Were We Told the Truth about World War 2?

Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by FatFreddy, Nov 26, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Does the official version say that more than one type of gas used?

    According to this video the gas also sticks to people so the bodies could not be touched.

    (6:30 time mark)

    It looks to me like it was technically impossible to remove the bodies in the manner officially described.

    If testimony goes against science, the testimony is obviously false.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Unless I'm mistaken, the gas would be relatively harmless to you upon touch, except in large doses - so long as they changed their clothes and showered aftewards, they should have been fine.

    I'm no chemical engineer though... but...

    The World Health Organization report in Concise International Chemical Assessment Document 61: HYDROGEN CYANIDE AND CYANIDES: HUMAN HEALTH ASPECTS

    Following application of cyanides in aqueous solution to the intact skin of New Zealand rabbits, the dermal LD50s of hydrogen cyanide, sodium cyanide, and potassium cyanide were 0.260, 0.298, and 0.343 mmol/kg body weight, respectively (corresponding to 6.8, 7.7, and 8.9 mg cyanide/kg body weight) (Ballantyne, 1983a). The dermal toxicity of cyanide, especially of hydrogen cyanide, is markedly greater following application on abraded skin, which enhances the penetration of cyanide (LD50s of 0.087, 0.220, and 0.30 mmol/kg for hydrogen cyanide, sodium cyanide, and potassium cyanide, respectively) (Ballantyne, 1987).5

    So, while you will absorb some through skin contact, it shouldn't be sufficient to kill you, unless you end up covered in it.

    Now, if you dissolve potassium cyanide in, say, Dimethyl sulfoxide... you get something lab workers like to refer to as "liquid death". This is because the DMSO absorbs readily thru the skin, and will carry the toxin in with it.

    So, again... it seems that so long as the proper precautions were taken, a person could easily extract bodies from such a chamber (presuming the atmosphere has been purged and fresh air returned). They would likely get sick from it, but not lethally so.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. leopold Valued Senior Member

    what do YOU think freddy?
    if you wanted to get rid of 10s of thousands of people quickly and efficiently, how would you do it?
    do you really think this never happened??

    deal with it buddy, cause it did.

    edit: added more after preview. (test)
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    What we need is an expert who is demonstrably not a government sophist to settle this. The info in this article gives the impression that those people couldn't have worked like that all day long with no ill effects.

    Exposure to lower concentrations of hydrogen cyanide may produce eye irritation, headache, confusion, nausea, and vomiting followed in some cases by coma and death.
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member


    No, what we need, is to accept the painfully obvious FACT, that WW2 did happen, and that the Holocaust was a part of that war.
    To deny, or even suggest that this did not happen, is quite fanatically bizzare and weird to say the least.
    I actually shake my head in disbelief that anyone could believe such outright nonsensical conspiracies. It ranks right up there with "faked Moon Landings" and 9/11 for craziness.
  9. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Agreed. We have THOUSANDS of first-hand reports from victims and survivors. To attempt to deny the truth is nothing more than the rantings of young idiots who were not alive at the time. It's painfully obvious that they know NOTHING about that period of time!

    Edit: Just a quick P.S.

    It meant nothing to the camp overlords if some of the prisoners working to remove the dead got sick and died from their efforts. NOTHING!
  10. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Except the officially describe "version" says the Nazi's gave protective gear to the workers.

    And then there is the small matter of dead bodies, confessions, and multiple wittnesses from different faiths, cultures and nations.
  11. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Everything I've seen has been consistent with their having been slave-labor camps with typhus epidemics and starvation due to the lack of food during the last month of the war.

    Do YouTube searches on these videos.

    Former Religious Jew On Holocaust Myths
    Auschwitz - Why The Gas Chambers Are A Myth
    BUCHENWALD A Dumb Dumb Portrayal Of Evil 1/32
    "Judea Declares War on Germany"
    The Complete David Cole and Mark Weber on the Montel Williams Show

    This shows how objective you are. The proof that the moon missions were faked and that 9/11 was an inside job is crushing.
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member


    Really old Freddy, it's a miracle that you are game enough to get out of bed every morning with all these conspiracies around us.

    PS: The TV shows [and movies] like X-Files and Millenium, certainly have a lot to answer for.
  13. paddoboy Valued Senior Member


    Conspiracy theories surround us. Witness the reactions on the Internet to the tragic and mysterious disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. Perhaps North Korea hijacked the plane. Perhaps the Chinese are responsible. Maybe aliens did it.

    Or, as an influential legislator in Iran contended to the New York Times, perhaps the United States "kidnapped" the lost plane in an effort to "sabotage the relationship between Iran and China and South East Asia."

    Pick your topic: Ukraine, the National Security Agency, assassinations of national leaders, recent economic crises, the authorship of Shakespeare's plays — it's child's play to assemble a host of apparent clues, and to connect a bunch of dots, to support a relevant conspiracy theory. In recent years, for example, many Americans have become convinced that the U.S. (or Israel) was responsible for the attacks of Sept. 11, that the U.S. government concocted HIV/AIDS, and that federal agencies have conspired to hide the association between vaccines and autism.

    Why do people accept such theories?

    Personal powerlessness, social networks
    The first explanation points to people's predispositions. Some of us count as "conspiracists" in the sense that we have a strong inclination to accept such theories. Not surprisingly, conspiracists tend to have a sense of personal powerlessness; they are also more likely to conspire themselves.

    Here's an excellent predictor of whether people will accept a particular conspiracy theory: Do they accept other conspiracy theories? If you tend to think that the Apollo moon landings were faked, you are more likely to believe that the U.S. was behind the 9/11 attacks. With a little introspection, many of us know, almost immediately, whether we are inclined to accept conspiracy theories.

