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 26th November 2012, 06:42 PM   #961
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,124
Yeehah!
Oystein 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 26th November 2012, 07:56 PM   #962
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 4,043
That is great news Chris! I am excited to see it is growing legs again, thanks for your dedication.
__________________
"All acts performed in the world begin in the imagination."--Barbara Grizzuti Harrison

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 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 November 2012, 12:21 AM   #963
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Chris: Good news, thanks again to Jim Millette and to you) So our original financing of the research is still sufficient for the completing this study?

"Travelling 9/11 Memorial"... could it be this one? I will check this web anyway, if they are some interesting details or photos...
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 27th November 2012, 01:30 AM   #964
cromleckderennes
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 70
This is smoke and mirrors (no pun intended)

One study
From a sample - No thermite was found

Another study - Thermite was found

Here's the philosphy

Once there were no black swans - All swans were white

Then they discovered Australia were black swans are common.

Nice long study - Blown away in an instance.

Moral

You have to look in the right place before you reach a conclusion.
cromleckderennes 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 November 2012, 03:11 AM   #965
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,863
Originally Posted by cromleckderennes View Post
This is smoke and mirrors (no pun intended)

One study
From a sample - No thermite was found

Another study - Thermite was found

Here's the philosphy

Once there were no black swans - All swans were white

Then they discovered Australia were black swans are common.

Nice long study - Blown away in an instance.

Moral

You have to look in the right place before you reach a conclusion.
I like swans. Neither of the two studies found thermite.
__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum
BasqueArch 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 November 2012, 03:14 AM   #966
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,124
Originally Posted by cromleckderennes View Post
This is smoke and mirrors (no pun intended)

One study
From a sample - No thermite was found

Another study - Thermite was found
...
Well, that is plain wrong.

That other study...
...failed to realize they were looking at different kinds of materials
...invalidly lumped together data from different kinds of materials to form one conclusion
...failed to identify even one of the many components of their samples[1]
...used extreme bias to invent a conclusion that is refuted by their own data

The Millette study was done to improve on some of those earlier failures.
And it already did - though yet falling short of improving everything (e.g. Millette is not yet clear on differentiating the different materials)



[1] This is really astounding: E.g. chips a-d: These are described as consisting of plate-like and grain-like particles embedded in an organic matrix, and this attached to a gray layer. Yet the study...
...failed to identify the chemical compounds that make up the plate-like particles
...failed to identify the chemical compounds that make up the grain-like particles
...failed to identify the chemical compounds that make up the organic matrix
...failed to identify the structure and nature of the gray layer and admits to remaining clueless about it.
With regard to the MEK-soaked specimen, they didn't even manage to show the finer structure, and again failed to identify even a single chemical compound, except for a slightly dubious claim to what must have been a tiny proportion of elemental aluminium.
To then go on and claim they have evidence that a specific chemical reaction took place borders on preposterous.
Oystein 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 27th November 2012, 03:39 AM   #967
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by cromleckderennes View Post
This is smoke and mirrors (no pun intended)

One study
From a sample - No thermite was found

Another study - Thermite was found

Here's the philosphy

Once there were no black swans - All swans were white

Then they discovered Australia were black swans are common.

Nice long study - Blown away in an instance.

Moral

You have to look in the right place before you reach a conclusion.
Indeed incorrect
They can even be some "black swans", i.e. thermite particles in the WTC dust, but Harrit et al, Basile, Henryco (and Millette) have not found/identified any thermite (black swans). All swans closely investigated are white.
"Thermitic" conclusions of Harrit et al are utterly wrong for countless reasons, which have been debated "ad nauseam" here, and are being reluctantly admitted even by some more educated truthers at present.

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 27th November 2012 at 04:16 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 27th November 2012, 06:01 AM   #968
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
Chris: Good news, thanks again to Jim Millette and to you) So our original financing of the research is still sufficient for the completing this study?

"Travelling 9/11 Memorial"... could it be this one? I will check this web anyway, if they are some interesting details or photos...
Yes he has not asked for more funding. He wants to complete the study and publish it out of scientific interest (and of course it creates visibility for his company).

