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 james millette , kevin ryan , Niels Harrit , paint chips , richard gage , steven jones , wtc

Reply
Old 12th June 2012, 03:21 AM   #881
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,242
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Two pages up,m I linked to Fig 9 which I uploaded to my Photobucket account. I just noticed that Photobucked scaled it down, from 1291x968 pixels and 247 KB to 1023x767 pixels and 64 KB.
I've uploaded the original (extracted from the paper in raw form) here:

http://www.formauri.es/personal/pgim...he/atm-007.jpg

The resolution is indeed 1291x968. File size is 310 Kb. I don't know how you got a 247 Kb file, probably the extraction method you used recompressed it. I guarantee that file to be extracted verbatim from the PDF. It starts at offset 493851 hexadecimal (4,798,545 decimal) and spans for exactly 318,054 bytes.

For those using Linux, it can be easily done with the standard system utility dd, which can be used to extract raw fragments of a file:

Code:
dd if=7TOCPJ.pdf of=Figure9.jpg bs=1 count=318054 skip=4798545
For those using Windows, no idea. There are hex editors that I've heard can extract portions of files. Googling I've found www.softpedia.com/get/System/File-Management/File-Parter.shtml which claims to do that, but I can't give any guarantees.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno 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 June 2012, 03:54 AM   #882
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,835
Alright, I am not that techie ... I simply highlighted the image, right-clicked, copied, then pasted into my favorite image editor, IrfanView (that preserved pixelresolution) - and then saved as jpeg, which compressed file size (I probably saved at a setting of "95%". At 100%, file size is 502 KB).

Anyway, there isn't really a visible difference between these versions.
Oystein 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 June 2012, 04:22 AM   #883
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,242
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Anyway, there isn't really a visible difference between these versions.
That was actually my point, since MM seemed to make a big deal of the "low resolution 68 KB JPEG image" (defining "low resolution" as "79% the original size"). I was actually just proving that 1291x968 is the exact resolution available in the paper, and providing means for those who want to check.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.

Last edited by pgimeno; 12th June 2012 at 04:24 AM.
pgimeno 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 June 2012, 09:08 AM   #884
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
"That was actually my point, since MM seemed to make a big deal of the "low resolution 68 KB JPEG image" (defining "low resolution" as "79% the original size"). I was actually just proving that 1291x968 is the exact resolution available in the paper, and providing means for those who want to check."
bolding is mine

On what basis do you assume that the embedded images in the Bentham Paper pdf are the same resolution as the originals.

The JPEG format is a lossy format.

Your 79% the original size, is 79% of a lossy copy of a lossy embedded pdf image.

The pdf image, is a cropped and compressed for publication copy of the original high resolution recorded image.

A typical professional digital back would be at least an 18 MP, producing RAW files upwards of 31 MB, a lot of data.

Where is the quality in an explanation that relies on a ruler measurement applied to a multiple generation, lossy, 68,000 byte image copy of an original, lossless, RAW image of 31,000,000 bytes or higher?

MM
Miragememories 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 June 2012, 10:07 AM   #885
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,835
MM,

1. Did you notice that pgimeno linked to an image with 100% of the resolution available from the Bentham paper, not 79%?
2. Did you notice that my original assessment (3.5 nm per pixel) was also derived from the 100% resolution, not 79%? I only linked to the lower resolution on my Photobucket account, being unaware that Photobucket had resized it. pgimeno fixed that problem. Does it hurt you physically to recognize and acknowledge that we readily corrected an honest and irrelevant mistake?
3. Did you notice my post 875 which supercedes the argument from pixel resolution with regard to the maximum capabilities of the particular SEM device that the Bentham authors used?
4. Did you notice that, according to Chris Mohr's paraphrasing of the convesation with Gage, Richard Gage determined from the Bentham paper that there are spheres 100 that are only atoms across - a claim that simply does not stand up to scrutiny, and is easily refuted by just looking at the Bentham paper?

I fully expect you to give me four separate answers to these four separate questions from which I can clearly determine whether or not you noticed 1.-4.!
Oystein 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 June 2012, 10:12 AM   #886
cjnewson88
Graduate Poster
 
cjnewson88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,678
Of course he did, but MM is here for scoring points, not debating logic
__________________
Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed.
Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88
cjnewson88 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 June 2012, 11:07 AM   #887
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,081
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
"Nanothermite in the WTC has been disproven because:

1) ____________________________

2) ____________________________

3) ____________________________ "
1) No trace of thermite, nano or otherwise was found. No evidence, no residual.
2) Thermite, nano or otherwise, would not cause the demolition.
3) No trace of ANYTHING outside of the known and provable established causes, to wit the impact and fires caused by the observed aircraft, have ever been found. No evidence what so ever, of anything that might over come the null hypothosis.

You know what the null hypothosis is right?
__________________
@tomhodden

Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW).
Tomtomkent 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 June 2012, 11:28 AM   #888
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Yes, I've noticed this. How many opportunities have you guys had to present your case now? What is the difficulty?

"Nanothermite in the WTC has been disproven because:


"Nanothermite in the WTC has been disproven because:

Many reasons, not least which the chips don't have enough thermitic compounds to react...

True or false, Ergo: a thermitic reaction requires both a fuel and an oxidizer
True or false, Ergo: the Harrit/Jones chips are mainly composed of Carbon
True or false, Ergo: thermite does not use Carbon as an oxidizer (unless you can find an example of one that does!)
True or false, Ergo: Thermite is composed MAINLY of a fuel and an oxidizer, not something else.

So how can this be thermite or nanothermite, Ergo? Please explain chemically how this could be so. It is Harrit's own XEDS data from the chips.

__________________
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 12th June 2012, 12:18 PM   #889
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
A mystery of missing strontium chromate solved?

To Oystein, Chris Mohr and others who may be still interested

Well, if some/many of chips investigated by Jim Millette are Laclede primer chips (as is indicated by their XEDS spectra and/or kaolinite pigment and/or epoxy resin, not speaking to iron oxide), they should contain ca 1.5 % of strontium chromate. This anticorrosive stuff should have a form of yellow crystalline needles with the lenghts of some micrometers or so. But, Jim has not found any strontium chromate, at least using his methods (XEDS, various microscopy).
(On the other hand, N. Harrit was so very kind and showed us a detailed XEDS spectrum of „Bentham chip a“, in which some strontium and chromium signals are detected – in his white paper WHY THE RED/GRAY CHIPS ARE NOT PRIMER PAINT.)

OK, it could not be easy to find pigment in such a low concentration in the paint, but is here any other explanation? Could strontium chromate crystals somehow „dissapear“ from the Laclede paint?
Yes, I think so (after some short study) The matter is that up to now, I hadn' t any closer idea how this pigment could behave during electrocoating/curing/usage of Laclede primer paint, especially I have mostly overlooked passivation processes as important parts of anticorrosive action. In my head, there was only info that strontium chromate is very sparingly soluble in water.

Here is a short excerpt from the lengthy article COATINGS FOR CORROSION CONTROL:

„The utility of chromate pigments for passivation is well established. Various mechanisms have been proposed to explain their effectiveness (38). All the proposed mechanisms require that the chromate ions be in aqueous solution. Like all passivators, chromate ions accelerate corrosion at low concentrations… Sodium dichromate is an effective passivating*agent, but would be a poor passivating pigment; its solubility in water is too high. It would be rapidly leached out of a film and would probably cause massive blistering. At the other extreme, lead chromate is so insoluble that it has no electrochemical action...
Strontium chromate (SrCrO4) has an appropriate solubility in water (5x10-3 mol CrO4/l) and is sometimes used in primers, especially latex paint primers…etc.“


This should mean that strontium chromate needles in the freshly electrocoated paint are gradually dissolved in the aqeous environment of the swollen paint, and they are probably further dissolved during curing and perhaps even later. Therefore, they could be basically missing in the paint, or they at least could change substantially their original form during this dissolution.

It seems that the fate of strontium and chromate ions („dissolved“ in water) in such wet paints is not really clear (I will add some good reference tomorrow), but chromate ions should travel to the painted steel and react with it forming very thin passivation layer. Therefore, at least chromium should not be easy to detect by XEDS, since it is "hidden" under the paint layer.

Btw, similar kind of passivation (migration of chromate ions to the protected steel and subsequent chemical reaction) is observed for zinc chromate (pigment in Tnemec primer), therefore even this stuff should be gradually dissolved in the wet paint to be effective „passivator“. The situation is more complex here, e.g. since various „zinc chromates“ are known, but any zinc chromate should be somehow chemically/physically transformed and this could shed a new light on the behavior of this pigment e.g. during the long term extraction of MEK chip with MEK.


Generally, the behavior of such passivating (and other) pigments in the electrocoated paint (a kind of colloid layer) can be quite complex and I have to admire researchers and engineers who have developed such sophisticated anticorrosive paints)

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 12th June 2012 at 12:51 PM.
Ivan Kminek 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 June 2012, 01:03 PM   #890
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,242
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
On what basis do you assume that the embedded images in the Bentham Paper pdf are the same resolution as the originals.
I don't. You've lost focus.
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Oystein,
Last Friday Richard Gage told me personally that some of the iron-rich spheres found in the Bentham paper were only about 100 atoms across. Is this true? That would be ultra-nano if it were! He thinks Millette may not have looked at this closely enough.
If Gage was talking about spheres found in an image with a better resolution than one in the Bentham paper, then that statement is false because then what he was talking about and what he said he was talking about are not the same thing.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno 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 June 2012, 04:00 PM   #891
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,473
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
To Oystein, Chris Mohr and others who may be still interested

Well, if some/many of chips investigated by Jim Millette are Laclede primer chips (as is indicated by their XEDS spectra and/or kaolinite pigment and/or epoxy resin, not speaking to iron oxide), they should contain ca 1.5 % of strontium chromate. This anticorrosive stuff should have a form of yellow crystalline needles with the lenghts of some micrometers or so. But, Jim has not found any strontium chromate, at least using his methods (XEDS, various microscopy).
(On the other hand, N. Harrit was so very kind and showed us a detailed XEDS spectrum of „Bentham chip a“, in which some strontium and chromium signals are detected – in his white paper WHY THE RED/GRAY CHIPS ARE NOT PRIMER PAINT.)

OK, it could not be easy to find pigment in such a low concentration in the paint, but is here any other explanation? Could strontium chromate crystals somehow „dissapear“ from the Laclede paint?
Yes, I think so (after some short study) The matter is that up to now, I hadn' t any closer idea how this pigment could behave during electrocoating/curing/usage of Laclede primer paint, especially I have mostly overlooked passivation processes as important parts of anticorrosive action. In my head, there was only info that strontium chromate is very sparingly soluble in water.

Here is a short excerpt from the lengthy article COATINGS FOR CORROSION CONTROL:

„The utility of chromate pigments for passivation is well established. Various mechanisms have been proposed to explain their effectiveness (38). All the proposed mechanisms require that the chromate ions be in aqueous solution. Like all passivators, chromate ions accelerate corrosion at low concentrations… Sodium dichromate is an effective passivating*agent, but would be a poor passivating pigment; its solubility in water is too high. It would be rapidly leached out of a film and would probably cause massive blistering. At the other extreme, lead chromate is so insoluble that it has no electrochemical action...
Strontium chromate (SrCrO4) has an appropriate solubility in water (5x10-3 mol CrO4/l) and is sometimes used in primers, especially latex paint primers…etc.“


This should mean that strontium chromate needles in the freshly electrocoated paint are gradually dissolved in the aqeous environment of the swollen paint, and they are probably further dissolved during curing and perhaps even later. Therefore, they could be basically missing in the paint, or they at least could change substantially their original form during this dissolution.

It seems that the fate of strontium and chromate ions („dissolved“ in water) in such wet paints is not really clear (I will add some good reference tomorrow), but chromate ions should travel to the painted steel and react with it forming very thin passivation layer. Therefore, at least chromium should not be easy to detect by XEDS, since it is "hidden" under the paint layer.

Btw, similar kind of passivation (migration of chromate ions to the protected steel and subsequent chemical reaction) is observed for zinc chromate (pigment in Tnemec primer), therefore even this stuff should be gradually dissolved in the wet paint to be effective „passivator“. The situation is more complex here, e.g. since various „zinc chromates“ are known, but any zinc chromate should be somehow chemically/physically transformed and this could shed a new light on the behavior of this pigment e.g. during the long term extraction of MEK chip with MEK.


Generally, the behavior of such passivating (and other) pigments in the electrocoated paint (a kind of colloid layer) can be quite complex and I have to admire researchers and engineers who have developed such sophisticated anticorrosive paints)
From this, I would assume that the chromium would be more likely to be found in the "gray layer" of the chips, in the +3 oxidation state. Correct?
Redwood 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 June 2012, 11:10 PM   #892
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by Redwood View Post
From this, I would assume that the chromium would be more likely to be found in the "gray layer" of the chips, in the +3 oxidation state. Correct?
I'm not sure about the state of chromium in gray layers, it only seems that passivation layers are only some nanometers or tens of nanometers "thick", therefore negligible in comparison with the thicknesses of gray layers of oxidized steel in WTC red-gray chips.

Another quote from this article:

The failure to find an adequate alternative to chromate inhibitors during the last 25 years is, at least partly, due to a lack of understanding of the mechanism of inhibition. Numerous studies (2-5) have been devoted to clarification of the mechanism by which chromate ions inhibit the corrosion of metals and alloys. Thus, at high concentrations, chromate may act as the classical anodic passivating inhibitor, while at lower concentrations it may be reduced at cathode sites to chromium oxide, essentially functioning as a cathodic inhibitor.

Some schemes how such passivation can work eletrochemically in paints are here.

It could be easily a "full time job" for at least several days to know all essentials about chromate passivation of steel, but suitable chromate pigments in anticorrosive primers must be simply "very slightly soluble" in water, which leads to the formation of chromate and strontium ions migrating/diffusing (at least) in the still wet paint layer.

I have always wondered how strontium chromate crystals, quite rare in Laclede primer and firmly "trapped" in the crosslinked epoxy resin binder, can inhibit steel corrosion, since it looks like a classical "action at the distance"; and at least this point is clearer now

For me, it is another "point for Laclede paint" (here is some explanation of perhaps missing strontium chromate needles, as for Jim Millette's effort to find them), although I cannot be really conclusive in this regard

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 12th June 2012 at 11:19 PM.
Ivan Kminek 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 13th June 2012, 12:52 AM   #893
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Some more thinking about the dissolution of strontium chromate crystals in wet Laclede primer paint...

The solubility of this stuff in cold water is ca 1 g/l. Its weight concentration in dry paint is ca 1.5 % (it corresponds ca to 15 g/kg). But, in the wet paint after electrocoating (basically colloid layer which is highly swollen with water), its concentration can be much lower and can approach 1 g/l. Therefore, crystals can be dissolved substantially. Here, my reasoning is not well-based (I do not know e.g. the content of water in fresh coating), but it is at least some very rough guess)

Interestingly, dissolution of chromates can be important process also in dried/cured anticorrosive primers. Here is an explanation for zinc chromate:

“In dry, low humidity weather the zinc chromate does not do anything other than remain in the coating. On the other hand, when the humidity in the air increases, or on a rainy day moisture from the air penetrates the primer coating and slightly dissolves the zinc chromate. The dissolved zinc chromate solution now does react with the underlying metal surface and forms a passive layer (like a blanket) that prevents corrosion. As soon as the weather becomes dry again the zinc chromate no longer plays a role ... at least until the next time it rains, when the process is repeated. If there are frequent cycles of high and low humidity the zinc chromate will eventually be depleted and soon after you might start to see corrosion of the metal.”


And another quote from the article cited yesterday:

For the pigment to be effective, the binder must permit diffusion of water to dissolve the pigment. Therefore, the use of passivating pigments may lead to blistering after exposure to humid conditions. Such pigments are most useful in applications in which the need to protect the steel substrate after film rupture has occurred outweighs the desirability of minimizing the probability of blistering.

Well, Laclede paint has been exposed to quite stable and low humidity both on WTC floor trusses and in the bags for storage of WTC dust samples, but after 40 years... some strontium chromate crystals can be "dissolved" even in this way. Perhaps)

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 13th June 2012 at 01:24 AM.
Ivan Kminek 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 13th June 2012, 01:25 AM   #894
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,835
Wow - chromate may actually get depleted over time... I wouldn't have thought that.

I don't think that all the depletion action already occurs from the electrocoating and before the paint layer is fully dry. It is my understanding that the purpose of chromate as a rust inhibitor is to "repair" the passivation layer when it gets disrupted during the lifetime of the coating. If you think that the pigments merely dissolve and the solution is distributed in the wet vehicle, then I'd think the chromate would re-crystallize, perhaps to smaller particles.


If the chromate gets depleted, where do the three elements go? O goes to steel surface and bonds with Fe. What happens to Cr and Sr? They don't vanish, or do they?
Oystein 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 13th June 2012, 01:44 AM   #895
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Oystein: I also do not think that all strontium chromate is dissolved during painting - just some small portion of it.

Chromate ions go to steel and react with it somehow. As for strontium ions... no idea so far.

Perhaps this quote from here indicates that strontium reacts/interacts with the steel as well:

In protective (primer) coatings containing strontium chromate as the inhibitive pigment, both chromate and strontium species are present and may leach and react at the metal/coating interface. It is possible that the additional presence of strontium (associated with the chromate) would affect the local electrochemistry at this location.

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 13th June 2012 at 02:17 AM.
Ivan Kminek 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 13th June 2012, 06:40 AM   #896
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
"Oystein: I also do not think that all strontium chromate is dissolved during painting - just some small portion of it.

Chromate ions go to steel and react with it somehow. As for strontium ions... no idea so far.

Perhaps this quote from here indicates that strontium reacts/interacts with the steel as well:

"In protective (primer) coatings containing strontium chromate as the inhibitive pigment, both chromate and strontium species are present and may leach and react at the metal/coating interface. It is possible that the additional presence of strontium (associated with the chromate) would affect the local electrochemistry at this location."
"
Is this a PM or a Post?

MM
Miragememories 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 13th June 2012, 08:58 AM   #897
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
MM: ? This was just normal post, I think

Oystein: For the record, here is a document Polymer Flammability

E.g., in Appendix A, there are these values tabulated for epoxy resin:

Td (onset of decomposition) 427 degrees C
Tp (peak mass loss rate) 462 degrees C
Tign (autoignition temperature) 427 degrees C

Btw, I have heard about some red chips from WTC dust, which perhaps autoignited at ca 430 degrees C.... But indeed, we should not take these data as something ultimate or valid for all epoxies...

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 13th June 2012 at 09:06 AM.
Ivan Kminek 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 13th June 2012, 01:20 PM   #898
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,835
Epoxy physical data

Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
Oystein: For the record, here is a document Polymer Flammability

E.g., in Appendix A, there are these values tabulated for epoxy resin:

Td (onset of decomposition) 427 degrees C
Tp (peak mass loss rate) 462 degrees C
Tign (autoignition temperature) 427 degrees C

Btw, I have heard about some red chips from WTC dust, which perhaps autoignited at ca 430 degrees C.... But indeed, we should not take these data as something ultimate or valid for all epoxies...
Cool! -> # oysteinbookmark

I might add, for epoxy (EP):

Table A2:
LATENT HEAT OF GASIFICATION: 1.6 kJ/g
ENTHALPY OF GASIFICATION OF POLYMERS: 1.5 kJ/g
CHAR YIELD: 4%

Table A3:
THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY: 0.19 W/(m*K)
DENSITY: 1.2 g/ml
HEAT CAPACITY: 1.7 J/(g*K)

Table A5:
EFFECTIVE HEAT OF COMBUSTION: 20.4 kJ/g
HEAT OF COMPLETE COMBUSTION OF FUEL GASES: 27.1 kJ/g
Efficiency: 75%



Might come in handy at some point
Oystein 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 13th June 2012, 02:12 PM   #899
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,835
Little Fe in post-DSC spheres

Today I looked very closely at Fig. 25 of the Bentham paper, which shows post-DSC residue of some red-gray chip. It shows grainy and coarse particles as well as a few microspheres that are several µm across. This is accompanied by an XEDS chart that is supposedly taken from one of the spheres, with a dominant Fe-peak, and also much Si and a lower Al peak. Of course O and C, too:



This is a link to a greater magnification of the SEM image:

http://i1088.photobucket.com/albums/...ig25a_orig.jpg



What is interesting here?
-> The spheres are only medium gray!

Why is that intersting?
-> Because it's a BSE image! The brightness of spots in BSE images scales with the atomic number or mass of the predominating elements in thar spot. As we know e.g. from Fig. 4, 5, 8, particles or regions rich in iron (Fe, atomic number 26) appear bright, almost white, while regions dominated by Si and Al (atomic numbers 14 and 13) appear medium gray, and where there is only organic matrix (C, O; atomic numbers 6 and 8) we have a dark background.

Now this Fig 25 shows several small whitish, non-spherical particles that may be between 200 nm and perhaps 3-4 µm across, but the spheres, several µm in diameter, are of the same medium gray as large platy particle to the left of the spheres in the center. So the spheres have to be dominated by Al and / or Si, and contain little, if any, Fe, while it seems that the Fe-rich particles of hematite are preserved in shape, and probably also in size.

There is one sphere that has lines like meridians, below center. Its surface appears sprinkled with very small whitish particles, which are near the resolution of this image in size. In the larger version, one pixel is ca. 56 nm, so these sprinkles, often around 2px across, may well be just the hematite pigment size of 100-150 nm.


The large Fe-peak in the corresponding XEDS then comes from where?
-> We don't know, but not from a clean surface of a sphere! Perhaps this XEDS catches a sphere contaminated on its surface with lots of Fe2O3 pigmnents, or it captures a much larger area than just a sphere.




Conclusion: These post-DSC spheres don't contain any significant amount of iron, whether elemental or oxidized. They probably consist mainly of Si and Al (with O, no doubt, and quite possibly C).





On the other hand, Fig. 21, where the sphere also doesn't look bright enough to be dominated by Fe, has a corresponding XEDS without any Al and very little Si. Here, I believe that the XEDS scan is not from the sphere, but from the coarse, brighter region in the top left quarter:






Perhaps Jim Millette has similar findings? I heard he wanted to look into this microsphere issue
Oystein 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 13th June 2012, 05:47 PM   #900
cjnewson88
Graduate Poster
 
cjnewson88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,678
Bookmarked. Amazing work Oystein.
__________________
Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed.
Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88
cjnewson88 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 14th June 2012, 01:03 PM   #901
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
"Today I looked very closely at Fig. 25 of the Bentham paper, which shows post-DSC residue of some red-gray chip. It shows grainy and coarse particles as well as a few microspheres that are several µm across. This is accompanied by an XEDS chart that is supposedly taken from one of the spheres, with a dominant Fe-peak, and also much Si and a lower Al peak. Of course O and C, too:

http://i1088.photobucket.com/albums/...rial_Fig25.jpg

This is a link to a greater magnification of the SEM image:

http://i1088.photobucket.com/albums/...ig25a_orig.jpg

What is interesting here?
-> The spheres are only medium gray!

Why is that intersting?
-> Because it's a BSE image! The brightness of spots in BSE images scales with the atomic number or mass of the predominating elements in thar spot. As we know e.g. from Fig. 4, 5, 8, particles or regions rich in iron (Fe, atomic number 26) appear bright, almost white, while regions dominated by Si and Al (atomic numbers 14 and 13) appear medium gray, and where there is only organic matrix (C, O; atomic numbers 6 and 8) we have a dark background.
...
"
Again you appear to be guilty of attempting to extract more than is offered.

Are you suggesting that the Bentham authors were unaware of how BSE images are created?

That they purposely expected to fool the rest of the scientific community?

Your lengthy, poorly supported ramble, is strictly based on your expectation that dramatic brightness changes should be observable in the published BSE images.

You fail to consider how image editing and processing can easily render such an expectation meaningless.




The composite image above is comprised of a portion of Fig.25 (on the left), and Fig.5d (on the right).

To my eye, there is insufficient brightness difference between those two large spheres in Fig.25, and the gray chip shown in the bottom half of Fig.5d, to base your dramatic claims.

MM
Miragememories 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 14th June 2012, 01:21 PM   #902
Africanus
Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 224
Interesting article and good work, Oystein. As I read your article, one fact drew my attention that I didn't consider before

Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Is it possible, that kaolinite is present in this sample? The platlets to the left of the three spheres are very similar to kaolinite and the average atomic number matches, too.
Africanus 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 14th June 2012, 02:11 PM   #903
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,245
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post

That they purposely expected to fool the rest of the scientific community?


MM
I seriously doubt this was ever their intention. They have never seriously presented this to the scientific community, instead they chose to pay to have it published in a journal where they could also control the peer review. They have never sought independent verification. They refuse to share their samples or release tests (more conclusive) that they have claimed to have done.

Their intention was to fool their target audience, you!


__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 14th June 2012 at 02:12 PM.
DGM is online now   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 14th June 2012, 02:16 PM   #904
Dog Town
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,862
Originally Posted by DGM View Post

Their intention was to fool their target audience, you!



It does seem to be, the one thing they are successful at!
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
Old 14th June 2012, 02:48 PM   #905
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,835
Originally Posted by Africanus View Post
Interesting article and good work, Oystein. As I read your article, one fact drew my attention that I didn't consider before



Is it possible, that kaolinite is present in this sample? The platlets to the left of the three spheres are very similar to kaolinite and the average atomic number matches, too.
Difficult to say at that magnification.

the black bar that goes across almost the entire width of the image is ca. 50 µm.
Kaolin platelets are typically 1 or 2 µm wide and several tens of nm thin. The latter is equivakent to just 1 pixel in that image. Most of what I see in that image would be larger than that order of magnitude. I see some platy candidates above the left end of the black bar, but it's not clear to me that this must be kaolin, I can't rule out other substances, as we don't have a spectrum and a higher-magnification image that would show shape and size more clearly.






MM by the way should explain what the those grains an particles are that are brighter than the spheres, if he wishes to imagine that the spheres are basically iron. They must be rich in something with a higher atomic number than iron.

As for what my observation means with regards to the intentions or abilities of the authors: I'll leave that up to him. I am only pointing out the cool facts.
Oystein 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 14th June 2012, 02:56 PM   #906
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
Originally Posted by Dog Town View Post
It does seem to be, the one thing they are successful at!
I think they could have lit dog crap on fire, called it thermite, and every truther out there would have still bought it.
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 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 14th June 2012, 03:02 PM   #907
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,835
Originally Posted by Justin39640 View Post
I think they could have lit dog crap on fire, called it thermite, and every truther out there would have still bought it.
If sufficiently dry, it will no doubt ignite in the requisite temperature range (remember: +/- 100 °C is no problem at all), release as much energy per mass unit (remember: a factor of 5 times more or less is no problem at all), and the ash will contain iron-rich spheres.
Oystein 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 14th June 2012, 03:37 PM   #908
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
"MM by the way should explain what the those grains an particles are that are brighter than the spheres, if he wishes to imagine that the spheres are basically iron. They must be rich in something with a higher atomic number than iron.

As for what my observation means with regards to the intentions or abilities of the authors: I'll leave that up to him. I am only pointing out the cool facts.
"
Your idea of what constitutes a "fact" leaves a lot to be desired.

I suggest you address the issue of your seeing what isn't there to be seen.

No doubt the Bentham scientists could easily see those white particles, and clearly they felt there was not a conflict with their observations.

As professionals, who actually performed the tests, and observed the original BSE images generated, they would have a far greater understanding of what they observed than an unqualified pretender such as yourself, attempting an armchair greyscale analysis in front of 72dpi computer monitor.

MM
Miragememories 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 14th June 2012, 06:04 PM   #909
cjnewson88
Graduate Poster
 
cjnewson88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,678
Or; they knew they were being dishonest, lied about it, and hoped that people like MM would make excuses and assumptions for them in defense. Guess it worked.
__________________
Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed.
Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88
cjnewson88 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 14th June 2012, 07:13 PM   #910
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,473
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
I'm not sure about the state of chromium in gray layers, it only seems that passivation layers are only some nanometers or tens of nanometers "thick", therefore negligible in comparison with the thicknesses of gray layers of oxidized steel in WTC red-gray chips.

Another quote from this article:

The failure to find an adequate alternative to chromate inhibitors during the last 25 years is, at least partly, due to a lack of understanding of the mechanism of inhibition. Numerous studies (2-5) have been devoted to clarification of the mechanism by which chromate ions inhibit the corrosion of metals and alloys. Thus, at high concentrations, chromate may act as the classical anodic passivating inhibitor, while at lower concentrations it may be reduced at cathode sites to chromium oxide, essentially functioning as a cathodic inhibitor.

Some schemes how such passivation can work eletrochemically in paints are here.

It could be easily a "full time job" for at least several days to know all essentials about chromate passivation of steel, but suitable chromate pigments in anticorrosive primers must be simply "very slightly soluble" in water, which leads to the formation of chromate and strontium ions migrating/diffusing (at least) in the still wet paint layer.

I have always wondered how strontium chromate crystals, quite rare in Laclede primer and firmly "trapped" in the crosslinked epoxy resin binder, can inhibit steel corrosion, since it looks like a classical "action at the distance"; and at least this point is clearer now

For me, it is another "point for Laclede paint" (here is some explanation of perhaps missing strontium chromate needles, as for Jim Millette's effort to find them), although I cannot be really conclusive in this regard
I apologize in advance for further derailing this thread, but discussing real science and technology is much more interesting than debunking woo!

Chromate is indeed a very effective corrosion inhibitor. Once upon a time where I worked we used chromate in aqueous solution at ~pH 12 in boiler water to inhibit corrosion. Interesting that at that pH, chromate isn't a very good oxidizing agent. In fact, it's easier to oxidize trivalent chromium to chromate at that pH!

True also that the actual mechanisms of corrosion inhibition haven't been extensively studied. It's just that everyone knows that they work! As an example, nitric acid was traditionally used to clean stainless steel, since that is what was used to passivate stainless in the first place. Theory was that the nitric acid reacted with the s.s. to produce an oxide surface layer. Problem was that, at the concentrations generally used, nitric acid is only weakly oxidizing. And as it turns out, citric acid, which isn't oxidizing at all, works really well. It seems that the mechanism is more that it "scrubs" the surface of the steel, allowing it to react with atmospheric oxygen, which forms the passivating layer.
Redwood 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 14th June 2012, 07:27 PM   #911
Dog Town
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,862
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
No doubt the Bentham scientists could easily see those white particles, and clearly they felt there was not a conflict with their observations.
There's your sign!
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
Old 14th June 2012, 07:30 PM   #912
Dog Town
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,862
Originally Posted by Justin39640 View Post
I think they could have lit dog crap on fire, called it thermite, and every truther out there would have still bought it.
Gos ta pay dem beeels!
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
Old 15th June 2012, 09:06 PM   #913
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Millette Dust Study Update 6/15/12

I had another phone conversation with Jim Millette today to get a progress report on his WTC Dust study. A few highlights:

1) Since this project is not funded any further, he is having his employees work on this when they are having a "slow day at the office" so it doesn't get in the way of his work commitments, but it is coming along and he has written and studied more.

2) He has done more experiments and research on the iron-rich spheres. His updated report on the WTC Dust will be featured at a Microscopy Conference around July 10 (The McCrone Inter-Micro 2012 Conference, to be exact). There he will get another round of peer-review feedback on his work so far.

3) So far he has been unable to find a sample of known LaClede coating (and other possible suspected coatings that could be a match for his chips). He considers coming up with a positive ID of the red-gray chips relatively unimportant, as he has already confirmed that there is definitely no measurable amount of thermitic materials in any of the chips. However, he agrees it would be good if he DID find a match. To that end, there are many people at this conference with private collections of samples of all kinds of building materials, including customs officials, people from the Smithsonian Institute, fire forensics experts, etc. He will be asking all of them if anyone has samples of LaClede primer coatings.

4) He is still working on a final report and it will have additional information that the preliminary report did not have, as you can see.
__________________
20 videos rebutting Blueprint for Truth YouTube keyword chrismohr911 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC3JgWkNNIQ
Playlists http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
and http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
WTC Dust study http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/911...12webHiRes.pdf Hundreds more links and info both sides: http:www.chrismohr911.com
chrismohr 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 15th June 2012, 09:48 PM   #914
cjnewson88
Graduate Poster
 
cjnewson88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,678
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
2) He has done more experiments and research on the iron-rich spheres. His updated report on the WTC Dust will be featured at a Microscopy Conference around July 10 (The McCrone Inter-Micro 2012 Conference, to be exact). There he will get another round of peer-review feedback on his work so far.
I dont suppose he gave any hints as to what his research on the iron-rich spheres revealed?
__________________
Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed.
Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88
cjnewson88 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 June 2012, 12:49 AM   #915
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,835
Thanks Chris, sounds all good!

Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
...
2) He has done more experiments and research on the iron-rich spheres.
Ah the suspence

Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
His updated report on the WTC Dust will be featured at a Microscopy Conference around July 10 (The McCrone Inter-Micro 2012 Conference, to be exact). There he will get another round of peer-review feedback on his work so far.
That conference will be held July 9-13:
http://www.mcri.org/home/section/101...inary-schedule

And Jim is scheduled to speak on tuesday, 10th of july:
http://www.mcri.org/home/section/101...s-and-speakers
Quote:
Thermite in the World Trade Center Dust?
James R. Millette, MVA Scientific Consultants
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
3) So far he has been unable to find a sample of known LaClede coating (and other possible suspected coatings that could be a match for his chips). He considers coming up with a positive ID of the red-gray chips relatively unimportant, as he has already confirmed that there is definitely no measurable amount of thermitic materials in any of the chips. However, he agrees it would be good if he DID find a match. To that end, there are many people at this conference with private collections of samples of all kinds of building materials, including customs officials, people from the Smithsonian Institute, fire forensics experts, etc. He will be asking all of them if anyone has samples of LaClede primer coatings. ...
I agree that a positive ID is not necessary - for rational people. But very nice to have, since, alas, we are NOT dealing with rational people. It's like you are finding a yellowish liquid on your dinner table with tiny bubbles that form a white foam at the top and tastes slightly bitter. Forensic analysis shows its mostly water and about 4% alcohol and contains CO2, and traces of hops, malt and yeast. You remember that you had bottles of Coors, Budweiser (the Czech original of course ) and Uerige Altbier in your fridge (and possibly other brands, too) and that the liquid, as per sworn affidavid by your wife, originated from the fridge. You think it tastes like Coors, but somehow you are missing the freshness.

Rational people will conclude that the liquid is beer.

Twoofers will suspect it must be a military lab grad poison with magical properties, unless you ID the brand of beer, because the yellowish color proves it's not Uerige.
Oystein 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 June 2012, 12:50 AM   #916
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
I had another phone conversation with Jim Millette today to get a progress report on his WTC Dust study. A few highlights:

1) Since this project is not funded any further, he is having his employees work on this when they are having a "slow day at the office" so it doesn't get in the way of his work commitments, but it is coming along and he has written and studied more.

2) He has done more experiments and research on the iron-rich spheres. His updated report on the WTC Dust will be featured at a Microscopy Conference around July 10 (The McCrone Inter-Micro 2012 Conference, to be exact). There he will get another round of peer-review feedback on his work so far.

3) So far he has been unable to find a sample of known LaClede coating (and other possible suspected coatings that could be a match for his chips). He considers coming up with a positive ID of the red-gray chips relatively unimportant, as he has already confirmed that there is definitely no measurable amount of thermitic materials in any of the chips. However, he agrees it would be good if he DID find a match. To that end, there are many people at this conference with private collections of samples of all kinds of building materials, including customs officials, people from the Smithsonian Institute, fire forensics experts, etc. He will be asking all of them if anyone has samples of LaClede primer coatings.

4) He is still working on a final report and it will have additional information that the preliminary report did not have, as you can see.
Hi, Chris, thanks for the interesting news

As a "discoverer" of Laclede primer, I still think that most of Jim Millette's red chips for which XEDS were measured on crossections can be attributed to the Laclede paint quite reasonably (not for sure, but in the way "because of this and this, theses chips could be this WTC paint, for which we know this published specification").

I understand that Jim Millette considers such claim as relatively unimportant (his goal was to falsify thermite hypothesis), but they are important for us. Moreover, in the case this hypothesis will not be included in the final report, truthers will always claim that "paint hypothesis" was not confirmed by this study; remember the sneaky interpretation of AE911Truth.

I am confused: since Jim Millette had no problem to consider the Tnemec primer as the material of chips, why he does not consider "Laclede primer"? Its specification was published in NIST reports as well.

