Cremation patent & 3.5 kg of coke per corpse debunked

[Hannover]

This is a nice example of the tactics that the desperate will resort to.

See Roberto Muehlenkamp ('Cortagravatas') from another Forum shown the door with his fraudulent assertion of a German patent that could cremate a corpse with 3.5 kg of coke, a scientific impossibilty.

No wonder they stopped debating Revisionists. The 3.5 kg per corpse nonsense is critical to their lies. It's the only way they can rationalize the coke shipments vs. their unsubstantiated assertions of the number of Jews allegedly murdered and then cremated. The whole thing doesn't hold up; not by a long shot. And they know it.

Have a look, very informative.

Follow this mercifully short thread from the former CODOH bbs:
http://forum.codoh.com/codoh/493.html

- Hannover

[Sailor]

Actually the claimed coke requirement of 3.5 kg for the cremation of a body was based on some memos written by the SS and Topf, to which the poster referred to.

This is typical for the approach by many Holocaust believers: The SS wrote themselves..., the SS confessed themselves..., the SS said so themselves... etc, or the IMT, the NMT, or even the German courts ruled so and so.

Revisionists usually pay no attention to all of this and take a different tack: Is it technically possible, is it within the laws of physics, of nature, does it make sense.

Take Friederich Berg. He does not care what SS statements and confessions or court rulings say about the use of diesel engine exhaust fumes in order to gas people. He looks straight at the engine itself, the exhaust fumes and their chemical compositions, and questions whether it can really be used kill for example 30,000 Jews within a period of 24 hours, as claimed for Treblinka and as accepted by the German courts.

Or Mattogno who went through some great details about the technical aspect of the cremation process in his article The Crematoria Ovens of Auschwitz and Birkenau, regardless of some letters by the SS.

fge

[Hannover]

Aside from Roberto's laughable 'holocau$t' science, there's the obvious fraudulent attempt to claim a patent for an ***incinerator*** for godssake, not a crematory oven. Even though it cannot be shown to have been made, much less shown to have worked. That is what Roberto/Cortagravatas referred too, less than sincere I would say.
Yet another example of the types of desperation tactics used by promoters for the 'holocau$t Industry. That is why they run from debate.

It's rather like saying the witches of Salem stated themselves that they were allied with the devil. It's rather like saying hundreds of thousands stated themselves that they were abducted by aliens in UFOs.

If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

- Hannover

[TMoran]

The nut shell summary for collapsing the Holocaust nonsense that a Holocaust body could be cremated with 3.5 kilos (7.7 pounds/shoe box full) of coke is -

3.5 kilos (shoe box) of coke can deliver 112,000 BTUs of heat.

A modern day cremation oven requires about 1,000,000 BTUs to cremate a body of 68 kilos (150 lbs.).

Up to five (5) Holocaust bodies could be cremated in 15 minutes so it's said.

A modern day cremation facility takes an hour to cremate one body of 68 kilos/150 lbs.

That's it for the nut shell summary that shrinks up that Holocaust nonsense into a black hole.

[Sailor]

A modern day cremation oven requires about 1,000,000 BTUs to cremate a body of 68 kilos (150 lbs.).

That is about in line with Mattogno’s numbers for coke fired ovens.

The Polish Jewess Rachel Auerbach, author of In the Fields of Treblinka, however surprises us with the epoch making scientific discovery, that blood is a first class fuel.. For her the 3.5 kg of coke for the cremation of the human body is probably more than enough.

Cortie usually gets his information from the Nizkor or THHP sites.

fge

[steve]

I must confess, until four years ago, I thought 'coke' was only something people drank.

Seriously, I have no clue as to the properties of coke, how long it would take to cremate a corpse. I can only go by what experts in that field say about it.

However, I did see something in the threads Hannover posted.

Namely, Cortagravatas said "When the 7840 kilograms of coke usage for a 12 hour period are divided by the 2208 bodies which could be cremated in a 12 hour period, the average comes out to about 3.5 kilograms per body."

Now, ignore the figures given and consider another point. That is, while it may be impossible to cremate a body with 3.5Kg. of coke, it may not necessarily follow that you need 7 Kg to cremate 2 bodies. Because, possibly, during the cremation process, the ovens are quite hot, and maybe the incineration of body #X can very well help body #(X+1) be incinerated.

Now, what I just said may very well be scientific nonsense. Intuitively, I have no real feel about it.

So, again, what is needed is a real, public, debate. Then, we can see who
contradicts themselves first. (Or should I say, contradicts themselves for the thousandth time PUBLICALLY.) Acually, during the Zundel Trial, a crematory expert testified that it is/was impossible to cremate the number of bodies alleged.

Another point. If the Holocaust Industry wanted to show up the revisionists, all they have to do is build an oven capable of doing what the Germans were allegedly capable of doing 55 years ago. Surely they have the monetary resources. But, we all know that will not happen and why it will not.

You know, as Butz pointed out, we do not need documents proving atom bombs were dropped on Japan. On the other hand, look at the 'evidence' provided to prove millions of people were transported all over Europe, burned in magical ovens, etc.:
Documents, insane eyewitness accounts, testimony extracted thru torture, etc.

WHen it is looked into at all, the Hoax is pretty much shown up for what it is.

Steve

[Hannover]

Good points. Some clarification:

- The idea that one body could help provide fuel for another body and another, etc. is based upon the notion that more than one body could simultaneously be burned in a single crematory muffle. While on rare occasions I would imagine that could happen, the builder of the ovens, SS Kurt Prufer said himself that doing so would damage the ovens. I believe Mattogno has the documentation for that. And, starting a fire using x amount of coke, and then sustaining it for a long period of time simply by introducing more bodies, as though the substance being burned was paper, has no support at all. Remember, the coke fuel was in a separate compartment, meaning the body(s) could not effect the coke burn rate, a continual supply of coke was required to keep the coke burning. By not maintaining the coke fuel supply meant that the cremation process could not be achieved.
- the crematory ovens were pre-heated prior to corpse placement, requiring yet more fuel
- practical data from the Gusen crematoriums indicate about 30 kg per corpse, not 3.5 kg
- combine the laughable 3.5 kg lie with the utterly impossible & absurd alleged cremation times per corpse (4-10 minutes) and you have one tall tale

If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Hannover

[Sailor]

I must confess, until four years ago, I thought 'coke' was only something people drank.

Druggies use that stuff too.

Coke is made out of coal through a heating process (yellow heat) without air, to remove all chemicals that can be gassed or steamed out. Coke is 90% pure carbon and is used mainly for heating and the reduction of iron from iron ore. It has a heating value of appr. 6000 - 7000 kcal/kg, which is appr. 24,000 - 28,000 BTU.

The leading four Topf engineers who were involved in the design, manufacture and installation of the Auschwitz ovens were after the war arrested by the Soviets, thoroughly interrogated by officers of the Soviet anti-espionage agency SMERSCH and were condemmed to 25 years of hard labor. Two of them, among them engineer Prüfer, did not make it home, they died in the Sovietunion.

Prüfer told the officers of SMERSCH (according to documents found in the Moscow archives) that only one body at a time could be cremated per muffle and that the cremation time took 60 minute, and that they tried in his presence to cremate 2 bodies at the same time. But the temperature inside the muffle went so high, that they were afraid to damage the oven.
Mattogno/Deana give a thorough description of the cremation process in their paper "The Crematoria Ovens of Auschwitz and Birkenau" http://codoh.com/found1/fndcrema.html
They did some theoretical calculations in order to determine the estimated coke requirements, based on a method developed by engineer W. Heepke, and came up with 20.3 kg coke for the cremation of one emaciated body ("Muselmann") inside the three muffle ovens in Krema II in Birkenau.
Mattogno then compared this with the actual documented coke consumption and the documented recorded deaths for a certain period of time and came up with a practical coke consumption of 26.3 kg per body. (Note: This energy is required in addition to the heat provided by the burning of the body's fat.)