As far as finding "black swans," the people who claim they have found the black swans (thermite) refused to give samples of their evidence to Millette. They have also failed to release all of their test results. I will ask them again for both because Millette is willing to test the chips from Harrit et al.
__________________
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 27th November 2012, 06:17 AM   #969
Spanx
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,020
It would be interesting to see what results Jones & Co get from Millette's chips.
Spanx 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 November 2012, 06:52 AM   #970
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,124
Originally Posted by Spanx View Post
It would be interesting to see what results Jones & Co get from Millette's chips.
I am in contact with Mark Basile, who wants to find funding for more independent testing.

I can try and ask him if he would be interested in trading chip specimens: For example, he could give chips that he believes to react in an unexpected (too hot and vigorous) fashion to Millette, and vice versa Millette could give him chips that he has determined to be paint, so that Basile can test their thermal properties.

@ Chris Mohr: Would it make sense to propose such a thing? (Don't ask Millette yet, I'd want to ask Mark first).
Oystein 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 27th November 2012, 07:03 AM   #971
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,258
Originally Posted by cromleckderennes View Post
You have to look in the right place before you reach a conclusion.
Millette looked in the right place. Many people have already pointed out that the Jones et al. paper does not prove any "black swan", but if there were "black swans", Millette should have found them.

From the Jones et al. paper:
For clarification, the dust samples collected and sent to the authors by Ms. Janette MacKinlay will be sample 1; the sample collected by Mr. Frank Delassio, or the Delassio/Breidenbach sample, will be sample 2; the sample collected by Mr. Jody Intermont will be sample 3; and the sample collected by Mr. Stephen White will be sample 4. The red/gray chips are attracted by a magnet, which facilitates collection and separation of the chips from the bulk of the dust. A small permanent magnet in its own plastic bag was used to attract and collect the chips from dust samples. The chips are typically small but readily discernible by eye due to their distinctive color. They are of variable size with major dimensions of roughly 0.2 to 3 mm. Thicknesses vary from roughly 10 to 100 microns for each layer (red and gray). Samples of WTC dust from these and other collectors have been sent directly from collectors to various scientists (including some not on this research team) who have also found such red/gray chips in the dust from the World Trade Center destruction.

[...]

RESULTS

1. Characterization of the Red/Gray Chips

Red/gray chips were found in all of the dust samples collected. An analysis of the chips was performed to assess the similarity of the chips and to determine the chemistry and materials that make up the chips.
Millette went through the exact same process of selection and characterization as the authors of the paper. Given that such chips are claimed to be ubiquitous, it makes no sense to claim that Millette didn't analyze chips of the same nature. The nature of the chips analyzed by Millette matches exactly the nature of the chips analyzed by Jones et al., and while the Jones et al. paper fails to prove any free aluminium in the samples in question (and fails to properly characterize all of the chips analyzed, making their results invalid), the Millette study unequivocally disproves it.

Also, as Chris has said, the Jones et al. group refused to give their samples to Millette for an independent analysis when asked.
__________________
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 27th November 2012, 08:20 AM   #972
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Hi gang,

I just talked with Jim Millette today. After being overwhelmed with work for several months, he has now hired more help. He says that he is lining things up to complete his WTC dust study and publish the results. He's hoping to have his work situation in better control early next year so he can get back to this study, which he remains very interested in completing.

he also is interested in WTC dust samples, and more importantly, LaClede and other primer paint samples. He himself had someone scratch off a bit of paint from a traveling 911 memorial exhibit when it went through Atlanta but hasn't yet studied the flakes that were collected! he was most interested in other paint chip sources from known WTC beams and columns...

Anyway I say let's start lining these samples up. He is most interested in primary research on actual samples. Wow this may yet be completed!!
bolding is mine

Regretfully, it, (being a laboratory investigation into reproducing the Harrit et al Bentham Paper findings using the same investigative tools), never started.

Because his company specializes in research that uses different, very expensive test equipment, Millette does not own those required investigative tools.

He would have to contract that work out to another lab which owned the equivalent test equipment used by Dr. Harrit et al for their Bentham Paper findings.

Therefore, Millette has shown, by only using the tools he owns, he is unable to debunk the findings of the Harrit et al Bentham Paper fairly.

As I have said before. If I had not been deceived into thinking Millette was going to truly attempt a recreation of the Bentham Paper by following the same testing methods, I would have never contributed to his wallet.

Dr. Harrit and his fellow scientists performed testing on the red chips from the WTC dust that amongst other things, revealed that when a cleaned red-chip sample was gradually warmed in its electrically heated crucible, a powerful exothermic ignition always occurred around the same crucible temperature.

The same testing on available WTC primer paint samples showed no similarity in appearance or in residue.

In addition, where they were not found in the red chips prior to ignition, the post ignition debris revealed many microspheres, some of which were iron-rich.

Sufficiently iron-rich as to provide proof of molten iron.

Those findings are what Millette should be concerned with, otherwise he is going back to his same old dust samples that he has been looking at for years and using the same research tools.

If he disproves the Bentham Paper findings, using true copycat testing, and not just his financially-biased interpretation of what are valid testing substitutions, then the Bentham Paper authors do have some answering to do.

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 27th November 2012, 08:42 AM   #973
NoahFence
Psycho Kitty
 
NoahFence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 21,101
^^
Pathetic.
__________________
you to the ignorant, uneducated portion ofAmerica too short sighted to see what's right in front of your cheeto loving faces.
NoahFence 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 November 2012, 08:45 AM   #974
Spanx
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,020
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
^^
Pathetic.
Your not wrong
Spanx 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 November 2012, 08:49 AM   #975
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,258
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Dr. Harrit and his fellow scientists performed testing on the red chips from the WTC dust that amongst other things, revealed that when a cleaned red-chip sample was gradually warmed in its electrically heated crucible, a powerful an energetic exothermic ignition always occurred around the same crucible temperature.
Fixed that for you. Big difference.

At about the temperature that epoxy resin burns. With about the amount of energy output expected from carbon combustion. In the presence of an external oxidizer (atmospheric oxygen).


Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
The same testing on available WTC primer paint samples showed no similarity in appearance or in residue.
What of all the kinds of primer paint used in the WTC was tested? We don't know. What of all the kinds of chips were in the DSC? We don't know. That comparison is bogus: it's comparing something we don't know what it is with something we don't know what it is, except that both are red.


Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
In addition, where they were not found in the red chips prior to ignition, the post ignition debris revealed many microspheres, some of which were iron-rich.
That, again, proves nothing. The red layer with iron oxide (remember iron oxide is what makes it red) was still there, therefore whatever the origin of the microspheres was, it was not a thermite reaction. Most likely the microspheres came from the gray layer, which is thought to be oxidized structural steel.


Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Those findings are what Millette should be concerned with,
He is, according to what Chris said after Millette's preliminary report was made public.


Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
If he disproves the Bentham Paper findings, using true copycat testing, and not just his financially-biased interpretation of what are valid testing substitutions, then the Bentham Paper authors do have some answering to do.
If he did that, he'd not be following the scientific method. The scientific method formulates hypotheses and seeks for means to disprove them. Following the same procedure someone has followed in past does not provide answers to the crucial questions; see e.g. the case of Blondot and the N-rays. Millette sought answers to questions such as, "is there iron oxide?", "is there elemental aluminium?", "is there epoxy resin?", "is there kaolinite?" and found his answers. The answer is, there is no thermite. Face it.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.

Last edited by pgimeno; 27th November 2012 at 08:58 AM. Reason: minor wording fix
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 27th November 2012, 08:50 AM   #976
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I am in contact with Mark Basile, who wants to find funding for more independent testing.

I can try and ask him if he would be interested in trading chip specimens: For example, he could give chips that he believes to react in an unexpected (too hot and vigorous) fashion to Millette, and vice versa Millette could give him chips that he has determined to be paint, so that Basile can test their thermal properties.

@ Chris Mohr: Would it make sense to propose such a thing? (Don't ask Millette yet, I'd want to ask Mark first).
You are in contact with Mark Basile? Interesting news It's of course your private communication, but could you give me/us some hint what he thinks about Millette's study? And does he is still firmly believe that his chips were nanothermite, although he himself clearly excluded this possibility with his "quantitative" XEDS analysis?

As regards some proposal of mutual exchange of samples and some "joint truthers-debunkers study", I'm rather skeptical. First of all, such hypothetical study would be hardly accomplished in just few months like Millette's study, and even I'm not patient enough to wait for some more years. Enough is enough, this marginal matter does not deserve such an extraordinary joint effort, which would be inevitably accompanied by various misunderstandings, accusations etc. I think

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 27th November 2012 at 08:56 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 27th November 2012, 02:55 PM   #977
Starving for Truth
Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 194
Thumbs up Everyone lies in the dark shadow government house

Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
bolding is mine

Regretfully, it, (being a laboratory investigation into reproducing the Harrit et al Bentham Paper findings using the same investigative tools), never started.

Because his company specializes in research that uses different, very expensive test equipment, Millette does not own those required investigative tools.

He would have to contract that work out to another lab which owned the equivalent test equipment used by Dr. Harrit et al for their Bentham Paper findings.

Therefore, Millette has shown, by only using the tools he owns, he is unable to debunk the findings of the Harrit et al Bentham Paper fairly.

As I have said before. If I had not been deceived into thinking Millette was going to truly attempt a recreation of the Bentham Paper by following the same testing methods, I would have never contributed to his wallet.

Dr. Harrit and his fellow scientists performed testing on the red chips from the WTC dust that amongst other things, revealed that when a cleaned red-chip sample was gradually warmed in its electrically heated crucible, a powerful exothermic ignition always occurred around the same crucible temperature.

The same testing on available WTC primer paint samples showed no similarity in appearance or in residue.

In addition, where they were not found in the red chips prior to ignition, the post ignition debris revealed many microspheres, some of which were iron-rich.

Sufficiently iron-rich as to provide proof of molten iron.

Those findings are what Millette should be concerned with, otherwise he is going back to his same old dust samples that he has been looking at for years and using the same research tools.

If he disproves the Bentham Paper findings, using true copycat testing, and not just his financially-biased interpretation of what are valid testing substitutions, then the Bentham Paper authors do have some answering to do.

MM
Excellent post. Hereby I, Starving for Truth - performance artist and hobby ornitologist - officially peer-review you as being a hero of truth and nanochemistry.

Last edited by Starving for Truth; 27th November 2012 at 02:59 PM.
Starving for Truth 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 November 2012, 07:00 PM   #978
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Originally Posted by Starving for Truth View Post
Excellent post. Hereby I, Starving for Truth - performance artist and hobby ornitologist - officially peer-review you as being a hero of truth and nanochemistry.
Do you think you can explain why all of the chips studied by either side found kaolin, which is not used in any kind of useful thermite, but which is a major component of just about any bulk-produced PAINT?

That is ask, what, in your un-trained opinion, differentiates these chips from PAINT?
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.
leftysergeant 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 November 2012, 11:14 PM   #979
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,801
Originally Posted by cromleckderennes View Post
This is smoke and mirrors (no pun intended)

One study
From a sample - No thermite was found

Another study - Thermite was found

...
Nice long study - Blown away in an instance.

Moral

You have to look in the right place before you reach a conclusion.
You left out many more studies which did not find thermite, how did you miss them?

Not a single piece of evidence on anything from the WTC shows thermite was used. Thermite would leave fused iron on the steel, it would stand out like a sore thumb. Please study 911 before you join idiots who made up the claim of thermite based on delusions from a physics whose best work is a study of Christ in the New World, a more likely event than thermite used on 911. Good luck, you seem to like the fantasy world of 911 truth.
beachnut 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 28th November 2012, 09:00 PM   #980
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Hi again gang,
I have a request: if anyone's willing to help procure dust and known paint LaClede samples from whatever sources (such as the traveling 9/11 memorials or anywhere else), I will ask Steven Jones for dust samples from his original ETC dust experiment. Since Jim Millette is interested in actual samples of paint etc, that would be a great thing to look for. Plus, if he can get a sample of dust from Jones or anyone else on the original sample, there can be no doubt that he has the same kinds of samples we found in the Bentham study. If I work on the Jones crew, is anyone else able to try to get actual LaClede primer samples? I know I'm asking a lot but that would be extremely helpful.
__________________
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 29th November 2012, 02:30 AM   #981
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,124
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Hi again gang,
I have a request: if anyone's willing to help procure dust
I could ask Mark Basile; and perhaps he'd be interested to have Millette provide samples from his dust in turn.

My understanding is that Basile has a few table spoons of dust from Janette McKinlay, who also provided one of the four dust samples in the Harrit study, but that Basile got his directly from her, not through Jones; but I'd have to check.

http://markbasile.org/ - which is hosted by Rick Shaddock - has a test proposal which talks at one point about "red chips of suspected primer from building dust" and "known thermitic red/gray chips", so apparently, Basile can tell paint chips and thermitic chips apart.

(As an iside: Basile's page has a little fund raiser that was stuck at $500 for months, but now is at $603, so something seems to be happening)

Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
and known paint LaClede samples from whatever sources (such as the traveling 9/11 memorials or anywhere else), ... Since Jim Millette is interested in actual samples of paint etc, that would be a great thing to look for. ... is anyone else able to try to get actual LaClede primer samples? I know I'm asking a lot but that would be extremely helpful.
Difficult, I had asked for that before we had hired Millette. Trouble is that few, if any, of the memorials will have the relatively (compared to columns) flimsy floor trusses, the vast majority of which will be tangled and crushed and just not impressive. The best chance would be to go to NYC where hopefully somewhere there is a hangar or a campus with an assortment of building remains. That would certainly require some bureaucratic process. I think the best person to start that process would actually be Millette himself, in his capacity as forensicist, entrepreneur and scientist who has previoiusly been hired to analyse WTC aftermath for the EPA.

LaClede Steel Company doesn't exist any longer, so no contact there, it would thus be difficult to locate other of their projects from the time where the same shop primer may have been applied.
Oystein 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 29th November 2012, 04:09 AM   #982
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Chris: I agree with Oystein, "Hangar 17" at JFK Airport is the "best" potential source of remnants of floor trusses. Otherwise I cannot substantially help here, since there are no WTC memorials in the Czech Republic

I have checked the web of this "Traveling 911 Memorial" , but it seems that they have no WTC steel available. No wonder, since this museum is basically some bus or so, with not enough room for such items.

"Laclede primer" was not manufactured by Laclede Steel Company, but (probably) by former Pittsburgh Plate Company, now PPG Industries. Sadly, my direct e-mail inquiry sent to their Electrocoating division was not answered, perhaps since I stupidly mentioned 9/11 conspiracy theories.
My (our) other search as for WTC steel manufacturers showed that these companies mostly do not held documents concerning their very old products/jobs, the less e.g. paint/steel samples
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 29th November 2012, 05:00 AM   #983
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by Starving for Truth View Post
Excellent post. Hereby I, Starving for Truth - performance artist and hobby ornitologist - officially peer-review you as being a hero of truth and nanochemistry.
Ornithology is your hobby but you can't spell it?
dafydd 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 29th November 2012, 08:14 AM   #984
Josarhus
Thinker
 
Josarhus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Aarhus, Denmark
Posts: 212
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Hi again gang,
I have a request: if anyone's willing to help procure dust and known paint LaClede samples from whatever sources (such as the traveling 9/11 memorials or anywhere else), I will ask Steven Jones for dust samples from his original ETC dust experiment. Since Jim Millette is interested in actual samples of paint etc, that would be a great thing to look for. Plus, if he can get a sample of dust from Jones or anyone else on the original sample, there can be no doubt that he has the same kinds of samples we found in the Bentham study. If I work on the Jones crew, is anyone else able to try to get actual LaClede primer samples? I know I'm asking a lot but that would be extremely helpful.
As I remember it, Harrit stated during one of his lectures a couple of years ago, that they are out of the original dust samples.
__________________
Niels Harrit: "I do not actually understand why they fire insulates steel structures. It just slows the heating of the steel by one hour. There must be money in it."
Josarhus 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 29th November 2012, 08:45 AM   #985
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
...Plus, if he can get a sample of dust from Jones or anyone else on the original sample, there can be no doubt that he has the same kinds of samples we found in the Bentham study.
Just additional question, Chris: who has some doubt that he (Millette) has the same kinds of samples we saw in Bentham study? Jim Millette himself? You?
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 29th November 2012, 08:57 AM   #986
Spanx
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,020
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
Just additional question, Chris: who has some doubt that he (Millette) has the same kinds of samples we saw in Bentham study? Jim Millette himself? You?
Hi Ivan,
I think it may have been me that planted that seed in post 969
Spanx 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 29th November 2012, 09:39 AM   #987
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Spanx: well, my question in the previous post was not clever. Jim Millette has no doubt in this respect, as well as Chris, I think.
Of course, truthers have such doubts and would ever have, since they live in the completely different, "alternative thermitic history", as is again very clear from the "document" of Talboo and Siggi "Super". In this kind of history, absolutely everything and everybody (including Oystein and me) confirms thermite and excludes paint. It's their problem and their Super lifes, who cares