It is not very probable that anybody in the microscopic conference can possess the samples of authentic "Laclede paint" directly from WTC floor trusses. But, who knows?
Ivan Kminek 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 June 2012, 01:59 AM   #917
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Oystein: Yes, we can consider only Budweiser beer with the Czech origin as genuine. We Czechs have no problem with German people in this regard, just American copy of Budweiser is a problem

We have invested a lot of time (among others) in this WTC paint matter. Lets wait up to Jim Millette's final report. Jim is not obliged to prove any paint. If there is no mention on "Laclede primer" in the final report, we can still write some seriously meant paper, e.g. for Bentham Press, why some/many of these chips studied by both Harrit and Millette can be Laclede primer

Anyway, many thanks again to both Chris and Jim

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 16th June 2012 at 02:01 AM.
Ivan Kminek 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 June 2012, 06:11 AM   #918
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
Hi, Chris, thanks for the interesting news

As a "discoverer" of Laclede primer, I still think that most of Jim Millette's red chips for which XEDS were measured on crossections can be attributed to the Laclede paint quite reasonably (not for sure, but in the way "because of this and this, theses chips could be this WTC paint, for which we know this published specification").

I understand that Jim Millette considers such claim as relatively unimportant (his goal was to falsify thermite hypothesis), but they are important for us. Moreover, in the case this hypothesis will not be included in the final report, truthers will always claim that "paint hypothesis" was not confirmed by this study; remember the sneaky interpretation of AE911Truth.

I am confused: since Jim Millette had no problem to consider the Tnemec primer as the material of chips, why he does not consider "Laclede primer"? Its specification was published in NIST reports as well.

It is not very probable that anybody in the microscopic conference can possess the samples of authentic "Laclede paint" directly from WTC floor trusses. But, who knows?
Ivan,
I may be wrong, but: he does seem interested in LaClede. He just doesn't feel he can offer a positive ID unless he can find a known sample to compare it against. He didn't say this explicitly, but I get the impression he doesn't want to publish a speculation, however well founded. This gives a high degree of credibility to what he DOES say, which is: no thermitic material in the dust. And I think you would agree that NO THERMITE is more important than a positive ID of LaClede, though all of us would love it if he can find it. Who knows, in the circles he is connected with, he may actually find a sample. The likelihood is reasonably high because several of these people have large collections of samples of stuff like this.
cmjsn88 wondered if he said more about the iron-rich spheres. He never tells me about his results until he is finished and is certain of what he is saying. It was obvious he was heading towards some kind of conclusion but again, he never talks without very high certainty of what he is saying.
__________________
20 videos rebutting Blueprint for Truth YouTube keyword chrismohr911 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC3JgWkNNIQ
Playlists http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
and http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
WTC Dust study http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/911...12webHiRes.pdf Hundreds more links and info both sides: http:www.chrismohr911.com
chrismohr 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 June 2012, 06:32 AM   #919
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Ivan,
I may be wrong, but: he does seem interested in LaClede. He just doesn't feel he can offer a positive ID unless he can find a known sample to compare it against. He didn't say this explicitly, but I get the impression he doesn't want to publish a speculation, however well founded. This gives a high degree of credibility to what he DOES say, which is: no thermitic material in the dust. And I think you would agree that NO THERMITE is more important than a positive ID of LaClede, though all of us would love it if he can find it. Who knows, in the circles he is connected with, he may actually find a sample. The likelihood is reasonably high because several of these people have large collections of samples of stuff like this.
cmjsn88 wondered if he said more about the iron-rich spheres. He never tells me about his results until he is finished and is certain of what he is saying. It was obvious he was heading towards some kind of conclusion but again, he never talks without very high certainty of what he is saying.
OK, Chris, I understand that Jim must be very carefull in his conclusions. And I am looking forward to any results as for iron-rich spheres.

Still, one of the Jims claims in the preliminary report was:

"The composition of the red/gray chips found in this study (epoxy resin with iron oxide and kaolin pigments) does not match the formula for the primer paint used on iron column members in the World Trade Center towers (Table 1).16 Although both the red/gray chips and the primer paint contain iron oxide pigment particles, the primer is an alkyd-based resin with zinc yellow (zinc chromate) and diatomaceous silica along with some other proprietary (Tnemec ) pigments. No diatoms were found during the analysis of the red/gray chips."

He simply considered one of the WTC primer paint which does not fit (Tnemec) , whereas the other primer paint (Laclede primer), which fits and was used in WTC according the same reliable source (NIST reports), is strangely omitted.

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 16th June 2012 at 06:40 AM.
Ivan Kminek 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 June 2012, 06:52 AM   #920
thedopefishlives
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,696
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
OK, Chris, I understand that Jim must be very carefull in his conclusions. And I am looking forward to any results as for iron-rich spheres.

Still, one of the Jims claims in the preliminary report was:

"The composition of the red/gray chips found in this study (epoxy resin with iron oxide and kaolin pigments) does not match the formula for the primer paint used on iron column members in the World Trade Center towers (Table 1).16 Although both the red/gray chips and the primer paint contain iron oxide pigment particles, the primer is an alkyd-based resin with zinc yellow (zinc chromate) and diatomaceous silica along with some other proprietary (Tnemec ) pigments. No diatoms were found during the analysis of the red/gray chips."

He simply considered one of the WTC primer paint which does not fit (Tnemec) , whereas the other primer paint (Laclede primer), which fits and was used in WTC according the same reliable source (NIST reports), is strangely omitted.
He presumably considered the one which he happened to have on hand and could definitely compare against. At the time of his preliminary report, neither he nor (that I am aware of) anyone here had any knowledge of the LaClede primer as a potential candidate. His preliminary findings revealed it to be a possibility, and now he's going back to try to find a sample to compare against.
thedopefishlives 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 04:41 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.