Frederic Henry-Couannier? (trying to reproduce Jones' nanothermite analysis)

R.Mackey said:
Unless I'm mistaken, he's a poster here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/member.php?u=31619

Regardless of his biases, a proper scientific study will soon put to rest any and all of Dr. Jones's nonsense. I'll be interested to see his final results.
Click to expand...

Of course his bias need not affect his results, a good study stands by itself.

As far as I understand he is not testing Jones' samples, but some new that he has aquired? (The source is somewhat sketchy on his webpage)

Henrico, I just heard the two month time frame from a poster on another board - could you tell us a bit of your study?
 
Last edited:
Using Google Translate on this page, he says he can't fully confirm the identification of nanothermite, and thus believes, well...

Why is it so important to establish whether it was to the same objects? because of my side and after multiple tests none of the red chips that I brought up to 900 ° C has responded by producing molten iron in complete contradiction with the result highlighted by the authors of the article, result which, I repeat, is the only truly reliable publication as the only one that can be verified by anyone independently! That the layer of red chips gray / red and red chips are one and the same may be confirmed by photos that show some chips with the red part is already widely separated. My negative result should be extended to all chips: they are not thermite particles may react with less than 500 ° C. I get the spectra after heating are clear: the iron and aluminum remained in the same proportions, only carbon has decreased very significantly: it burned with oxygen from the air.

In short, despite repeated efforts, I can not confirm the presence of particles in the dust nanothermitiques! Thus there are several possibilities: either my samples were falsified, or published studies are fraudulent or have been made from a material also forged ahead. From which my samples?: From what I understand, leaflets distributed in New York have prompted those still in possession of the WTC dust to give it the pretext of health studies. We received by mail in Marseille 4 samples from 4 different people, one of them m'ayant contacted directly by email to ask if the dust was a danger to his health and had enough air upset when I explained to him that it was collecting evidence of an inside job (apparently I Gaffé and I was called to order by the organizer of this collection was explained to me that I was not supposed to be in direct contact with shippers). This episode and the similarity of red chips that I found in all samples (and other particles such as dust microspheres) tends to convince me of the authenticity of them. The differences from sample to sample seem explained by the conditions of collection: some that have collected dust, others also gravel glass and concrete biggest ...

Why my samples had been falsified? so that I can not corroborate the study published? why as my role in this whole story is very modest? Moreover, the secret services of all countries may well get more reliable than me and the dust be analyzed ... those who participated in the inside job can not be hoped to hide this material and compromising deceive foreign intelligence services who have also all the elements to be long convinced of the reality of the inside job (free fall of WTC7 by example, or fighter aircraft that are not addressed by the 11 / 9)!

That is why I tend to think today that the samples are authentic, which means that all theses thermite or nano thermite may be borked and probably have been put forward to mislead. To deceive whom? Why? Certainly not the masses that all ways are completely under control of the media. Probably more foreign intelligence services that beyond the reality of the inside job (not hard to show for experts) would be rather interested in the type of technology used on 11 / 9. The nanothermite would be essentially a decoy? It is already clear that the nanothermite could not explain the explosive destruction of the towers, just possibly the initiation of a collapse of natural appearance with weakened (by heating it more efficiently than fire) of steel structures.
Click to expand...

I think what he's saying is that Jones et al. have been deceived by fake nanothermite chips to hide the true way the towers were brought down, which he goes on to say might have been cold fusion.
 
boloboffin said:
I think what he's saying is that Jones et al. have been deceived by fake nanothermite chips to hide the true way the towers were brought down, which he goes on to say might have been cold fusion.
Click to expand...

Sounds more like he's accusing Harrit and Jones of being disinfo agents. Perhaps he hasn't considered incompetence?

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
Sounds more like he's accusing Harrit and Jones of being disinfo agents. Perhaps he hasn't considered incompetence?

Dave
Click to expand...

Oh. So Jones et al. are the ones hiding the cold fusion with the faked nanothermite chips?

Wait, don't answer that. Let me pop some corn.
 
Fred Henri seems to be like Frank Greening, but less bitter, and more paranoid. Seems a good soul underneath, just thinks the government HAD to be in on it.

I remember near the end of our conversation on the JREF link way above, that he was convinced that someone had replaced chips he had originally received, with new ones that would not reproduce the results he was looking for.

The mindset that would rather blame it on "government set up" then simple error, well, it is amazing to say the least.

TAM:)
 
"From what I understand, leaflets distributed in New York have prompted those still in possession of the WTC dust to give it the pretext of health studies. We received by mail in Marseille 4 samples from 4 different people, one of them m'ayant contacted directly by email to ask if the dust was a danger to his health and had enough air upset when I explained to him that it was collecting evidence of an inside job (apparently I Gaffé and I was called to order by the organizer of this collection was explained to me that I was not supposed to be in direct contact with shippers)."

Is that an accurate translation? If so, that is outrageous. That is fraud, that is a crime, that is a complete betrayal of public trust.

If that is accurate, this whole study is completely and utterly worthless.
 
16.5 said:
"From what I understand, leaflets distributed in New York have prompted those still in possession of the WTC dust to give it the pretext of health studies. We received by mail in Marseille 4 samples from 4 different people, one of them m'ayant contacted directly by email to ask if the dust was a danger to his health and had enough air upset when I explained to him that it was collecting evidence of an inside job (apparently I Gaffé and I was called to order by the organizer of this collection was explained to me that I was not supposed to be in direct contact with shippers)."

Is that an accurate translation? If so, that is outrageous. That is fraud, that is a crime, that is a complete betrayal of public trust.

If that is accurate, this whole study is completely and utterly worthless.
Click to expand...

hmm that sounds odd though
i wonder if something was lost in the translation (as google translate does at times)

it sounds like a 3rd party was collecting the samples
but im not sure

maybe that email was what caused him to find out about the leaflets (just to be fair) but if he knew that from the onset it would be disgusting
 
dtugg said:
Jones and Harrit are disinfo agents? LOL! This is great!
Click to expand...

This is actually nothing new - the fractures amongst various truther camps have produced this accusation before - particularly between Dr. Judy Wood, Dr. Jim Fetzer and Dr. Steven Jones and/or their followers.

I look forward to the results of his study.
 
boloboffin said:
I think what he's saying is that Jones et al. have been deceived by fake nanothermite chips to hide the true way the towers were brought down, which he goes on to say might have been cold fusion.
Click to expand...

What on earth would cold fusion have to do with 911?
 
Here's what Frederic wrote in English:



T.A.M
My samples are full of chips which have nothing to do with the chips described in the articles. These are almost perfect doubles:
1) same appearance on one face : same red color!
2) same range of sizes
3) same composition: Carbon, oxygen, Iron, Aluminum, Silicium in the same proportion

almost because

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

best

Fred






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

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

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

Best

F
 
R.Mackey said:
Unless I'm mistaken, he's a poster here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/member.php?u=31619

Regardless of his biases, a proper scientific study will soon put to rest any and all of Dr. Jones's nonsense. I'll be interested to see his final results.
Click to expand...
Right...

It is also possible that Thermobarics did the job but the physics of cold fusion unexpectedly occurred in high powerful electric discharges used to trigger the explosions or the thermitic reactions used to weaken the steel columns. http://www.darksideofgravity.com/marseille_gb.pdf
Click to expand...
It is possible; but... ("it" being rational, not nonsensical tripe)

The secret technology to bring down WTC7 was fire; most of us have a legacy, thousands of years, understanding the secret of fire. A few challenged, the 911 truth cult, have not discovered the secret.

WHAT??? Cold fusion did it and Jones missed it; no, Jones made up thermite nonsense to cover his collusion with the terrorists. The molten nut case science is flowing freely 7 years after the collapse...
 
Last edited:
alienentity said:
Here's what Frederic wrote in English:

Some time ago i believed powerful discharges was used at the WTC using capacitors. The discharges may have been triggered by the piezoelectric effect: as you can see in the USGS data: the girder coatings have Titanium but also Baryum and strontium and i think its very hard to understand the high levels of baryum and strontium (quite the same) in these coatings.
As you know high capacitors commonly use baryum titanate often mixed with strontium titanate.
Click to expand...

Just as an aside: those who saw Kevin Ryan's bizarre exercise in connect-the-dots (Stratesec tried but failed to supply security equipment to the WTC, somebody who works for Stratesec used to work for NASA, NASA sometimes uses thermite and explosives, therefore Stratesec smuggled explosives and thermite into the WTC) might be interested in the similarities in reasoning here. In effect, this is the scientific equivalent: barium and strontium have been seen as elements, but there's no evidence they were present as barium titanate or strontium titanate, and even less that these substances were present as the dielectric layer in any kind of capacitor. To deduce, therefore, from the presence of barium and strontium that electrical discharges from capacitors were involved in the collapse of the WTC towers is a line of reasoning that's missing virtually all the necessary steps.

Dave
 
Would the absence of nitrogen peaks in the spectra provided by the Jones paper and the Couannier paper constitute a negative result for test for conventional explosive residue? I ask because I came across this troofer's blog. He's no fan of the nanothermite hypothesis and wants Jones to test his dust for explosive residue.

He writes:


Hey Steven and Neils, I got an idea: why not test for the exact kind of explosive residue that the controlled demolition industry ACTUALLY USES? Hey, there’s a concept. You know, the kind of tests that NIST and FEMA report that they DIDN’T run? The kind of test that you yourselves also admit you DIDN’T run? The kind of test I specifically ASKED you to run, not once but TWICE now in private communications? And the VERY kinds of tests you yourselves suggest SOMEONE ELSE RUNS in your recent ******** “thermetic material” paper?

You know, THOSE tests. That’s an idea, huh? The kind of tests that Greg Roberts told me in an email that he DIDN’T want to run because a negative result might hurt the Truth movement. Those tests.
Click to expand...


Given that for some time now Jones' hypothesis has been that both a thermite variant AND conventional explosives were used, he has a point. Nice to get confirmation in his penutimate sentence that the Troof Movement leaders ares not interested in the truth.
 
Hello, everyone? It's me again, and guess where I am? In London! Woot! On my way to Marseilles, France to try and contact Fred in person. He was looking for dust, and I've got dust. Actually, if you remember, it's a foam. Air bubbles and such. Wish me luck!
 
WTC Dust said:
Hello, everyone? It's me again, and guess where I am? In London! Woot! On my way to Marseilles, France to try and contact Fred in person. He was looking for dust, and I've got dust. Actually, if you remember, it's a foam. Air bubbles and such. Wish me luck!
Click to expand...

WOOT! Indeed!

Did you pick the cigarette butts out of your otherwise pristine sample?
 
WTC Dust said:
Hello, everyone? It's me again, and guess where I am? In London! Woot! On my way to Marseilles, France to try and contact Fred in person. He was looking for dust, and I've got dust. Actually, if you remember, it's a foam. Air bubbles and such. Wish me luck!
Click to expand...
Good luck.

Friendly advice. Try to keep your clothes on in public.


;)
 
DGM said:
Good luck.

Friendly advice. Try to keep your clothes on in public.


;)
Click to expand...

Actually the French don't mind nudity, they get offended more by Niqabs (Muslim headcoverings) :p

Y'know, Tracy, it would make sense to send some of your dust to an independent, impartial lab as well. Couannier is as partisan as they come..in favour of the whole 9/11 Conspiracy™ baggage, that is.
 
WTC Dust said:
Hello, everyone? It's me again, and guess where I am? In London! Woot! On my way to Marseilles, France to try and contact Fred in person. He was looking for dust, and I've got dust. Actually, if you remember, it's a foam. Air bubbles and such. Wish me luck!
Click to expand...

I take it there will be a pit stop in Amsterdam? Bring me back some brownies! :D (jk)
 
Some of the dust I discovered had cigarette butts, but I didn't collect that dust. The dust I collected was free of cigarette butts. :-)
 
Frederick Henry-Couannier, Judy Wood, and Tracy Blevins are the three scientists who are proposing a non-thermitic process of WTC destruction that resulted in a cool dust cloud. So there's three of us. :-) I'd say 3 Ph.D.s beats 1,000 architects in this matter, especially since what was seen on 9/11 was advanced, secret technology. In this case, knowing how to build and destroy buildings doesn't help. What was required was research science, not general knowledge of building construction.
 
alienentity said:
Actually the French don't mind nudity, they get offended more by Niqabs (Muslim headcoverings) :p

Y'know, Tracy, it would make sense to send some of your dust to an independent, impartial lab as well. Couannier is as partisan as they come..in favour of the whole 9/11 Conspiracy™ baggage, that is.
Click to expand...

If I sent my dust to an impartial laboratory, and then this laboratory performed the same experiments already performed on the dust, then the science would not be advanced in any way. Just another data point.

So I'm not doing that, yet. I'm working on a new method that will result in a proper analysis of the dust that leads to the real mechanism of destruction.

What does finding silicon in the dust tell you? NOTHING. Because windows are made of glass. Big deal. The real question is how the dust came into existence, and spectral analysis has not provided any real insight into this process to date.
 
WTC Dust said:
If I sent my dust to an impartial laboratory, and then this laboratory performed the same experiments already performed on the dust, then the science would not be advanced in any way. Just another data point.

So I'm not doing that, yet. I'm working on a new method that will result in a proper analysis of the dust that leads to the real mechanism of destruction.

What does finding silicon in the dust tell you? NOTHING. Because windows are made of glass. Big deal. The real question is how the dust came into existence, and spectral analysis has not provided any real insight into this process to date.
Click to expand...

So you are not a fan of the whole scientific method, huh?
 
WTC Dust said:
If I sent my dust to an impartial laboratory, and then this laboratory performed the same experiments already performed on the dust, then the science would not be advanced in any way. Just another data point.

So I'm not doing that, yet. I'm working on a new method that will result in a proper analysis of the dust that leads to the real mechanism of destruction.

What does finding silicon in the dust tell you? NOTHING. Because windows are made of glass. Big deal. The real question is how the dust came into existence, and spectral analysis has not provided any real insight into this process to date.
Click to expand...

Tracy, that excuse is really lame. I'm disappointed at your attempts to dodge good science and pursue pseudo-science well out of your areas of expertise. You're no different and certainly no better than the likes of Steven Jones, for example.

The definitive test for nanothermite has already been explained on this forum several times; if you wanted to really strike a blow to the heart of your competitors you'd perform those tests.

I see that you have no interest in a thorough elimination of the competing theories. I guess you think you already 'know' what happened. ;) That's what makes you a truther.
 
WTC Dust said:
Frederick Henry-Couannier, Judy Wood, and Tracy Blevins are the three scientists who are proposing a non-thermitic process of WTC destruction that resulted in a cool dust cloud. So there's three of us. :-) I'd say 3 Ph.D.s beats 1,000 architects in this matter, especially since what was seen on 9/11 was advanced, secret technology. In this case, knowing how to build and destroy buildings doesn't help. What was required was research science, not general knowledge of building construction.
Click to expand...
AE911T's list of 1500+ architects and engineers includes about 48 PhDs.

Using your own highlighted criterion to choose between those two arguments from specious authority, your argument loses.
 
W.D.Clinger said:
AE911T's list of 1500+ architects and engineers includes about 48 PhDs.

Using your own highlighted criterion to choose between those two arguments from specious authority, your argument loses.
Click to expand...

Tracy's hubris is breathtaking. ETA almost as impressive as her poor logic.
 
Last edited:
Ugh. Not this again.

Dusty, remember your demonstration that conclusively proved your samples aren't magnetic?
 
Last edited:
Big deal. The real question is how the dust came into existence,
Click to expand...

I'm thinking massive collapse of a steel and concrete structure with untold amounts of gypsum wallboard inside may have contributed to it.

Also, thousands of computer keyboards with bits of crackers in between the keys probably contributed. Hope those first responders weren't allergic to peanuts.
 
WTC Dust said:
Frederick Henry-Couannier, Judy Wood, and Tracy Blevins are the three scientists.
Click to expand...
Evidence? I've seen nothing even remotely scientific from any of them. Maybe Judy Wood was at one time, before her unfortunate brain injury.
 
WTC Dust said:
If I sent my dust to an impartial laboratory, and then this laboratory performed the same experiments already performed on the dust, then the science would not be advanced in any way. Just another data point.
Click to expand...
What experiments did you perform on the dust and where are the results?
 
Don't forget her iconic picture of the ceremony a year later at GZ where it was 'still fuming,' even though it's blatantly obvious that the wind just kicked up dust right when the picture was being taken. Can't remember what page that was on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom