ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 9/11 conspiracy theories , Bentham journals , nanothermite , Niels Harrit , steven jones , thermite

Reply
Old 17th June 2009, 08:00 AM   #321
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,811
Originally Posted by henryco View Post
T.A.M
My samples are full of chips which have nothing to do with the chips described in the articles. These are almost perfect doubles:
1) same appearance on one face : same red color!
2) same range of sizes
3) same composition: Carbon, oxygen, Iron, Aluminum, Silicium in the same proportion

almost because

1) Dont produce molten iron even when heated to more than 900°C
2) Have the same chemical composition after being heated to more than 900°C
3) Not double sided: red /red rather than red/shiny grey

According to the articles the red/grey chips should be numerous while in my articles the
red/red chips are more numerous...so i'm afraid there are only two possible ways for understanding this:

1) The red-gray chips were completely invented or the th truthers were provided with
fake samples to deceive them
2) My red-red chips were added and the genuine red/gray ones removed...

I dont know which way to understand these facts is the most paranoiac one...probably you know better than me.

To be Honest i should also follow a little bit the first paranoia way:

If 911 was an inside job, its not a problem to make the common citizen believe that Al Qaeda did it. If i were one of the perpetrators i could even travel and give conferences in the USA and in Europe with wonderful powerpoints (the architectes and ingeniers one for instance) and movies (for instance the italian movie: Zero) showing that 911 was an inside job, just for fun and to make money... indeed people are totally under control through the control of the medias. The important thing if you do that is to be sure that there are enough (not so many) absurd or silly claims in your presentation so that any honest expert in the concerned fields can explain why your are just an idiot conspirationist....and you can be sure the subject will remain as exotic as the UFOs, for long...

Much more problematic is to also deceive intelligence agencies from other countries : impossible ! these have their experts and the collapse of WTC7 is much more than sufficient to convince them that there is something wrong with the official story. But another kind of deception can take place which goal would be to hide the exact type of secret technology that was used to bring down the towers. Nanothermite or another technology based on the understanding kept secret for years by militaries of the new physics behind cold fusion for example?

Many features, in particular pure iron spheroids which crackled surfaces cooled down very rapidly are also commonly seen in experiments involving very powerful electric discharges ( The new physics that occurs there is the same as behind the historical electrolysis experiment that have shown extra production of heat: in these micro-discharges are also involved, in the palladium porous structure). These discharges produce what is often called "strange radiations": nobody (at least among searchers working in public labs today) understands this physics and these objects. These were discovered by many searchers independently all over the world and given different names (ectons, micro lighting-balls, Electrum Validum...and of course strange radiations) : much bigger ones are also naturally produced by much more powerful electric discharges in the atmosphere: lighting balls.
Some time ago i believed powerful discharges was used at the WTC using capacitors. The discharges may have been triggered by the piezoelectric effect: as you can see in the USGS data: the girder coatings have Titanium but also Baryum and strontium and i think its very hard to understand the high levels of baryum and strontium (quite the same) in these coatings.
As you know high capacitors commonly use baryum titanate often mixed with strontium titanate. My understanding for a long time was that the weakening and superficial melting of the column was obtained thanks to these discharges and the very large fluxes of the strange radiations they produced heating them very efficiently. But i progressively gave up the idea because of the discoveries of nanothermite red/gray chips.
The problem is now that i cant find them so i can suspect again that nanothermite was completely invented to hide the other technology which secret is believed crucial (as you probably know it was demonstrated by a Russian team that the half life of Uranium radionucleides is modified in presence of the strange radiations so you can imagine why it is kept secret!).

Nanothermite or something else?:
For anybody in the USA reading my post and whishing to understand better what happened on 911, it's very important to realize that checking the red/gray chips hypothesis is something anybody can do at home: its straightforward!

If you personally know a new_Yorker who still has WTC dust contact him (independently, discretely, no email , no phone). Then you just need a small magnet , a needle, a 50 dollars microscope and a kiln (or know someone who is doing pottery or ceramics). Find the red/gray chip yourself, heat it yourself in your kiln, check yourself the appearance of the metallic microspheres at less than 500°C...and help me do the same.
This is crucial to help me choose between my two paranoias !!

best

Fred






De : Frédéric Henry-Couannier <fhenryco@yahoo.fr>
À : Gregg Roberts <groberts@ae911truth.org>; Frank Legge <flegge@iinet.net.au>
Cc : harrit@fys.ku.dk; Steven <hardevidence@gmail.com>; Keogh Justin <justin.keogh@gmail.com>; Larsen Brad <brlbu@sisna.com>; Ryan Kevin <kncryan@msn.com>; A Carson <azcarson@gmail.com>; Shane Geiger <shane.geiger@gmail.com>
Envoyé le : Mercredi, 17 Juin 2009, 11h10mn 59s
Objet : Re : Re : Problem !

The most recent sample i received with nothing but red-only chips (or may be red/orange as Keven says) inside was from Steve White (collected in a loft at 18 Warren street).

I'm wondering how many among you did themselves the crucial ignition test and have noticed themselves the appearance of iron microspheres...please clarify

Best

F
Fred;

Thank you for your civil reply. I apologize for the harshness of my comments earlier, but the suggestions you made at that time seemed to be ONLY in favor of someone planting the red only chips within your sample.

Here is what I suggest to clarify the matter. I provided you with 4 different papers. I am sure there are other labs besides these, who have WTC dust samples...especially medical labs, where they were analyzing the dust for toxins/teratogens etc...

My suggestion is that you approach as many labs as you can, and ask them for samples of their dust. These labs have no reason to manipulate the samples. As well, you need not be specific in what you are looking for when you sequester the samples...you just wish to perform an independent analysis of the dust...that is all.

In doing this you eliminate any contact with Dr. Jones, or the truth movement, or those who would want to, either way, taint the samples or the results.

Just a suggestion, as I can see that even though you may be someone who believes the govt was in on it (or not, you have not stated clearly your position), like Dr. F. Greening, you (unlike many others) seem to place the science above all else.

Good luck with your research...keep up updated.

On a side note, did you find any grey fragments, that might have represented the "grey side" of the dual layered chips. In other words, is it possible that the dual layered chips, came apart for some reason?

TAM
T.A.M. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2009, 12:10 AM   #322
henryco
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 155
Originally Posted by T.A.M. View Post
F

On a side note, did you find any grey fragments, that might have represented the "grey side" of the dual layered chips. In other words, is it possible that the dual layered chips, came apart for some reason?

TAM
Why the red part would not react and produce molten iron without the gray part?: the Aluminum is still there in those chips even after heating up to more than 900°C

I just want to stress that the frst hypothesis i follow in my previous message is of course very unlikely but only the analysis of new sample will allow me to clarify this.
henryco is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2009, 04:02 AM   #323
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,811
Originally Posted by henryco View Post
Why the red part would not react and produce molten iron without the gray part?: the Aluminum is still there in those chips even after heating up to more than 900°C

I just want to stress that the frst hypothesis i follow in my previous message is of course very unlikely but only the analysis of new sample will allow me to clarify this.
Yes, and that is why I suggested requesting samples from multiple labs. My suggestion is request the samples from multiple labs, including some of the medical labs that analyzed the dust for toxins/teratogens. I am sure if you inform them you are a scientists in France who wishes to conduct some independent tests on the dust, some of them would be willing. Have the samples sent to an unnamed post office box, or have them sent to someone you trust.

Otherwise, I suspect you will never eliminate your suspicions of tampering.

TAM
T.A.M. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2009, 10:58 AM   #324
henryco
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 155
Originally Posted by T.A.M. View Post
Yes, and that is why I suggested requesting samples from multiple labs. My suggestion is request the samples from multiple labs, including some of the medical labs that analyzed the dust for toxins/teratogens. I am sure if you inform them you are a scientists in France who wishes to conduct some independent tests on the dust, some of them would be willing. Have the samples sent to an unnamed post office box, or have them sent to someone you trust.

Otherwise, I suspect you will never eliminate your suspicions of tampering.

TAM
Sometime ago one of my colleagues contacted repeatedly the USGS just asking for the raw data from the mass spectrometer (because this could be useful to search for isotopic anomalies, expected in case the enigmatic "cold fusion" physics took place somehow). No answer! If they were not ready to send data electronically , why should i hope they will send us dust samples? May be our english was too approximative and the demand did not sound serious enough. Why dont you try to contact them .. if you are more diplomatic than we are they will hopefully say they can send me this dust, and i'm of course ready to receive and analyze it.

Best

Fred
henryco is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2009, 01:29 AM   #325
henryco
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 155
Thinking about it, there is a third posibility: intermediaries (the sender themelves ?) checked for the presence of the red/gray chips in my samples and doing this , removed the most interesting material (the more magnetic part) probably thinking that i would be able to find other chips in the remaining dust . They were probably not aware that the genuine
red/gray chips are actually quite rare, most of the chips not being the chips of interest...
henryco is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2009, 10:42 AM   #326
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,811
Originally Posted by henryco View Post
Sometime ago one of my colleagues contacted repeatedly the USGS just asking for the raw data from the mass spectrometer (because this could be useful to search for isotopic anomalies, expected in case the enigmatic "cold fusion" physics took place somehow). No answer! If they were not ready to send data electronically , why should i hope they will send us dust samples? May be our english was too approximative and the demand did not sound serious enough. Why dont you try to contact them .. if you are more diplomatic than we are they will hopefully say they can send me this dust, and i'm of course ready to receive and analyze it.

Best

Fred
Well I am not saying they will be one of them, but that aside, do not forget that there data, their analysis, is what is worth something to them, not the samples themselves...so they may be more willing to part with a few grams of dust, compared to sending you their copyrighted data...just a thought.

I guess I am suggesting a shotgun approach to all the possible lab sources you can find, and see who agrees to send you samples.

TAM
T.A.M. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2009, 10:44 AM   #327
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,811
Originally Posted by henryco View Post
Thinking about it, there is a third posibility: intermediaries (the sender themelves ?) checked for the presence of the red/gray chips in my samples and doing this , removed the most interesting material (the more magnetic part) probably thinking that i would be able to find other chips in the remaining dust . They were probably not aware that the genuine
red/gray chips are actually quite rare, most of the chips not being the chips of interest...
I was under the impression (perhaps falsely) that the red/gray chips were quite common in the samples that Jones etc... had.

Getting portions of unanalyzed, untouched dust samples would solve the problem...good luck with that.

TAM
T.A.M. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2009, 06:03 AM   #328
Jackanory
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,339
Originally Posted by henryco View Post
Thinking about it, there is a third posibility: intermediaries (the sender themelves ?) checked for the presence of the red/gray chips in my samples and doing this , removed the most interesting material (the more magnetic part) probably thinking that i would be able to find other chips in the remaining dust . They were probably not aware that the genuine
red/gray chips are actually quite rare, most of the chips not being the chips of interest...
Doesnt it appear odd that the only samples in existence that are said to be abundant with evidence of 'thermite' are held by the very person claiming 'thermite'. He sourced them, analysed them, writes a paper on them yet nobody else on the planet can do the same. That material would be worth more than all the diamonds on the planet its so rare. Yet here we are, having been hooked, going into scientific analysis of a red/grey substance supposedly coming from the steel of the WTC and nobody else can find any?

Why oh why are the logical and intelligent members of this or any other forum even discussing it?
__________________
The mind of the bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it, the more it will contract.
Oliver Wendell Holmes
Jackanory is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2009, 10:46 AM   #329
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Jackanory View Post
Doesnt it appear odd that the only samples in existence that are said to be abundant with evidence of 'thermite' are held by the very person claiming 'thermite'. He sourced them, analysed them, writes a paper on them yet nobody else on the planet can do the same. That material would be worth more than all the diamonds on the planet its so rare. Yet here we are, having been hooked, going into scientific analysis of a red/grey substance supposedly coming from the steel of the WTC and nobody else can find any?

Why oh why are the logical and intelligent members of this or any other forum even discussing it?
A well told lie seems to trump any number of facts.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2009, 04:53 AM   #330
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,811
Originally Posted by Jackanory View Post
Doesnt it appear odd that the only samples in existence that are said to be abundant with evidence of 'thermite' are held by the very person claiming 'thermite'. He sourced them, analysed them, writes a paper on them yet nobody else on the planet can do the same. That material would be worth more than all the diamonds on the planet its so rare. Yet here we are, having been hooked, going into scientific analysis of a red/grey substance supposedly coming from the steel of the WTC and nobody else can find any?

Why oh why are the logical and intelligent members of this or any other forum even discussing it?
Well just to be clear, Fred-Henry does claim to have found ONE red/grey chip in his samples originally, but he cannot find any now, If I am reading his explanations correctly.

TAM
T.A.M. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st June 2009, 08:00 PM   #331
metamars
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,207
3 Norwegian Scientists debate Dr. Jones

Details here: http://zelikow.wordpress.com/2009/05...-on-911-truth/

Quote:
On Wednesday, May 20th 2009, more than 7 years after the 9/11-attacks, alternative perspectives penetrate the Nowegian State Broadcasting Corporation NRK, for the first time, in the program ‘Her og Nå’ (’Here and Now’ -ed.) on NRK Radio P1.

Three Norwegian scientists has publicly attempted to discredit the University of Copenhagen’s findings in a recent scientific paper covering an extensive analysis of dust from the attacks on Manhattan in 2001. The Norwegians do not express direct support for the Bush/Cheney-conspiracy theory about Usama bin Laden.

A reply from co-author Steven E. Jones is already in place right here1 and currently awaiting response.
metamars is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd June 2009, 05:01 AM   #332
Leviath
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 119
Originally Posted by metamars View Post
Quote:
Three Norwegian scientists has publicly attempted to discredit the University of Copenhagen’s findings in a recent scientific paper covering an extensive analysis of dust from the attacks on Manhattan in 2001. The Norwegians do not express direct support for the Bush/Cheney-conspiracy theory about Usama bin Laden.
Distortion of facts. The three professors didn't try to discredit anything. I'm norwegian and have listened to the interviews. They were asked to give their opinion on this spesific paper and they gave the opinion it was weak and not in any way conclusive.
And they weren't asked about Bush/Cheney/Laden, so of course they didn't give support of any "official conspiracy".

I have studied at the institute where Grande and Einarsrud are employed, even taken courses that Grande taught. These people are real experts in inorganic chemistry and nano-materials. They analyse and synthesize these compounds on a daily basis and educate master- and PhD-students on relevant subjects. If they say the paper is weak I'm almost tempted to pull an "argument from authority".

They're asking for replications and further analysis before concluding, just like any sane scientist would do.
Leviath is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th June 2009, 08:11 AM   #333
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,811
Originally Posted by Leviath View Post
Distortion of facts. The three professors didn't try to discredit anything. I'm norwegian and have listened to the interviews. They were asked to give their opinion on this spesific paper and they gave the opinion it was weak and not in any way conclusive.
And they weren't asked about Bush/Cheney/Laden, so of course they didn't give support of any "official conspiracy".

I have studied at the institute where Grande and Einarsrud are employed, even taken courses that Grande taught. These people are real experts in inorganic chemistry and nano-materials. They analyse and synthesize these compounds on a daily basis and educate master- and PhD-students on relevant subjects. If they say the paper is weak I'm almost tempted to pull an "argument from authority".

They're asking for replications and further analysis before concluding, just like any sane scientist would do.
Bingo.

Now maybe the smart thing for Fred Henry (or others looking for HONEST results) to do, would be to get in touch with these scientists, and provide them with samples.

I am guessing you won't see Jones or Harrit jumping at the chance...

A theory/theorist that works best in the shadows, will always avoid the sunlight.

TAM
T.A.M. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2009, 03:33 AM   #334
henryco
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 155
Originally Posted by T.A.M. View Post


I am guessing you won't see Jones or Harrit jumping at the chance...
A theory/theorist that works best in the shadows, will always avoid the sunlight.

TAM
This is your way or thinking, not mine!
henryco is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2009, 11:54 AM   #335
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,811
Originally Posted by henryco View Post
This is your way or thinking, not mine!
Well I was not speaking of you. My way of thinking is Jones has had YEARS to have other truly independent labs verify his results. If his results were so earth shattering, so conclusive, so damning, he should have sent his samples to hundreds of labs, build a huge base of comparative results, and then (A) he would have got it published in a real peer reviewed journal, and (B) he would have garnished support from the scientific community.

IMO, he has not done so, because he knows when the sunlight of honest science and repeatability are placed on his results, on his samples, he will fail, and he will lose forever, his pet "thermite" theory.

Whether that is your opinion or not...not my call.

I am hoping that like Dr. F. Greening Fred/Henri, you will put the science above agenda, paranoia, or discontent with authority or the govt of the USA.

TAM
T.A.M. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 08:30 AM   #336
JAStewart
Graduate Poster
Tagger
 
JAStewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,523
Themite appearing in a peer-reviewed journal?

http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/co...001/7TOCPJ.SGM

I seldom follow CT's anymore because its nothing new.

Someone presented the above link on a local forum I participate on and I thought that I'd share it. I don't know anything about it, or if it has been challenged here.

Good to see y'all again.
__________________
Ignorance and google is a horrible combination. - BigAl

Argumentum ad YouTubeum - sts60
JAStewart is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 08:33 AM   #337
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,257
Yes, it's been dealt with here and here.

ETA: And yes, it's nothing really "new" in that it ceases to address the fact that thermite is contradicted by existing evidence. All this Bentham paper ends up being is an in-depth analysis of the supposed "thermite chips" Jones claims were discovered in the dust. The links above deal with that analysis.

ETA #2: Link to Sunstealer's first post going into detail on his criticisms of the Bentham paper's assertions: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=1694 The second of the above linked threads goes into more depth on that.
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."

Last edited by ElMondoHummus; 1st July 2009 at 08:38 AM.
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 08:35 AM   #338
KDLarsen
Illuminator
 
KDLarsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,494
Bentham is a fraud and that paper is rubbish.

More in this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=139293

.. and the follow-up thread http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=140017

ETA: Bugger, ElMondo beat me to it
KDLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 08:39 AM   #339
dtugg
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 7,885
This has been discussed here many times. Basically, Bentham isn't a legitimate journal. They will publish anything so long as they are payed $800. Somebody even got a paper consisting of nonsensical gibberish generated by a computer approved for publication.

The editor the one the garbage thermite paper was published in quit over the whole thing. Apparently she wasn't even aware of paper before it was published.
dtugg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 08:39 AM   #340
Longfellow
St. Louis Cardinals Fanatic
 
Longfellow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Baseball Heaven
Posts: 288
I believe Bentham is a vanity journal where all one has to do is pay the requisite amount to get published.

It is not, strictly speaking, a peer-reviewed journal.

Scholarly Kitchen proved that and there is also a closed thread here at JREF concerning Bentham.

ETA: Boy am I slow. . .need more coffee.

Last edited by Longfellow; 1st July 2009 at 08:41 AM. Reason: Need more coffee
Longfellow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 08:40 AM   #341
JAStewart
Graduate Poster
Tagger
 
JAStewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,523
Alright cheers.

I'm sure it will not satisfy the resident loon on the forums but its there for everyone else to read too.

Thanks.
__________________
Ignorance and google is a horrible combination. - BigAl

Argumentum ad YouTubeum - sts60
JAStewart is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 08:56 AM   #342
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10,060
Yeah, Bentham has pretty much been established as a joke in the scientific community. Of course, this hasn't stopped the Truth Movement from crowing about their "peer-reviewed" paper. And I'm certain it never will.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 09:25 AM   #343
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,257
Regardless of the authority or legitimacy of Bentham as a publication - judgements I fully agree with, by the way - I think it's better to point out that the work itself is flawed, as Sunstealer so excellently demonstrates. Many of us in those threads pointed out problems that have nothing to do with the publication house in question.

While I fully agree that Bentham is a vanity publication, that in and of itself does not mean that something published by them is false. It merely means that the publication has sloppy controls and an interest in not looking at material too closely, since they're being paid by the author of a paper to publish it. That injects doubt, but does not address the actual veracity of a paper published through them. But other critiques in the above linked threads do address that. Which is why I'm composing this terribly didactic post: We should be noting that the paper inherently is flawed, not merely that it's published in a vanity journal, and demonstrate what is flawed about it. That's why I pointed to Sunstealer's post.

[/stuffy pedanticism]
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 09:35 AM   #344
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 23,029
Originally Posted by ElMondoHummus View Post
[/stuffy pedanticism]
You mis-spelled "pedantry".

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 10:53 AM   #345
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,257
Internet sites agree; it's a word too!





Granted, one of those links says the definition of "pedanticism" is "pedantry", but hey! It still lists it! I win I win I win!!!
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."

Last edited by ElMondoHummus; 1st July 2009 at 10:55 AM.
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 11:11 AM   #346
The Big Dog
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,014
Originally Posted by ElMondoHummus View Post
Regardless of the authority or legitimacy of Bentham as a publication - judgements I fully agree with, by the way - I think it's better to point out that the work itself is flawed, as Sunstealer so excellently demonstrates. Many of us in those threads pointed out problems that have nothing to do with the publication house in question.

While I fully agree that Bentham is a vanity publication, that in and of itself does not mean that something published by them is false. It merely means that the publication has sloppy controls and an interest in not looking at material too closely, since they're being paid by the author of a paper to publish it. That injects doubt, but does not address the actual veracity of a paper published through them. But other critiques in the above linked threads do address that. Which is why I'm composing this terribly didactic post: We should be noting that the paper inherently is flawed, not merely that it's published in a vanity journal, and demonstrate what is flawed about it. That's why I pointed to Sunstealer's post.

[/stuffy pedanticism]
well far be it for me to disagree, but pointing out that Bentham is a farking unbelievable joke of a farking farce is directly relevant to claims that the journal is "peer-reviewed" as the title of the post suggests.

I say prove it Jones ya freaking hack.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st July 2009, 12:56 PM   #347
Pantaz
Muse
 
Pantaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 973
From Nature, 15 June 2009: http://www.nature.com/news/2009/0906....2009.571.html
Editor will quit over hoax paper

Computer-generated manuscript accepted for publication in open-access journal.

The editor-in-chief of a journal is to resign after claiming that the publisher, Bentham Science Publishing, accepted a hoax article for publication without his knowledge.

The fake, computer-generated manuscript was submitted to The Open Information Science Journal by Philip Davis, a graduate student in communication sciences at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, and Kent Anderson, executive director of international business and product development at The New England Journal of Medicine.
Pantaz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th July 2009, 02:36 AM   #348
240-185
Muse
 
240-185's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 512
It seems that henryco sunk under the Kool-Aid:

Quote:
La nanothermite serait donc essentiellement un leurre! Il est dailleurs évident que la nanothermite ne pouvait expliquer la destruction explosive des tours, seulement éventuellement l'initiation d'un effondrement d'apparance naturelle en ayant fragilisé (en les chauffant plus efficacement que les incendies) les structures d'Acier.

Quelle serait donc la technologie à maintenir secrête et qui aurait justifié toute cette mise en scène de publication scientifique faisant état de découverte de particules de nanothermite !? Je suis maintenant convaincu qu'il s'agit d'une physique mal comprise, celle de la fusion froide...
Roughly translated to:

Quote:
So, the nanothermite would essentially be a trap! It's obvious that the nanothermite could explain the explosive destruction of the towers, only perhaps the initiation of a collapse apparently natural, while weakening (by heating more efficiently than fires) the steel structures.

What would be that technology to keep secret and would have justified all that comedy of scientific publication mentioning nanothermite particles!? I'm now convinced that it's misunderstood Physics, the COLD FUSION one
Source, pimped by Google Translations
__________________
Like a toy, the black dinosaur walked towards a Goomba and asked him: "What do Truthy Chain Chomps say when they bark? Twoof! Twoof! Twoof!" *badum pschhh*

My 9/11 Crackpot Index
240-185 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th August 2009, 08:35 AM   #349
padragan
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 119
Originally Posted by Leviath View Post
Distortion of facts. The three professors didn't try to discredit anything. I'm norwegian and have listened to the interviews. They were asked to give their opinion on this spesific paper and they gave the opinion it was weak and not in any way conclusive.
And they weren't asked about Bush/Cheney/Laden, so of course they didn't give support of any "official conspiracy".

I have studied at the institute where Grande and Einarsrud are employed, even taken courses that Grande taught. These people are real experts in inorganic chemistry and nano-materials. They analyse and synthesize these compounds on a daily basis and educate master- and PhD-students on relevant subjects. If they say the paper is weak I'm almost tempted to pull an "argument from authority".