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 29th November 2012 at 09:51 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 29th November 2012, 11:04 AM   #988
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,124
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
Just additional question, Chris: who has some doubt that he (Millette) has the same kinds of samples we saw in Bentham study? Jim Millette himself? You?
1. Prof Jones stated in September:
Originally Posted by ProfJones
More and more, it appears that Millette was simply not looking at the same material that we studied.
(Do a local search for "Millette" to find several reasons why Jones thinks so. Of course the same criticism must be levied against himself: They did not make sure they looked at the same material; in fact, it is abundandly clear that they looked at several different materials, but lumped results together to form invalid conclusions)


2. Mark Basile told me on the phone, and implies in his study proposal, that some chips are paint, some are "thermitic". So this implies that Millette may have looked at the wrong chips, even if the dust is "right".
I asked him to provide us either with objective, repeatable criteria by which to identify thermitic chips, or provide us wuth chip specimens he deems thermitic.
Oystein 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 29th November 2012, 11:13 AM   #989
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,303
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
or provide us with chip specimens he deems thermitic.
The problem with this is it would be outside of the original paper that the "truthers" regard as fact.

A far simpler tact would be for them to release the data they say they already have. The fact they haven't (IMHO) is more damning then anything they could offer up in form of a sample.

Let's face it "truthers". They say they did the same tests a Millette but refuse to show the data. Why would that be?
__________________
"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; 29th November 2012 at 11:16 AM.
DGM 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 29th November 2012, 11:42 AM   #990
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,124
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
The problem with this is it would be outside of the original paper that the "truthers" regard as fact.

A far simpler tact would be for them to release the data they say they already have. The fact they haven't (IMHO) is more damning then anything they could offer up in form of a sample.

Let's face it "truthers". They say they did the same tests a Millette but refuse to show the data. Why would that be?
True, but that's a somewhat different topic and objective. In this thread, we are discussing Millette's study, and Millette wants samples, so I see to what I can do about that.


For now, however, Basile is an asset on "their" side. His face is prominently placed on the starting page of ae911truth (left column, just off the first screen on my 1680x1050 display), because he is featured in their films as having "seen" thermite in the dust. If Basile's "thermitic" chips prove to be paint, then not only is Basile in trouble, and AE911Truth, but the Harrit team as well - of course! They all have claimed at one time or another that Basile "confirmed" their findings (and I think he did ).
Oystein 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 29th November 2012, 12:23 PM   #991
Spanx
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,020
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZEvA8BCoBw&feature

The above link is oysteins featured in their films link.

I notice Chris sarns is on the message board spreading false claims about Jim Millette
Spanx 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 29th November 2012, 03:59 PM   #992
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrismohr
Hi again gang,
I have a request: if anyone's willing to help procure dust and known paint LaClede samples from whatever sources (such as the traveling 9/11 memorials or anywhere else), I will ask Steven Jones for dust samples from his original ETC dust experiment. Since Jim Millette is interested in actual samples of paint etc, that would be a great thing to look for. Plus, if he can get a sample of dust from Jones or anyone else on the original sample, there can be no doubt that he has the same kinds of samples we found in the Bentham study. If I work on the Jones crew, is anyone else able to try to get actual LaClede primer samples? I know I'm asking a lot but that would be extremely helpful.
Originally Posted by Josarhus View Post
As I remember it, Harrit stated during one of his lectures a couple of years ago, that they are out of the original dust samples.
IIRC, at the "Toronto Hearings", either Harrit or Ryan claimed to have at least 5 gallons (about 20 liters) of WTC dust samples. I downloaded the presentations, but I'm not feeling masochistic enough at present to sit through them again. Perhaps someone with a tougher temperament might try.
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 29th November 2012, 04:17 PM   #993
Josarhus
Thinker
 
