.
. 
      
  
 
                                                                          
         The Chemistry of Auschwitz
                 
                                            
                                            
                                            
           
         
                     
                                            
                                            
                                                                     
         By Germar Rudolf 
 
 Transcript
 
 In 1989, a graduate student in chemistry was surprised to learn that  no
         one had ever studied the Auschwitz gas chambers from a chemical  perspective. A year later, while preparing his PhD thesis
         in chemistry  at the prestigious Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research in  Stuttgart, Germany, he realized that this
         institute gave him access to  all the resources he needed to look into this matter himself. Now, after  more than two decades
         of continued research and archival studies, this  curious scholar, Germar Rudolf, has published his findings in the form 
         of a book and a video, both with the title “The Chemistry of Auschwitz.”  Let’s see what he found out.
 
 On June 15, 1994, David Lawson was scheduled
         to be killed in the  execution gas chamber of the state prison of North Carolina. This is a  view into this chamber. Lawson,
         however refused to cooperate.  Instead  of breathing quickly and deeply, he repeatedly held his breath and took  only
         short breaths in between. Again and again he called out “I am  human!” For ten straight minutes, he kept on struggling
         against his  fate. Only eighteen minutes after the beginning of the execution was he  declared dead. It was the longest-lasting
         gas-chamber execution in the  history of the United States.
 
 The witnesses to the execution were horrified, and the prison warden supervising the execution
         was so shaken that he resigned.
 
 Because
         of disasters like this, executions by gas chamber were eventually banned for being cruel and unusual.
 
 And this despite the fact that executions with gas were considered  swift,
         painless and humane when they were first introduced in the United  States in the 1920s.
 
 Here is a clip from a British documentary showing how it’s supposed
         to work:
 
  “This
         is BBC One. And now, ‘Fourteen Days in May.’ Viewers are  advised that this is a disturbing documentary about
         the death penalty in  Mississippi. Filmed during the final days of one condemned man’s fight  to save his life, it includes
         a sequence of the gas chamber being tested  with rabbits. ‘Fourteen Days in May.’”
 
         
  This test gassing occurred in the gas chamber of
         the state prison in  Parchman, Mississippi, using two black rabbits. The poisonous cyanide  powder is put into a bowl beneath
         the execution chair. Once the door is  secured, sulfuric acid is poured over the powder. As a result,  hydrogen-cyanide gas
         is released so violently that it rises up in a  cloud of sulfuric-acid mist. The bunnies die after not even a minute.
 
 If we look up expert literature, like Henderson
         & Haggard’s  “Noxious Gases,” we find in them the claim that humans die very quickly,  within a minute
         or less, when exposed to the hydrogen-cyanide  concentrations as they are used during executions in the United States.  But
         that’s apparently not true.
 
 U.S.
         researcher Scott Christianson has written a study on the history  of the U.S. gas chambers. He found that, during hundreds
         of executions  over the past 90 years, it took on average some 9 minutes to kill a  human. So what’s wrong here, and
         who is right?
 
 Turns out, reality
         is right, and the scientists are wrong. In a 1976  study for the U.S. Army on the toxicity of hydrogen-cyanide gas for  humans,
         a certain McNamara traced back what the experts quote in their  books on toxicology. It turned out that directly or indirectly
         they all  refer to a German book of 1919 that reported the results of gassing test  made prior to World War One on…
         well, rabbits.
 
 The study also
         established that gassing experiments with dogs,  monkeys and humans demonstrated that humans are much less susceptible  than
         dogs. For example, in one case a dog and a human volunteer were  placed in a gas chamber and exposed to the same concentration
         of  hydrogen cyanide. While the dog stopped breathing after just one and a  half minutes and was assumed dead, the man at
         that time did not even  show any symptoms.   
  
 In fact, the values found by this study closely resemble the values  found
         by Christianson in his study. Instead of killing within a minute  and less, the concentrations used in the U.S. execution
         gas chambers  would indeed not kill with certainty before some ten minutes.
 
         This poor roofing fellow got caught on the top of the roof of the  Catholic church
         of St. Michael at Untergriesbach in Bavaria, Germany,  when the bells starting tolling frantically. This church is our next
          stop on our journey to the Chemistry of Auschwitz. In 1972, major  renovation work was carried out on this church. Among
         other things, the  plaster on the inside was redone, and a pest-control company was called  to kill the woodworms which had
         infested the church’s woodwork. But  replacing the plaster first and then fumigating the church with hydrogen  cyanide
         in order to kill the bugs was a bad idea, as the church’s  newsletter reports. In the church’s chronology on the
         church’s website  we find an entry for July 1972 referring to the – quote – “fumigation of  the entire
         church with Zyklon against woodworm infestation” – unquote.  Zyklon refers to Zyklon B, the active ingredient
         in which is hydrogen  cyanide. Further down we read that the fumigation led to blotchy  discolorations of the plaster.
 
 Not much more information can be gleaned
         from that website, but a  similar case that occurred four years later in another church in Bavaria  is more revealing. This
         concerns the Protestant church of the town of  Wiesenfeld. Here, too, the church’s plaster was redone, and a few weeks
          later the whole church was fumigated using Zyklon B, that is to say,  hydrogen cyanide, in order to kill woodworms. A few
         months later, the  entire plaster started developing blotchy blue stains, as if someone had  splattered blue ink everywhere
         onto the plaster.
 
 This time,
         however, the case was properly documented, and the experts  called to investigate took samples, analyzed them chemically,
         and  determined what the problem was. The case was published as an entry in  Volume 4 of the German series “Bauschäden-Sammlung”,
         that is,  “Collection of Construction Damages.” Here are the first two pages of  this article in German. The paper
         was also published in an English  translation in this book on pages 557 to 559.
 
 From this article, we learn that the hydrogen cyanide had been  absorbed
         by the fresh and moist plaster, and that the small traces of  rust contained in the plaster – which is a natural component
         of every  cement and sand used to make it – had reacted with the hydrogen cyanide  to slowly form a pigment called “Iron
         Blue” or “Prussian Blue”. Being an  integral part of the plaster, the only way to remove the blue stains
          was by completely knocking off the new plaster and redoing the entire  job, as the lead architect of the renovation project
         Konrad Fischer  stated in an interview.
 
 Unfortunately, there aren’t any color images of that case available.  The only illustration shown in the documentation
         is this black-and-white  image, which may have looked something like this in color, but there  are other cases where the same
         reaction occurred. Zyklon B was used on a  grand scale during World War II in Europe to combat lice which infested  the clothes,
         bed linen and living quarters of soldiers, prisoners of  war and concentration-camp inmates. Lice transmit typhus, which is
         a  deadly disease. During WWII, hundreds of thousands of people died of it.  This is a 1948 paper on that topic by Dr. John
         Gordon from Harvard  University. I have redone the chart to improve its clarity. It shows the number of typhus cases in  Germany as officially recorded and published by the German civilian  authorities between 1939
         and 1943, and as encountered by U.S. troops in  their zone of occupation in the first half of 1945. No data is available 
         for 1944. The numbers for the years 1939 through 1943 evidently do not  include typhus cases in German labor or concentration
         camps. Otherwise  those numbers would be vastly higher.
 
 To prevent or stamp out typhus epidemics during World War Two,  killing lice was one of the most important challenges
         all warring  parties faced. The Germans’ chief method of killing lice was Zyklon B,  deployed in fumigation gas chambers.
         Such chambers were built in many  locations, civilian as well as military in nature, and of course in the  vast German system
         of labor and concentration camps.
 
 Many
         if not most of these fumigation chambers were destroyed after  the war, but some survived. This here is the Zyklon B fumigation
         chamber  at the former Stutthof Concentration Camp near Danzig, West Prussia,  used to disinfest inmate clothing. Note the
         blotchy blue stains on the  walls, outside as well as inside.
 
 This is a room of one building at the former Majdanek Camp which was  also used for fumigating
         clothes. Again, it has blue stains in many  places. The same is true for another structure in that camp also used  for Zyklon-B
         fumigations.
 
 This is a former
         Zyklon-B-fumigation facility at the former  Auschwitz-Birkenau Camp. It exhibits the same kind of blue stains, both  on the
         outside walls and on the inside. That structure existed in two  mirror-symmetrical units. This is the other one, only a few
         yards away  from the first. It, too, exhibits the tell-tale blue discoloration of  bricks, mortar and plaster on the inside
         as well as on the outside.
 
 We
         may assume that the plaster of two churches fumigated with Zyklon B we just discussed looked very similar to this.
 
 Now that we’ve arrived at Auschwitz,
         let’s take a look around.
 
 This
         is a map of the Auschwitz region. In order to get an orientation  as to where we are, here is an inset showing on the left
         a map of  Europe. The small blue rectangle shows the area of Poland that is  enlarged in the right-hand inset. In it, I have
         surrounded with a red  rectangle the area which we see here in the large map.
 
 Three areas on this map are of interest in the present context.  First,
         the Auschwitz Main Camp, which was the original concentration  camp opened in 1940. Most of its structures survived the war
         and serve  today as a museum. It also includes a crematorium with a homicidal gas  chamber. We’ll return to that later.
         Next, there is the huge  Auschwitz-Birkenau Camp just a mile away, which was initially planned as  a PoW camp, but ended up
         as the destination for roughly one million  Jews deported from various European countries. Most structures of that  camp have
         been destroyed, either by the Germans prior to their retreat,  or afterwards by Poles who used the building material as fire
         wood or to  reconstruct their homes. Finally, there is the industrial area of the  German chemical trust I.G. Farbenindustrie
         to the east.
 
 The Auschwitz Camp
         is considered the largest concentration camp of  the Third Reich. At its peak in 1944, it had 48 subcamps where inmates  worked
         in armaments industries, workshops, farming, coal mines and  chemical factories. If you wish, it was Europe’s largest
         slave-labor  enterprise ever. The most-important factories, from a strategic point of  view, were the Buna plants of the German
         chemical trust I.G.  Farbenindustrie. Planning and construction started in 1941. These photos  of this plant from the German
         Federal Archives are from 1943 and 1944.  Some of these structures still exist to this day. You can see some  photographic
         juxtapositions on the website given. Parallel to these  industrial activities, plans to increase the nearby slave-labor  population
         were also made. For that purpose, the initially small  Auschwitz Concentration Camp was turned into a huge system of camps,
         which at one point was planned to accommodate some 200,000 inmates as a  slave-labor resource.
 
 The background of the chemical factories was the fact that Germany,  in
         times of war, could easily be deprived of all major imports of food  and raw materials by a British blockade. Already during
         the First World  War, Germany felt the devastating effect of being cut off from all  imports, among them also rubber and petroleum,
         to name only the two most  important raw materials for any industrialized nation. Ever since,  Germany strove to became independent
         from natural rubber and mineral oil  by exploiting its coal reserves and its chemical talents.
 
