Friday, June 23, 2017

A short debunking of Mark Weber's "Auschwitz: Myths and Facts"

Author: Sergey Romanov
Original here. A short debunking relying mostly on the already published materials follows.


Section "Four Million Victims?"

See: Revision of the Auschwitz plaque.

Reitlinger's and Pressac's estimates are woefully incomplete and thus not credible, see Van Pelt's report.

Same is true for Fritjof Meyer, see rebuttals here.

Section "Fake 'Gas Chamber'"

Gas chamber not fake but reconstructed, the reconstruction was partially botched.

See:
Detached Krema I chimney?
Flimsy gas chamber door with a window?

Section "Bizarre Tales"

Polevoi's claim is in no way an "eyewitness testimony", see What the Soviets knew about Auschwitz - and when. Part IV: deniers and Boris Polevoi's article

Also see Fake, unreliable or mistaken witnesses.

On Jackson's alleged claim see Deceit & Misrepresentation. The Techniques of Holocaust Denial. Nazi Atomic Bombs

Section "The Höss 'Confession'"

In the same time period in which he denounced his older death toll estimate and described his initial torture, Höß also confirmed the mass gassings. He also revised the estimate down to about 1 million - all on his own, which we know because the official Communist figure was 4 million (see above). We now know the number to be roughly accurate. See Van Pelt's report.

"Wolzek" was Sobibor, see The "Wolzek" paradox; possible origin of the name: the village Wolczyn or Wolczyny near Sobibor.

Höß' confused chronology is long ago acknowledged by the historians, see Karin Orth, "Rudolf Höß und die "Endlösung der Judenfrage". Drei Argumente gegen deren Datierung auf den Sommer 1941", in WerkstattGeschichte, Heft 18, 6 (1997), S. 45-57

Section "Many Jewish Inmates Unable to Work"

See:
Small children and people unfit for work in Auschwitz?
Holocaust deniers, Gerhard Maurer and Jews unfit for work in Auschwitz

Arno Mayer is not an authority on Auschwitz in any way, shape or form. Also see Deceit & Misrepresentation. The Techniques of Holocaust Denial. The Mayer Gambit.

Section "Anne Frank"

See: Small children and people unfit for work in Auschwitz?

Also see: Anne Frank diary.

Sections "Allied Propaganda" and "Survivor Testimony"

See:
Index of Published Evidence on Mass Extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
What the Soviets knew about Auschwitz - and when
Survivors did not see or hear about gas chambers?
Fake, unreliable or mistaken witnesses.

Section: "Inmates Released"

Auschwitz did not immediately become an extermination camp. In fact, the whole of Auschwitz can not be said to have been an extermination camp, it was a huge complex consisting of many camps with many functions. While Auschwitz II Birkenau acquired this function (among others), other Auschwitz subcamps were nevertheless "normal" (relatively speaking) concentration and labor camps from which some inmates (a tiny minority) could indeed get released. And of course even in Birkenau most inmates were not eyewitnesses to the extermination. They mostly heard rumors and sometimes smelled the burning odor. But rumors about Auschwitz were going around the general population too, so it wasn't a factor in a decision about whether or not to release someone (and even then they were made to take an oath that they would be silent about their experiences in the camp and when they arrived home they would be watched after by the local Gestapo or other Nazi authorities). Being a Geheimnisträger (bearer of secrets) would have been such a factor, but no such people can be shown to have been released.

Also see:
Aus der „Sippenhaft“ entlassen, 1943
Wypuszczeni zza drutów piekła

Section "Telltale Aerial Photos"

See:
John Ball's Air Photo Evidence on Auschwitz
The Auschwitz Open Air Incineration Photographs as Evidence for Mass Extermination
Personal Movement in the Auschwitz-Birkenau Compound on 25 August 1944 Aerial Photographs

Section "Absurd Cremation Claims"

See: Rebuttal of Mattogno on Auschwitz: Part 1: Indoor Cremation

Section "Gassing Expert Refutes Extermination Story"

See: Leuchter's report.

Lindsey is dishonest.

1. He claimed that the underground gas morgues were "cool", not mentioning that they were preheated before gassings, and that the heat of hundreds or thousands of bodies would generate enormous amounts of heat too (he was forced to admit it later). He also did not mention the Nazi wartime studies showing that HCN evaporates readily even at cold temperatures.

2. He used the dishonest flimsy doors argument.

3. The "skin absorption" argument has been debunked even by a denier star Fritz Berg:
Faurisson has repeatedly overstated the danger of HCN absorption through the skin. Although skin certainly does absorb HCN, it does so rather slowly. According to a source which Faurisson has himself used, 10 minutes are required to overcome a man with a gas mask whose skin is exposed to a concentration of 2% HCN in air.

“(2) It should also be remembered that a man may be overcome by the absorption of hydrocyanic acid gas through the skin; a concentration of 2 percent hydrocyanic acid being sufficient to thus overcome a man in about 10 minutes. Therefore, even if one wears a gas mask, exposure to concentrations of hydrocyanic acid gas of 1 percent by volume or greater should be made only in case of necessity and then for a period not longer than 1 minute at a time. In general, places containing this gas should be well ventilated with fresh air before the wearer of the mask enters, thus reducing the concentration of hydrocyanic acid gas to low fractional percentages.” (See: The Gas Mask, Technical Manual No. 3-205, War Department, Washington, October 9, 1941, p. 144, NA RG 407, Records of the Adjutant General's Office, 1917 TM 3-205.)
The typical lethal concentration for an execution chamber and for delousing is only 0.1% HCN in air, in other words, the lethal gas need only be one-twentieth as strong as the gas discussed in Faurisson's reference. If one applies a rule of thumb or reciprocity known sometimes as Henderson's Rule, one would need twenty times as long to cause the same toxic effect. In other words, approximately 200 minutes or three hours of exposure to 0.1% HCN would be needed to overcome a worker wearing a gas mask but whose skin is exposed. It is almost inconceivable, however, that workers removing corpses would be exposed to anything near these concentrations after the doors were opened."
Lüftl is dishonest: he claimed about the ventilation equipment in the gas chambers that "nothing of the sort has ever been found in any [alleged homicidal] gas chamber!", whereas the ventilation systems in the crematoria 2 and 3 are richly documented and their existence is not doubted by the leading deniers.

He also claimed that HCN "vaporizes at 25.7 degrees Celsius" whereas it boils at that temperature. Boiling is one way to vaporize, another way is evaporation which happens even at low temperatures, as mentioned above.

He also claimed that the crematoria chimneys do not smoke - based on something he read in a book - whereas this is only true for the ideal conditions. The Auschwitz crematoria did smoke as is evident from the soot on the chimneys. He also claimed that no fire can erupt from crematoria chimneys, however chimney fires caused by build-up of burning byproducts like creosote are a fact. He also denied the use of CO bottles for gassings, however their use in euthanasia is richly documented.

In other words, he has no credibility.

Sections "Himmler Orders Death Rate Reduced" and "Combating Disease"

Not clear what this is supposed to show. There is no contradiction between managing valuable slave labor more efficiently and murdering those unfit for work. Also see: Small children and people unfit for work in Auschwitz?

Summary

Mark Weber's Auschwitz research is woefully inadequate, the only thing his article illustrates is how deniers carp at the edges of historiography without providing solid evidence or caring to propose credible alternative theories.

No comments: