Archive/File: orgs/american/oregon/banished.cpu lie.9-11

Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Gannon adds Lie #9, Lie #10, and Lie #11 to LIAR file..
Summary: Gannon makes three claims, all false, regarding information
         contained in the Leuchter FAQ and the Ten Questions articles
Expires: 
References: <9403171410.A5156wk@banished.com>
Sender: 
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Distribution: world
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Keywords: 

In article <9403171410.A5156wk@banished.com> dgannon@banished.com writes:

>     McVay, McVay.........

>     The reason I didn't respond to this "Holtz-Elliot data" you refer to is
>because it was not mentioned in your "10 questions" (which is what I was

Lie #9. Thank you, Dan. See below for proof...

>responding to!), nor in your "Leuchter FAQ" mentioned in question #9, or

Lie #10. Thanks again. See below for proof...

>anywhere in any of your documents that I am aware of.  Remember, you got very

Lie #11. Thanks thrice. See below for proof...

>upset when I started requesting copies of your documents, so I don't have all
>of them.

You weren't interested in obtaining documents, but in clogging the net. A
request for over 600 documents isn't what I'd consider a "request for
documents," but rather a deliberate attempt to crash the system, and bc.net
in the process.

>     What report are you talking about?  I notice you did not provide a
>citation.  You're really grasping at straws, McVay.  What's the matter, are you
>upset that I have answered your precious "10 questions"?

Given that you haven't answered them, no, I'm not "upset." Let me quote,
verbatum, from the "10 Questions" article - i.e. proof that you are lying:

9) You have responded to the question here about the toxidity of
   diesel exhaust by attacking the British tests, a valid approach,
   but you failed to respond to the Holtz-Elliot data. Since Berg 
   helped you formulate your "answer," I found this interesting.      

   First, of course, is the obvious: You didn't respond because
   neither you, nor Berg, _could_ respond. Instead, you tossed out
   a specious remark about suicides and diesel automobiles.

   Holtz and Elliot reported data supporting the lethal nature of
   diesel exhaust in February of 1941, and provided data (Holtz, J.C.
   & Elliott, M.A., "The significance of diesel-exhaust-gas analysis,"
   Transactions of the ASME, Vol.  63, pp 97-105, February, 1941.)
   showing that lethal levels of gasses would be produced simply by
   reducing the fuel-air ratio:

   Exhaust gas composition of a diesel engine, running at the correct
   fuel-air ratios (% by volume):

   O2:   1.5% 
   CO2: 13.5% 
   CO:   0.5% 
   

   Exhaust gas composition of a diesel engine running at a fuel-air
   ratio of 0.094 (% by volume):

   O2:   0.3%
   CO2:	10.2%
   CO:	 6.0%
   Other:	see above

   Given that the simple expedient of reducing the intake by covering
   it with something as simple as a piece of cardboard will cause any
   diesel engine to produce about 60,000 ppm CO, and that the evidence
   is clear that the Nazis understood this, do you still maintain that
   squeezing people into a chamber and having a 500 BHP engine - like
   those used in Treblinka - pump fumes into it, will not be, let's
   say, hazardous to the health of these people?  Hell, Dan, even your
   OWN sources concede that 4,000 ppm CO is "fatal in exposure of less
   than 1 hour," so I'd like to know what you think a concentration
   fifteen times higher would do!

   Let me repeat the question, which you apparently didn't read:

   What do you think a concentration of 60,000 PPM would do, Dan?

That's the _verbatum_ quote from the 10 Questions article, Dan. Here's a
_verbatum_ quote from the Leuchter FAQ. It proves you have lied once again:

[Leuchter]                                                     [Page 18]

   Additional information was published to several UseNet newsgroups in
   November of 1993, in which smullins@ecn.purdue.edu quotes Holtz (see
   Recommended Reading section) and Elliot.  A quick scan of the data
   clearly shows the difference in oxygen and carbon monoxide levels
   found in diesel exhaust under different fuel-air mixture conditions:

      Exhaust gas composition of a diesel engine, running at the correct
      fuel-air ratios (% by volume):

      O2: 1.5% 
      CO2: 13.5% 
      CO: 0.5% 

      Exhaust gas composition of a diesel engine running at a fuel-air
      ratio of 0.094 (% by volume):

      O2:	0.3%
      CO2:	10.2%
      CO:	6.0%

   The data clearly demonstrates that simply restricting the air intake
   of the engine, any diesel engine will produce sufficient CO to be
   clearly and rapidly fatal (6% CO represents roughly 60,000 ppm). This
   data (Holtz & Elliot) appeared in "Transactions of the ASME" in early
   1941, and was probably known to the Nazis.

   Mr. Mullins has also published an article to UseNet which deals with
   Berg's "The Diesel Gas Chambers: Myth Within a Myth," (request
   holocaust/ihr JHR.v5n1), and which demonstrates not only how diesel
   engines can quickly produce highly toxic levels of gasses, but which
   uses Berg's own references to do so. (Request holocaust/ihr
   diesel.001 for the full article.)

{end verbatum quote from Leuchter FAQ, page 18}

So, once again, Dan Gannon publishes lies. Once again, I document those
lies. Note that the FAQ article also cites references to these data, i.e.
diesel.001.... Lie #11, no great surprise. That's three for three, Dan,
three for three. Perfect record, as usual.

FALSUS IN UNO, FALSUS IN OMNIBUS, right, Dan?

Those interested in reading Dan's other 8 documented lies are invited to
send the following command to listserv@oneb.almanac.bc.ca:

GET HOLOCAUST/B-CPU LIAR

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