Fge

[steve]

And, starting a fire using x amount of coke, and then sustaining it for a long period of time simply by introducing more bodies, as though the substance being burned was paper, has no support at all. Remember, the coke fuel was in a separate compartment, meaning the body(s) could not effect the coke burn rate, a continual supply of coke was required to keep the coke burning. By not maintaining the coke fuel supply meant that the cremation process could not be achieved.

Ok, that certainly sounds plausable. But, unfortunately, it is WE who are in the position of having to prove that something did NOT happen.

Also, given my mathematical (and fair) mind, if I want to establish proposition A, then I want to hear all the arguements for ~A, and show that it leads to nonsense.

Now, back to your(Hannover) coke and cremation claims, this is just the kind of thing that can be easily refuted, if it is indeed possible to refute.

So, 'believers', for this particular point, I do not want to take Hannover's (or where ever he got his info from) word for it. However, the one way to disprove him is to demonstrate that what he is saying is false. I don't want to see documents, testimonies, etc. Get an expert to show one does not need a continuous, constant supply of coke for continual cremations. And that previous bodies do not 'help' in the cremation of further bodies.
Surely, if the Germans did it 55 years ago, someone could do it now, right?

Steve

[Scott]

And, starting a fire using x amount of coke, and then sustaining it for a long period of time simply by introducing more bodies, as though the substance being burned was paper, has no support at all. Remember, the coke fuel was in a separate compartment, meaning the body(s) could not effect the coke burn rate, a continual supply of coke was required to keep the coke burning. By not maintaining the coke fuel supply meant that the cremation process could not be achieved.

Ok, that certainly sounds plausable. But, unfortunately, it is WE who are in the position of having to prove that something did NOT happen.

Also, given my mathematical (and fair) mind, if I want to establish proposition A, then I want to hear all the arguements for ~A, and show that it leads to nonsense.

Now, back to your(Hannover) coke and cremation claims, this is just the kind of thing that can be easily refuted, if it is indeed possible to refute.

So, 'believers', for this particular point, I do not want to take Hannover's (or where ever he got his info from) word for it. However, the one way to disprove him is to demonstrate that what he is saying is false. I don't want to see documents, testimonies, etc. Get an expert to show one does not need a continuous, constant supply of coke for continual cremations. And that previous bodies do not 'help' in the cremation of further bodies.

Surely, if the Germans did it 55 years ago, someone could do it now, right?

And previously,

Another point. If the Holocaust Industry wanted to show up the revisionists, all they have to do is build an oven capable of doing what the Germans were allegedly capable of doing 55 years ago. Surely they have the monetary resources. But, we all know that will not happen and why it will not.

I agree. But like it or not, Revisionists are in a position of having to prove something wrong. If nothing is done the Believers win by default.

All of the cremation arguments are theoretical. Maybe multiple bodies could be practically stuffed into ovens, and so on. Maybe not. Only one way to know for sure.

What is needed is some independently-verifiable hard data on ovens built to wartime German specifications and to try all possible objections empirically that can be made.

Of course, this would require some funding, but it would not be necessary to construct more than one multiple muffle oven I would think to generate some reliable data on the process.

And some hard data about how many you can really burn on barbecue grills would be nice, too.

I have no doubt that diesel engines did not kill people. But I could think of numerous experiments that would definitely answer all possible objections for testable hypotheses. However, there is little point since all anyone merely has to say is that they were really just gasoline engines all along and the witnesses simply made a common mistake or got that detail from rumor. For example, if there were diesel engines associated for generating electrical power as well as gasoline murder-engines, then this would be an easy mistake to duplicate.

We don't have a lot to go on, but the Believers win by default.

And, in the case of crematoria there are always those fanciful and quite dimensionless body burning-pits as the wildcard.


Once mass-murder has been proved wrong in the dimensions claimed, it might still be necessary for Revisionists to disprove that no one was mass-murdered by poison gas. I'm not sure if that is possible even if true.

Again, Believers win by default.

[Hannover]

Once mass-murder has been proved wrong in the dimensions claimed, it might still be necessary for Revisionists to disprove that no one was mass-murdered by poison gas. I'm not sure if that is possible even if true.

Again, Believers win by default.

