From uroessl1@gwdu19.gwdg.de Wed Dec 13 19:13:06 PST 1995
Article: 15911 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!news.dfn.de!news.gwdg.de!uroessl1
From: uroessl1@gwdu19.gwdg.de (Ulrich Roessler)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Luftl's 'Report' Again (Re: Comments and Questions to Ulri
Date: 13 Dec 1995 20:15:35 GMT
Organization: Lichtenbergs Buckel, Goettingen
Lines: 129
Message-ID: <4anc97$bpa@gwdu19.gwdg.de>
References: <4aevkt$nlk@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gwdu20.gwdg.de
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

DbtgThomas (dbtgthomas@aol.com) wrote:

: U. Roessler comments:

: >: >(1)  Zyklon-B continues to emit HCN fumes in lethal quantities for
: many
: >: >hours.  
: >.From the data quoted above - this is plain nonsense.

: From the several different rates you give it is less true than with the
: rate published by Rudolf in graph form.  

Unfortunately, I just demonstrated that Rudolf lied about one source,
he quoted, to validy his long evaporation rates - the book by Dr Peters.

Moreover, Rudolf's graphical representation stands on two bits of
information - exponential decay in total evaporation, and a safe 
rule of thumb about the times to evaporate all HCN from a modern 
product which resembles Zyklon-B. See below. 

On the other hand, Rudolf acknowledges that the patent for Zyklon-B
states nearly complete evaporation within 10mins.

I'm still evaluating Dr Peters' book(s) - but in all applications he
mentions the peak of HCN-concentration in the air of fumigated rooms 
(often very high concentrations) is reached within less than one hour -
in essential agreement with these data and the remarks by Dr Peters
about the possibility to control the release of HCN to a certain extent.

However, considerable HCN evaporation over hours, as you seem to claim 
based on your unclear informations about Rudolf's work, contradicts
these data, and could be avoided in any case using simple precautions.

:                                                  It would appear that some
: consensus on acceptable rate is needed.  I do not regard your speculations
: as nonsense, whether they agree with my comments or not.  

I admit, that I haven't seen the patent for Zyklon-B so far.
But this and Peters' technical paper about the use of this
stuff are solid informations and not speculations - Peters was
a leading expert in the field and the chief researcher at
the producer of Zyklon products in Germany. His book appeared
in a series of scientific monographs in applied chemistry.

:                                                            They are useful
: additions to the discussion.  The graph was labeled with the name Delta
: Gmbh or Detia Gmbh.  Perhaps you could locate some information on this
: company?

It's Detia GmbH, and the graph WAS NOT PROVIDED by them, as Rudolf 
admits. He mentions a letter, he received from them about their 
HCN product, apparently this letter states only that it was a safe
rule of thumb to assume nearly complete evaporation of the HCN within
two hours at normal temperatures and under various other conditions
which may modify the rate of evaporation. Rudolf is not very clear 
about that point, although he admits, that the Detia people refused to
give exact technical data just because the evaporation rate may
differ depending on circumstances. And, whatever the letter really 
contained, I cannot check.

So, what Rudolf did apparently was simply fitting an exponential 
to reach 10% remaining HCN after 2hours - and then he plotted that
I wouldn't call this a technical information, do you?

: >: >       Thus, scattered pellets would present a considerable, though
: not
: >: >impossible, cleanup hazard.
: >
: >Thus, that conclusion is also nonesense - apart from the fact, 
: >that either people could use gas-masks (as testified by 
: >_Sonderkommando_ members), or the removal of the Zyklon-B remains 
: >would eliminate any such dangers.

: It is not a conclusion, it is a speculation.  And it is not nonsense if
: the figures given by Rudolf are correct, 

'if' indeed - I have no reason for that assumption, do you?

:                                                 and we are looking at the
: situtation where pellets were said to have been poured into roof openings
: onto a large, closely packed group of people.  

Which would possibly result in a heating of the Zyklon to more than 30 
degree C, thus above the boiling temperature of HCN, while the distribution 
of the stuff in space might still be a serious problem, which couldn't 
be solved by any calculations at all.

But, I'm really not interested in a perfect reconstruction of the gassing 
procedure - in my modest opinion the essential agreement of witness 
testimonies and technical facts suffices completely for that matter. 
If you have any intention to doubt here you must demonstrate that there 
really ARE any serious inconsistencies which would demonstrate 
the impossibility to kill people with the highly poisoneous HCN gas 
>from  Zyklon-B. It's your turn.

:                                            If the pellets continued to
: emit serious amounts of HCN past the time the building doors were
: reopened, they would present a hazard to the area, gas masks or no. Gas
: mask filters for cyanide protection may have a very short useful life,
: perhaps less than an hour.  (Don't have a reference for that last, it's
: something I ran across while looking for info on HCN.)

'if' indeed, this may be so, possibly, if your informations about gas mask
filters are true and if one hour of ventilation with open doors were
insufficient to reduce the HCN concentration considerably so that some
residual HCN emitting slowly after that time wouldn't be dangerous and 
if the remaining highly soluble HCN in the carrier wasn't washed down 
with water when cleaning the corpses in the gas-chamber ... - but,
this all is really speculation of yours without any facts nor argument.

[..]

[The remaining question about the wire mesh introduction devices
have been answered elsewhere in this thread.]

: Thanks for your comments, they help to shed light on the subject.  I
: dislike discussions which try to reach conclusions without referring to
: available facts.  In this case, it seems that the facts are available with
: a little digging, discussion and calculation.

Well, do provide facts and calculations, I'd still appreciate anything
in that departement. In the case of Rudolf's "research" his citation
led the way to really useful information. In his attempt to lie with
scientific appearance he unwittingly provides the material to refute 
his claims in his own foot-notes: 

I'd call that progress in _Revisionist scholarship_.

u.roessler                                            uroessl1@gwdg.de


From roessler@.gwdg.de Sat Dec  9 17:35:51 PST 1995
Article: 15549 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!nntp.coast.net!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!fu-berlin.de!news.dfn.de!news.gwdg.de!roessler
From: roessler@.gwdg.de (ulrich roessler)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Luftl's 'Report' Again (Re: Comments and Questions to Ulri
Date: 9 Dec 1995 18:50:36 GMT
Organization: GWDG, Goettingen
Lines: 137
Message-ID: <4aclps$9cr@gwdu19.gwdg.de>
References:  <49qpj5$ros@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <4a1mn1$7eb@access5.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: umpa06.gwdg.de
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Michael P. Stein (mstein@access5.digex.net) wrote:

: In article <49qpj5$ros@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
: DbtgThomas  wrote:

: >There's some new information out in a report done by a German chemist
: >named Germar Rudolf which applies directly to the questions being
: >discussed here.  Rudolf gives specific times for the evaporation rate of
: >Zyklon-B which lead to two important conclusions.

:     I don't think it's all that new.  I am trying to find an English
: version of this.  Do you have one, or do you read technical German?  (I 
: can get through ordinary German, but technical - I don't think so.)  
: Where did you run across this?

I also asked this and got no answer. (May be, my message didn't make
it very far in the net.) - Actually, I happen to have here a relatively
new article by G.Rudolf and E.Gauss (T"ubingen 1994) where he provides 
such data. Roughly 10% will be emitted in about 6-7min, about 37% within 
half an hour, and 90% in the first 2h at normal temperature. 

He refers for that only to a letter from a producer, successor of
the DEGESCH, which seems to say that within 2 hours nearly all HCN
will be emitted from their product (at 20 degree C). But here
Rudolf also admits, that this seems rather a safe rule of thumb 
than a real technical information, though.

Rudolf assumes an exponential decay in time dependency for 
the quantities of HCN emitted at a given time - hence a constant rate 
for the evaporation process. 

However, in the same article he admits the following:

The original patent for Zyklon-B specifies that nearly ALL HCN 
(more than 90% apparently) will be emitted within 10min, at normal 
temperatures (20 degree C)! Rudolf tries to dismiss this with the lame 
comment that everyone exaggerates technical data in patent applications.

Then he notes that in a publication by the DEGESCH chief researcher,
and later _Generaldirektor_, Dr.G.Peters, the amount of HCN evaporated
within half an hour is given as roughly 50% only. 