 In fact, already prior to the First World War, in 1909, the German  Chemist
         Fritz Hofmann invented a process for producing artificial  rubber.
 
 A process to convert nitrogen from the air into ammonia – an  important first step in
         the production of any modern fertilizer or  explosive – was first demonstrated by the German chemist Fritz Haber  also
         in 1909. He received the Nobel Prize for it in 1918. Haber also  invented the insecticide Zyklon B. Haber was Jewish.
 
 A process to turn coal into liquid hydrocarbons
         was first developed  by the German Friedrich Bergius starting in 1910, with a patent issued  in 1913.
 
 Hence, all the scientific pieces were in place when the First World  War
         broke out, but turning them into an industrial-scale operation to  make Germany independent from imports took a few decades.
         This stage was  only achieved to a large degree during the later years of the Third  Reich. The chemical industry near Auschwitz
         played a major role in this  scheme.
 
 The importance of Auschwitz in Germany’s economic plans can be  derived from the summary written right after
         the war by some of  America’s greatest experts on German industry, quote:
 
  “Wartime Germany was a chemical empire built on
         coal, air, and water.  Eighty-four and a half per cent of her aviation fuel, 85 per cent of  her motor gasoline, all but a
         fraction of 1 per cent of her rubber, 100  per cent of the concentrated nitric acid, basic component of all  military explosives,
         and 99 per cent of her equally important methanol  were synthesized from these three fundamental raw materials.
 
         […] The body of this industrial organism was the  gas-generating plants which turned coal
         into process gases; its arms  were the many plants that used those gases and other materials drawn  from the coal to produce
         synthetic fuels and lubricants, chemicals,  rubber, and explosive products.”
 
 
  Apart from Auschwitz, Germany had only three other plants producing  the
         basic chemicals from which the vast majority of all German supplies  of rubber, fuel and lubricants were synthesized. Destroying
         these  factories should therefore have been at the very top of all Allied  bombing lists – although they were placed
         there only in 1944. Here is an  Allied air photo of the Auschwitz plant taken on January 14, 1945,  barely two weeks before
         the area was occupied by the Red Army. In this  section enlargement, you can see many bomb craters caused by a number of 
         Allied air raids on that factory which started in mid-1944. Some of  them I have marked here red.
 
 Deportation of Jews to Auschwitz as slave laborers started in early  1942,
         but construction of the new camp Auschwitz-Birkenau had just  begun. This here is a map showing the situation in May 1942.
         There  actually wasn’t much of a camp in existence yet. Only in late 1942 did  the first inmate showers and delousing
         facilities become operational in  that camp, the already-mentioned hygiene Buildings 5a and 5b with their  Zyklon-B fumigation
         chambers. As a consequence, hygienic conditions at  the camp were catastrophic, and inmates started dying like flies right
         from the beginning. In Danuta Czech’s mainstream standard work on the  chronology of events at Auschwitz, we read on
         page 209 in the entry for  May 10, 1942 that the typhus epidemic is spreading at the Auschwitz  Concentration Camp, and was
         even threatening the camp’s SS staff. One of  the more prominent victims among them was the Auschwitz garrison  physician
         Dr. Siegfried Schwela, who died during that month of the  disease.
 
 The entry for May 25th states that more typhus cases were reported on  that day in the camp
         infirmary. By the summer of 1942, possibly also  because there was never a proper garrison physician in charge during  that
         time, the typhus epidemic had gotten completely out of control.  Hundreds of inmates were dying every day.
 
 On page 277 we read in the entry for August 17 that Dr. Kurt  Uhlenbrock
         took over the post of garrison physician on that day, but a  footnote explains that he, too, succumbed to typhus a few weeks
         later  and remained in Auschwitz until October 2 of 1942 only because he was  still recovering from that disease. Uhlenbrock
         barely survived.
 
 The sick Uhlenbrock
         was replaced on September 6th by Dr. Eduard  Wirths, who until then had been garrison physician at the Dachau Camp.  Only
         after Dr. Wirths had assumed his position, did things start to  change. Here is how the new garrison physician Dr. Wirths
         described the  situation at the Auschwitz camp when he arrived there – quote:
 
  “I discovered intolerable conditions for the prisoners.
         There was no  running water, no proper toilets, no means of bathing. The barracks in  which the prisoners were quartered were
         unheated, overcrowded, and beds  were missing. Lice literally swarmed on the floors, clothes, bodies of  the people. The walls
         were black with fleas. The people in an  inconceivable condition, wasted to their ribs, plagued with vermin, the  dead lying
         between the living and the dying. Every day hundreds of dead  were carted off, often after lying for days among the living.
         I was so  spiritually demoralized that I soon saw suicide as the only way out.”
 
 
  Wirths, here on the left, together with, among others, camp commander  Höss
         on the very right, subsequently went to work to improve the  conditions, yet it took him a full year to get the epidemic under
         control. Among other things, he also saw to it that the most modern  delousing technique was installed at Auschwitz: a large
         microwave  delousing device. Here is an image of that device as installed at  Auschwitz in early 1944, and this is a circuit
         layout. These documents  are stored in the archives of the Siemens company who developed this  device under the aegis of the
         German Army in order to keep the clothing  of German soldiers clean. A shift of priorities occurred in 1943,  however, as
         a result of which the device was used to save the lives of  inmates at Auschwitz instead. Here is a blueprint from the files
         of the  Auschwitz camp authorities showing the building where the device was  installed. And this is a report by Dr. Wirths
         of August 1944 in which he  enthusiastically praises the exceptional performance of this device.  The Siemens Archives in
         Munich even have some film footage of the device  as it is being operated at Auschwitz, but we were not allowed to make a
         copy of it.
 
 Also in 1944, DDT
         made its first appearance in Auschwitz under the  German name “Lauseto.” Nine metric tons were delivered in April
         1944,  fifteen tons in August, and two tons in October of that year. Together  with the highly effective and efficient microwave
         delousing facility,  Auschwitz therefore had hardly any need for Zyklon B in 1944, at least  when it came to disinfestations.
         As a matter of fact, only a little more  than one metric ton of Zyklon B was delivered to Auschwitz in 1944, and  the last
         delivery was made in late May of that year. Since the factory  buildings of the producer of Zyklon B, the Dessauer Zuckerwerke
         – that  is: Sugar Works of Dessau, in Saxony –, were damaged in summer 1944 by  an Allied air raid, Zyklon B deliveries
         pretty much dried up after that  in general. It is important to note that the mass extermination of  Hungarian Jews at Auschwitz
         using Zyklon B is said to have started in  mid-May 1944, that is to say, around the time Zyklon-B deliveries came  to an end.
         These are images made by the SS while these Jews were  unloaded from trains at Auschwitz. There aren’t any photos showing
         homicidal gassings, though. There are, however, images showing inmates  who have just undergone the admission procedures to
         the camp, which  included showering and shaving to prevent the spread of lice. Having  their hair shaved off was certainly
         humiliating for these women, but it  also was a necessary, life-saving measure.
 
 Plans for the two big Zyklon-B delousing facilities we saw earlier  were
         drawn up in the summer of 1942. The original blueprints show that  the room used for fumigating clothes was called “Gaskammer”
         that is,  “gas chamber.” Most of these blueprints were drawn by inmates employed  at the Auschwitz Construction
         Office. Interestingly, around the same  time the blueprints for these two buildings were drawn, Polish  resistance groups
         started reporting the existence of two homicidal gas  chambers at Auschwitz. Some of the claimed features of these alleged
         homicidal gas chambers closely resemble features of these two fumigation  facilities.
 
 These fumigation rooms were not of the professional kind that had  been
         developed by the company distributing Zyklon B, but of a rather  more-basic, if not to say primitive, design. The rooms were
         huge, had a  lot of dead space in the gable area, were not properly sealed along the  roofline, had no means of either heating
         the Zyklon B or distributing  its fumes in the chamber, and their ventilation system was rather crude  as well. Here you see
         the two openings where once ventilators were  installed. In fact, to operate this fumigation chamber, someone wearing a  gas
         mask had to enter the room and spread out the Zyklon B pellets on  the floor, then retreat and lock the door firmly.
 
 The doors to these disinfestation rooms were
         of a makeshift kind as  well, since they were made by inmates working in a local workshop. They  consisted of wooden boards
         held together by iron bands, as you can see  in these illustrations. The cracks between the boards were –  quote-unquote
         – “sealed” with felt strips, which, by the way, lets  hydrogen cyanide through as if it were nothing.
 
 These doors were moreover equipped with a
         peephole, as was required  by German law. It stipulated that the person entering such a chamber had  to be observed by another
         person from the outside, who needed to wear a  gas mask as well and had to have a first-aid kit at hand. This way he  could
         swiftly intervene in case of an emergency, for example caused by a  leaking or improperly donned gas mask.
 
 This kind of door is the only kind that has ever been found in  Auschwitz-Birkenau.
         Here is one currently leaning against a wall inside  the former Zyklon-B-fumigation wing of Building 5a that has a proper
         window. It probably served as a door to a hot-air disinfestation room,  though. This is a 1945 photo of another typical camp-made
         wooden door,  this one without window or peephole, though. It was found near the ruins  of Crematorium V, and is today stored
         in the Old Crematorium at the  Main Camp.
 
 Somewhat more-sturdy steel doors were found at the Auschwitz Camp in  the old Crematorium building which is said
         to have had a homicidal gas  chamber. However, these doors were ordered and installed only during the  conversion of this
         building into an air-raid shelter for the SS in  1944. At that point in time, this crematorium had already been out of  operation
         for a year. This particular door was sealing the air-raid  shelter’s air lock to the outside. This one, which is currently
         stored  in the former furnace room, might have been ordered to seal the opening  between the shelter and the former furnace
         room, before it was decided  to wall up that opening. But even those doors are made of a wooden frame  and merely have a sheet
         metal cover to make them gastight.
 
 There
         is no trace of any massive steel door ever having been ordered  or installed at Auschwitz prior to mid-1944. This is what
         they look  like. These are massive steel doors as installed at the fumigation  chambers at Dachau. That one and this one sealed
         fumigation chambers at  Majdanek, and that’s the fumigation chamber at Stutthof.
 