Josarhus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Aarhus, Denmark
Posts: 212
Originally Posted by Redwood View Post
IIRC, at the "Toronto Hearings", either Harrit or Ryan claimed to have at least 5 gallons (about 20 liters) of WTC dust samples. I downloaded the presentations, but I'm not feeling masochistic enough at present to sit through them again. Perhaps someone with a tougher temperament might try.
And they probably do, but as I wrote, Harrit stated a few years back that they are out of the ORIGINAL dust samples used in their 2009 Bentham paper. They can very well have gotten new samples since.
__________________
Niels Harrit: "I do not actually understand why they fire insulates steel structures. It just slows the heating of the steel by one hour. There must be money in it."
Josarhus 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 29th November 2012, 04:27 PM   #994
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
1. Prof Jones stated in September:

(Do a local search for "Millette" to find several reasons why Jones thinks so. Of course the same criticism must be levied against himself: They did not make sure they looked at the same material; in fact, it is abundandly clear that they looked at several different materials, but lumped results together to form invalid conclusions)


2. Mark Basile told me on the phone, and implies in his study proposal, that some chips are paint, some are "thermitic". So this implies that Millette may have looked at the wrong chips, even if the dust is "right".
I asked him to provide us either with objective, repeatable criteria by which to identify thermitic chips, or provide us wuth chip specimens he deems thermitic.
You provide no context for his agreement that "some chips are paint".

We know primer paint chips had to co-exist in the WTC dust and for all we know Mark was simply acknowledging that fact.

At what point did he hang up on you?

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 29th November 2012, 04:52 PM   #995
NoahFence
Psycho Kitty
 
NoahFence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 21,101
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
You provide no context for his agreement that "some chips are paint".

We know primer paint chips had to co-exist in the WTC dust and for all we know Mark was simply acknowledging that fact.

At what point did he hang up on you?

MM
Why don't you just come out and explicitly state what lie you're looking to hear, so we can just type it and move on?
__________________
you to the ignorant, uneducated portion ofAmerica too short sighted to see what's right in front of your cheeto loving faces.
NoahFence 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 30th November 2012, 12:00 AM   #996
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,124
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
You provide no context for his agreement that "some chips are paint".
We were talking about red-gray chips in the WTC dust that Basile studied. He said without hesitation, and with an intonation that means "of course" that some of these chips are surely paint. In fact, he also found blue paint.

Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
We know primer paint chips had to co-exist in the WTC dust and for all we know Mark was simply acknowledging that fact.
...
We? Who, specifically, is "we"?

Please name names, and provide evidence that these individuals KNOW that some of the red-gray chips are paint!
Oystein 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 30th November 2012, 01:52 AM   #997
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Some speculations as for potential exchange of samples with truthers (where "samples" are either bags of WTC dust, or chips chosen by truthers to be thermite):

1) Our deal: We can give (well, Jim Millette can give) any samples of the dust or the chips to truthers to check their composition/structure/origin. We have enough of direct and indirect clues and proofs that all red chips are just paints (or perhaps some other innocent red layered stuffs in some cases), starting with the plain fact that alleged "auxiliary" controlled demolition of WTC is just an utter idiocy and paranoid delusion without any acceptable logic. We have absolutely no reason to cheat.

2) As for engaged truthers, I am quite sure that e.g. Mark Basile would provide "us" (Jim Millette) also with only authentic dust samples with authentic chips. But in the case of Steven Jones (or other co-authors of Bentham paper), I wouldn't be so sure. To considerable extent, his credibility among truthers is dependent on the credibility of nanothermite "theory". I do not believe that he believes in nanothermite anymore (if he had ever believed in it), so hypothetically (!), he may even thing to add some red thermitic chips to his samples of dust (not necessarily from WTC) for exchange. Or, he can "improve" in the similar way the samples obtained from Millette.

3) In this case (hypothetically!) Jones would be forced to add thermitic chips which have similar look, composition, stucture and bilayered arrangement as chips (a) to (d) or MEK chip, since just these closely analyzed chips were declared to be nanothermite particles in Bentham paper.

4) I'm trying now to be in the position of Steven Jones in such attempt to cheat: Jones knows (or should know) that in Bentham chips mentioned above, some polymer binder prevailed, which is not fluoropolymer usable even as oxidant in thermites (fluorine was not detected by anyone by XEDS). To make such chips pyrotechnic (not really thermitic), Jones will have to add a lot of some proper strong oxidant for polymer (some nitrate, e.g.), which would by easily detected by XEDS. Therefore, this is not a feasible way of cheating.

5) What else Jones could do? He can try to prepare chips, in which kaolinite stacking platelets present in chips (a) to (d) are replaced with a similar form of aluminium. I personally do not know such form of aluminium, but let say it exists and Jones will acquire it. In this way, Jones could prepare chips with aluminium as thermitic component. But what about silicon, clearly detected by XEDS in chips (a) to (d)? Well, aware of this, Jones could add even some nanosized silicon stuff for credible XEDS spectra or even prepare some "mixed platelets" with both metallic aluminium and silicon oxide, whatever. The great problem with such chips, made with some extreme effort, is that they would have finally composition similar to chips (a) to (d), but they would not behave like thermites (or pyrotechnics) anyway They would again behave just like PAINTS e.g. in DSC device, just because of prevailing polymer binder

Summary: Jones (or any other truther) basically cannot cheat and adulterate chips, which can be similar to Bentham chips (a) to (d) and be thermitic/pyrotechnic simultaneously
Apology for truthers who could read it: remember that the text above is just my speculation, and I'm aware that it's not really "politically correct".

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 30th November 2012 at 02:06 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 30th November 2012, 02:08 AM   #998
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,124
Ivan,

speculation, and rather baseless. I see no indication of Jones fabricating samples or inventing data, thus committing outright scientific fraud.
To the contrary, I see lots of indications that their data so far has been genuine. The latest exchange in september on 911Blogger, where Jones included notes from Farrer, further shows that they are not making stuff up - as far as samples and data is concerned.

However, they hold back data, cherry-pick data, misinterprete data, and combine data to conclusions that don't belong together. These techniques won't work when they release specimens with claimed properties: Outside of their control, they will know that Millette can extract any property, and refute any false claim made about any specimen.


So I am sure they will simply refuse to release any specimens! And no doubt use the same ploy that Kevin Ryan has alreade employed: Declare that Millette is the fraudster!
Oystein 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 30th November 2012, 06:11 AM   #999
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Ivan,

speculation, and rather baseless. I see no indication of Jones fabricating samples or inventing data, thus committing outright scientific fraud.
To the contrary, I see lots of indications that their data so far has been genuine. The latest exchange in september on 911Blogger, where Jones included notes from Farrer, further shows that they are not making stuff up - as far as samples and data is concerned.

However, they hold back data, cherry-pick data, misinterprete data, and combine data to conclusions that don't belong together. These techniques won't work when they release specimens with claimed properties: Outside of their control, they will know that Millette can extract any property, and refute any false claim made about any specimen.


So I am sure they will simply refuse to release any specimens! And no doubt use the same ploy that Kevin Ryan has alreade employed: Declare that Millette is the fraudster!
I know as well as you and further debunkers that Jones/Harrit et al have not fabricated any data so far and analyzed genuine chips from genuine WTC dust. Without such assumption, we could hardly spend months on this matter and order/pay the verification of Bentham paper.
My rather wild speculation above was just a kind of "exercise" with the aim: could be (hypothetically) prepared some red/gray chips which may have the look and composition of chips (a) to (d) and still be thermitic/pyrotechnics?
Indeed, it was not clever that I mentioned Jones as a person who could (hypothetically) commit such a fraud... Sorry for that
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 30th November 2012, 06:39 AM   #1000
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
A few comments... This request for funds for a new study has the same old ad hominem attacks I spent hours refuting last year: http://911debunkers.blogspot.cz/2012...ave-found.html

This is the blog post from Kevin Ryan that Talboo et al continue to refer to:

http://digwithin.net/2012/02/17/when...ls-at-the-wtc/

And here is my response: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...212725&page=86 (start 2/3 of the way down, on post 3435-3437). Kevin Ryan's ad hominem attack against both me and Jim Millette was staggerringly false. The EPA whitleblower who praised Millette's scientific integrity was used as evidence that Millette had no integrity! This is unbelievable and inexcusable. Kevin and I originally had a friendly connection after a personal meeting and several respectful emails but this shattered it. If anyone is in contact with Talboo and others, please tell them to read this post and my response to Kevin Ryan's ad hominem attacks. They have no place in this WTC dust discussion.
__________________
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
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 01:21 AM.
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.