They're asking for replications and further analysis before concluding, just like any sane scientist would do.
Sorry to revive a thread that's a month old, but is the statements of the norwegian scientists available somewhere? I'm currently discussing this with a twoofer who claim the norwegians said Jones and Harrit produced good work that followed good scientific methods. Not exactly the impression you get after reading the above post of Leviath, so I would love to read or hear it for myself (since I'm swedish it would be no problem listening to audio clips).

Anyone that can help?
padragan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th August 2009, 10:53 AM   #350
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by padragan View Post
Sorry to revive a thread that's a month old, but is the statements of the norwegian scientists available somewhere? I'm currently discussing this with a twoofer who claim the norwegians said Jones and Harrit produced good work that followed good scientific methods. Not exactly the impression you get after reading the above post of Leviath, so I would love to read or hear it for myself (since I'm swedish it would be no problem listening to audio clips).

Anyone that can help?
Here's the link to the radio show, plus if you scroll down there's a dialogue between Prof. Nilson and STeven Jones.



http://zelikow.wordpress.com/2009/05...-on-911-truth/

And this is a link to the thread about Frederic Henry-Couannier

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=151009

hope this helps

AE
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th August 2009, 06:02 PM   #351
Jono
Graduate Poster
 
Jono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,970
Originally Posted by alienentity View Post
Here's the link to the radio show, plus if you scroll down there's a dialogue between Prof. Nilson and STeven Jones.



http://zelikow.wordpress.com/2009/05...-on-911-truth/
Heh:
Prof Nilsen: The formation of iron-rich spheres

"Again the experimental work seems to be of adequate quality. I see no reason to doubt the formation of iron-rich spheres. I miss a comment on what is happening to the gray layer, but that seems to be of minor importance. The effect on heating the organic binder in air seems not to be considered. The conclusion that heating a material containing intimately mixed particles of aluminum and iron oxide give rice to a thermitic reaction (Fe2O3 + Al → Al2O3 + Fe) is not unreasonable."

Prof Jones: "Thank you… we do say in the paper: “One possibility is that the organic material in the red layer is itself energetic.”

Ahum...
__________________
"I don't believe I ever saw an Oklahoman who wouldn't fight at the drop of a hat -- and frequently drop the hat himself." - Robert E. Howard
Jono is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th August 2009, 02:01 AM   #352
henryco
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 155
Hello,

See my www.darksideofgravity.com/redreds.pdf

i'm currently translating a french pdf i have describing the analyses and conclusions,... available tomorrow.

Not my preferred interpretation but it' s still possible that these red-red chips are of normal thermite in a gel which would expain why they did not ignite up to 900°C

I was asked to send one of those red-red chips to Steven group. I replied of course i would be glad to do so and would appreciate to receive a red/gray chip in turn ... i was told that they would feel better about the exchange if i
accepted to publish my results in a referee review instead of Jref. I cannot loose my time trying to convince a referee paid to make me loose my time so i decided to stop my communications with this group.

Best

Fred
henryco is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th August 2009, 05:14 AM   #353
henryco
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 155
Originally Posted by henryco View Post
Hello,

See my www.darksideofgravity.com/redreds.pdf

i'm currently translating a french pdf i have describing the analyses and conclusions,... available tomorrow.

Not my preferred interpretation but it' s still possible that these red-red chips are of normal thermite in a gel which would expain why they did not ignite up to 900°C

I was asked to send one of those red-red chips to Steven group. I replied of course i would be glad to do so and would appreciate to receive a red/gray chip in turn ... i was told that they would feel better about the exchange if i
accepted to publish my results in a referee review instead of Jref. I cannot loose my time trying to convince a referee paid to make me loose my time so i decided to stop my communications with this group.

Best

Fred
The translation is ready: find it here

www.darksideofgravity.com/marseille_gb.pdf

best

Fred
henryco is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th August 2009, 08:09 AM   #354
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,811
Thanks Fred;

As I have said before, the only way to rid yourself of this "confusion" or "potential deception" around reproducing nano-thermite results, is to obtain samples of the WTC dust, with the following stipulations,

1. Must be obtained independently of Jones and his associates
2. Must not be ANONYMOUSLY submitted.
3. Must have a KNOWN CHAIN OF CUSTODY.
4. Must eliminate other potential sources of the red-grey chips when analyzed.

Ultimately if you go into it thinking someone is purposely trying to obfuscate your results by tampering, then you could say the same could happen regardless of the methods used, and the procedure followed.

Who is to say that the person who submits the samples to you has not tampered with the dust in the first place?

TAM
T.A.M. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th August 2009, 08:48 PM   #355
metamars
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,207
Oh, HenryCo!

Originally Posted by henryco View Post
The translation is ready: find it here

www.darksideofgravity.com/marseille_gb.pdf

best

Fred
This link doesn't work:

http://www.darksideofgravity.com/Nouvelles/NewPhys.html
metamars is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2009, 06:48 PM   #356
pteridine
Thinker
 
pteridine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 248
Energetics

The DSC of the chips in an inert atmosphere is still the key experiment. Two of Jones' samples in the Bentham paper showed about 1.5 to 2 times the theoretical energy per unit mass of the thermite reaction. Jones, et al., invoke partial combustion of the binder in air as the energetic difference but this has not yet led to the obvious experiment.

My suspicion is that Jones and crew are stalling on the DSC because the exotherm at 440*C was due entirely to combustion and they don't want to admit it. Recently, I heard that they were now complaining of a deficiency of sample material. I think that this is the first step in an unfortunate shortage of true sample. No samples to analyze will prevent the truth [paint] from coming out and forever beatify the dedicated, heroic scientists after the men in black steal all their red chips. No other red chips will be valid samples, of course, because they were obviously planted by the reptilian-led, Zionist-Illuminati-Bilderberg NWO that owns the main stream media that the sheeple believe....etc.
pteridine is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th August 2009, 06:48 AM   #357
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,257
Yes, you're correct. Conspiracy addicts were suckered into Jones's claims that either 1. The "nano" nature of nanothermite is what allowed for more energy release because it's tunable (which is a stupid argument; as you noted, the release was still in excess of what a thermite redox can produce), or 2. The "sol-gel" matrix provided the excess energy. Which of course raises the question of why thermite would be needed to begin with, if the medium that holds it can contribute far more energy to the reaction.

Yeah. Old hat. The energetics Jones put forth is pretty much pseudoscience for suckers.
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th August 2009, 02:23 AM   #358
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 23,029
Originally Posted by pteridine View Post
Recently, I heard that they were now complaining of a deficiency of sample material. I think that this is the first step in an unfortunate shortage of true sample.
That, alone, is more or less fatal to the thermite hypothesis, if you think about it. For the hypothesis to have any credibility at all, this stuff would have to be highly abundant in the WTC dust.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st February 2010, 08:31 PM   #359
jay howard
Muse
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 626
Red/Gray Chips Are Not Paint

The ways this topic is treated demonstrate well the unscientific habits that debunkers here participate in. Why? If the material Harrit, Farrer, Jones, et. al. found is so much nonsense, then why can't it just be handled head-on, without resorting to pretended lacks of understanding, circumstantial ad hominems, and distractions?

You don't like the journal it's published in? Fine. You don't like other things the authors have written? So what? None of that changes what they found.

The little actual scientific debate of the merits of the research say basically that the chips were paint—DESPITE the fact that paint (especially in the WTC towers) could withstand temperatures of at least 800C. The thermitic chips in the WTC dust IGNITED at about 430C. Not only did they ignite, they formed iron microspheres. Imagine that.

Does primer ignite at 430C? Can you show me a sample somewhere, anywhere, that ignites at 430C when dry? Much less a sample that produces metallic iron when ignited? We all know it doesn’t exist. What would be the point? To make a REALLY unsafe primer that ignites at a very achievable office fire temperatures and proceeds to increase BEYOND the melting point of iron? Yea. Give that one to the sales department.

Another standard response to this will no doubt be the uncontrollable urge to turn this into a debate over HOW the thermitic material could possibly have ended up in the towers. Now, that’s not a bad line of inquiry in itself IF it weren’t intended solely to be used as a means to reduce the premise to an absurdity and thus, dismiss it.

I'd love to know how and why it's in the dust. But suggesting that because someone doesn't know exactly how it was used, we can therefore dismiss their scientific findings, is poor reasoning at best.
jay howard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st February 2010, 08:37 PM   #360
Dog Town
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,862
Not this AGAIN!
Really?
Dog Town is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:18 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.