 And here are some excerpts from construction drawings of such doors  as
         offered to the Auschwitz camp in July 1942. However, they were  ordered only in June 1944, and in November 1944, the vendor
         of these  doors inquired whether the camp still had an interest in their delivery.  This means that they were evidently never
         delivered. Auschwitz simply  never felt a need to order massive steel doors…
 
 This fact is not trivial. After all, the orthodox Holocaust narrative  has
         it that hundreds of people were crammed into the homicidal gas  chambers. Some witnesses even speak of a thousand, two thousand,
         like  Rudolf Höss, or even three thousand people, like Charles Bendel. Let’s  ignore the fact that it would have
         been physically impossible to press  many more than a thousand people into the rooms referred to. Here is a  drawing of the
         largest of the rooms claimed, densely packed with 1680  people (120 rows of 14 each). And such a packing density is only 
         theoretically possible, meaning that it requires the drill and  discipline of experience soldiers to line up in such a fashion.
         Anyway,  there can be no doubt that panic would have broken out among those  victims, once they realized that they had been
         locked up in a chemical  slaughter house and were about to be poisoned.
 
         What a panicking crowd can do can be seen from the Heysel Stadium  disaster that occurred
         in Belgium in May 1985. Let’s watch this clip:
 
 
         “Heysel Stadium, Brussels. British soccer fans fly into a frenzy,  attacking rival Italian fans. The
         Belgian police are caught off guard,  as innocent fans are pelted with bottles and rocks. British hooligans  break through
         a fence. In a panic, the Italians make a run for the  exists, but they suddenly have nowhere to go. A concrete wall blocks
         their escape. Fearing for their lives, a few lucky fans manage to escape  over the wall, but it quickly collapses under their
         weight. Hundreds  are now trapped under a crushing mass of humanity. Cries for help go  unanswered.”
 
         
  Note that the wall was pushed over by the pressure
         exerted by the hundreds of fans pushing against it.
 
 The steel doors sealing U.S. execution gas chambers look like an  overkill in security, for even if an inmate ever
         had a chance of getting  out of the execution seat he is strapped into, any normal steel door  would prevent him from getting
         out. But here, it’s not just about  keeping the inmate in, but also about keeping all the witnesses  absolutely safe
         from any leakage.
 
 At Auschwitz,
         leakage would not have been the major issue. After all,  all the leaky makeshift fumigation doors did their job just fine.
         For  homicidal gas chambers designed to contain hundreds of unfettered  victims, the challenge would have been to let the
         door open to the  outside, and to secure it against a panicking crowd violently pushing  and kicking against it. The door
         had to open to the outside, because  many if not most victims, trying to escape through the door, would  collapse and die
         right in front of it, making it impossible to open any  door opening to the inside. However, a door opening to the outside
         is  much more difficult to secure against being opened by force. Simple  wooden doors held together by iron bands would never
         do. The flimsy iron  bands would give way within seconds, and the wood would bend and  splinter.
 
 To illustrate that point, I have used Photoshop to make the latch on  this
         gas tight door move. This was the kind of latch that was used on  all the gas-tight doors at Auschwitz. Imagine hundreds of
         people pushing  against that latch. How long would it last? These doors worked for  fumigation chambers, but for homicidal
         gas chambers,      
     
 Here is a scene from the 2011 movie “Auschwitz” by Uwe Boll
         showing a  gassing scene. It shows a massive steel door, as has to be expected,  even though the latch is a little flimsy.
         The problem is that none of  the claimed homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz was ever equipped with  such doors.
 
 The situation is even worse when it comes
         to the room at the  Auschwitz Museum which is presented every year to over a million  visitors as a homicidal gas chamber.
         This is an original German  blueprint of 1942. It clearly shows not only that the room in question,  in its original layout,
         which is labeled as an innocuous morgue, had no  door through which the claimed victims could have accessed the morgue  from
         the outside. They actually had to enter into it either by walking  through the furnace room where their already-murdered fellow
         inmates  were just being cremated – an absurd idea. Or else they had to enter  walking through the dissecting room were
         piles of corpses were awaiting  autopsies by the camp’s physicians – a no less absurd scenario.
 
 Worse still, the door connecting the morgue – the alleged gas chamber
         – to the furnace room was a swinging door, as can be seen from  blueprints of 1940, here an enlargement of that door,
         1942, also as an  enlargement, and even 1944, when the building was converted to an air  raid shelter, although here the draftsman
         apparently got the opening  direction wrong. This proves, however, that through the entire history  of that crematorium, until
         that door was walled up in 1944, this door  was a swinging door. The question is: How do you make a swinging door  gas tight?
         And how do you secure it against a panicking crowd?
 
 Look at this real-world swinging door in my home. There is no way of  looking it securely against a panicking crowd.
         And look at these gaps.  By their very design, swinging doors are not even able to prevent a  draft. It makes perfect sense
         to have such a door in a place where  people constantly haul heavy loads from one room to another. The door  opens with a
         push in either direction, and in closes by itself. But such  a door is utterly inconceivable for a homicidal gas chamber.
         And yet,  there it is.
 
 Today,
         there is no door at all between these two rooms. That’s not a  smart design for a homicidal gas chamber either, but
         reinstating the  original design is apparently out of the question as well.
 
         It goes without saying that the Auschwitz Museum hides this ugly  little secret from
         its millions of visitors, because otherwise the  entire fraud upon which this museum was built would swiftly collapse. On
         this chart, today located right next to the building, there is no trace  of that swinging door.
 
 There’s more to the story, but before discussing this, let’s
         go back to chemistry.
 
 As mentioned
         before, in the case of the Bavarian church in  Wiesenfeld, masonry samples were taken and analyzed in order to find out  what
         had caused the blue stains. Similar investigations were done in  Auschwitz, where a number of researchers took masonry samples
         of the  various fumigation chambers and of rooms that are said to have used, or  rather misused, at some point in time to
         mass murder people with  hydrogen cyanide in the form of Zyklon B.
 
 Before we can go into the details of these analyses, however, we need to address a number of
         questions.
 
 First, how likely
         is it to find any trace of the blue chemical  compounds involved in the first place? After all, several decades have  passed
         since Zyklon B was used in those locations.
 
 Next, what conditions are favorable to their formation?
 
 And finally, are there any factors that could interfere with the reliability of chemical analysis?
 
 The first question concerns the stability
         of the blue pigment we are  analyzing. Viewed on the surface of things, it is plainly obvious that  this pigment must be very
         stable, because it can still be found to this  day in the walls of the various fumigation facilities, even on the  outside
         where the walls have been exposed to the influence of sunshine  and rain for many decades. This fact is backed up by a  long-term-stability
         test which was performed in England starting in the  late 1950s. During that test, the blue pigment was simply precipitated
         on an aluminum sheet, and that aluminum sheet was then exposed to rain  and shine for 21 years on the rooftop of the factory
         building of the  High Duty Alloys Company in Slough, which is a western suburb of London.  During the 1950s and 1960s, at
         the peak of the age of coal, acidic smog  was a common occurrence in and around London.
 
  “[…] this choking, eye-watering
         smog. Traffic in London was  completely at a standstill on many occasions. In fact, the fog was the  worst on record for many
         a year.”
 
 
  Hence, the
         color samples used in that test were exposed to one of the  most aggressive environments possible. Yet still, the results
         published  in this paper of 1981 were astounding. They showed that this Prussian  Blue pigment was one of the most stable
         pigments of all the pigments  investigated, similar only to iron ochre, which is basically rust.  Almost all of the samples
         used hardly lost any of their vibrancy.
 
 Another strong indicator that the pigment in question is extremely  long-lasting can be seen from the fate it suffered
         in the soil of former  coking plants and city gas works. During the age of coal, people used  to heat their homes and cook
         with city gas, which could be produced from  coal in a number of ways. Let’s watch the following educational  Australian
         footage from the 1950s, which I have cut down to what’s  essential in the present context:
 
  “the coal is fed from the hoppers and falls into
         the retorts, which  are heated from the outside. As the coal is heated, coal gas is given  off. […] Those
         dots show how the gas escapes from the retorts  through pipes. What is left of the coal is called coke, and is emptied  from
         the bottom of the retorts into steel trucks. […] Other sections of the gas works clean this gas by removing
         tar, ammonia and other impurities, to make it fit for our use.”
 
 
 
         One of these impurities is a small amount of hydrogen cyanide, which gets washed out
         in the cleaning step mentioned next:
 
 
         “and also this scrubbing plant to remove still more impurities.”
 
 
  Hydrogen cyanide was removed by letting it react with a solution of  iron-two
         and iron-three hydroxide, resulting in Prussian Blue. Because  Prussian Blue was considered innocuous, many city-gas works
         and coking  plants simply dumped the pigment on the factory grounds. As a result,  the soil of thousands of coking and city
         gas plants all over the world  contains high quantities of Prussian Blue to this day, at times even  giving the soil a bluish
         hue.
 
 In the 1990s, when environmentalism
         became fashionable, people  started noticing the high quantities of cyanide in the soil of former  coking plants. Ever since,
         a plethora of scientific papers has appeared  investigating how dangerous this cyanide contamination is, if at all.
 
 One scientist in particular built his career
         on pushing the panic  button about that, the Dutchman Johannes Meeussen. In a number of papers  which he collected in a volume
         he eventually submitted as his PhD  thesis, he theorized that Prussian Blue from coke-gas scrubbers  deposited in soil would
         be highly unstable and should dissolve within a  short period of time, giving off toxic levels of free cyanide into the  ground
         water. But when he tested his theory by taking soil samples and  analyzing them, the results did not support his theory, which
         turned out  to have been based on the premise that Prussian Blue is present in the  soils as a microscopic mixture of iron
         cyanide and iron hydroxide, that  is, rust – a so-called solid solution. That may in fact be the case with  some of
         the Prussian Blue dumped on the grounds of former gas works, as  this Prussian Blue formed quickly using an excess of iron
         hydroxide.  But that is not at all what we would be dealing with in our case. The  slow formation of the pigment in masonry
         in the absence of noticeable  amounts of dissolved iron hydroxide precludes the formation of mixed  crystals and supports
         the formation of pure Prussian Blue crystals.
 
 Further studies revealed that Prussian Blue as such is in fact highly  stable for many decades. This chart shows
         in purplish blue the range of  stability of Prussian Blue and, in a lighter blue, of Turnbull’s Blue,  which is almost
         identical to Prussian Blue. The acidity of the  environment is plotted along the x axis, and the oxidative strength on  the
         y axis. Actual environmental conditions in masonry and soils are  located between pH 4 and pH 8. In other words, there is
         no way Prussian  Blue could dissolve quickly under the circumstances considered here.
 
 The actual solubility of Prussian Blue can be calculated by the upper  limit
         of alkalinity at which it is still stable. According to this  chart, that limit is somewhere between pH 9 and pH 11, depending
         on the  oxidative strength of the environment. With the known solubility of  iron(III) hydroxide, this yields a solubility
         product pKS for Prussian Blue of somewhere between 165 and 200.
 
