Is there any evidence of ventilation devices?

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3112
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: Is there any evidence of ventilation devices?

Post by blake121666 » Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:33 am

I'm just getting around to looking over that Mattogno article that Werd referenced:

http://www.inconvenienthistory.com/9/3/4888

Nessie is quite right that Mattogno is out of his depths for at least some of this. Look at this doozy:
Mattogno wrote:The invoices of the Topf Company no. 171 of February 22nd 1943, and no. 729 of May 27, 1943, refer explicitly to the frequency of 50 periods or cycles, that is 50 Hz. Therefore, increasing the power output of the motor, from 2 to 3.5 HP, the number of the revolutions would have remained unchanged.
LOL! He is of course referring to output power. The output power of the motor was changed from 2 hp to 3.5 hp. He mentions that the input frequency of the electric input stays at 50 Hz and therefore the rpm can't change!!!!!! ROFLMAO!

For Mattogno's (or anyone else's) information, the way to view the output power is as:

P = T * w

where

T = torque of motor
w = angular velocity of shaft

The actual input electricity would be the same for any and all electric motors that we are talking about here (3-phase 380V motor - at 50 Hz of course) . The torque of the motor is what spins the motor - causing the rotational velocity. An increase of the output power would necessarily entail that you desired a higher rpm. You sure as hell wouldn't increase the power for any other reason. I suppose one could imagine a much heavier motor which would require greater torque to move it at the same rpm; but Mattogno doesn't mention anything like that. He brings up the input frequency!

In general, it is most logical that a motor rated with a higher output power, all other things more or less equal, means a greater output rpm - no matter what kind of electrical motor we are talking about in this instance. Both motors are obviously blower motors for ventilation. If we were comparing, say, automobile engine motors to fan motors what I say would not be correct; but we aren't doing that.

That Mattogno goes through all of the BS in that article to not understand such a simple thing shows just how far out of his depth he is! And the way in which he shows this is pretty funny!

Werd
Posts: 9003
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Is there any evidence of ventilation devices?

Post by Werd » Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:55 am

This is what is preferable. Someone actually tackling Mattogno's work head on. Not rhetoric from Nessie.

Blake, if you managed to craft a longer post or two showing some of his errors, it could be sent to Germar Rudolf who is affiliated with inconvenienthistory. If the errors are bad enough, perhaps the article will be retracted and reworked instead of being published in book form with the other articles. Maybe that's what it needs. Mattogno has made mistakes before. Sometimes he discovers his own errors. Other times not.

User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3112
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: Is there any evidence of ventilation devices?

Post by blake121666 » Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:42 am

Werd wrote:
Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:55 am
This is what is preferable. Someone actually tackling Mattogno's work head on. Not rhetoric from Nessie.

Blake, if you managed to craft a longer post or two showing some of his errors, it could be sent to Germar Rudolf who is affiliated with inconvenienthistory. If the errors are bad enough, perhaps the article will be retracted and reworked instead of being published in book form with the other articles. Maybe that's what it needs. Mattogno has made mistakes before. Sometimes he discovers his own errors. Other times not.
Well I'd tell him to remove 90% of what is in that article - simply because it has nothing whatsoever to do with his argument.

His argument is that the ventilation fans that were used were the ones that were billed. His trying to say that a larger fan could not have been used is the height of folly - stupid on its face. Why he even thinks he can say such a thing is beyond any reasonable person's forbearance to read through such nonsense. Just ditch what is on its face stupid in that article.

To make the thing more readable, he should state his conclusions with hand-waving reasoning upfront and point to whatever calculations and references to bolster his claims. Why he drags out a bunch of crap that no one in his right mind would wish to wade through - interspersing it with some cranky conclusions of his is tortuous reading. I had to skip over the vast majority of the article for this simple reason. He needs to give the reader a REASON to read his tortured crank manifestos.

Mattogno is a crank who might have a point or two; but it is no fun to find those points within his crankery.

Werd
Posts: 9003
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Is there any evidence of ventilation devices?

Post by Werd » Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:49 am

blake121666 wrote:
Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:42 am

His argument is that the ventilation fans that were used were the ones that were billed.
Why is that unreasonable? Why shouldn't he follow a paper trail?
His trying to say that a larger fan could not have been used is the height of folly - stupid on its face.
Not sure what you're getting at. What is Mattogno saying is impossible and why precisely? What section did you find that in?

User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3112
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: Is there any evidence of ventilation devices?

Post by blake121666 » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:05 am

Werd wrote:
Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:49 am
blake121666 wrote:
Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:42 am

His argument is that the ventilation fans that were used were the ones that were billed.
Why is that unreasonable? Why shouldn't he follow a paper trail?
I didn't say such was "unreasonable". Where'd you get that idea? I'm saying that is essentially what that crank article is saying - in the most cranky way imaginable!
Werd wrote:
Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:49 am
His trying to say that a larger fan could not have been used is the height of folly - stupid on its face.
I must have missed the part where he says a fan that has a larger height (or diameter I guess) could not have been used and for what exact reason.
A larger capacity fan - higher hp motor. That Mattogno doesn't even know what the output power rating of an electric motor means is pretty bad. I suppose he could wave his arms about and do any type of calculation that strikes his fancy. But it boils down to: a motor with larger output power right off the bat implies a faster rpm - all other things being equal. Why didn't he mention that and wave his arms about picking instances where such might not be the case or something. No, Mattogno throws out a bunch of useless calculation to confuse the reader.

Mattogno needs to present his ideas in a more digestible way.

User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3112
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: Is there any evidence of ventilation devices?

Post by blake121666 » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:10 am

Werd wrote:
Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:49 am
Not sure what you're getting at. What is Mattogno saying is impossible and why precisely? What section did you find that in?
Sections VI and VII.

Things like:
section VI wrote:In any case, it is certain that the increase in power of the motor of air-blower Type 450 from 2 to 3.5 HP does not equate to an increase in the capacity of the air-blower from 4,800 to 8,000 m3/h. On the contrary, this appears patently absurd, because – from Pressac’s perspective – the increase of power should have induced an increase in the number of revolutions per minute of the motor (the capacity being conditioned by this factor), but Topf’s invoice no. 132 of December 23, 1943 mentions clearly the same number of revolutions in the cost estimate of November 4, 1941 (925 rpm), which relates to the same capacity in both invoices no. 171 of February 22 and no. 729 of May 27, 1943 (4.800 m3/h).
"the increase of power should have induced an increase in the [rpm] ...". He doesn't think this is the case! He's a crank!

Similar to his other claims in those sections. Contrary to his delusions, he doesn't know what he is talking about. And his sources for his crankery in these matters shows that fact. One can safely assume that a larger rpm would draw more air and result in a higher air exchange rate. How much higher is quite unknown though. He could say that and leave it at that. Fans can actually have a quite complicated result - I've looked into the matter. But this simple statement is undoubtedly true. One could assume that all of the fans we are dealing with in this article are essentially the same type of fans with the simple relation: higher hp => larger air exchange rate. That he even goes about with his weird calculations belies very strange delusions going on in his mind. A linear relationship of power to air exchange rate is not unreasonable. He brings up his crank reasons to say otherwise. He simply doesn't get the matter very well though and spits out crankery.

He doesn't sanity-test what he writes - just plows through with unexplained equations - that it appears he doesn't understand well within the overall picture of what he is claiming. He should leave the technical matters as separate to his claims. No one wants to read that junk he writes.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26822
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Is there any evidence of ventilation devices?

Post by Nessie » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:11 am

blake121666 wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:15 pm
Nessie wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 6:08 pm
Mattogno's argument is a logical fallacy. SOME witnesses claim thousands were gassed at one time. The kremas could not cope with such. Therefore ALL the witnesses lied.
WTH is this? This thread is about ventilation of the Kremas. What int the hell are you talking about? This argument I quote of yours is nowhere to be found - directly or indirectly - in any points of discussion.

Quit the derailing crap, Nessie.
I have quoted where Mattogno uses that exact argument.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=3078#p115618

"The logical consequence to be taken from all that has been considered above is that “gassings” of 1,500 or even of 1,000 or even of some hundreds of persons never took place.....it can only be deduced that the claimed “gassings” described by witnesses as simple operations without dangers were impossible, and therefore they were not real."
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26822
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Is there any evidence of ventilation devices?

Post by Nessie » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:15 am

Werd wrote:
Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:44 pm
As I said, tellingly no denier wants Mattogno checked for accuracy.
You said it but you can't prove it. And it's hard to prove because as I already said mattogno puts it out in the public where people can read it. Which means anyone can critique it. You dummy. If he didn't want others to see it, he would not publish publicly. Stop trying to score the tiniest rhetorical points by lying just to cover up the fact mattogno is smarter than you, has read more primary documents than you, has been to Auschwitz more than you, has even inspected the so called homicidal gas chambers more than you, etc, and therefore is obviously READY AND WILLING TO RESPOND TO A RESPONSE.

Trying to pretend mattogno doesn't want people to read his stuff and respond to him is betrayed by the fact that he responded at least two times to Roberto Muehlenkamp's blog series about cremation at Belzec going back to at lest 2009. After that Mattogno helped write an entire damn book against the holocaust controversies team. And he has continually replied to Jean Claude Pressac in his books.

People will take you seriously when you stop lying, Nessie.
So, where are the denier peer reviews of his work? The answer is there are none, you have taken his word is taken as gospel and without question. How do you know his calculations and conclusion are correct?
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26822
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Is there any evidence of ventilation devices?

Post by Nessie » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:19 am

Werd wrote:
Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:55 am
This is what is preferable. Someone actually tackling Mattogno's work head on. Not rhetoric from Nessie.

Blake, if you managed to craft a longer post or two showing some of his errors, it could be sent to Germar Rudolf who is affiliated with inconvenienthistory. If the errors are bad enough, perhaps the article will be retracted and reworked instead of being published in book form with the other articles. Maybe that's what it needs. Mattogno has made mistakes before. Sometimes he discovers his own errors. Other times not.
It is not rhetoric to point out a study has not been checked for errors by someone with expertise in ventilation systems. It is ridiculous for you to have attacked me for wanting his work to be checked when you admit he has made mistakes before.

At least we now agree, his work on ventilation needs proper expert review.

Then we need to deal with his conclusion and how that is a logical fallacy and it assumes an incredible CT.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26822
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Is there any evidence of ventilation devices?

Post by Nessie » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:28 am

Blake explains some of the issues very well. Mattogno's understanding is limited, his presentation his designed to baffle, so hiding flaws and he ignores there are many variables.

Mattogno has used this tactic before. He did calculations to do with wood required for pyres and the number of bodies that can be buried in a given space to conclude witnesses lied. He does that by taking exactly what they said (ignoring witness estimates are unreliable) and then using the most extreme figures to say something is not possible. All that needs to be done is accept the witness estimates of the number of bodies gassed/buried/burned are too high and then the calculations become plausible.

Reducing the number killed is in line with academic research which has continually reduced the number killed at the camps.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], Norm and 7 guests