Anyone who reads Risser and Bjonsch's abstract, cited in that first post, can see quite clearly that this is a lie. The first sentence of the abstract states that:
The aim of this retrospective survey of unintentional carbon monoxide-related deaths in Vienna was to determine whether the cherry-pink coloring of livor mortis is a reliable finding for the coroner to suspect a carbon monoxide-related death immediately at the death scene.Risser and Bjonsch were therefore studying the ability of coroners to detect the cherry-pink colour associated with livor mortis. A simple internet search reveals that livor mortis is a condition that takes hours to produce the full cherry-pink coloration. For example, as this medical expert explains:
...the color of death, or liver mortis, starts coming on in about two hours and gets more and more intense for about eight to ten hours and then just remains thereIt is therefore dishonest to apply this study's finding to a critique of the Reinhardt eyewitness testimony, because the latter is describing corpses immediately after death.
Defenders of Berg may claim that this is an honest error. He's an old man and maybe his failing eyesight did not pick out the words 'livor mortis' in the text, despite it being in the first sentence of the abstract. If this were the case, however, one would expect Berg to stop using the source as soon as the error was pointed out to him. However, a quick visit to the CODOH forum, hosted by the dim-witted faker Jonnie 'Hannover' Hargis, reveals that the 'error' was exposed before Berg started his RODOH thread. On Tuesday September 18th, 2007, 'jnovitz' posted this information:
A distinction should be drawn between liver mortis, which is blood leaking out of the vessels and infusing the tissue - a process that happens several hours after death and the distinctive cherry pink of carbon monoxide poisoning, shown in the top photo.Berg read this post because he responded in part to it, so he must have known that a study of livor mortis could not be applied to Reinhardt eyewitness testimony, in which the corpses were being described immediately after being gassed. Despite this knowledge, however, Berg started his RODOH thread on Saturday October 13th, 2007, 25 days after his central claim had been debunked on CODOH.
Is it a tribute to the rank stupidity of Hargis that he allowed this clear evidence of Berg's dishonesty to remain on the CODOH forum for us all to discover? Or was he hanging Berg out to dry, bearing in mind that Hargis and Bradley Smith were very critical of Berg here?