         To cut a long story short: If Prussian Blue forms in masonry as a  result of exposure
         to hydrogen cyanide, the pigment formed is extremely  stable. In fact, it is similarly stable as the main components of the
         wall itself, since it is an integral part of it and one of its most  stable components to boot. In particular, it is less
         soluble than the  iron hydroxide from which it formed. Hence, as long as the wall itself  exists, it must be expected to contain
         Prussian Blue in undiminished  concentrations. Therefore, taking samples and analyzing them for  Prussian Blue makes sense,
         even if undertaken many decades after the  events that led to the pigment’s formation.
 
 Let’s now turn to the conditions that are favorable for the formation
         of Prussian Blue. First off, the formation of Prussian Blue in masonry  exposed to hydrogen cyanide cannot be the rule, because
         the fumigation  of buildings with Zyklon B and similar products based on hydrogen  cyanide has been a common practice for
         more than half a century, yet  reports about walls turning patchy-blue, such as the two churches I  discussed earlier, are
         rare exceptions.
 
 The question
         is: what do all the cases of wall discolorations known  to us have in common that sets them apart from the rest? Well,  fumigations
         of buildings for pest control usually take place only in  older buildings, because newly erected buildings cannot be infested
         by  pests. Such an infestation usually takes years or even decades. However,  all the fumigation chambers of the Third Reich
         era were specifically  built to be used right after they had been erected. The same  instant-exposure situation was given
         in the case of the two churches,  whose plaster had been replaced a few weeks prior to the fumigation. The  same, of course,
         would have been true for the claimed homicidal gas  chambers inside the crematoria at Auschwitz-Birkenau, which are said to
         have been built for the specific purpose of being used right after these  facilities had been finished.
 
 So, what factors are favorable to the formation of Prussian Blue in masonry?
 
 In this presentation, I will focus only on
         the most important aspects  of the physics and chemistry of hydrogen-cyanide interaction with  masonry. More details with
         many references to expert literature can be  found in my book. Anyway, in order to find out which factors support the  formation
         of Prussian Blue in masonry, we need to look into the various  steps leading to the formation of this pigment.
 
 First, hydrogen cyanide needs to get absorbed
         by the moisture contained in the wall.
 
 Next, the hydrogen cyanide molecules must be split to form cyanide  ions, because only these ions react with iron
         at a considerable rate.
 
 Then,
         those cyanide ions must attach themselves to the iron ions  contained in rust. That means that the cyanide ions displace the
         oxygen  and hydroxide ions that, together with the iron, constitute rust.
 
         After this, some of the iron must be reduced from the trivalent to  its bivalent form,
         because Prussian Blue is a mixture of both, but the  rust contained in masonry contains almost exclusively trivalent iron.
 
 Finally, all components must come together
         so as to precipitate as the blue pigment in question.
 
 The first step requires that the masonry contains lots of water. At  low temperatures and a high relative humidity
         of the ambient air, such  as one can find in unheated basements, up to 10% of the masonry material  can consist of water.
         If the ambient air is warm and dry, however, this  value may sink down to just 1% or even less.
 
 The influence of moisture in the wall on the tendency to absorb  hydrogen
         cyanide was determined during a series of tests conducted in  Germany in the late 1920s. In our context, a comparison between
         a moist  lime sandstone and one dried for half a year at 20°C, that is 68°F, is  of interest. Here you can see a factor
         of almost 10 between moist and  dry material.
 
 In fact, a high water content is conducive to all the reactions  considered, none of which can take place at a noticeable
         rate in the  absence of water. Hence cool and thus moist walls will be more inclined  to form Prussian Blue than warm and
         dry walls.
 
 The second step depends
         on the acidity of the masonry’s capillary  water. Since hydrogen cyanide is a weak acid, it forms cyanide ions to a
         noticeable degree only in an alkaline, or low-acidity environment. Such  an environment exists in fresh lime mortars and plasters
         for a few  weeks, and in cement mortars and concretes for many months, years or  even decades, depending on their exact composition
         and history. It can  be stated in general that a masonry material remains alkaline for a  longer period of time, if it contains
         little lime and lots of cement.  Hence, fresh and thus still-alkaline lime plaster supports this step of  the formation of
         Prussian Blue for a number of weeks, while mortar and  concrete rich in cement support it for many months, if not years or
         even  decades.
 
 The difference
         in absorption of hydrogen cyanide between fresh, hence  alkaline mortar and old, well-set, hence pH-neutral mortar was also
         investigated in the previously mentioned study.
 
 We derive from it that, compared to the old mortar, the fresh,  alkaline mortar absorbed at least 26 times as much
         hydrogen cyanide, and  that it released it much more-slowly, widening the gap between the two  types of mortar as time went
         by.
 
 Aging lime plaster turns
         pH-neutral after several weeks, at which  point any cyanide not bound by iron will be turned back into hydrogen  cyanide by
         the wall’s moisture. That hydrogen cyanide will slowly  evaporate and vanish into thin air. Cement mortar and concrete,
         however,  stay alkaline for much longer periods of time. Hence, these materials  allow any cyanide that has accumulated in
         its capillary system to  continue reacting for a much longer time.
 
 The third step is the slowest of all the reactions considered. It  therefore determines the
         rate of formation of long-lasting iron-cyanide  components. While the trivalent iron of rust becomes more readily  available
         for reactions with increasing acidity, its reaction partner,  the cyanide ion, has the opposite tendency. Hence, while fresh
         and thus  very alkaline plasters, mortars and concretes can accumulate lots of  cyanide, it takes a long time for iron cyanide
         to form. In the cases of  the two churches mentioned earlier, that process took many months up to a  year.
 
 Helpful to this slow process is the next step, the reduction of  trivalent
         iron to bivalent iron. This reduction requires that something  else gets oxidized. In our case, the oxidizing agent is an
         excess of  cyanide itself, which also needs an alkaline environment for this  reaction. The driving force behind this reaction
         is the energy released  when trivalent iron surrounded by cyanide turns into bivalent iron. That  reaction is so strong in
         an alkaline medium that it is even capable of  turning trivalent chromium into hexavalent chromium. The energy  difference
         ΔH between the two types of iron cyanides is some 64  kilo-Joule per mol.
 
 Hence, even if only small amounts of iron(III) cyanide can form in a  moderately
         alkaline environment, it gets withdrawn from the equilibrium  by turning into iron(II) cyanide in the presence of excess cyanide.
         In  the course of many days, weeks, months or even years, this can amount to  considerable quantities of iron(II) cyanide.
 
 The last step, the precipitation of Prussian
         Blue, can take place  when the acidity sinks below the limit where this pigment is stable  compared to iron hydroxide, that
         is, rust. As shown previously, that is  somewhere between pH 9 and 11. Since the masonry’s acidity sinks with  time
         starting at the surface, that’s where most of the Prussian Blue  will show up initially. If the wall is moist, that
         moisture evaporates  at the surface, leaving behind everything that travels along with the  water but cannot evaporate. That
         includes any soluble iron cyanides not  yet precipitated as Prussian Blue. Hence, this pigment tends to get  accumulated on
         the surfaces, inside and outside.
 
 The
         red arrow on this photo points to the spot where I took a wall  sample from the inside of Building 5a in Auschwitz-Birkenau.
         Note that  just a few millimeters beneath the surface, the plaster is considerably  less blue. But even in deeper layers,
         the plaster still contains high  concentrations of cyanide. It’s just that on the very surface, that  pigment’s
         concentration is extremely high in certain places.
 
 This accumulation process on a wall’s surface depends on a number of  factors, starting with the kind of material
         that makes up the wall at  any particular spot, the amount of water in its capillary system, and  the water’s mobility.
         Last but not least, the heat conductivity of the  underlying material also has an influence on this.
 
 There are a few other factors to be considered. For instance, it goes  without
         saying that high contents of rust in the masonry are also  conducive to the formation of Prussian Blue, but since most materials
         have an iron content between 1 to 5 percent anyway, the difference  between them is usually negligible.
 
 Furthermore, any masonry material containing considerable amounts of  cement
         also has the advantage that its microscopic inner surface is much  larger than that of masonry consisting mainly of lime.
         Here is a  scanning-electron microscope image of lime mortar, and here is one of  cement mortar at the same magnification,
         although the image is much  smaller. As you can see, the crystals in the cement mortar are much  smaller.
 
 Here is a series of three images showing what happens to cement and  concrete
         after water has been added to the cement powder. The first  image shows the state after 4 hours, the second after 10 hours,
         and the  last after 21 hours. What you see growing here are needles of  aluminosilicates, something that happens only in cement
         mortars and  concretes, but never in lime mortar. These crystals are responsible for  the fact that cement mortar is much
         firmer and longer-lasting than lime  mortar. Due to this micro-crystalline structure, the inner surface of  cement and concrete
         is much larger than that of lime mortar. The actual  value, measured with water vapor, can be as high as 200 square meters
         per gram of material. Lime mortar has only about 10% of that value. The  micro-crystalline structure of cement mortars and
         concretes means that  the solid/liquid interface is very large. Since we are dealing here with  a reaction of the mostly solid
         iron ions with cyanide dissolved in the  capillary water, such a large surface is very conducive to this  reaction.
 
 It also means that more iron is exposed at
         the surface, and that it  is more inclined to react, energetically speaking. The opposite is true  for sintered materials,
         however, which do not tend to form Prussian  Blue, because the sintering process drastically reduces the inner  surface of
         such materials, hence their propensity to react in any way.  Bricks are a case in point. Only on the surface, where the material
         has  been eroded due to environmental influences, is the rust contained in  them able to react to a considerable degree.
 
 Before we turn to the actual analysis, we
         need to understand that  analyzing a substance for a certain chemical isn’t always a  straightforward process. Many
         methods are sensitive not just for one  chemical, but for several, so a certain reading might not necessarily  indicate how
         much of a certain chemical is in a sample, because it may  give a combined reading of several chemicals.
 
 In the present case, Johannes Meeussen determined with a series of  experiments
         the kind of chemicals that can give false positive readings.  The most common one among them is carbonate. This is very important
         for  our case, because one of the main components of masonry is calcium  carbonate. In fact, older lime plaster samples may
         mainly consist of it.  If we extrapolate Meeussen’s data to carbonate contents in the order of  several hundred grams
         per kilogram sample material, or several ten  percent, this means that such samples can yield a reading of several  milligrams
         of cyanide even in the total absence of any cyanide. In other  words, the analytical methods used to detect cyanide traces
         become  insensitive in the case of masonry material rich in carbonates, and  readings of up to a few milligrams of cyanide
         per kilogram of sample  material should be considered uncertain or unreliable.
 
 Equipped with this knowledge, let’s now have a look at the analytical
         results of a number of researchers who took samples at Auschwitz.
 
 To make things easier to digest, I do not give the results of  individual samples in this table,
         but only the ranges of results.  Furthermore, I have grouped the samples by the type of location they  came from, and then
         by the individual who took the samples and had them  analyzed. The first, white set of results comes from samples taken from
         walls which are said to have been part of homicidal gas chambers. The  second, blue set of results concerns samples taken
         from walls of former  fumigation chambers, mainly of the two buildings at Birkenau shown  before. The third set of results
         relates to samples taken from walls of  buildings which belong to neither group.
 
 First, we see that all samples taken from structures that were not  fumigation
         chambers exhibit results which are close to what must be  considered the detection limit. To demonstrate this, I have actually
         retested two of the samples using a different lab. While the first one –  the Institute Fresenius – found traces
         in the samples, the second lab  did not.
 
 This means basically that the cyanide readings in samples taken from  claimed homicidal gas chambers are comparable
         to those taken from any  other location, and that none of them contain any traces of cyanide that  can be detected with any
         degree of reliability, if they exist at all.
 
 The situation is different when it comes to samples taken from former  fumigation chambers. Only three of the four
         individuals who took  samples agree on the range of cyanide contents. All samples that these  three samplers had taken had
         readings of at least a gram of cyanide per  kilogram of sample material. This means that at least 0.1% of the  samples consisted
         of cyanide, something we would expect of a sample  taken from walls exhibiting a patchy blue discoloration caused by  Zyklon-B
         fumigations. The third set of samples taken from various  Auschwitz fumigation chambers and analyzed by Markiewicz and colleagues,
         however, didn’t result in any significant cyanide readings at all.
 
         The reason for that is simple: Dr. Jan Markiewicz, here a portrait  from the 1960s,
         had been commissioned by the Polish State Museum at  Auschwitz, thus by the Polish government itself. Markiewicz himself was
         an employee of the Jan-Sehn-Institute for Forensic Research, which is  run by the Polish government’s department of
         justice. Since denying the  Auschwitz gas chambers is a crime in Poland, Markiewicz must have been  under massive pressure
         to somehow conclude that the cyanide readings  from the claimed homicidal gas chambers resemble those of fumigation  chambers.
         To produce those results, he chose an analytic method which by  design was unable to detect any Prussian Blue and
         similar  long-term-stable iron cyanide compounds. Here is his 1994 publication of  his rigged results. As a reason why he
         excluded all Prussian Blue from  the analysis, he stated that he did not understand how Prussian Blue  could possibly form
         in masonry as a result of Zyklon B gassings. Quote:
 
 
         “It is hard to imagine the chemical reactions and physicochemical  processes that could have led to
         the formation of Prussian Blue in that  place.” – unquote
 
 
  Referring to a paper by an Austrian chemist, Markiewicz then stated,  quote
         “that the formation of Prussian blue in bricks is simply  improbable,” and that the blue discoloration could instead
         be the result  of blue wall paint. While such a hypothesis is certainly permissible,  ignoring arguments to the contrary certainly
         is not. But that is exactly  what Markiewicz and his colleagues subsequently did. Here is what they  quoted in their paper
         in footnote 4 on the last page: Ernst Gauss, which  used to be a pen name of mine, Vorlesungen über Zeitgeschichte,
         which means Lectures on Contemporary History. This book is the German predecessor of the currently available book
         Lectures on the Holocaust.  Its first edition was published in early 1993. In it, I explained with  the
         same arguments as presented here, and supported by the same sources  of expert literature, how Prussian Blue can
         form in masonry  after exposure to hydrogen cyanide, and which factors are favorable.  Although he quoted the book, Markiewicz
         ignored those arguments  completely. That book also addressed specifically the many deficiencies  and fallacies of the Austrian
         paper quoted by Markiewicz, in particular  the demonstrably false hypothesis that the blue discoloration of the  Auschwitz,
         Stutthof and Majdanek fumigation walls could be the results  of blue wall paint. Specifically, we read on page 292, quote:
 
  “These cyanide readings
         can be found not only on the wall’s surface,  as would have to be expected in the case of wall paint, but also deep
         inside the wall and on the outside of the masonry, and also on the  bricks. Furthermore, the blue discoloration resembles
         anything else but a  typical coat of paint; in fact, the patchy pattern also proves that the  Prussian Blue originated from
         fumigation gassings.”
 
 
  There
         are actually many more arguments clearly showing that the  wall-paint hypothesis is nothing more than a red herring conjured
         up to  conceal a fraud:
 
 - First,
         Iron Blue as such is not even sold as wall paint at all,  since it lacks sufficiently high lime fastness. It is offered only
         as a  mixture with other blue pigments. But there is no trace of any other  blue pigment on these walls.
 
- Second, if this argument were correct, it would be remarkable that  the SS,
         of all the rooms in the concentration camps of the Third Reich,  would apply blue paint only to their disinfestation chambers
         where no  one could admire it; and, strangely, always with the same blue:  Auschwitz, Birkenau, Majdanek, Stutthof….
         All other rooms were merely  whitewashed at best.
 
- Third,
         the disinfestation chambers themselves already had a coat of  lime paint. Why would they cover this coat of lime paint with
         another  paint which, in addition, is not even lime-fast? They would therefore  have had to wait until the lime paint and
         plaster had set before one  could (re‑)paint the walls. And then it would have been by no means  certain that the paint
         would not furthermore have become stained as a  result of chemical reactions.
 
- Fourth, neither would a coat of paint on the inside of the room  explain the absence of blue discolorations on the
         interior walls which  were added to the disinfestation wing of Building 5a at a later time. It  is striking that only such
         walls have blue stains which were exposed to  hydrogen cyanide.
 
- Fifth, the wall-paint argument is refuted by the fact that none of  the colored walls shows any pattern of brush
         marks and also no  identifiable coat of paint, since wall paint consists not only of  pigment, but also of a considerable
         proportion of binding agents to hold  the pigment in place and other chemicals. The blue pigment is, however,  simply one
         component of the lime paint, plaster and mortar.
 
- Sixth,
         the wall-paint argument furthermore fails to explain how the  artistic skills of the painters could have succeeded in imitating
         the  brick structure lying beneath the plaster. Such a pattern, however, is  fully consistent with the accumulation of cyanides
         and the formation of  Prussian Blue as a result of fumigations, because that depends on the  wall’s humidity and temperature,
         which in turn depends on whether there  is mortar or brick behind the plaster.
 
- Seventh, the wall-paint argument does not explain the only-pale-blue  tint of the interior south walls of the original
         disinfestation wing of  Building 5a. This, too, can be explained by fumigation, because that  interior wall was warmer and
         dryer than the exterior walls, hence less  prone to form Prussian Blue.
 
- Eight, neither does this wall-paint argument explain the high  cyanide content in the superficially white, iron-poor
         material of the  walls of the disinfestation wing of Building 5b – unless one posits that  these rooms were painted
         with an “iron white,” a wall paint that does  not even exist. Here, too, the fumigation hypothesis has no trouble
         explaining this. Since the plaster in that building does not adhere  firmly to the underlying wall, moisture cannot easily
         travel from the  wall through the plaster into that room. Thus, accumulation processes on  the plaster’s surface are
         impeded.
 
  The
         Austrian paper quoted by Markiewicz and colleagues in order to  prop up their auxiliary wall-paint hypothesis was published
         in this  political pamphlet. It was written by Josef Bailer and stands out by not  having a single reference to any literature,
         chemical or otherwise,  regarding the formation and stability of Prussian Blue, or any other  cyanide chemistry, for that
         matter. In his first footnote, he excuses  that fact by stating that his subsequent remarks – quote – “aren’t
         supposed to be a treatise on the chemistry of hydrogen cyanide” –  unquote. How can any researcher take such a
         paper seriously in the first  place that is devoid of any substantiated reasoning? Well, Markiewicz  didn’t back up
         any of his claims with any references to chemical  literature either, as can be seen from his meagre footnotes. So, I guess
         ignorant birds of the same feather flock together. And yet, these two  vacuous papers serve as the linchpin for the orthodox
         musings on the  chemistry of Auschwitz.
 
 Anyway, after Markiewicz and his colleagues had picked an analytical  method that wouldn’t find anything anywhere,
         no matter how hard they  looked, they found that the readings of samples taken from fumigation  chambers were similar –
         that is to say, non-existing – to those taken  from claimed homicidal gas chambers. Hence, they concluded that the 
         history of both groups of samples must also have been similar. So,  because we know that Zyklon-B gassings took place on a
         grand scale in  the fumigation chambers, they concluded that similar Zyklon-B gassings  must also have taken place in the
         claimed homicidal gas chambers. And  Bingo! The reality of homicidal gassings at Auschwitz had been  confirmed! Because the
         absence of any evidence proves what needs to be  demonstrated!
 
 Good job!
 
 So, how do you prove that a civilization exists on Mars? Well, first  you take a detection device that cannot detect
         civilizations. Then you  use it to measure the civilization existing on earth. Your device will  show some value close to
         zero. Next, you train your instrument on Mars.  Here, too, the instrument shows a value close to zero. Hence, you  conclude
         that a civilization similar to ours must indeed exist on Mars,  for the values measured in both cases are similar!
 
 Of course, if you care to look, there would
         be a similar civilization  “value” for the Moon, for Mercury, Venus, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune,  Uranus, and Pluto;
         for the sun, for Alpha Centaury, for the Andromeda  Nebula, and wherever you train your smart device. Smart? Really?
 
 There are people who take the Polish frauds
         around Jan Markiewicz  seriously. Some don’t know better, because they simply trust  quote-unquote “renowned”
         researchers, but others do know better, such as  the Jewish-American chemist Dr. Richard Green. The psychology behind  his
         persistent denial of reality is worth its own documentary, so I  won’t dwell on it here.
 
 It goes without saying that the lack of any reproducible, reliable  cyanide
         readings in wall samples taken from claimed homicidal gas  chambers does not conclusively prove that no gassings
         took  place there. After all, most premises fumigated with Zyklon B don’t  exhibit such residues either, as I mentioned
         before. But then again, so  do all buildings that were never exposed to the gas.
 
 What we need to do is look into all possible factors that can  influence
         the formation of Prussian Blue, and then compare those with  the two cases: the fumigation chambers on the one hand, and the
         claimed  homicidal gas chambers on the other.
 
 This is exactly what the next table does. It compares three types of facilities:
 
 - The documented case of the church at Wiesenfeld where the plaster
         turned patchy blue after just one fumigation.
 
- Morgue #1
         each of Crematorium II and III at Birkenau. These unheated  underground basements were built into the ground water, from which
         they  were insulated by a layer of tar between two layers of bricks. Their  interior plaster is of a very hard consistency
         to this day, indicating a  high portion of cement. The roof is made of concrete; so is the floor.  These rooms allegedly served
         as homicidal gas chambers. When samples  were taken there in the 1990s, the roof and walls of Morgue #1 of  Crematorium II
         were still extant to a large degree, and sections of the  interior wall’s plaster were relatively well protected from
         environmental influences.
 
- The disinfestation facilities
         5a and 5b at Birkenau, as shown here  already a number of times. While the exterior walls have been exposed to  the elements
         since these facilities were built in 1942, their interior  walls have always been sheltered from any weathering. The plaster
         and  mortar of these buildings is coarse and brittle, indicating a high  amount of sand and lime as their ingredients and
         little, if any, cement.  The former Zyklon-B-fumigation chambers of these buildings were heated  above-ground rooms.
 
  While we have relatively reliable
         information about the fumigation  cases, some parameters of the claimed homicidal gassings are by  necessity speculative in
         nature, as we have only highly unreliable and  at times wildly divergent witness statements to back them up. I’ll get
         back to that in a few minutes.
 
 In
         this table, I have listed seven features of the masonry under  consideration. Four of them – alkalinity, inner surface,
         moisture and  number of gassings – clearly favor the claimed homicidal gas chambers  over the disinfestation chambers
         when it comes to the formation of  Prussian Blue. This is mainly due to the fact that the underground  morgues were unheated,
         hence cool and moist locations, and that their  plaster, containing large quantities of cement, was of a much higher  quality,
         evidently due to the constant high moisture it needed to  withstand.
 
         Hence, if we consider only the chemical and physical features, the  claimed homicidal
         gas chambers would have had a considerably higher  propensity to form Prussian Blue than the fumigation chambers.
 
 However, we need to somehow explain a difference
         of up to a factor of one thousand in favor of the fumigation chambers, although so far, the opposite seems to be
         more likely.
 
 But there are two
         more factors related to how the rooms were used,  which I have marked with three question marks in the gas chamber column.
         The first concerns the amount of hydrogen cyanide used per volume of  air, called concentration, and the second concerns the
         amount of time  during which the gas was contained in these rooms, and thus could react  with the masonry.
 
 This is exactly the line of argument of scholars defending the  orthodox
         Holocaust narrative, such as Richard Green, Josef Bailer and  Jan Markiewicz. They claim that, compared to fumigations, only
         a  fraction of the concentration of hydrogen cyanide was used, and that  killing humans took much less time than fumigating
         bugs. With that, they  are not entirely wrong. But they are not entirely right, either.
 
 First, in order to kill insects like fleas, lice and woodworms, one  also
         has to kill their larvae and eggs, which, due to their slow  metabolism, react only slowly to poisonous substances in the
         air. In  contrast to that, humans, as warm-blooded animals, always have a fast  metabolism.
 
 Orthodox scholars base their assumption of swift Zyklon-B executions  on
         toxicological handbooks saying that hydrogen cyanide kills humans  swiftly already at low concentrations. As we have seen
         at the beginning  of this presentation, however, that assumption is based on experiments  on rabbits which cannot be transferred
         to humans, who react much slower  to gaseous hydrogen cyanide
.
 When it comes to the speed of the execution and the amount of poison used
         to effect it, what do witnesses claim about Auschwitz?
 
 We have only one testimony regarding the quantity of Zyklon B  allegedly used during homicidal gassings. It stems
         from Rudolf Höss, the  former Auschwitz camp commander. However, he was severely tortured  during his initial interrogations,
         and many of the claims he made in his  various statements are demonstrably false. I won’t go into details  about that
         here. Hence, I must abstain from using his coerced  confessions as a source, not least because they would be inadmissible
         in  any proper court of law.
 
 There
         is an indirect way of determining the amount of poison  allegedly used, though. It uses the claimed execution times in order
         to  calculate from them the effective concentration needed to achieve such  times. That requires, of course, that we have
         reliable information about  the execution times. Fact is, however, that claims about that vary  between instantly and up to
         20 minutes. We can get out of that bad fix  by acknowledging that not all witnesses are created equal.
 
 As a matter  of fact, many witnesses claiming knowledge of how long a gassing lasted  at Auschwitz
         cannot possible have that knowledge. It requires knowledge  of when the gassing started and when it was considered concluded.
         When  it comes to executions in the underground morgues of Crematoria II and  III, whose activities were hidden from most,
         the only individuals who  could possible know all this were the physicians who are said to have  ordered and supervised the
         gassings.
  
I have found four
         former Auschwitz physicians who made statements in  this regard, and they all agreed more or less that it took only a few
         minutes, not more than five anyway, until all victims had succumbed.  Now, remember that in U.S. execution gas chambers, it
         took up to ten  minutes to make the toughest executees succumb. Employing Haber’s rule  that it takes twice the amount
         of poison to kill in half the time, this  means that the effective concentration used at Auschwitz must have been  at least
         twice that used in U.S. execution gas chambers. Their  concentration is given as roughly a third of one percent by volume,
         which means that some two thirds of one percent by volume or more would  have been needed to achieve the execution times claimed
         by these  physicians.
 
 Already
         now you can see that we are very close to the concentrations  usually used for fumigations, which are usually around 1 to
         2 percent by  volume. That takes one of the two reasons out why we should expect less  Prussian Blue in homicidal gas chambers
         than in fumigation chambers.
 
 And
         how about the time during which the masonry was exposed to the  poison? Here we run into an even bigger problem. Again, eyewitness
         statements clearly stating how long it took before the doors to the  execution chamber were opened are rare, and few of those
         who did testify  could possibly know it in the first place.
 
 In addition, when it comes to executions with Zyklon B, we face the  problem that it does not
         behave at all like the cyanide powder mixed  with sulfuric acid as it was used in U.S. execution gas chambers. In  those chambers,
         the bulk of the poison gas develops instantly, engulfing  the victims within seconds.
 
 Zyklon B, on the other hand, was developed to release its poison only  slowly,
         both in order to allow personnel spreading it out in the  fumigated locations to retreat safely, and also in order to continuously
         release more hydrogen cyanide for an hour or more. This was meant to  compensate for losses occurring in fumigated places
         through leakage,  absorption in moisture, and adsorption on fabrics, for instance.
 
 This is a German paper that discussed how fast hydrogen cyanide  evaporates
         from the carrier substance of Zyklon B. It was published in  1942, right at the height of Zyklon-B usage at Auschwitz. The
         author,  Richard Irmscher, was a researcher involved in developing and improving  Zyklon B. Zyklon B was available on a number
         of different carrier  substances, but toward the beginning of the war, it was pretty much down  to wood-fiber discoids and
         gypsum. While in the U.S. the discoids were  primarily used, the type usually used in German concentration camps  during the
         war was made of gypsum pellets. In the year 2000, the  Auschwitz Museum cooperated in having some pellets analyzed which they
          had taken from Zyklon B cans left behind at Auschwitz by the German  authorities. A spectral analysis carried out on the
         pellets confirmed  that they consisted mainly of gypsum.
 
 Here is a chart taken from Irmscher’s paper showing how fast hydrogen  cyanide evaporates from the gypsum-type
         Zyklon B, depending on the  ambient temperature. These values are valid only for cases where the  pellets are spread out thinly
         and at low relative humidity. The highest  temperature given is 15°C, which corresponds to 59°F.
 
 In our case, where people would have been packed tightly into the  chamber,
         the room temperature sooner or later would have risen well  beyond 15°C even in an unheated basement room in winter, and
         its  relative humidity would have reached 100% rather quickly, probably  already before the start of the actual execution.
         That complicates our  considerations, as does the fact that it would not have been possible to  spread out the pellets as
         during a fumigation.
 
 While a
         higher temperature accelerates the evaporation, a high  humidity leading to condensation of moisture on the gypsum pellets
         would  have slowed down the evaporation to a crawl. Hydrogen cyanide is so  soluble in water that, once the carrier
         material is moist, it will give  off its hydrogen cyanide only reluctantly, even if warmed up.
 
 At the end, the entire scenario we are trying to figure out depends  on
         how the Zyklon B is said to have been applied. Here is a scenario  invented by German moviemaker Uwe Boll in his 2011 movie
         “Auschwitz.”  Was the Zyklon B dumped indiscriminately into the execution chamber  through some openings, as some
         witnesses claimed, in some columns, as  shown here, or was it lowered into the chamber through some contraption  and retrieved
         after it was all over, as some other witnesses have  claimed? And how reliable are these witnesses? Plus, are their claims
          consistent with documentary and physical evidence we have? Moreover, are  these claims technically feasible? And can they
         have the claimed  results?
 
 Let’s
         start by asking us what a quote-unquote “reasonable” person  hell-bent on mass-murdering people would have done.
         The camp authorities  of Auschwitz in charge of building gas chambers – be they for  fumigation or for execution –
         had been informed about the best way of  conducting such gassings: They had been sent two articles describing the  Degesch
         circulation device as discussed earlier. We know that, because  these articles were found in the camp’s files currently
         stored in  Moscow. In this device, a can of Zyklon B is opened by a large  can-opening mechanism operated from the outside
         with a crank wheel like  this, or a simple crank. Once opened, the Zyklon-B pellets fall into a  metal basket, through which
         a fan blows warm air. This fan gets its air  from the other end of the chamber, resulting in the gases inside the  chamber
         being circulated, leading to a swift and even distribution of  the poison gas. By retracting the crank wheel at the end of
         the  procedure, the fan no longer circulates the air but blows it out,  replacing it with fresh air from the outside. Here
         is Degesch’s  schematic drawing as shown earlier explaining it in more detail. Degesch  offered that fumigation device,
         called a “Normalgaskammer” or “standard  gas chamber,” to the Auschwitz authorities, who initially
         planned to  install a number of them. That project was abandoned in 1943, however,  when the swift deployment of the world’s
         first microwave device to kill  bugs was promised, as mentioned before.
 
         It goes without saying that it would have made perfect sense for the  Auschwitz authorities
         to use similar principles when outfitting a room  for mass executions. Keeping the device out of reach of the victims, who
          could otherwise sabotage or wreck it in their fits of panic, and making  sure that warm air is blown through the gypsum pellets
         to quickly  evaporate and dissipate the fumes seems like a no-brainer. I could make  detailed suggestions on how to solve
         the challenges involved most  intelligently from an engineering point of view, but I won’t do that  here, because we’re
         not in a competition to reinvent the claimed Nazi  gas chambers.
 
 Now let’s look into what orthodox scholars claim about how it was  supposedly done. We’ll
         go through one Auschwitz gas chamber after  another.
 
