Image result for boring

Mr Wear continues to go around in circles. The same topics keep coming up time and time again. I’ll just stick to debunking the little new stuff there is.

“A body that has been killed with hydrocyanic acid (HCN) cannot be safely touched without protection.”

Mr Wear fails to give us any actual scientific evidence as to why. Not even Holocaust deniers and neo Nazis like Friedrich Berg agree with this claim.

“The typical lethal concentration for an execution chamber and for delousing is only 0.1%–in other words, the lethal gas need only be one-twentieth as strong as the gas discussed in Faurisson’s reference. If one applies a rule of thumb or reciprocity known sometimes as Henderson’s Rule, one would need twenty times as long to cause the same toxic effect. In other words, approximately 200 minutes or three hours of exposure to 0.1% HCN would be needed to overcome a worker wearing a gas mask but whose skin is exposed. It is almost inconceivable, however, that workers removing corpses would be exposed to anything near these concentrations after the doors were opened. Depending upon the duration of the forced-venting of the chamber, the cyanide levels confronting workers would be far, far less than 0.1%; that was why, after all, the chambers would have been force-vented in the first place before the doors were opened. The principal danger to workers removing corpses is from cyanide vapors gradually leaving corpses and walls and then mixing with air surrounding the workers. However, with the circulation blowers continuing to bring fresh air into the chambers, the cyanide levels in air would be maintained easily enough at extremely low levels, safe enough for workers wearing rubber gloves to remove corpses without also wearing gas masks. In other words, the danger of HCN absorption through parts of the skin not covered with rubber gloves is negligible in a Degesch delousing chamber or tunnel if it is operated correctly.”

Ouch!

“Dr. Robert Faurisson states in regard to HCN poisoning:”

…total rubbish apparently…but then Mr Faurisson is not a scientist.

 

So now to the distortions Mr Wear gives us about Viktor Frankl.

“Viktor Frankl’s book Man’s Search For Meaning has been ranked by the Library of Congress as one of the 20th century’s 10 most influential books in the United States. Frankl described his experiences at Auschwitz in this book as if he had spent many months there. In reality, Frankl was in Auschwitz only for a few days in October 1944 while in transit from Theresienstadt to a sub-camp of Dachau.”

Frankl’s book is about the psychological effects of concentration camp life. His book flitters from one event to another; each taking place in a random order and in different camps. Saying that, however, Frankl makes it quite clear in the book that he was chosen for transportation to a “rest camp” the morning after his arrival at Auschwitz.

“Frankl’s short time in Auschwitz is substantiated by the prisoner log from the sub-camp of Dachau, Kaufering III, which listed Frankl’s arrival on October 25, 1944, six days after his departure from Theresienstadt.[7] Thus, Frankl’s descriptions of his long stay at Auschwitz in Man’s Search For Meaning are false and misleading.”

Frankl does not describe a long stay at Auschwitz. His descriptions of life in the concentration camp system are taken from different camps and not just one. Mr Wear is the one spreading falsehoods.

CONCLUSION

Mr Wear needs to produce something new.

 

 

 

 

Advertisements