It's already been "proved wrong", as the info. in this thread attests, as this Forum attests, as Revisionist research attests:

- absurd scientifically impossible allegations
- no physical evidence for the claims
- forged documents
- forged photos
- confessions via torture and intimidation
- sham show trials
- no mass graves as alleged
0n & on & on.

One does not need to go to Mars to see that it's not inhabited by Martians. Scientific observation & research suffices nicely.

The issue is about getting access to the public. The profit minded 'holocau$t' Industry and judeo-supremacists are utterly desperate to keep the public from receiving the true Revisionist information; hence such dumb canards as Roberto's ... shown in this thread, hence laws to prevent questioning the scam. Perhaps this is what is meant by 'winning by default'.
Now there is the issue of emotionalism & psychology, as most are reluctant to admit to being duped. Revisionists have admitted it, since we were all Believers once.
It doesn't require that we win over everyone. Forget it, there are still people who believe the earth was created in 6 days, and then God rested on the 7th.
There will always be Jews who believe in the 6,000,000 & gas chambers....it's become their RELIGION. That's their problem, we just need to demand the right to free speech and the truth wins.

- Hannover

[Sailor]

Once mass-murder has been proved wrong in the dimensions claimed, it might still be necessary for Revisionists to disprove that no one was mass-murdered by poison gas. I'm not sure if that is possible even if true. Again, Believers win by default.

to prove = to establish evidence that something is true.

But don’t the believers have first to show evidence that the alleged victims were really killed and prove the existence of gas chambers? And did they do all this?

fge

[steve]

Scott wrote:

Once mass-murder has been proved wrong in the dimensions claimed, it might still be
necessary for Revisionists to disprove that no one was mass-murdered by poison gas. I'm not
sure if that is possible even if true. Again, Believers win by default.

I think many of the Hoax claims, including gassings, have adequately been disproven (forensics, etc.). Which, by the way, should not have even been necessary. Meaning, many of the H claims have no supporting evidence. (Not testimony extracted by torture, absurd 'eyewitness' accounts, etc.) After all, if one claims some huge event happened, is
it not incumbent on them to provide some real evidence? Not only is there no real evidence, many of the claims seem to be physically impossible.

And again, some claim is made, which the revisionists claim to be impossible, and the best 'proof' the Hoaxers can come up with is documents. That is outrageous considering some of the claims, IF TRUE, can be simply demonstrated.

The Hoaxers never seem to present any real counter to the revisionists.

Take Provan, trying to show that some un-Godly number of people can fit into the so-called Gas Chambers. He convinced himself by having his children squeeze into some small area. How pathetic.

If the Hoaxers want to establish the possibility of even that very small part of the Hoax (# people one can squeeze into the 'gas chambers') all they have to do is round up 700 (or 2000) average, or even under-average sized people and demonstrate it. Of course, you will never see that done. (It's demeaning, it brings back horrible memories (despite making a new movie about the H every 2 weeks), etc.) As mentioned earlier in this thread, a similar arguement goes for cremation capabilites with respect to coke.

I find the purpose of this board to be many-fold. It is good to know there are people out there who are aware of this evil fraud, who you can discuss things with, and to 'enlighten' those who have a genuine curiousity. Unfortunately, for 99% of people, they need some authority figure (TV, the minister at the church, etc.) to tell them. We are not good enough to be listened to, I guess. After all, since when did logic, reasoning, etc. carry any weight with the average person?

Steve

[Scott]

But don’t the believers have first to show evidence that the alleged victims were really killed and prove the existence of gas chambers? And did they do all this?

One would think so, but regardless of who proved what, if everybody already believes, then it is not really incumbent upon the Believers to do anything but believe, and pontificate against non-Believers of course. Unless a belief-system is proved wrong fact-by-fact, until the dam finally bursts and doubt leads to skepticism and the mainstream asking questions, then the Believers win again by default. Taking a dogmatic view against Believers is only another form of belief, however. Skeptics always ask questions and seek to challenge even their own assumptions.

[Moderator]

Okay gents, let's get back to the topic of the thread.

Thanks, Moderator