• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

WTC Dust Study Feb 29, 2012 by Dr. James Millette

Senenmut said:
did they do a XEDS spectra on any of those larger particles?
Click to expand...
If they didn't then why not? If these particles are so different to anything they had previously seen or analysed then why didn't they perform EDX? You are indirectly calling Harrit et al incompetent.

The fact of the matter is it would be extremely bizarre to find two different sizes of hexagonal platelet with different chemical compositions in the same material. Even the authors realised that.

What you don't realise you are doing is making the material even more complex. So we go from iron oxide and kaolin pigment mixed with epoxy to "a made up nano-thermite material that uses nano-sized iron oxide particles reacting with inefficiently shaped hexagonal particles that are made up of a pure aluminium core surrounded by a silicon oxide layer, embedded in an unknown organic material that when heated produces an unknown explosive pressure, whose products are unknown, but produce microspheres of different compositions, some iron rich, some silicon AND iron rich, ALL Oxygen rich, with no evidence of alumina, but leaves behind a mystery larger hexagonal platelet material that wasn't part of the reaction and no-one knows why such particles are part of the nano-thermite composition."

I'll tell you something Harrit et al didn't do. They didn't find any Al2O3 particles. The DSC is enclosed so they must be there. They didn't do any EDX on any Al2O3 particles. Where is the Al2O3? Tillitson and Gash specifically manufactured nano-thermite, but even they wanted to confirm that the thermite reaction had occurred, so being competent scientists they actually analysed the reaction products. Note the plural. For the reaction 2Al +Fe2O3 --> ? + ? to be confirmed then you have to find both the question marks. The question marks are: 2Fe + Al2O3 Tillitson and Gash confirm this, Harrit et al do no such thing. Why don't you direct your ire toward Harrit et al who did DSC after reading Tillitson, but then failed to use the same method to analyse the reaction products? Didn't someone say that replicating experiments is one of the main principles of science. Oh yes they did - it was you.
Senenmut said:
replicate the experiments......its one of the main principles of the scientific method.
Click to expand...
Where's the alumina Senenmut? Why do you criticise Millette, but fail to hold Harrit et al to your same standards?
 
Sunstealer said:
Here is a simple exercise for you, it won't take an hour.

1. Quote Millette's criteria for ensuring he has the same material as chips a-d.

2. Compare the data Millette has with the data from chips a-d in Harrit et al. Cut and paste is easy.
Click to expand...
he replicated a couple of things but it still may or may not be the same material.
Sunstealer said:
e.g here is a photo of Harrit compared with Henyco and underneath is Millette

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=181&pictureid=861[/qimg][qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=845&pictureid=7260[/qimg]
Click to expand...
heryco's chip did not react. none of his chips turned from red to pinkish and none produce iron or silicon rich microspheres.
Sunstealer said:
Look the same don't they? So do that for all data from chips a-d.

Compare the EDX for the red layer.
Compare the EDX for the gray layer.
Compare the shape and size of the particles in the red layer.
Compare the morphology of the matrix.
Compare the EDX for the particles in the red layer.

When you do that you will see they are the same.
Click to expand...

nope. looks can be deceiving. millette needs to keep on replicating the experiments that show or not show that his chips can produce iron and silicon microspheres.

Sunstealer said:
Incidentally, Farrer doesn't know what material he put in the DSC. We have no idea whether he put Tnemec or Laclade or another red paint adhered to steel or indeed a completely different material - they never document what went in DSC. So until we know exactly what the composition of the cips that went in to the DSC test it would be pointless for Millette to do it.
Click to expand...

whatever helps you rest at night....
 
Sunstealer said:
I
Where's the alumina Senenmut? Why do you criticise Millette, but fail to hold Harrit et al to your same standards?
Click to expand...

well, if you remember when i started that thread about questions to ask jones, that was the first one i asked i believe. where is the al2o3?
 
well, if you remember when i started that thread about questions to ask jones, that was the first one i asked i believe. where is the al2o3?
Click to expand...

Is it possible that the al in figures 25 and 26 is not al2o3?

Sunstealer believes that, like he believes his theory about epoxy making the spheres. Why does he not ask a scientist, like Millette, to verify his faith with published experiments?

Could it be for the same reason that Sunstealer does not publish his theory using his real name:
Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status
Click to expand...
 
"Truther" fun fact:

Every "truther" cried foul that NIST did not release the data for their FEA simulations but, none complain that their heroes won't allow independent analysis of their work.

Funny how that is.
 
Senenmut said:
he replicated a couple of things but it still may or may not be the same material.

heryco's chip did not react. none of his chips turned from red to pinkish and none produce iron or silicon rich microspheres.


nope. looks can be deceiving. millette needs to keep on replicating the experiments that show or not show that his chips can produce iron and silicon microspheres.



whatever helps you rest at night....
Click to expand...
Nonsense. You just can't do cut and paste from harrit et al and Millette's progress report in to something like paint, save it and upload it to JREF or you won't do it because it will show you up.

Why did Millette use a criteria purely based on chips a-d in Harrit et al to make sure he had the correct chips?

Show, using the criteria and the data why Millette doesn't have the right chips. Use the data provided. If you don't have the computer skills then say so.

See here for an example: Millette (top), Harrit el al (middle), Jones talk (bottom)

picture.php


Ooops they are all identical.

picture.php


These are Fig 11a from Harrit et al - Hexagonal platelets. Other 3 are from Millette. Damn they are the same material! Found via the exact same methods! What is the chance of that? Who knew that thermite contained a common material called kaolin that is mined in it's thousands of tonnes?

You can quibble all you want but it won't make any difference, the material is the same.

Here's a hint though: Do not play Snap with a 4 year old for money - ever. You'll lose a sizeable amount of cash.
 
Last edited:
Senenmut said:
well, if you remember when i started that thread about questions to ask jones, that was the first one i asked i believe. where is the al2o3?
Click to expand...
Is it still hiding? Why do you give Jones a free pass and not Millette who is an expert in this type of work?
 
Here is a comparison between Millette and Harrit et al's BSE (back scattered electron) SEM photographs of the red layer.

I've added labels to each and added the scale bar on each side for comparison. (Scale bar is taken from Fig 8d)

picture.php


Did anyone notice the similarities? If I removed all the labels and just posted the pictures, would you have been able to tell which one came from Harrit and which one came from Millette?

All of the characteristics are the same; we see the same shape and size of hexagonal particles that are the same hue using BSE. We see the same stacking of these hexagonal platelets. We see the exact same bright whitish particles.

There simply is no denying that the material is the same.

This is the sort of simple analysis that truthers refuse to do and will certainly ignore and handwave away. How difficult is it to compare photos?

N.B. Labels where far clearer before uploading.
 
Last edited:
jtl said:
WOW, some one guy you don´t remember changed his mind. Was this before Jones commented on the paper and pointed out problems? Had this guy seen Ryan´s FTIR? How about the fraud charges against Millette?
Why doesn´t Millette submit his paper to a journal for publishing?
Click to expand...

There have never been any fraud charges against Dr. Millette. This has been pointed out to you several times. This means you are a liar. If you have some evidence, please start a new thread.
 
jtl said:
Is it possible that the al in figures 25 and 26 is not al2o3?

Sunstealer believes that, like he believes his theory about epoxy making the spheres. Why does he not ask a scientist, like Millette, to verify his faith with published experiments?

Could it be for the same reason that Sunstealer does not publish his theory using his real name:
Click to expand...

Assuming you're referring to figures 25 and 26 in Harrit's paper, not only is it possible they are not Al2O3 (alumina), it's a dead certainty they are not. Look at the X-ray emission charts next to the photos. Based on the loss of C compared to the original chips, Harrit has simply succeeded in burning off the organic matrix, leaving behind the original hematite and kaolin in his paint samples. (Doing the DSC in air instead of an inert atmosphere was either deliberate deception or an unforgivable blockhead mistake - I'll leave it to you to decide.) Note the red color of figure 25. The hematite is still unreacted, meaning this is either paint or the world's most incompetently manufactured thermite ever, not even good for giving a fellow a hot-foot.
 
Sunstealer said:
Why did Millette use a criteria purely based on chips a-d in Harrit et al to make sure he had the correct chips?
Click to expand...
he does NOT know he has the correct chips until he heats them up and gets iron and silicon rich microspheres. replicate the experiments then take it another notch and figure out how "paint" could produce the spheres without a thermitic reaction.

Sunstealer said:
Show, using the criteria and the data why Millette doesn't have the right chips. Use the data provided. If you don't have the computer skills then say so.
Click to expand...
you will only know he has the same material when he produces iron and silicon microspheres. from there, he can determine whether or not a thermitic reaction occured. he says no thermite. well, make those chips react like jones' and prove that a thermitic reaction did not take place. its called replication of experiments.
from wiki-
Reproducibility is the ability of an entire experiment or study to be reproduced, or by someone else working independently. It is one of the main principles of the scientific method.

after he replicates the experiment and produces iron and silicon rich microspheres, then he can explain how they were formed without thermite. its not that hard to understand. he just half did the paper. i guess you get what you pay for!!


Sunstealer said:
See here for an example: Millette (top), Harrit el al (middle), Jones talk (bottom)

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=845&pictureid=7276[/qimg]

Ooops they are all identical.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=845&pictureid=7554[/qimg]

These are Fig 11a from Harrit et al - Hexagonal platelets. Other 3 are from Millette. Damn they are the same material! Found via the exact same methods! What is the chance of that? Who knew that thermite contained a common material called kaolin that is mined in it's thousands of tonnes?

You can quibble all you want but it won't make any difference, the material is the same.

Here's a hint though: Do not play Snap with a 4 year old for money - ever. You'll lose a sizeable amount of cash.
Click to expand...

good data! i love data... once millette gets iron and silicon rich microspheres from his chips, he has some data that he can use one way or another.
 
Senenmut said:
he does NOT know he has the correct chips until he heats them up and gets iron and silicon rich microspheres. replicate the experiments then take it another notch and figure out how "paint" could produce the spheres without a thermitic reaction.

you will only know he has the same material when he produces iron and silicon microspheres. from there, he can determine whether or not a thermitic reaction occured. he says no thermite. well, make those chips react like jones' and prove that a thermitic reaction did not take place. its called replication of experiments.
from wiki-
Reproducibility is the ability of an entire experiment or study to be reproduced, or by someone else working independently. It is one of the main principles of the scientific method.

after he replicates the experiment and produces iron and silicon rich microspheres, then he can explain how they were formed without thermite. its not that hard to understand. he just half did the paper. i guess you get what you pay for!!

good data! i love data... once millette gets iron and silicon rich microspheres from his chips, he has some data that he can use one way or another.
Click to expand...

A jigsaw puzzle.

Harrit et al say they found a thermite duck.
Millette says it's not a thermite duck, it's Winnie the Pooh paint on steel.
Thermiters say that unless you have every single piece in place, you haven't proven that it's not a thermite duck.


religiouslogic.jpeg


From:http://www.patheos.com/blogs/explor...-the-cutest-response-to-creationism-ever.html
 
Last edited:
Pinocchio Sunder and the walking beams.

Dr.Millette has found nothing he wasn't looking for. Nothing he had 'not found' before in all other Government DUST studies he was involved in. Why would anyone expect anything different? The iron-rich spheres were 6% by mass of the DUST clouds as disclosed by Ritchie LEE. You got to be able to explain that 'unusual' percentage of iron-rich spheres being produced as the buildings disintegrated. That is the only time they could have infiltrated the DUST., as the DUST was forming so too the Iron-rich spheres within. What part of [cold] collapse gravity physics allows for creation of 6% [unusual - LEE] iron-rich [hot] microspheres during collapse phase? What 'office furnishings' contain that much energy - to spit that many molten steel droplets into the air - what part of the gravity collapse supplies that function - plus energy to reduce all concrete/office furnishings to ppm at the same time??
 
Last edited:
remo said:
Dr.Millette has found nothing he wasn't looking for.
Click to expand...


No. You have it backwards.

Truthers haven't found what were looking for, and are pretending that what they have found in their cack-handed vanity study somehow supports CD, when it does no such thing.

The belligerent bleating of a handful of CD enthusiasts as they attempt to discredit the results of a properly conducted study is something to behold, and entertaining in a car crash kind of way, but said bleating won't gain any credibility outside CT circles.
 
Last edited:
remo said:
Pinocchio Sunder and the walking beams.
Click to expand...
How does this relate to reality there was no thermite used on 911? Would this be better for Jones, since he lies about thermite?

remo said:
Dr.Millette has found nothing he wasn't looking for.
Click to expand...
Millette found no thermite. Jones found no thermite, he says he did but his paper proves otherwise.

Millette analyzed the dust, it was not thermite. A fact which makes people with the thermite fantasy go nuts.

remo said:
Nothing he had 'not found' before in all other Government DUST studies he was involved in.
Click to expand...
What does this mean? 911 truth is upset Millette found no fantasy thermite?

remo said:
Why would anyone expect anything different?
Click to expand...
No thermite? There was no steel damaged by thermite, how can anyone find thermite.

remo said:
The iron-rich spheres were 6% by mass of the DUST clouds as disclosed by Ritchie LEE.
Click to expand...
The dust found at the WTC was not 6 percent iron spheres (USGS). Oops, making up evidence?

A steel building after a big kinetic energy event spreads dust with the exact percent of iron as there is in the earth's crust. Wow, what a finding. What does it mean?
RJ Lee said all the iron spheres were due to fire, not thermite. It would be wise for those with the idiotic thermite claims to stop using RJ Lee; it is no logical.


Particles of materials that had been modified by exposure to high temperature, such as spherical particles of iron and silicates, are common in WTC Dust because of the fire that accompanied the WTC Event, but are not common in “normal” interior office dust.​
Click to expand...
Fire did it, thermite did not. RJ Lee said so; thus RJ Lee debunked the failed claims of thermite, 2 years before Jones made up thermite out of his conspiracy mind.

remo said:
You got to be able to explain that 'unusual' percentage of iron-rich spheres being produced as the buildings disintegrated.
Click to expand...
Wow, the exact percent that iron occurs in the earth's crust. Plus the dust collected by RJ Lee was AFTER clean up of the WTC. RJ Lee samples, includes clean up dust. Forgot to check your dates?

remo said:
That is the only time they could have infiltrated the DUST., as the
Click to expand...
Dust studied by RJ Lee after clean up; so the dust was collapse and clean up dust.

remo said:
DUST was forming so too the Iron-rich spheres within. What part of [cold] collapse gravity physics allows for creation of 6% [unusual - LEE] iron-rich [hot] microspheres during collapse phase?
Click to expand...
RJ Lee said the iron spheres were from the fires and the collapse, not thermite. RJ Lee, referencing RJ Lee debunks the crazy claims of Jones and Harrit. Big failure to use RJ Lee. It debunks 911 truth.

remo said:
What 'office furnishings' contain that much energy - to spit that many molten steel droplets into the air - what part of the gravity collapse supplies that function -
Click to expand...
There was no thermite except in the minds of Jones and Harrit, two paranoid conspiracy theorists spreading lies and faking a conclusion in a failed vanity journal paper.

E=mgh was released, and the heat energy equal to 2,500 tons of thermite was in the fires prior to collapse. Office fires beat fantasy thermite.

E=mgh is over 130 tons of TNT in each tower. Like 260 2,000 pound bombs, in the form of two collapsing buildings. Called physics; the energy 911 truth ignores in favor of fantasy thermite.

remo said:
plus energy to reduce all concrete/office furnishings to ppm at the same time??
Click to expand...
ppm? lol, this makes zero sense. What are you trying to say? It is gibberish. Millette found no thermite, and 911 truth has nonsense, off topic gibberish.

Why can't 911 truth do the energy? E=mgh. Can 911 truth do math?

Millette found no thermite is making 911 truth ballistic, posting nonsense, with no evidence.

What was the heat energy of the office fires prior to collapse? (got math)
How much termite would be needed to equal the heat of the office fires?
What was the energy of collapse? (E=mgh)
How much energy does it require to do what we saw on 911? (E=mgh)

Take your nonsesne to ther right thread, you offered nothing to suppport he fantasy claims of thermite.
Take Millette's paper and try to debunk it. You can't, 911 truth can't.
 
Senenmut said:
you will only know he has the same material when he produces iron and silicon microspheres.
Click to expand...

This makes no sense on its face. You might as well argue that the only way to determine whether a substance is aluminum foil is to make a Drano bomb, because someone else did that once.

Senenmut said:
from there, he can determine whether or not a thermitic reaction occured. he says no thermite. well, make those chips react like jones' and prove that a thermitic reaction did not take place. its called replication of experiments.
from wiki-
Reproducibility is the ability of an entire experiment or study to be reproduced, or by someone else working independently. It is one of the main principles of the scientific method.
Click to expand...

This makes no sense on its face. Reproducibility is, as you quote, an ability -- or perhaps we should say a property. It is highly desirable for experiments to be reproducible, but it does not follow that all researchers are obligated to follow all the same steps. See above.
 
MarkLindeman said:
This makes no sense on its face. Reproducibility is, as you quote, an ability -- or perhaps we should say a property. It is highly desirable for experiments to be reproducible, but it does not follow that all researchers are obligated to follow all the same steps. See above.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that it has been explicitly stated, multiple times, by the original commissioner of Millette's study, that the intent was NOT to reproduce the Harrit et al. study. Chris Mohr went to Millette and said, "See if there is any thermite in this dust." Millette only followed Harrit et al. in the process of selecting chips which were supposed to be thermitic - the rest of the study was done according to his own discretion as far as how to determine if the chips were thermite.
 
MarkLindeman said:
This makes no sense on its face. You might as well argue that the only way to determine whether a substance is aluminum foil is to make a Drano bomb, because someone else did that once.
Click to expand...
if you were not sure it was aluminum....sure..why not. you would then have one more clue that what you have is aluminum.



MarkLindeman said:
This makes no sense on its face. Reproducibility is, as you quote, an ability -- or perhaps we should say a property. It is highly desirable for experiments to be reproducible, but it does not follow that all researchers are obligated to follow all the same steps. See above.
Click to expand...

you cant go to the store and buy these red gray chips as something with a name attached. one needs to make sure they are the same chips. that is, that they produce iron and silicon microspheres. jones proved his chips did. millette did not.
why dont you show us how millette would get iron and silicon microspheres from his chips?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom