The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/r/rudolf.germar/usenet.0996

From Sun Sep  1 22:04:29 PDT 1996
Article: 61594 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,soc.culture.german
From: (Martin Paegert)
Subject: Re: Holocaust revisionism
Followup-To: alt.revisionism,soc.culture.german
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Organization: RCB
References: <4i63p3$>    
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 00:57:58 GMT
Lines: 91
Xref: alt.revisionism:61594 soc.culture.german:84692

Ole Kreiberg ( wrote:
> In article , Martin Paegert wrote:

> >I did state on that in a previous article. There will be almost no
> >unevaporated HCN left after a few minutes. First point: The evaporation
> >rate does fall within minutes very rapidly.  

> FROM THE *RUDOLF REPORT*  (rough translation, original text at bottom)

Nice citation but it has nothing to do with my argumentation. That was:

1. The pellets will be crushed by victims in panic trampling around. This
   will increase the releasing surface and lead to an instant 
   evaporation of almost all HCN.
   The "Rudolf Report" does give figures of undestroyed pellets.

2. If any pellets are left intact, they are mixed in the mainly liquid
   excrements the dying victims will release. As HCN is soluable in water
   any HCN not outgassed till then will dissolve in water, but not enter
   the air.
   The "Rudolf Report" does not say anything about this situation.

Your claim was that HCN could not be used for gassings because of the
danger of unevaporated gas after 20 to 30 minutes. The few figures in the
report contradict this claim. Let's first have 2 short cites from sources
Rudolf is using.

> Detia Freyberg GmbH only provided a rule of thumb, which was that, given a
> temperature in excess of 20 degress Centigrade, and an even distribution
> of the product, 80% to 90% of the gas would be evaporated after two hours

> G. Peters claimed at the beginning of the 1930Ęs that about 50% of the
> prussic acid would be released after half an hour, with a distribution of
> the preparation in a sheet between 1/2 to 1 centimeter in thickness.
> [163], which comes out as somewhat less than the reported time from Detia
> Freyberg GmbH.  

Both figures are just comparable if and oly if the same product in terms 
of carrier, shape and size of it f.e.  Flat egg or pancake shape of the 
carrier versus ball shape will lead to completly different behaviour. 
At least the carrier itself did change as might be seen from

> The higher evaporation rates given by Peters apparently come after the 
> time when the gypsum component in the carrier was being increased for 
> product stability, and needless to say, to lower the cost of the carrier 
> materials.

Thus Peters did use an improved version. Increased stability in terms of
HCN staying in the carrier instead of getting liquid outside of it. But
increased release rate.

The next, immediately following remark of Rudolf is quite interesting.

> For further determinations it should be kept in mind that during the first 
> five, or apparently as much as ten, minutes after applying the product, a 
> maximum of 10% of the prussic acid will have been lost from the carrier 
> material at temperatures greater than 20 degrees Centigrade.

This is a clear contradiction to Peters - whatever shape, size or material
is used for the carrier.

Assume the evaporation to be linear in time. Then according to Peters (50
percent in 30 minutes)
                          50% / 3  =  17 %
should have left the carrier after 10 minutes. 17 and not 10 percent.

In fact the situation is worse for Rudolf. The evaporation rate is not
linear but following a falling exponential graph. That does mean: high
evaporation rates at the beginning of the process, smaller rates later.
Thus the timescale of evaporated mass is more as this:
           0 - 10 min:      21 %
          10 - 20 min:      18 %
          20 - 30 min:      11 %
          Sum after 30 min: 50 %

Note: even if calculating with the rates of Detia GmbH between 13 and 
17 % will evaporate in the first 10 minutes.

Thus reading the "Rudolf Report" carefully you should have noticed:

1. There is at least one version of Zyklon B in the early 30ths which 
   even under laboratory conditions leads to a substantial decrease of
   danger within half an hour.

2. Rudolf does make claims he can not derive from the material he cited.


Martin   (

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

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.