 First, there is Crematorium I, the old crematorium in the main camp  shown to this day to millions of tourists every
         year. It is equipped  with four wooden shafts built into four roughly hewn holes in the roof,  marked here with red arrows.
         They are said to have been used to simply  pour the Zyklon-B pellets on top and among the people inside. Here is a  view of
         these primitive holes as seen from the inside. It goes without  saying that it would have been impossible to remove the Zyklon
         B after  the execution. Hence, it would not have been possible to successfully  ventilate the room unless all hydrogen cyanide
         had evaporated from the  pellets.
 
 But
         there is more to the story. Here is what Franciszek Piper, the  Auschwitz Museum’s curator, said about these holes when
         interviewed by  Jewish-American revisionist David Cole in 1992:
 
  “So, after the liberation of the camp, the former gas chamber presented
         a view of [an] air[-raid] shelter. In order to gain the earlier view [look], earlier sight of this
         object, the inside walls built in 1944 [during the conversion to an air-raid shelter] were removed and the openings
         in the ceiling were made anew.”
 
 
  A little later, Cole asked:
 
 
         “Were the holes in the ceiling put in in the same way that they were…”
 
         “Yes, in the same place because the traces were visible on the ceiling.”
 
         
  But how does Piper know this? After all, when this
         – quote-unquote –  “reconstruction” work was performed in 1947, he was only six years old.  Asked
         whether there is any proof other than Piper’s word for the claim  that there were traces of old openings on the ceiling
         before the new  openings were opened in 1947, the Auschwitz Museum responded that they  have no documentation at all in this
         matter.
 
 All they have to prop
         up their claim is only one testimony deposed in  1981, hence 34 years after the fact, by the former museum guard Adam  Źłobnicki.
         Here is his statement. Interestingly, he remembered  quote-unquote “exactly” that the new shafts were made of
         bricks, when in  fact the museum used primitive wooden boards to build these shafts. So  much for that. But wait. Why did
         the museum ask a former museum guard  to testify about this? If anyone had any knowledge about what was done  back
         then, it would be the museum authorities of that time, and in  particular the individuals who commissioned and supervised
         the  quote-unquote “reconstruction.” Any construction worker or architect  hired to do the work would also seem
         to be a competent witness in this  regard. But why, of all possible people, would a former museum guard  have had any knowledge
         about traces of old holes having been turned into  new ones? And why did the museum secure his testimony only 34 years  after
         the fact? Why wasn’t the claimed crime scene photographed in  detail, in particular the only obviously incriminating
         trace of mass  murder, that is, traces of the old Zyklon B holes?
 
 Shortly after the retreat of German forces from the Auschwitz area in  early 1945, the Polish
         authorities commissioned a lengthy expert report  on documentary and physical evidence found at Auschwitz, compiled by  the
         Polish investigative judge Jan Sehn, here a portrait of him, and by  professor of engineering Dr. Roman Dawidowski. But nowhere
         in their  report is anything mentioned about holes or traces thereof in the  ceiling of this building – or of any other
         Auschwitz building implicated  in mass murder, for that matter.
 
 Embarrassed by this total lack of any evidence for their claims, the  Auschwitz museum authorities
         must have used this one former museum guard  as a fig leaf to cover up the fact that the Auschwitz emperor is naked.
 
 But that’s still not the end of it.
         Here is how these four holes are  distributed across the ceiling of what tourists encounter at Auschwitz  today as –
         quote – “the gas chamber.” As you can see, they are neatly  arranged to be crosswise at equal distances
         to opposite walls. But  there’s a glitch. When the Auschwitz Museum quote-unquote  “reconstructed” that
         building by removing the separation walls added in  1944, they removed one wall too many, leaving behind a room that is  considerable
         longer than the original morgue, aka gas chamber. If we put  that original wall back in place, and if we also remove the additional
          entry with the air lock added in 1944, the distribution looks like this.
 
         Even though that is not an iron-clad proof that the holes are  post-war fakes, this
         fact combined with the fact that there is no  evidence at all for the existence of any holes prior to this  quote-unquote
         “reconstruction” would suffice to convince any jury in a  trial that the Auschwitz Museum committed a fraud and
         is thus guilty of  the criminal charge of tampering with the evidence of a claimed crime  scene.
 
 At any rate, no sane person would compromise a massive concrete roof  by
         hacking holes into it in order to dump Zyklon B onto people inside.  There would have been far better and less destructive
         methods of adding  poison gas into that room. That’s the end of that claim.
 
 Let’s move on to next claimed gas chambers, the so-called bunkers.
          Two of them are said of have existed. They allegedly were two old farm  houses converted to mass execution gas chambers.
         There is no evidence  whatsoever that the first of these buildings ever existed as such. For  the second bunker, we have witness
         drawings, like this one by David  Olère. Zyklon B is said to have been dumped through openings in the  wall, plain
         and simple. See the red arrow. I will not dwell on this here  in more detail.
 
 When it comes to non-anecdotal evidence for Bunker 2, the Auschwitz  museum
         presents us with foundation walls visible to this day. Although  that may be impressive, if we look at any of the witnesses
         who testified  about this claimed mass-slaughter facility, their description of that  building has nothing to do whatsoever
         with the size, shape and  partitioning of the actual building as evidenced by its foundation  walls. Here is a typical drawing
         of Bunker 2 by the witness Slamy  Dragon.
 
 One of the most detailed description of a gassing said to have  occurred in one of these buildings was given by Richard
         Böck, a former  Auschwitz SS man. Here is what he testified about what he claimed to  have witnessed – quote:
 
  “Then an SS man came
         […] and got out a gas canister. He then went to a ladder with this gas canister. […] At the
         same time, I noticed that he had a gas mask on while climbing the ladder. […] he shook […]
         the contents of the canister into the opening. […] When he had closed the little door again, an indescribable
         crying began in the chamber. […]  That lasted approximately 8-10 minutes, and then all was silent. A  short
         time afterwards, the gate was opened by inmates, and one could see  a bluish cloud floating over a gigantic pile of corpses.
         […]  At any rate, I was surprised that the inmate commando who was assigned  to removing the bodies entered
         the chamber without gas masks, although  this blue vapor floated over the corpses, from which I assume that it  was a gas.”
         – unquote.
 
 
  There
         are two obvious problems with this testimony, and many more, if we were to go into the details, but don’t worry, I won’t.
 
 The first obvious problem is that hydrogen
         cyanide fumes are  colorless. We find in quite a few testimonies an association between the  color blue and hydrogen cyanide
         as such or the skin color of victims of  cyanide poisoning. Associating hydrogen cyanide with the color blue  originates with
         the fact that German chemists who discovered Prussian  Blue some 250 years ago correctly associated it with hydrogen cyanide.
          For that reason, they gave hydrogen cyanide the German name “Blausäure” –  “blue acid,”
         which refers to the fact that this was the chemical that  formed a blue pigment. Nevertheless, it is itself without any color.
 
 Next and more importantly, it would have
         been impossible for the  inmate commando to remove the bodies from the chamber without wearing  gas masks. Here is a sequence
         of cartoons by French cartoonist Konk  illustrating the problem. Since the Zyklon B had been dumped into that  room only some
         ten minutes earlier, it would have kept releasing lots of  hydrogen cyanide for the better part of an hour or even more, depending
          on the circumstances. Since these facilities are said to have had no ventilation system at all  – which in
         itself is a ludicrous claim – entering that room and  performing hard labor in it without gas masks would not have been
          possible for many, many hours. And that’s the end of that set of gas  chamber claims.
 
 This is also true for the gassings said to have been performed in the  claimed
         gas chambers of the Crematoria IV and V at Birkenau, which  allegedly didn’t have any ventilation system either. Anyone
         claiming  that a room without any ventilation system was used for the mass  slaughters of people using poison gas should see
         a psychiatrist.
 
 Having brought
         up Crematorium IV and V, there is a twist to that  story as well. Here is the floorplan of Crematorium IV. Crematorium V 
         was arranged mirror-symmetrically to it. The rooms marked red and with a  number one are said to have been used for mass slaughter
         – without any  ventilation. Yeah, sure. Anyway, Zyklon B is said to have been thrown  through openings in the walls,
         here highlighted in green, some of which  have a number two next to them.
 
         On this photo of 1943, you can see these openings.
 
 The problem is that, after subtracting the wooden frame of the  shutters,
         these openings were only 20 cm wide and 30 cm high, and that  they were equipped with iron grates. This is shown by documents
         found  among the paperwork left behind in the workshop where inmates had made  those grates. One witness even describes them.
 
 Now, here is the problem. If you install
         an iron grate in that  opening, which itself measured only 20 by 30 centimeters, then how can  you stick a Zyklon B can in
         there that had a diameter of some 15  centimeters in order to pour out any Zyklon B? The answer is: you can’t.
 
 End of story.
 
 Let’s turn to the two crematoria where the main action is supposed
         to  have taken place, Crematoria II and III. Most gas-chamber victims are  said to have been killed there. Taking samples
         from Crematorium II is  most-promising also because its claimed gas chamber is in a  somewhat-preserved state.
 
 Here are some images of the reinforced concrete
         roof of Morgue number  one of Crematorium II taken in 1998. The building is said to have been  blown up in late 1944 or early
         1945 by the Germans before they retreated  from the area. The roof of that morgue was lifted off the seven pillars  that supported
         it and collapsed back down. Some of the pillars  punctured the roof, while others still support it in places.
 
 Orthodox historians claim that there were
         four openings in each of  the roofs of these Morgues of Crematoria II and III through which Zyklon  B was poured in order
         to kill those trapped inside. I will not review  here the various reasons for that claim, but will go straight to the  question
         of whether there is any evidence for this claim that is other  than anecdotal in nature. First, here as well the expert report
         written  by Dr. Sehn and Dr. Dawidowski right after the war makes no reference at  all to any such openings. However, it is
         clear from an expert report  compiled by the Institute for Forensic Research in Krakow in June 1945,  here the first page
         of it, that Dr. Sehn had sent to that institute  material for analysis which originated from the interior of Morgue #1 of
          Crematorium II. Hence, Dr. Sehn must have somehow gained access to that  room’s interior. Since the only entrance to
         it had collapsed and is  filled with debris, he can have gained that access only by way of either  entering through pre-existing
         holes, if any existed, or if not, by  creating new ones.
 
 The only two holes that can be seen in that roof today are these two.  One of them had four reinforcement bars still
         sticking out from it in  the early 1990s. They had been cut at one end and bent back. While  visiting the place in 1997, Australian
         revisionist Dr. Fredrick Töben  tried to bend two of them back, but they broke. Here is a photo taken  before that attempt,
         and here one after the attempt. Be that as it may,  the fact that these rebars were not removed and were still present in
          the early 1990s proves that this was not an original hole but one added  after the room had been dynamited. This is also
         supported by the fact  that this crudely chopped-out hole is in an area where the concrete slab  has not been damaged much.
         In fact, no cracks are running through this  hole. Had that crude damage to the roof been there before the explosion,  cracks
         would have formed, most likely starting at its corners.  Therefore, it is likely that we are dealing here with a hole chiseled
          out after the explosion, probably by Dr. Sehn’s team in order to get  access to the area beneath.
 
 The other hole, here an image of that, is of a similar primitive  nature.
         It, too, was not a pre-planned hole cast while the roof’s  concrete was poured, but knocked out afterwards.
 
 The lack of any trace of the claimed holes
         in that roof has caused  mainstream historians some difficulty to explain. Jewish-Dutch cultural  historian Dr. van Pelt stated
         about this on page 295 of his 1999 expert  report submitted as evidence in the libel trial of British historian  David Irving
         against American author Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher,  Penguin Books – quote:
 
  “Today, these four small holes […]
         cannot be observed in the ruined remains of the concrete slab.” – unquote.
 
 
  British engineer Paul Barford, who around the  same time was assisting the Auschwitz Museum in efforts to conserve and  restore the camp, wrote
         in an email to David Irving in May 2000 – quote:
 
 
         “As you can guess, despite my belief that you and the Revisionists  are wrong, and despite spending
         half an hour examining the collapsed  roof of the underground gas chamber of Crematorium II from different  angles, I found
         no evidence of the four holes that the eyewitnesses say  were there […]. I remain puzzled by the lack of physical
         evidence for these holes.” – unquote.
 
 
  Later, the orthodoxy tried to remedy the damage done with such  statements by declaring some
         odd cracks in that collapsed roof to be  remnants of these holes. I won’t waste our time here exploring these  transparent
         and desperate attempts at salvaging the sunken battleship  Auschwitz. Others have done that expertly, and it would lead us
         too far  astray from the topic of this presentation.
 
 If, as some claim, Zyklon B was simply thrown through some holes in  the roof of those morgues, similar to the claims
         for the old crematorium  in the Main Camp, then the problem arising here as well would have been  that it would have been
         impossible to successfully ventilate this room  within a short period of time. The Zyklon B releasing its poison gas for 
         at least another hour would have prevented that.
 
 Some witnesses claim that certain devices were installed through  those holes. One witness in particular is frequently
         quoted in this  context: Michał Kula, a former Auschwitz inmate who worked in the camp’s  metalworking shop. During
         three post-war depositions, he made a number  of statements about Auschwitz, several of which are demonstrably false,  which
         casts a very unfavorable light on this witness’s trustworthiness.  Of interest for our topic are two of these depositions
         where he gave  more or less detailed, yet partially contradictory descriptions about  the devices allegedly built by his workshop.
         The first description made  prior to the show trial against former camp commander Rudolf Höss  described a column consisting
         of three layers. An inner, removable  wire-mesh column, 20 cm wide and deep, was surrounded by two more  columns of a wider
         wire mesh. The outer column was 3 meters high, and 70  cm wide and deep.
 
         The problem with that column is that it was too big even for the only  two existing
         holes in the roof of Crematorium II. The biggest of them  is barely 50 cm wide.
 
 During the trial, Kula testified, and while so doing, changed the  dimensions
         of the column. Most importantly, its width had now shrunk to  only 24 cm, hence roughly a third of his initial description.
 
 Interesting in this context is Kula’s
         description of the inner  column, which could be removed. It is said to have consisted of an inner  layer of solid sheet metal,
         and an outer layer of a fine wire-mesh  screen with openings of merely one millimeter. The inner sheet-metal  column was capped
         with a pyramid-shaped lid. Zyklon B is said to have  been poured onto this pyramid. The gypsum pellets subsequently fell into
          the space between the inner sheet-metal column and the outer wire-mesh  screen. This would maximize the pellets’ exposure
         to the surrounding air  and thus accelerate the evaporation of hydrogen cyanide. After the  crime, the inner column could
         be removed, thus making a swift  ventilation of the room possible.
 
 Hence, Kula’s columns are the orthodoxy’s magic bullet to reduce the  time during
         which this claimed gas chamber’s walls would have been  exposed to the lethal gas.
 
 The problems with this are manifold:
 
 First, as mentioned before, Kula obviously was a liar.
 
 Next, there is no documentary or physical evidence that these columns ever
         existed.
 
 Furthermore, these
         columns would have to have been firmly anchored in  a panic-proof manner in both the floor and ceiling of that room,  leaving
         indelible traces of the anchoring points. Here is a drawing on  how structures are being anchored in concrete after the concrete
         has  already been poured. But there aren’t any traces of such anchoring  points. A large part of the floor of Morgue
         I of Crematorium III was  actually cleared of all rubble during excavations carried out in August  1968. French historian
         Jean-Claude Pressac showed a photo of that  excavation in his 1989 book on page 234. Not a trace of any anchoring  points
         was found, though. There aren’t any visible in the ruins of  Morgue one of Crematorium II today either.
 
 Even orthodox historians agree that Kula’s
         columns had to be firmly  anchored with massive bolts in the floor and ceiling of the claimed gas  chambers. Here is a photo
         of a column built following the directions of  the already-mentioned Jan van Pelt, clearly showing the bolts that would  go
         into the floor and ceiling.
 
 In
         addition, Kula claimed that the outer column’s wire mesh consisted  of wire three millimeters thick. That column’s
         only purpose would have  been to protect the inner columns from the panicking crowds. A meshwork  made of wire merely three
         millimeters thick wouldn’t have done the  trick. Van Pelt understood this well, so when he constructed a model of  Kula’s
         column for an architectural exhibition, he departed from some of  Kula’s data, most importantly by using solid 8-mm
         interwoven steel rods  for the outer column’s meshwork.
 
 Moreover, Kula’s column wouldn’t even have worked. In his second  description of
         the device during the trial, where he reduced the width  of the contraption to make it more realistic, he claimed that the
         slit  of the inner column into which the Zyklon B is said to have been poured  was only 15 mm wide. Here is an image showing
         the size of the Zyklon-B’s  gypsum pellets. Try pouring such objects into a slit 15 mm wide. You’ll  quickly discover
         that they get stuck in lumps, jamming the slit. In  addition, if you use Zyklon B in a room with 100% humidity, moisture 
         will condense on the gypsum pellets, making them stick together, for  moist gypsum has the habit of getting gooey. Hence,
         even if you managed  to get some of the pellets to trickle down that slit, getting it out  after the deed would have been
         a mess.
 
 Finally and most importantly,
         Kula’s method of introducing the poison  into the chamber is incompatible with the claimed speed of execution.  Remember,
         in U.S. gas chambers, where the poison gas instantly engulfs  the victim in high concentrations, it takes up to 10 minutes
         to  incapacitate all victims, and even more before they are actually dead.
 
         Zyklon B releases its gas only slowly, and if used in a high-moisture  environment
         with no forced evaporation, this process slows down to a  crawl. So, the question is, how can one swiftly obtain, using moist
          Zyklon B, poison-gas concentrations even in the most remote corner of  the gas chamber which are at least twice
         as high as were used  in U.S. execution gas chambers? Alas, there is no possible way. To get  anywhere close to this, we would
         have to increase the amount of Zyklon B  to extremes in order to have a quick rise in concentrations beyond what  was used
         in U.S. execution chambers. I have made some calculations  which resulted in some 60 kilograms of Zyklon B which would have
         to be  used to achieve an execution time of five minutes, which means some 15  kg – or 15 cans – for each column.
         Since the volume of the slit-shaped  space of Kula’s column, second edition, was some 25 liters, and because  the bulk
         density of the gypsum pellets was well under a kilogram of  hydrogen cyanide per liter, Kula’s columns may not even
         have been able  to accommodate that amount, even if it had been possible to fill them  densely and completely. Pouring in
         those 15 cans into that column alone  would have taken so much time that it would have foiled the plan to kill  swiftly. Even-faster
         execution times, such as two of the four  physicians have claimed, are impossible to achieve.
 
 No matter which way we look at it, the claimed scenarios are  impossible.
         It is also absurd, because no sane SS officer knowing  advanced fumigation technologies would have consented to having crude
          holes knocked through a reinforced concrete roof, irreparably damaging  it in the process, in order to install several inoperable
         columns into  them for a purpose which they could not serve.
 
 The whole hypothesis is an insult to any thinking person.
 
 First, there were no holes in the roof.
 
 Second, there were no columns installed anywhere.
 
 Third, even if there were, they wouldn’t have worked.
 
 And finally, the room was equipped with a
         ventilation system designed  for a morgue, see the exhaust channels in orange (number 1) and the air  intake channels in blue
         (number 2) in this blue print. After the  decision was allegedly made in late 1942 to convert that morgue into a  chemical
         slaughter room, the ventilation system was not upgraded. That,  next to a smart design to get the poison into the chamber
         and some  sturdy doors to keep the victims inside, are design changes that would  have been necessary for converting these
         rooms into mass-execution  chambers. None of it ever happened.
 
 Hence, none of it ever happened.
 
 Anyway, ventilating a room chock-full of Zyklon B intermingled with a  thousand corpses or more
         would have taken many hours. Which means that  the average contact time of hydrogen cyanide with the masonry would not  have
         been just a few minutes, but more in the order of magnitude of an  hour or two. That may be up to a factor ten lower than
         what can be  expected for fumigations, but it is barely enough to offset the other  factors favoring the homicidal gas chambers
         with regard to the formation  of Prussian Blue. Hence, down goes the last crutch on which the  orthodox hypothesis rests.
 
 So, considering all this, we would have to
         expect to find in those  claimed homicidal gas chambers amounts of Prussian Blue that are similar  in order of magnitude to
         the traces we find in fumigation chambers.
 
 Yet we find basically no cyanide in those walls. Look at these walls  inside the ruins of that morgue. No blue stains,
         no cyanides. Just as we  didn’t find any traces of panic-proof doors, of devices or means to  introduce and swiftly
         distribute the poison gas, and of powerful  ventilation systems upgraded to swiftly dispose of huge amounts of  poison gas.
 
 Or as Jewish activist David Cole once wrote:
 
  “[T]he evidence
         just isn’t there, and the evidence that does exist calls that [extermination] claim into question.”
 
         
  And that’s the end of the line.
 
 For all the source material used in this
         video, and if you want to learn even more about this topic, read the author’s book on The Chemistry of Auschwitz,
          available wherever books can be bought, except for Amazon, because they  banned the book in July 2017. You can also download
         it as an eBook at  no charge at www.HolocaustHandbooks.com.
 
  
      
      .
.