However, his reference, a book about the use of HCN to control
infestations, reads as follows:

[ Dr. Gerhard Peters: _Blaus"aure zur Sch"adlingbek"ampfung_ 
   (=Sammlung chem. und chem.-techn. Vortr"age; N.F. 20)
         Verlag von Ferdinand Enke, Stuttgart 1933, p.64f ]

#Die Gasentwicklung aus dem Zyklon setzt unmittelbar nach dem 
#Ausstreuen mit gro"ser Heftigkeit ein. Je d"unner die Schicht 
#des ausgestreuten Tr"agermaterials ist, um so rapider ist die
#Gasentwicklung. Je nach Eigenart der zu bek"ampfenden Sch"adlinge
#und der zu begasenden R"aume hat man es durch Wahl der Streuungs-
#schicht in der Hand, das Maximum der Gaskonzentration sehr rasch
#oder allm"ahlich entstehen zu lassen. In der Regel wird das Material
#in einer Schichtdicke von 1/2 bis 1 cm ausgestreut, wonach der 
#gr"o"ste Teil der Blaus"aure bei Zimmertemperatur bereits nach einer
#halben Stunde entwickelt ist.

(The development of the gas from the Zyklon sets in with great 
(vehemence immediately following the pouring out of it. The thinner
(the layer of the disseminated support material the faster will
(be the development of the gas. Depending on the species of the
(pests to be controlled, and on the characteristic of the rooms
(to be gassed, one may choose to reach the maximum of the gas
(concentration to arise very quickly or more slowly by the thickness
(of the disseminated layer. Usually, the material will be disseminated
(in a layer of 1/2 to 1cm thickness, then the greatest part of the
(HCN will have developped already after half an hour at normal temperature.
[i.e. 20 degree C].

[End quote]

Now, _der gr"o"ste Teil der Blaus"aure_ is by no means only 50% - 
it means rather NEARLY ALL of the HCN. Rudolf refutates not only 
his own assumptions about the rate of evaporation of Zyklon-B
by these original technical data, he, moreover, misquotes them also. 

I haven't seen the above mentioned patent so far - however I'd guess 
that the very fast evaporation (10min for nearly all the stuff),
according to Rudolf's very own note, relates to a controlled laboratory 
experiment with single pellets. 

Then, the readsorption and renewed desorption of HCN molecules 
in different pellets will be the main factor to slow down evaporation 
in a realistic fumigation. Hence, Peters' description about the
possibility to control the time until maximum HCN concentration 
in the air is reached by the thickness of the Zyklon layer poured out.

: >(1)  Zyklon-B continues to emit HCN fumes in lethal quantities for many
: >hours.  

>From  the data quoted above - this is plain nonsense. 
Peters even mentions that the Zyklon support material is NOT toxic
after the fumigation (ibid. p.65). Moreover,the DEGESCH recommended
fumigation times in simple cases (only one room without large surfaces 
of furniture or food-stuff or so) as short as 1 hour only. That will be 
meaningful only if the evaporation of HCN has finished within that time, 
otherwise Zyklon-B would be a dangerous and also uneconomic agent.

: >       Thus, scattered pellets would present a considerable, though not
: >impossible, cleanup hazard.

Thus, that conclusion is also nonesense - apart from the fact, 
that either people could use gas-masks (as testified by 
_Sonderkommando_ members), or the removal of the Zyklon-B remains 
would eliminate any such dangers.

: >(2)  Piling the pellets in a basket would slow the evaporation rate
: >considerably.

Rather not - the readsorption and desorption cycles would be rather 
shortened by such a device, which is open also at the bottom,
compared to a layer of Zyklon-B on the floor. Thus, the Zyklon
in those baskets is rather a double layer emitting HCN more or less
in all directions.

The only adverse effect could be the smaller heat reservoire of such 
a basket, which has to provide the necessary heat of evaporation.
However, the higher heat conductivity of the metal compared 
to concrete floor will largely compensate that effect.

Hence, already by Rudolf's very own data, we see that lethal 
concentration, can be reached within less than 10 min - as
the SS could use a high overdosis in the gassings, and did
so in fact, according to the witnesses.

Moreover, he seems to overestimate greatly the time needed 
for evaporation compared to actual data provided by the producers 
of Zyklon-B. 

Whatever data we consider to be correct, the witness testimonies 
- few minutes until the victims were dead - or rather couldn't be 
heard anymore and had fallen unconscious - seem to be realistic. 

u.roessler                                      uroessl1@gwdg.de

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor