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 Mark Basile

Reply
Old 15th July 2014, 02:14 PM   #41
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,812
In another oddity:
Quote:
establish the non production of molten metal/iron from this material during DSC exposure to 400 - 600 Centigrade as well as the exotherm/endotherm character of the primer breakdown
.
So its to establish exo/endothermic property but forget establishing production/nonproduction of molten metal? Experimenter bias on display?

If primer isn't applied to, then scraped off of, a metal surface, what is any of this supposed to prove anyway?
jaydeehess 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 July 2014, 02:35 PM   #42
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
Originally Posted by ergo View Post




FTFY.
I did notice you didn't actually refute my points.

Why is it when people ask you to support your view you can't. Could it be because you have no idea what your talking about?

I'm prepared to back up everything I've said (and have to date). I'm waiting for you to step up. Can't, can 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
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 15th July 2014, 10:18 PM   #43
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,802
Mark Basile, is a dolt on Chemical Engineering. How can he do a rational study when he can't read for comprehension and make sup lies about corroded steel. Is he speading lies on purpos, or is he an idiot. 911 truth, 13 years of BS, and lies.

Quote:
Mark Basile:
Well I think there are some indications of thermitic reaction, potentially. There was a report done by a professor down at WPI. They have a big fire safety group - I think he's involved in that down there - where one of the samples from World Trade Center 7 was sent to him because it did have some uh... funny appearances. There was evidently something very strange that happened to it and uh.. There was some sulfidation. So basically, sections of this steel had been turned molten and had very high sulfur contents in them, along with the iron and the melted steel and so on, so. That's a possible other indicator that there was thermite here, because a lot of times, you know, people who are following this, they hear the term thermite, thermate, and so on. If you integrate sulfur into the thermite mixture you get what's called "thermate" and the reason that's done is, uhm... just like you can alloy steel with say carbon or nickel or chromium to make different, you know, whatevers, you can allow steel with sulphur, and when you do that it actually lowers its melting point significantly so, that's the reason it's used in building demolition type thermites specifically, or for a... further applications too, you know, for destroying equipment, you know like soldiers use this material when they're backing away from equipment and they need to destroy say a tank, but they can't take it with them so the enemy can't use it... They'll drop little thermite hand grenades into their equipment to basically melt through the material and destroy the equipment.
This is classic, a 911 truth expert who can't understand the Appendix C report.

He is suppose to be a Chemical Engineer? He can't comprehend the paper proves it was corrosion if fire up to 1000 C, and not thermite/thermate.


Basile can't read a report and understand it was corrosion not thermate.
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf
Is Basile an idiot, or a liar for 911 truth.
How can a someone who makes up lies about a report he can't understand do a study on dust? Will Basile do like Jones and Harrit and make up a conclusion?

I expect another fake conclusion, like Jones and Harrit. The faith based followers of 911 truth will fall for the fake conclusion, ignoring the fact there is no thermite damage to any WTC steel. The followers of 911 truth don't understand science, falling for lies from nuts in 911 truth.

Basile fails to understand FEMA's Appendix C, he can't do a valid study.

Last edited by beachnut; 15th July 2014 at 10:32 PM.
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 15th July 2014, 11:16 PM   #44
Spanx
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,020
Using an independent lab that has no idea that the dust is from the WTC or from 9/11

And then start telling them what to do.

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 16th July 2014, 02:59 AM   #45
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,259
Who will interpret the results? The independent lab or Basile et al?

If the latter, we already know that the data in the ATM paper does not support their conclusions.
__________________
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 16th July 2014, 07:49 AM   #46
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
I did notice you didn't actually refute my points.

Why is it when people ask you to support your view you can't.

Could it be because you have no idea what your talking about?

I'm prepared to back up everything I've said (and have to date).

I'm waiting for you to step up.

Can't, can you?

You have created an irrefutable argument by making sure it is devoid of any science points.

Could it be because you are the one who has no idea what they are talking about?

I've read through all your posts in this thread and you keep trying to sell 'sizzle' while claiming it is steak.

Maybe if you attempted to illustrate how the process Mark Basile is following is not scientifically valid as it relates to his stated goals...past or present?

Georgio has started a new thread where you can reveal to the world why you feel Mark Basile's current research is so pointless;

Is Mark Basile's WTC Dust Study Pointless?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=280539

Show us that Mark Basile is "following a road that doesn't lead to Rome."

Unlike Jim Millette who never got there, stopping his research once he decided the road "looked right."
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 16th July 2014, 10:05 AM   #47
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,802
Millette found clay in the dust. Jones and Harritt did no test find out what the dust was, they tested to fool a fringe few who can't think for themselves.

After running test on dust, Jones and Harrit found the heat energy in the dust did not match thermite, so they made up an excuse, and lied, saying they had thermite, and nuts in 911 truth agree.

Harrit and Jones run a DSC which does not match thermite, and say thermite.

Looks like 911 truth papers end with a false conclusion with proof not found in the paper - Millette explains what is in the dust, 911 truth cult members ignore it, out of ignorance.

The real proof the Jones/Harrit fake paper is nonsense; 13 years and nothing. Plus, there was no steel damaged from planted thermite, no planted thermite. A fantasy of Jones based on zero evidence, thermite.

Basile claims that steel at the WTC was damaged by thermite. He implies the steel in Appendix C is thermite damage. It is fire damage done at 1000C or less in fire. The paper talks of eutectic, and rules out thermite due to the damage done took place at or below 1000 C. Basile has no clue this rules out thermite, and spreads fantasy.

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf
Why is the entire 911 truth movement too lazy to get help with this report. 911 truth says this steel melted, and remain clueless idiots in a movement of lies mocking the murder of thousands.

What will 911 truth do about their fake studies?
Quote:
Nothing

Basile acts like a paranoid conspiracy theorist who has no clue on 911. What is his story on Flight 77, and Flight 93.

With no damage to steel at the WTC from thermite, his study is finished now. It will be funny if he lies and claims he found thermite.
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 16th July 2014, 02:10 PM   #48
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post

Georgio has started a new thread where you can reveal to the world why you feel Mark Basile's current research is so pointless;
I see reading comprehension is not one of your strong suits. What I said is the update on progress for the study shows no resemblance to the original proposal and is also pointless.

You ignored that naturally.

Tell us, were the known paint chips he's testing now separated using the same criteria specified in the proposal?

The topic here is not the proposed study, just the update work. Answer this first question then I'll explain (as if I should have to) why it's pointless.
__________________
"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; 16th July 2014 at 02:12 PM.
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 16th July 2014, 02:35 PM   #49
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
I see reading comprehension is not one of your strong suits. What I said is the update on progress for the study shows no resemblance to the original proposal and is also pointless.

You ignored that naturally.

Tell us, were the known paint chips he's testing now separated using the same criteria specified in the proposal?

The topic here is not the proposed study, just the update work. Answer this first question then I'll explain (as if I should have to) why it's pointless.
Oh I see.

You are under the impression that a brief update about the progress on the original proposal should already encompass results from everything listed in that proposal.

Maybe you need help understanding what an update means?

This sounds very much like the naive complaint that Dr. Harrit et al did not include every scrap of data from their research in the finished 2009 Bentham paper.

I suggest your complaint is very premature since we are talking about a simple "update" and not the completed report.
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 16th July 2014, 03:01 PM   #50
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Oh I see.

You are under the impression that a brief update about the progress on the original proposal should already encompass results from everything listed in that proposal.

Maybe you need help understanding what an update means?
Why test paint chips that you have not separated using a method used in either study? You think that's useful?

Maybe they should test dog crap too, just to make sure it doesn't match.
__________________
"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
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 16th July 2014, 03:08 PM   #51
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,802
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Why test paint chips that you have not separated using a method used in either study? You think that's useful?

Maybe they should test dog crap too, just to make sure it doesn't match.
Dog crap has more heat energy than thermite. BS beats the BS of thermite.
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 16th July 2014, 03:13 PM   #52
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
Dog crap has more heat energy than thermite. BS beats the BS of thermite.
And I wouldn't be all that surprised to see "iron-microsheres" after it was burned.
__________________
"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
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 20th July 2014, 11:10 AM   #53
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
There's been an up-date to the site. The $1000 from the "physics challenge" seems to have evaporated. They're back down to $5002 for the total.

http://markbasile.org/
__________________
"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
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 20th July 2014, 11:14 AM   #54
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Maybe it's a conspiracy!
It's a conspiracy to aid Gages' gallivanting.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th July 2014, 11:43 AM   #55
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Beachnut, you are wrong when you say that "Jones and Harritt did no test find out what the dust was." Jeff Farrer did TEM and Kevin Ryan did FTIR. Results of these materials characterization tests were never released. Steven Jones then went on to do a THIRD test, as he wrote here: “After our paper was published, we went to another lab trying to get XRD patterns that would definitively resolve the question of whether elemental aluminum was present. But like Dr Farrer's TEM results, there was no clear pattern of ANY aluminum-bearing compound in the XRD results. These results have surprised me, not satisfied me. So we go to further experiments.”

So you see Beachnut, Jones/Harrit/Ryan/Farrer did the tests all right, they just didn't like the results and never published them! Gotta stay accurate about these things ya know...
__________________
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

Last edited by chrismohr; 20th July 2014 at 11:44 AM. Reason: spelling
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 25th July 2014, 07:43 AM   #56
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
There's been an up-date to the site. The $1000 from the "physics challenge" seems to have evaporated. They're back down to $5002 for the total.

http://markbasile.org/
I think we know where the $1000 has gone..................

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=280900
__________________
"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
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 25th July 2014, 09:48 AM   #57
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,802
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Beachnut, you are wrong when you say that "Jones and Harritt did no test find out what the dust was." ...
They said they found thermite, implied thermite caused the WTC collapses. They were wrong, they did no test to find out what the dust was, they did tests to fake finding thermite.
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 25th July 2014, 02:50 PM   #58
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Beachnut my point is that they DID at least three tests and never included the results of those tests in the 2009 paper! And as you say, the tests they DID release like DSC do NOT provide evidence of thermite. We agree, I'm just saying it's even worse than you said.
__________________
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 2nd August 2014, 09:05 AM   #59
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
You would think "truthers" (not being blind sheep) would wonder what happened to the $1000 donated to the Bassile investigation. Nope, not a concern.

My guess based on facts in AE's tax files. Gage took over this fund-raiser after ANETA spent most of the money and he was un-willing to also suck-up a donation of $1000 that was never there. ANETA after the "physics challenge" donated the money to themselves. My guess, Mark Bassile asked AENTA for money to start his study and they don't have it. Gage to the rescue, he won't fund a study but, he will make sure no one cares. He will find volunteers to do pointless tests he knows will keep this dream alive.
__________________
"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; 2nd August 2014 at 09:20 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 2nd August 2014, 11:03 AM   #60
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,802
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Beachnut my point is that they DID at least three tests and never included the results of those tests in the 2009 paper! And as you say, the tests they DID release like DSC do NOT provide evidence of thermite. We agree, I'm just saying it's even worse than you said.
Ziggy is watching, and we need to give him better quote-mining gems. He is mainly a cut and paste google U grad, and we need to help him build a legacy of woo.

I can't believe 911 truth nuts are doing a study of something that never happened on 911, and people like ziggy start a blog based on delusional claptrap. At least this fraud 911 truth followers fall for can be a free experience; unless they donate 5k to Gage's endless scam.
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 12th August 2014, 09:41 PM   #61
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,554
The screwballs at the misnamed 911Debunkers site have an update:

Quote:
Mark Basile has done some work this summer. A progress report will be posted soon. Stay tuned..
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster 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 August 2014, 05:57 AM   #62
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
The screwballs at the misnamed 911Debunkers site have an update:
Likely the results of these test:

Quote:
Money has been raise an tests have begun by independent lab technicians.

Labs have been surveyed for the capabilities they have, including some new capabilities in DSC and Raman (like FTIR).

Staring with known primer chips doing SEM/EDX, FTIR and Raman to characterize chip composition and establish the non production of molten metal/iron from this material during DSC exposure to 400 - 600 Centigrade as well as the exotherm/endotherm character of the primer breakdown.

Next steps: move on to red/gray chips doing the same test, in characterizing composition, then showing the exotherms and reaction products.

Update July 2, 2014
Big deal.
__________________
"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
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 22nd August 2014, 01:39 PM   #63
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,554
Basile's progress report is up and somewhat underwhelming:

Quote:
Once the best candidates are found, work will move to the phase where funds will be expended using independent facilities. Once funds begin to be spent monthly accountings will be made, no funds have been spent and all will be accounted for publicly.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster 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 22nd August 2014, 02:09 PM   #64
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Basile's progress report is up and somewhat underwhelming:
The interesting part of this is it has nothing to do with the "update" that was on the original site.

Mark at least seems to be keeping his word. I suspect he had nothing to do with the original up-date.
__________________
"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
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 22nd August 2014, 03:01 PM   #65
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,475
"In other news, Francisco Franco is still dead."
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 22nd August 2014, 03:35 PM   #66
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Basile's progress report is up and somewhat underwhelming:
Thanks for posting the update.


It appears that things are progressing smoothly.
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 22nd August 2014, 03:40 PM   #67
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Thanks for posting the update.


It appears that things are progressing smoothly.
Good thing the previous up-date was not actually from Mark. Do you agree (or even see it)?
__________________
"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
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 22nd August 2014, 03:47 PM   #68
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Have any of you looked at "Proposal for Labs to Study the Building Fire Dust" in the website http:\\markbasile.org? He's talking about a blind analysis with FTIR and DSC with and without oxygen in the atmosphere. If this really happens the results will be interesting. Certainly things not done by the Jones/Harrit team.
__________________
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 22nd August 2014, 03:59 PM   #69
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Have any of you looked at "Proposal for Labs to Study the Building Fire Dust" in the website http:\\markbasile.org? He's talking about a blind analysis with FTIR and DSC with and without oxygen in the atmosphere. If this really happens the results will be interesting. Certainly things not done by the Jones/Harrit team.
The idea behind what he wants to do is good. I suspect he already knows the outcome and this is his "out".

Did you read the "up-date" on that site (I posted it up thread). What do you think about that?
__________________
"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
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 23rd August 2014, 09:52 AM   #70
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
I read the "update" and have little to comment on. Both the update and the proposal talk about the DSC tests, however. What will be interesting is to see if this lab he finds that is supposed to be doing a materials characterization test on the red-grey chips will ask, "Why are you having us do DSC, that won't tell us what the materials are?" They may not; when I was looking for a lab to do chip tests, some were willing to just blindly do whatever, and others had a protocol they explained to me. Millette was a guy who followed standard protocol for materials characterization and was very thorough, doing several tests that Harrit/Jones either didn't do at all or never released the results of (TEM and FTIR). And he had no interest in doing tests that did not help him I.D. the chips (DSC). I agree with Basile, finding a lab and moving carefully forward is important.

That said, Mark seems to be willing to publish all results no matter what. He is directing the protocol, and I did not. I just said ID the chips, I'm not telling you how how do your job. Mark could argue that he is way more qualified to direct the protocol than I was. Oystein once said Mark was one of the most honest of the 9/11 Truth people, and I have not seen any evidence yet to contradict Oystein's opinion.
__________________
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

Last edited by chrismohr; 23rd August 2014 at 09:59 AM. Reason: more comments
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 23rd August 2014, 10:17 AM   #71
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
I read the "update" and have little to comment on. Both the update and the proposal talk about the DSC tests, however. What will be interesting is to see if this lab he finds that is supposed to be doing a materials characterization test on the red-grey chips will ask, "Why are you having us do DSC, that won't tell us what the materials are?" They may not; when I was looking for a lab to do chip tests, some were willing to just blindly do whatever, and others had a protocol they explained to me. Millette was a guy who followed standard protocol for materials characterization and was very thorough, doing several tests that Harrit/Jones either didn't do at all or never released the results of (TEM and FTIR). And he had no interest in doing tests that did not help him I.D. the chips (DSC). I agree with Basile, finding a lab and moving carefully forward is important.

That said, Mark seems to be willing to publish all results no matter what. He is directing the protocol, and I did not. I just said ID the chips, I'm not telling you how how do your job. Mark could argue that he is way more qualified to direct the protocol than I was. Oystein once said Mark was one of the most honest of the 9/11 Truth people, and I have not seen any evidence yet to contradict Oystein's opinion.
I agree, I do believe Marks intentions are sincere.

I wondering about this:

Originally Posted by the update
Staring with known primer chips doing SEM/EDX, FTIR and Raman to characterize chip composition and establish the non production of molten metal/iron from this material during DSC exposure to 400 - 600 Centigrade as well as the exotherm/endotherm character of the primer breakdo
Why even do this (assuming Mark authorized it)? Did these samples pass the screening as described in the original proposal?
__________________
"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
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 23rd August 2014, 05:15 PM   #72
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
The DSC issue is central to Mark, Jones/Harrit, etc. They are convinced that only a thermite reaction can create the iron-rich spheres, and that regular paint on steel can't do this. Dave Thomas's little experiment casts doubt on that, as does my fire chemists' assertions that near-adiabatic temps in highly localized areas can actually melt iron/steel on a micro-scale.

Basile is wanting to see if known paint does NOT burn and create these microspheres at 430 C, but the problem I see with this is that THEIR chips are known paint to anyone who looks at what materials they are composed of. So they will find other paint chips, and those may not ignite at 430C and create microspheres. We know that some paint chips don't ignite like the mystery chips. I think Tnemec chips don't, as a very important example. So if other chips behave differently when heated to 430C, this just tells us they are different from Basile's mysteryu chips. We already know from Mark Basile's burnings that the LaClede chips (or thermite as they believe) DO ignite and create iron-rich spheres. So we know in advance that the same results are likely from this blind lab study. It's not going to be news if, as they expect, some kinds of chips ignite and create microspheres and others don't. That's common knowledge I think.

But the other experimental results, if fully released (FTIR/TEM etc), will show what MATERIALS these chips are made of. Let's see if the lab comes back and says this is paint, or this is thermite, or this is cotton candy, or whatever, if indeed Basile is giving the products to them blind and saying "tell us what this is" without leaking to them in any way that they are looking for thermite. If he's really doing that and not just the DSC comparisons, then I give him credit for intellectual courage. In that case, the DSC comparisons of paint and his mystery chips will show only that they are two materials with different properties (such as Tenemec and LaClede, as most of us think they are).

But the materials characterization tests will trump the DSC comparisons, in my opinion.
__________________
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 23rd August 2014, 09:22 PM   #73
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 147
Originally Posted by Spanx View Post
I guess the idea is to test primer paint which has not been adhered to a layer of rust then test the red/gray chips which have been adhered to a layer of rust then shout iron microspheres it must be thermite.

Why else would Ziggy be barking on about iron-microspheres ?
Who is Ziggy?

I was contacted a week ago by a Truther named Wayne who others claim is a civil engineer. He wanted to discuss WTC7, and how far steel can fly from a collapsing building. Kevin Barrett, Dr. Griscom and Rick Shaddock joined in, writing, wanting to debate me on Kevin's Friday evening radio show--got quite a few correspondences, lots of name calling. And then this vicious guy named Ziggy pops up at the end to tell me I was an "embarrassment to JREF" and that my comments were "lunatic ranting." Whoever he is, he's one angry guy.

Who is he?
Frank McLaughlin 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 September 2014, 06:03 AM   #74
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by frank3373 View Post
Who is Ziggy?

I was contacted a week ago by a Truther named Wayne who others claim is a civil engineer. He wanted to discuss WTC7, and how far steel can fly from a collapsing building. Kevin Barrett, Dr. Griscom and Rick Shaddock joined in, writing, wanting to debate me on Kevin's Friday evening radio show--got quite a few correspondences, lots of name calling. And then this vicious guy named Ziggy pops up at the end to tell me I was an "embarrassment to JREF" and that my comments were "lunatic ranting." Whoever he is, he's one angry guy.

Who is he?
Ziggi is a dedicated researcher and writer who got banned from JREF when he protested the lack of balance shown by those who control the administrative whip.
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 September 2014, 07:17 AM   #75
MileHighMadness
Muse
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Just Southeast of Hell
Posts: 630
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Ziggi is a dedicated researcher and writer who got banned from JREF when he protested the lack of balance shown by those who control the administrative whip.
Unlike Truther sites...where I have been banned just for supporting the "Official Story". MM, give it up. 13 years and zero evidence to support CD.
__________________
I dont look forward to heaven, it sounds as boring as hell. Lord Postsettle
MileHighMadness 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 September 2014, 07:52 AM   #76
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 15,597
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Ziggi is a dedicated researcher and writer who got banned from JREF when he protested the lack of balance shown by those who control the administrative whip.
Yeah, they got Triforcharity too!! Each a martyr for the cause.
__________________
"Realize deeply that the present moment is all you ever have." (Eckhart Tolle, 2004)
LSSBB 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 September 2014, 08:56 AM   #77
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,296
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Ziggi is a dedicated researcher and writer who got banned from JREF when he protested the lack of balance shown by those who control the administrative whip.
Asked and answered. Unless you have some way of peeking into everyone's private messages here, you have no basis for claiming the moderation is one-sided against you.
JayUtah 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 September 2014, 09:33 AM   #78
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,163
Originally Posted by frank3373 View Post
Who is Ziggy?

... And then this vicious guy named Ziggy pops up at the end to tell me I was an "embarrassment to JREF" and that my comments were "lunatic ranting." Whoever he is, he's one angry guy.

Who is he?
Good characterisation: That's what Ziggy is, an angry, vicious guy.
He is one of the regular posters at the Debunking the debunkers blog alongside Adam Taylor, JM Talboo and others.
I have had him comment on my own blog, as an anonymous, and he was angry and ranting throughout. Little substance, less structure in his thoughts. Calling your posts "lunatic ranting" is classical projection, IMO.

Last edited by Oystein; 13th September 2014 at 09:34 AM.
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 17th September 2014, 08:17 PM   #79
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 147
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post
Ziggi is a dedicated researcher and writer who got banned from JREF when he protested the lack of balance shown by those who control the administrative whip.
Well, if Ziggi protested the "lack of balance" using the manner and method in which he corresponded with me, naming calling, threats, no substance to anything or intelligent reply to my arguments, JREF didn't throw him out too soon.

I notice you are still here, posting. Guess the "whip" just didn't like Ziggi, but likes you, or could it be he was obnoxious?

BTW, I've posted polite, mildly worded initial counter arguments on every Truther website I can find, our friend Adam's included, and I've never had a comment printed. So I guess you could say I have been banned from all Truther sites.
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2014, 04:13 PM   #80
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,307
Bump..........
__________________
"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
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
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 04:53 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.