    Remarkably, people who accept one conspiracy theory tend to accept another conspiracy theory that is logically inconsistent with it. People who believe that Princess Diana faked her own death are more likely to think that she was murdered. People who believe that Osama bin Laden was already dead when U.S. forces invaded his compound are more likely to believe that he is still alive.

    The second set of explanations points to the close relationship between conspiracy theories and social networks, especially close-knit or isolated ones. Few of us have personal or direct knowledge about the causes of some terrible event — a missing plane, a terrorist attack, an assassination, an outbreak of disease. If one person within a network insists that a conspiracy was at work, others within that network might well believe it.

    Once the belief begins to spread, a lot of people within the network might accept it as well, on the theory that a spreading belief cannot possibly be wrong. And once that happens, "confirmation bias" tends to kick in, so that people give special weight to information that supports their view. They also treat contradictory information as irrelevant or perhaps even as proof of conspiracy. (Why would people — "they" — deny it if it weren't true?)

    Outrage and suspicion
    A third explanation emphasizes how human beings are inclined to react to terrible events. Such events produce outrage, suspicion and fear. Sometimes the perpetrator is self-evident, as in the case of many terrorist attacks, but if there is no clear perpetrator — as with a missing plane, a child's disability or the outbreak of a disease — people might go hunting for the malicious agent behind it all.

    To be sure, some conspiracy theories turn out to be true. Republican officials, operating at the behest of the White House, did, in fact, bug the Democratic National Committee's headquarters at the Watergate complex. In the 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency did, in fact, administer LSD and related drugs to unknowing subjects in an effort to investigate the possibility of "mind control." In 1947, space aliens did, in fact, land in Roswell, N.M., and the government covered it all up. Well, maybe not.

    Even when false, most conspiracy theories are harmless. Consider the theory, popular among younger members of our society, that a secret group of elves, working in a remote location under the leadership of a mysterious "Santa Claus," make and distribute presents on Christmas Eve. And in a free society, conspiracy theories must be allowed even if they are both false and harmful. But sometimes conspiracy theories create real dangers.

    If people think that scientists have conspired to cover up the harms of vaccines, they will be less likely to vaccinate their children. That's a problem.

    Unfortunately, beliefs in false conspiracy theories are also peculiarly resistant to correction. Recent research suggests that in the context of the alleged autism-vaccination link, current public health communications are unhelpful, even when they enlist facts to set the record straight.

    Efforts to establish the truth might even be self- defeating, because they can increase suspicion and thus strengthen the very beliefs that they were meant to correct.

    Such efforts are far more likely to succeed if they begin by affirming, rather than attacking, the basic values and commitments of those who are inclined to accept the theory.

    Conspiracists like to say that the truth is out there. They're right. The challenge is to persuade them to find their way toward it.
  14. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Viewers if you haven't had the time to actually look at the proof, please don't be swayed by rhetoric and withhold judgement on the Apollo hoax theory and the 9/11 inside job theory until you've had time to look at the proof. The proof that Apollo was a hoax and that 9/11 was an inside job is so clear that it makes a good objectivity test.


    No one who tries to obfuscate the above proof is to be taken seriously on any issue.
  15. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    No victor ever tells the truth about a war, not it's causes, nor it's battles, nor the politics.
  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member


    The vast majority of level headed logical folk, do know the "TRUTH" about Apollo and 9/11, as well as the Holocaust, without a shadow of a doubt.
    And no amount of ranting and raving by delusional conspiracy adherents, will ever be able to blot out that logical truth, based on logical evidence and observations.
  17. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Well Fatfreddy this makes me feel better about you. I thought you were just one of those weird neonazi anti semitic types. Now it looks like you simply believe any goofy conspiracy theory regardless of the context. I think it is pretty obvious that it is much better to be dumb than to be evil. So good for you!
  18. leopold Valued Senior Member

    practice what you preach freddy.
    i gave you links to a QBASIC program that verifies the capabilities of the saturn V.
    anyone that is halfway proficient in BASIC can verify it themselves.
  19. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    You're trying to mislead those viewers who don't have the time to look at the info. The reasons they faked it were not about the Saturn V not being able to get them there.


    Check out the anomalies that prove the missions were faked.

    Then read the part about space radiation.
  20. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    You misunderstand the word "proof".
  21. leopold Valued Senior Member

    question for you freddy, and please don't sidestep it.
    why did NASA develop the saturn 5 if they knew "space radiation" would prevent the missions?
    related question:
    do you believe russia would also have this "limiting" information?

    BTW, i have about 20 or so russian translations on space radiation on my HDD.

    another thing, the van allen belts are composed mainly of electrons, you know, alpha radiation.
    this type of radiation can be stopped by paper.

    so yeah, i urge "viewers" to actually read about the subject.
  22. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    This is a pretty silly question. They had to have a rocket to show being launched in order to fake the missions.

    So how do you know what you read is true?

    two sets of radiation data
    To prove his thesis, Rene tries to get certain solar data from NATIONAL
    OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, (NOAA) using clever techniques
    disguise his true intentions, [i.e. to get true data on solar flares.] NOAA,
    unfortunately, proved to be as cagey as Rene in dodging the giving out of any
    really good DETAILS on this matter, [you know, where the devil resides.]
    Rene, seeing games being played, deduced that there must be two sets of data,
    one which is sent to scientists on the preferred list, and one sent to the
    likes of Rene as casual strangers. (p.125)

    There's some alternative info on space radiation here.
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member


    My obvious question is, Could anyone really be that dumb?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page