous, so they are kept as cool as possible. Morgues are temperature controlled. Autopsies are also held in morgues. A corpse store is a morgue.
Any underground building can function as a bomb shelter, though in Birkenau the guards had trenches to lie in.
What about all the documents that recorded the construction of gas chambers, with gas tight doors, and gas detection devices? Gotcha.
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue May 27, 2025 9:32 am
What about all the documents that recorded the construction of gas chambers, with gas tight doors, and gas detection devices? Gotcha.
I just provided you the source documentation not even two days ago which clarifies this. These items were usually bought during a series of other clearly routine or normal installations/upgrades to the morgues in the Crematoria. See again:
Critics like Samuel Crowell argue this term, more accurately translated as “wire net sliding device,” likely refers to benign safety features like removable mesh screens for ventilation openings or emergency exits, consistent with anti-gas shelter literature of the time[21], rather than devices for Zyklon B introduction. This case for benign interpretation is further supported in light of general modifications taking place at Auschwitz-Birkenau throughout March 1943 across Crematoria 2, 4, and 5, driven by a need to improve airflow, containment, sanitation, and safety for normal morgue and camp functions, and disinfection processes.[22] Multipurpose potential as an air raid shelter is supported by at least one witness.[23]
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue May 27, 2025 9:32 am
What about all the documents that recorded the construction of gas chambers, with gas tight doors, and gas detection devices? Gotcha.
I just provided you the source documentation not even two days ago which clarifies this. These items were usually bought during a series of other clearly routine or normal installations/upgrades to the morgues in the Crematoria. See again:
Critics like Samuel Crowell argue this term, more accurately translated as “wire net sliding device,” likely refers to benign safety features like removable mesh screens for ventilation openings or emergency exits, consistent with anti-gas shelter literature of the time[21], rather than devices for Zyklon B introduction. This case for benign interpretation is further supported in light of general modifications taking place at Auschwitz-Birkenau throughout March 1943 across Crematoria 2, 4, and 5, driven by a need to improve airflow, containment, sanitation, and safety for normal morgue and camp functions, and disinfection processes.[22] Multipurpose potential as an air raid shelter is supported by at least one witness.[23]
That is the hypothesis, now prove usage. You could start by showing me other camps that had gas chambers, gas tight doors, and mesh insertion devices installed in their Krems, if that was normal procedure.
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue May 27, 2025 12:41 pm
That is the hypothesis, now prove usage. You could start by showing me other camps that had gas chambers, gas tight doors, and mesh insertion devices installed in their Krems, if that was normal procedure.
'Proving usage' is exactly where you fail in spectacular fashion. You have a questionable pool of witnesses engulfed in WW2 and political/ideological motives. You also have the science currently working against you (FeCN levels), which you at best can only hand-wave away, even though the scientific method credits this as significant.
How do you reconcile all of this?
To those who still believe it: grow up. To those lying about it consciously: may you burn in hell.
You're right, 'gassing cellar' would be the correct translation, which would also align it with actual delousing facilities in the camp that also started with 'Vergasungs-'.
Here you argue it cannot have been used as a gassing cellar, for delousing, or any other form of gassing;
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue May 27, 2025 12:41 pm
That is the hypothesis, now prove usage. You could start by showing me other camps that had gas chambers, gas tight doors, and mesh insertion devices installed in their Krems, if that was normal procedure.
'Proving usage' is exactly where you fail in spectacular fashion. You have a questionable pool of witnesses engulfed in WW2 and political/ideological motives. You also have the science currently working against you (FeCN levels), which you at best can only hand-wave away, even though the scientific method credits this as significant.
How do you reconcile all of this?
I do not have a questionable pool of witnesses. They are corroborated and your allegation of they all colluded and lied is not evidenced. You are the one with the motive, who cannot evidence usage or even agree with other so-called revisionists.
I have some scientists working against me and others with me. That means the science is inconclusive. At least, I am going with the side that had evidence of usage with it.
You're right, 'gassing cellar' would be the correct translation, which would also align it with actual delousing facilities in the camp that also started with 'Vergasungs-'.
Here you argue it cannot have been used as a gassing cellar, for delousing, or any other form of gassing;
