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 29th February 2012, 02:55 PM   #41
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Thank you Chris and Dr Millette, this is very interesting.

I agree with the suggestion that clear wording be used to emphasize that this material cannot be any kind of thermite, chemically.
and that it is consistent with some kind of primer paint, even if the manufacturer is not identified.

thx


ps I believe these results suggest why Dr Jones has dawdled off from this topic - no doubt they have quietly concluded that they were mistaken and are simply never going to publish a follow-up paper. Too embarrassing.
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th February 2012, 03:14 PM   #42
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
I would like to say good job, too, Chris. You're one of the very few on the "debunking" side of 9/11 who is willing to put his money where his mouth is.

This is how science is advanced. This is how you challenge findings that you don't agree with. This is how dialogue is furthered.

Provided Millette really did follow the exact same methodology, I will be very interested in seeing Jones, Harrit et al's responses to this.
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 February 2012, 03:17 PM   #43
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,227
Thanks, Chris, for copying the summary for us! I immediately noticed at least half a dozend things that Millette did a lot more competently than Harrit e.al.!

Is it possible for us to see the Figures and data somewhere, somehow? I read the summary just once, and it seems to me his criteria for selecting chips were a little broader than I, personally, would have wished for (keeping in mind of course that the study wasn't commisioned by me nor done for my convenience), but maybe if I see the data I am satisfied. Or maybe I'll find that, oh my bad, he selected chips I am not (personally) interested in.


Now some answers to fair questions:

Originally Posted by cjnewson88 View Post
Ok so, correct me if I'm wrong.. but..

In Summery;

1) Red/Gray Chips are Not Thermite

2) Red/Gray Chips are Not Primer Paint

3) However, Red/Gray Chips Could Be Laclede Primer Paint?

What other source for the chips could their be? Clarity please if anyone can provide it

edit: Oh and Thanks Chris! Very much appreciated by all! Thanks to Jim too!
Before everything, remember that there were at least 2, almost certainly more than 2, different steel primers used in the three towers, and that also there are at least two, almost certainly more than 2, different kinds of red-gray chips found in the WTC dust. So be careful when you ask questions about "the" red/gray chips or "the" primer.

1) Mostly correct: The chips that Millette studied are most definitely not thermite of any kind, as no elemental Al could be found. Just remember that of course it could still be logically possible that other kinds of particles are thermitic. The point is: No one has found any evidence of it.

2) Essentially false: Instead, they are beyond any reasonable doubt a kind of paint, painted on steel: Iron oxide and kaolin (two of the most mundane pigments out there) in epoxy. Call it "primer" if you you like, cause it's painted on steel. However, it is not Tnemec, which is a particular family of primer brand, two members of which we know were painted on the WTC perimeter columns. That brand contains Zinc; ;Millette, like Harrit, found no zinc, so the chips Millette studied are not Tnemec primer. They still are primer, just a different one

3) Probably false: Millette found no strontium chromate, but found some titanium (dioxide, I presume). Both these facts would indicate that his chips are not the LaClede formulation

Last edited by Oystein; 29th February 2012 at 03:19 PM.
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 29th February 2012, 04:16 PM   #44
Quad4_72
AI-EE-YAH!
 
Quad4_72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,354
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
I would like to say good job, too, Chris. You're one of the very few on the "debunking" side of 9/11 who is willing to put his money where his mouth is.

This is how science is advanced. This is how you challenge findings that you don't agree with. This is how dialogue is furthered.

Provided Millette really did follow the exact same methodology, I will be very interested in seeing Jones, Harrit et al's responses to this.
For now, what do you think of the findings? Do you still believe that the chips were thermite?
__________________
Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken
Quad4_72 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 February 2012, 04:33 PM   #45
Steen Svanholm
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 62
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Before everything, remember that there were at least 2, almost certainly more than 2, different steel primers used in the three towers, and that also there are at least two, almost certainly more than 2, different kinds of red-gray chips found in the WTC dust. So be careful when you ask questions about "the" red/gray chips or "the" primer.
1. Do we know specifically of any other primers in WTC 1, 2 or 7 (or 3, 4, 5 and 6 for that matter)?

2. Do we know of any other primer candidates that would match the chemical findings and that have a reasonable propability of having been used in WTC?

And thanks to Mohr and Millette for the effort which at least will nuance future debates extensively.
Steen Svanholm 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 February 2012, 04:33 PM   #46
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,965
Excellent work Chris! I certainly appreciate the hard work you've put into this. Job well done!

And Dr. Millette, thanks to you too for agreeing to be completely neutral and taking on this study!!. Thank you so much.

Conclusion: Truthers are going to have to make something else up now. Maybe methane gas......

Last edited by triforcharity; 29th February 2012 at 04:34 PM.
triforcharity 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 February 2012, 04:45 PM   #47
cjnewson88
Graduate Poster
 
cjnewson88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,660
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Now some answers to fair questions:

Before everything, remember that there were at least 2, almost certainly more than 2, different steel primers used in the three towers, and that also there are at least two, almost certainly more than 2, different kinds of red-gray chips found in the WTC dust. So be careful when you ask questions about "the" red/gray chips or "the" primer.

1) Mostly correct: The chips that Millette studied are most definitely not thermite of any kind, as no elemental Al could be found. Just remember that of course it could still be logically possible that other kinds of particles are thermitic. The point is: No one has found any evidence of it.

2) Essentially false: Instead, they are beyond any reasonable doubt a kind of paint, painted on steel: Iron oxide and kaolin (two of the most mundane pigments out there) in epoxy. Call it "primer" if you you like, cause it's painted on steel. However, it is not Tnemec, which is a particular family of primer brand, two members of which we know were painted on the WTC perimeter columns. That brand contains Zinc; ;Millette, like Harrit, found no zinc, so the chips Millette studied are not Tnemec primer. They still are primer, just a different one

3) Probably false: Millette found no strontium chromate, but found some titanium (dioxide, I presume). Both these facts would indicate that his chips are not the LaClede formulation

Thanks for the clarity Oystein. I hate myself for saying this, but getting this explained in 'lay mans' terms is really the easiest way I can understand this. When it comes to physics, mechanics etc I am more than competent at understanding in depth, however chemistry and in depth experiments like this one is a nightmare for me to understand easily, so any interpretation is much appreciated

On another note, one of the main arguments for thermitic material was that these red/gray chips were highly reactive in heat. IIRC, Harret et al heated the chips to 400C and recorded a violent reaction.

According to Chris's post;
Quote:
Chips of interest were ashed in a muffle furnace using a NEY Temperature Programmable furnace operated at 400oC for 1 hour. The gray layer remained intact and the red layer residue was prepared as described above and analyzed using a Philips CM120 TEM-SAED-EDS.
Was this a replication of the same experiment? Could someone explain this section please for people like myself? Thanks.
__________________
Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed.
Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88

Last edited by cjnewson88; 29th February 2012 at 05:43 PM.
cjnewson88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th February 2012, 05:23 PM   #48
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Thanks, Chris, for copying the summary for us! I immediately noticed at least half a dozend things that Millette did a lot more competently than Harrit e.al.!

Is it possible for us to see the Figures and data somewhere, somehow? I read the summary just once, and it seems to me his criteria for selecting chips were a little broader than I, personally, would have wished for (keeping in mind of course that the study wasn't commisioned by me nor done for my convenience), but maybe if I see the data I am satisfied. Or maybe I'll find that, oh my bad, he selected chips I am not (personally) interested in.


Now some answers to fair questions:



Before everything, remember that there were at least 2, almost certainly more than 2, different steel primers used in the three towers, and that also there are at least two, almost certainly more than 2, different kinds of red-gray chips found in the WTC dust. So be careful when you ask questions about "the" red/gray chips or "the" primer.

1) Mostly correct: The chips that Millette studied are most definitely not thermite of any kind, as no elemental Al could be found. Just remember that of course it could still be logically possible that other kinds of particles are thermitic. The point is: No one has found any evidence of it.

2) Essentially false: Instead, they are beyond any reasonable doubt a kind of paint, painted on steel: Iron oxide and kaolin (two of the most mundane pigments out there) in epoxy. Call it "primer" if you you like, cause it's painted on steel. However, it is not Tnemec, which is a particular family of primer brand, two members of which we know were painted on the WTC perimeter columns. That brand contains Zinc; ;Millette, like Harrit, found no zinc, so the chips Millette studied are not Tnemec primer. They still are primer, just a different one

3) Probably false: Millette found no strontium chromate, but found some titanium (dioxide, I presume). Both these facts would indicate that his chips are not the LaClede formulation
Hi Oystein,
Yes, the entire preliminary findings, complete with figures, will be posted tomorrow morning. I'll put out the link and everyone will be able to see everything.
__________________
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 February 2012, 05:25 PM   #49
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
The full preliminary report will be available tomorrow, figures and pictures included, with a web link. I'll post that link here as soon as Jim Millette puts it up.
__________________
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 February 2012, 05:32 PM   #50
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
 
LashL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 35,250
Mod InfoFYI, chrismohr sought permission in advance of creating this thread to have it placed on Moderated status once it was eventually created, and after discussion among the Mod Team, that permission was granted. Please ensure that your posts are on topic and in keeping with the higher standards of a Moderated thread. This thread is for discussing the findings of the report by Jim Millette. Other discussion that is not confined to that subject matter or is otherwise not suitable for a Moderated thread should be posted in the pre-existing thread cited in the OP. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.
Posted By:LashL

Last edited by LashL; 29th February 2012 at 07:47 PM.
LashL 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 February 2012, 05:58 PM   #51
grandmastershek
Graduate Poster
 
grandmastershek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,443
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
I would like to say good job, too, Chris. You're one of the very few on the "debunking" side of 9/11 who is willing to put his money where his mouth is.

This is how science is advanced. This is how you challenge findings that you don't agree with. This is how dialogue is furthered.

Provided Millette really did follow the exact same methodology, I will be very interested in seeing Jones, Harrit et al's responses to this.
Indeed..the Millette study is how science is conducted. Harrit, Jones, Ryan, etc should take some notes.
__________________
For as the NWO are higher than the people, so are their ways higher than your ways, and their thoughts than your thoughts. (A amalgam of Isaiah 55:9 & truther logic)
grandmastershek 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 February 2012, 06:14 PM   #52
uke2se
Philosopher
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,134
Good work, Chris and Dr. Millette. I know you did this for yourself, Chris, and I hope you aren't too upset when the twoofers step up their attempt at character assassination. No way they are going to accept a study like this.

On the plus side, you've given rational people another strong scientific argument for why nobody should take twoofers seriously.
uke2se 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 February 2012, 06:23 PM   #53
nicepants
Graduate Poster
 
nicepants's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,722
Originally Posted by grandmastershek View Post
Indeed..the Millette study is how science is conducted. Harrit, Jones, Ryan, etc should take some notes.
Agreed!!

I remember when I first heard about the red/grey chips, I thought that the possibility of them being paint seemed likely.

Chris, thanks for taking point on this and doing what Gage & his crew have refused to do for years! Unfortunately, if past actions are any indication, Gage & co are likely to attack you, Millette, etc in any way possible in a grasping-at-straws effort to attempt to discredit the findings. (All you need is Gage to find some parking attendant at Millette's lab that's 3rd cousins with Dick Cheney and he'll throw the baby out with the bathwater).

I fear that the only way to get someone like Gage to accept findings like this is to have him agree, in advance, to the terms of the tests and to accept/endorse the findings regardless of the results so long as the tests abide by the agreed-upon terms.

That said, I'm looking forward to the full results and to the responses by truthers!
__________________
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen -Einstein
nicepants 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 February 2012, 11:04 PM   #54
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by nicepants View Post
Agreed!!

I remember when I first heard about the red/grey chips, I thought that the possibility of them being paint seemed likely.

Chris, thanks for taking point on this and doing what Gage & his crew have refused to do for years! Unfortunately, if past actions are any indication, Gage & co are likely to attack you, Millette, etc in any way possible in a grasping-at-straws effort to attempt to discredit the findings. (All you need is Gage to find some parking attendant at Millette's lab that's 3rd cousins with Dick Cheney and he'll throw the baby out with the bathwater).

I fear that the only way to get someone like Gage to accept findings like this is to have him agree, in advance, to the terms of the tests and to accept/endorse the findings regardless of the results so long as the tests abide by the agreed-upon terms.

That said, I'm looking forward to the full results and to the responses by truthers!
I have a suspicion Gage will focus on the lack of 'iron rich microspheres' as some kind of proof that the Millette chips are not the same as the Jones/Harrit chips.
I can just hear his Wolf Blitzer-like talking points 'Iron microspheres were not found by Millette, but could only be created by a thermitic reaction, so his study does not disprove the clear evidence for nanothermite found in the dust, or the freefall speed of the collapse, which could only be caused by controlled demolition' or something along those lines.
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th February 2012, 11:51 PM   #55
GlennB
In search of pi(e)
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 20,011
Chris, I'd just like to add my congratulations to the list

I can't say I'm exactly looking forward to the response of Gage, Harrit and co. as I strongly suspect it offers a huge opportunity for Trutheresque obfuscation. Perhaps they will surprise us and put their samples through more rigorous and meaningful testing?
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 12:13 AM   #56
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Hi, Chris, [/b], thanks a lot And many, many thanks to Jim Millette as well!

I think that our predictions from Paint thread are being confirmed experimentally, but it is too soon to discuss the results of Jim's study in detail without seeing figures, spectra, etc.

As a "discoverer" of Laclede red primer paint, I'm perhaps rather "biased" so far, since I'm still convinced that red-chips described by Jim and compared with closely studied "Bentham chips (a) to (d) are Laclede paint chips (at least mostly)

Steen Svanholm: pls, read the Paint thread, everything we know about red WTC paints has been summarized there. Perhaps Oystein could put some short summary (or some good summarizing post from the paint thread) here?

Oystein:
as for your point: "3) Probably false: Millette found no strontium chromate, but found some titanium (dioxide, I presume). Both these facts would indicate that his chips are not the LaClede formulation"... You already know me quite well, Oystein, my instant question is: could titanium dioxide be naturally present in small amounts in kaolinite? And the quick answer is: yes, it can See e.g. here http://www.clays.org/journal/archive...4/24-5-215.htm or here.
As for strontium chromate, we agreed that in 1 wt% concentration in Laclede primer, it might not be easy to detect/determine this compound in the paint. It seems that this really happened.
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 1st March 2012, 12:58 AM   #57
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 35,970
Thanks very much, Chris, Dr Millette, and to all who funded the study.
__________________
Challenge your thoughts.
Don't believe everything you think.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 01:17 AM   #58
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,227
Originally Posted by Steen Svanholm View Post
1. Do we know specifically of any other primers in WTC 1, 2 or 7 (or 3, 4, 5 and 6 for that matter)?

2. Do we know of any other primer candidates that would match the chemical findings and that have a reasonable propability of having been used in WTC?

And thanks to Mohr and Millette for the effort which at least will nuance future debates extensively.
As far as I am aware of, we know only two primer formulations (Tnemec and LaClede). I don't know if anyone has found any paint formulation for any other building but the twin towers.
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 1st March 2012, 01:45 AM   #59
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,227
Originally Posted by cjnewson88 View Post
Thanks for the clarity Oystein. I hate myself for saying this, but getting this explained in 'lay mans' terms is really the easiest way I can understand this. When it comes to physics, mechanics etc I am more than competent at understanding in depth, however chemistry and in depth experiments like this one is a nightmare for me to understand easily, so any interpretation is much appreciated
yw

Originally Posted by cjnewson88 View Post
On another note, one of the main arguments for thermitic material was that these red/gray chips were highly reactive in heat. IIRC, Harret et al heated the chips to 400C and recorded a violent reaction.

According to Chris's post;
Quote:
Chips of interest were ashed in a muffle furnace using a NEY Temperature Programmable furnace operated at 400oC for 1 hour. The gray layer remained intact and the red layer residue was prepared as described above and analyzed using a Philips CM120 TEM-SAED-EDS.
Was this a replication of the same experiment? Could someone explain this section please for people like myself? Thanks.
No, this wasn't a replication of the tests Farrer did for the Harrit team.

What Millette did is quite simply this: he carefully burned the organic matrix (epoxy), which largely turns into gas (CO2, H2O, ...) and disappears, to free the pigment from the matrix, so he can take a closer look at the pigments. Other methods to achieve the same result would have been: Dissolve paint in paint solvent (he tried that, but epoxy is notriously difficult to dissolve, so that didn't work), cut chips with a skalpell (that exposes only those pigments very close to the cut surface).
His furnace controls temperature carefully, but doesn't measure anything beyond that, as far as I understand.


The DSC (Differantiated Scanning Calorimeter) does something quite more complicated: You have to heating plates - one with your paint sample, the other without any sample as a control. You slowly feed energy (electric current I suppoose) to them, at the same rate, and you measure how the temperature of the device develops. You adjust energy input to both such that temperature rises constantly, for example at a rate of 10°C per minute. You really measure and plot how much energy you need to feed to your plates to achieve that heating rate.
No, if your sample contains some water, for example, that water will boil off around 100°C. This cools the plate, and you need to feed more energy to the plate with that sample than to the control plate, to still achieve the same heating rate. The same happens if an endotherm reaction occurs in your sample - that is a reaction that needs more energy input than comes out of it. If, on the other hand, your sample undergoes an exotherm chemical reaction (for example: it burns), then the sample heats up the plate, and you must reduce the heat you feed to your sample plate, or else your heating rate gets to high.

You do that process, starting perhaps at room temperature (20°C), and continue till you reach a desired maximum temperature (typically, DSCs will go to 600 or 700°C).

So what you basically measure at each temperature along the scale is the energy flow of the chemical and physical reactions that take place at that temperature. If you know the initial mass of your sample, you can compute from the curve a property called "energy density". But the shape of the curve can also be of interest, and of course the temperatures at which reactions peak.


What Farrer, Harrit and the others found was that thei chips react exothermally mostly around a peak at 430°, plus minus 50°. This means their reaction already started under 400°C. This is consistent with Millette's ashing of the sample at 400°C - a polymer like epoxy will degrade thermally at that temperature, no surprise. Also, it is no surprise that this reaction is exotherm. The energy densities that Farrer measured were unremarkable for organic substances: between 1.5 and 7.5 kJ/g. Paper and wood would have more than 15kJ/g, many plastics between 20 and 40 kJ/g, fossil fuels more than that. I don't have values for epoxy handy, but wouldn't be surprised at all if epoxy, too, had like 20kJ/g. Farrer's value were much lower than that, because (as Harrit e.al. concede themselves) their chips had this gray layer, which does not react, so it adds mass, but not energy, lowering the energy per mass. However, their values would be highly remarkable, if not downright impossible, for thermite: Ideal thermite has only 3.9kJ/g - two of Farrer's samples were above that value, so something that was not thermite must have burned, there is no way around that conclusion in this universe, and they even admit it.


Now, something that I am missing from Millettes ashed-in-a-furnace samples is - microspheres
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 1st March 2012, 06:02 AM   #60
Sunstealer
Illuminator
 
Sunstealer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,121
Firstly I'd like to thank Chris for his efforts in arranging for these tests to be performed, you have the patience of a saint.

It's about 20 years ago since being introduced to kaolin during a ceramics lecture. I've never used the material or come across it in any professional capacity, however, upon seeing the Harrit et al paper's SEM images and other data, 3 years ago, it was abundantly clear that kaolin was present. I'm unaware of any other hexagonal platelet with those characteristics. Millette has performed many tests that any self respecting and experienced materials scientist would carry out in what is essentially a "materials characterisation" exercise. The confirmation of the presence of kaolin by FTIR/TEM and the matches to reference data is especially pleasing. I wonder how many truthers will acknowledge that I was right 3 years ago?

The fact that FTIR also shows a cross-linked epoxy binder is good news too because this is what we were expecting to find. These two facts kill the thermite nonsense from Harrit and Jones et al stone dead.

It's also pleasing to see that Millette shows that the gray layer is consistent with steel which again shows that we were on the right path. No truther has ever managed to explain the gray layer nor refute the data indicating it is steel.

I'm looking forward to the full paper and it's data.
Sunstealer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 07:30 AM   #61
Dragon37
Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 192
I see some people hung up on the source of the flakes. The only thing that matters, but this will be obscured by the truth movement talking about the source, is that it is not, I repeat not, thermite or nanothermite. That should not be lost in the ensuing war of words.

I find it interesting that Jones and company still refuse to allow further analysis of their samples by any other source. This, along with Millette's work, prove conclusively that the thermite debate.

Unfortunately, the "truth" side will continue to believe their thermite lie.
Dragon37 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 07:57 AM   #62
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Conversation with Jim Millette

Hi all,

The link to the full study is coming out this morning.

I asked him one simple question about the study:

Did you replicate the Bentham study 100%? It looks like there was no test of the ignition temperature or energy release of the chips.

(Paraphrase) That's correct. We did cook the chips to release the particles from epoxy bindings for further study, but not to measure ignition temperature of energy release.

It was not necessary to take this step, because my chemical tests proved that the chips could not be thermitic in any way. I would have just been testing the ignition point and energy release of a paint chip and that would not have been necessary.

If someone wanted to do such a test, it would be as two-part process. A different lab would have to be employed to measure the heat output and ignition temperatures properly, and then someone else with expertise would need to properly analyze the data. The cost would be around $300 per sample for just the raw testing.

Otherwise, every part of the Bentham protocol was followed, and several other tests they did not do were added to the protocol.
__________________
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 1st March 2012, 08:02 AM   #63
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Question from Jim Millette

Jim Millette is continuing his work to prepare for a peer-reviewed publication of his WTC dust sample findings and he has one question:

In the original Bentham study, Harrit et al wrote one line about how someone tested known thermite and found iron-rich microspheres. Rather than slog through the Bentham Report yet again, I'm wondering if anyone here knows what that line is about. He'd like to get any information he can about what Harrit et al did, what other studies might be out there re thermitic material and iron-rich microspheres, etc.

Thanks in advance.
__________________
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 1st March 2012, 09:50 AM   #64
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Moderator(s): As for my first post here, it took about 8 hours to be "allowed" here. Wouldn't it be better to eliminate off-topic and other inappropriate contributions later, after they are "published"? Thanks for considering this possibility

Chris:Basically, Jim's preliminary conclusions from his experimental work are quite similar to our presumptions at the beginning of "Paint thread": "Red-gray chips (with the structure and compositions identical/similar to Bentham chips (a) to (d)) are indeed not thermites because of this and this and this; they are paint particles, but they are not particles of Tnemec paint and we don't know what kind of paint they could be."
Since we know what paint it could be and why, Jim Millette should be informed about this at least now, after his fine experiments are finished. Therefore I suggest, Oystein, , even here that we should send our "white paper" on "Laclede paint hypothesis" to Jim Millette through Chris now, without further editing or reviewing. Jim can consider our claims and mention them in the final version of his peer-reviewed paper
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 1st March 2012, 10:06 AM   #65
Dragon37
Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 192
They claim the only source of iron-rich microspheres is a by-product of a thermite reaction. No other combustible could have created them is their claim. I think the conjectures about the spheres came before and ultimately facilitated their false finding of thermite in their "tests".
Dragon37 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 10:40 AM   #66
Gamolon
Graduate Poster
 
Gamolon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,915
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Jim Millette is continuing his work to prepare for a peer-reviewed publication of his WTC dust sample findings and he has one question:

In the original Bentham study, Harrit et al wrote one line about how someone tested known thermite and found iron-rich microspheres. Rather than slog through the Bentham Report yet again, I'm wondering if anyone here knows what that line is about. He'd like to get any information he can about what Harrit et al did, what other studies might be out there re thermitic material and iron-rich microspheres, etc.

Thanks in advance.
Is this the one? Taken from the Bentham paper, page 25.


The [5] reference is below.
Gamolon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 11:23 AM   #67
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,704
Gigantic kudos for having the patience to actually go this far with what I would have otherwise never taken seriously. I thought the results would be fairly straightforward but it still was a minor curiosity to be able to find out. You have way more patience that I got these days and I guess that's not always a bad thing if it helps you do what you set out for.
__________________
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 11:53 AM   #68
moorea34
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 157
I think you should remind him the composition of Laclede Primer Paint.
(the second most used paint during the construction of the Twin Towers with the tnemec primer paint) :

* Pigment (28,5 %)
----- Iron Oxyde 55 %
----- Aluminum silicate (kaolin) 41 %
----- Strontium Chromate 4 %

* Vehicule (71.5 %)
----- Epoxy Amine 45 %
----- Deionized Water and amine 55 %


moorea34 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 12:11 PM   #69
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Here is the link to the full Jim Millette preliminary report, pictures, diagrams and all. Have fun!
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/911..._030112web.pdf
__________________
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 1st March 2012, 12:58 PM   #70
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
Moderator(s): As for my first post here, it took about 8 hours to be "allowed" here. Wouldn't it be better to eliminate off-topic and other inappropriate contributions later, after they are "published"? Thanks for considering this possibility

Chris:Basically, Jim's preliminary conclusions from his experimental work are quite similar to our presumptions at the beginning of "Paint thread": "Red-gray chips (with the structure and compositions identical/similar to Bentham chips (a) to (d)) are indeed not thermites because of this and this and this; they are paint particles, but they are not particles of Tnemec paint and we don't know what kind of paint they could be."
Since we know what paint it could be and why, Jim Millette should be informed about this at least now, after his fine experiments are finished. Therefore I suggest, Oystein, , even here that we should send our "white paper" on "Laclede paint hypothesis" to Jim Millette through Chris now, without further editing or reviewing. Jim can consider our claims and mention them in the final version of his peer-reviewed paper
Ivan I have a different idea: really look at all the new data in Jim's preliminary report first, then see if any of the spectra etc. line up with any particular paint. THAT would be very useful, I would think!
__________________
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 1st March 2012, 01:05 PM   #71
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 13,695
Excellent job, Chris! I have linked both this discussion and the PDF at SLC.
__________________
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 1st March 2012, 01:24 PM   #72
moorea34
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 157
'Cr' is found several times in the spectra by Millette.
Exactly as in Harrit's paper.

Page 28, on the last graph on the left, quantities of Cr are not negligible.
moorea34 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 01:24 PM   #73
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,795
kodos and a blessing on your houses for this study. I look forward to further updates.
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 1st March 2012, 01:37 PM   #74
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 12,673
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Here is the link to the full Jim Millette preliminary report, pictures, diagrams and all. Have fun!
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/911..._030112web.pdf
Thanks for getting this done, Chris. I will keep the report close to me heart. (No, really. I dowloaded it to my phone, which I keep in my jacket inner pocket).
__________________
"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 1st March 2012, 01:48 PM   #75
Vinny Shinblind
Student
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 44
There are conflicting results concerning thermite in the dust! That's why we need a new investigation!

/truther
Vinny Shinblind is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 03:04 PM   #76
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
From the Millette study, pp 6-7 'Some small EDS peaks of zinc and chromium were detected in some samples but the amountdetected was inconsistent with the 20% level of zinc chromate in the primer formula.'

Based on what we do know about LaClede formulas of the day, is it not fair to say that this material is very similar to it in composition?
And further, can we not also surmise why this kind of material would be used in the construction of the towers?
Why else would it be present in the dust? I can't think of any other reason..
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 03:31 PM   #77
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,227
Wow - this is massive! And lots of new things for me to learn.

Will take me a while to digest. Better try to avoid any half-baked comments...
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 1st March 2012, 04:56 PM   #78
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 35,970
Dear Truthers: Don't try and move the goalposts and say this test was about proving which sort of paint the chips are.

Harrit, Jones et al tested the chips and said they were ~thermite.

Dr Millette has tested the chips more thoroughly and proved Harrit, Jones et al wrong.

The test proves they were not thermite. End of story.
__________________
Challenge your thoughts.
Don't believe everything you think.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 06:24 PM   #79
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Hi all,

Did you replicate the Bentham study 100%? It looks like there was no test of the ignition temperature or energy release of the chips.

(Paraphrase) That's correct. We did cook the chips to release the particles from epoxy bindings for further study, but not to measure ignition temperature of energy release.

It was not necessary to take this step, because my chemical tests proved that the chips could not be thermitic in any way. I would have just been testing the ignition point and energy release of a paint chip and that would not have been necessary.

Um, okay, but I thought that

Quote:
... primer paint – being basically a ceramic material – is chemically stable at temperatures up to 800 °C.

COMPARISON WITH THERMAL STABILITY OF RED/GRAY CHIPS

In contrast to the primer paint, the red/gray chips react violently, igniting in the neighbourhood of 430 °C.
http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/200...-niels-harrit/
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 07:21 PM   #80
fourtoe
Graduate Poster
 
fourtoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,031
Originally Posted by Orphia Nay View Post
Dear Truthers: Don't try and move the goalposts and say this test was about proving which sort of paint the chips are.

Harrit, Jones et al tested the chips and said they were ~thermite.

Dr Millette has tested the chips more thoroughly and proved Harrit, Jones et al wrong.

The test proves they were not thermite. End of story.
This just seems way too straight forward. And whatever Kevin Ryan says is worthless because he had the chance to let others use his samples but didn't...nice that he's against open, independent scientific research.

Again, I wonder what Gage will say about this especially considering his good relations with Mohr. A lot of the attacks seem to rely on Mohr being deceitful.

It looks like at BEST they can get away with moving the goalposts, but that will only be accepted by the ones who already took the red pill
__________________
***My old username used to be knife fight colobus, but it was totally too long.***
-Here's my YouTube Channel where I either debate crazies (Kirk Cameron, Westboro Baptist Church, Truthers etc.) or play Zelda
-I sooo have a blog.
-The thread for discussing/reviewing and posting any 911 related debates one can find!
fourtoe 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 01:12 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2016, 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.