I continue being right: You are always wrong about almost everything.
Here again:
Given the time to look through this more carefully, I can see where you are attempting to perpetuate a self-serving lie and that I was correct about the 10 keV and 20 keV usages.
The normal EDX spectrum shown above is from Fig.(7) of the 2009 Dr. Harrit et al paper: Active Thermitic Material Found in WTC Dust.
”XEDS maps of the cross-section surface of the red layer were acquired at a beam energy of 10 keV”
[snipped the rest of this deeply embarrassing FAILure]
You took time out of your busy day to get something wrong that you had already corrected. Because you totally FAIL at reading comprehension. So sad!
The quoted sentence "
XEDS maps of the cross-section surface of the red layer were acquired at a beam energy of 10 kV." on page 12 applies to (I highlighted the bit you failed to comprehend) the XEDS
maps that are shown in Figure 10 - indeed the quoted text continues right away thusly: "
The acquisition area of the maps is shown by the BSE image in Fig. (10a). The XEDS maps, several of which are shown in Fig. (10b-f)". Do you see that? 10 keV applies to Figure 10. Not Figure 7. Because, you see, on page 9, Harrit et al explain quite clearly:
"
Operating conditions for the acquired XEDS spectra were 20 keV beam energy (unless otherwise specified) and 40-120 second acquisition time (livetime). XEDS maps were acquired using the same system at a beam energy of 10 keV."
So you see, XEDS
maps (Figures 10 and 15) were done at 10 keV, but XEDS
spectra at 20 keV - unless otherwise specified.
Figure 7 is NOT an XEDS map. It is merely 4 XEDS
spectra. Thus the 20 keV applies - because nothing is otherwisely stated.
So please acknowledge explicitly at this time:
- Figure 7a in "Active Thermitic Material..." and Figure 5b in "Why the Red/Gray Paint Chips..." show the exact same XEDS spectrum, won at 20 keV, and I, Criteria, was foolishly wrong to return to the stupid claim one was done at 10 keV.
- Harrit found traces of strontium and chromium.
- Farrer found traces of strontium and chromium.
- Finding strontium and chromium is consistent with, and is predicted from, the LaClede theory.

Dr. Harrit writes that; “Before measurement, the chips were broken (with one exception to be discussed below) in order to secure a fresh uncontaminated surface from which the SEM XEDS was obtained.
NONE of these SEM XEDS spectra, taken from four independently collected samples, showed signals from either zinc, chromium or magnesium in intensities significantly above the baseline noise.”
MUUURRRRP!
They all show minute signals of chromium - Harrit et all consciously, and perhaps fraudulently, elected to remove the label "Cr" from its rightful position at 5.4 keV (
K-alpha of Cr).

In captioning Figure 5, Dr. Harrit states that the right side (20 keV XEDS) spectra for chip (a); “The same spectrum as in frame (a) with intensity (vertical) and horizontal scales expanded. Minute signals in level with the noise are observed from sulfur, calcium, chromium and strontium. “
Your formatting for emphasise is strangely chosen. Here ist the correct emphasise:
“The same spectrum as in frame (a) with intensity (vertical) and horizontal scales expanded. Minute
signals in level with the noise are observed from sulfur, calcium, chromium and strontium. “
He clearly states that there are
signals for strontium (two in fact),
signals (2) for chromium,
signals (2) for calcium, and a
signal for sulfur.
"Signal" is still the opposite of noise.
"In level with noise" is not equivalent to "it is noise", nor is it equivalent to "it isn't signal". The only thing it means is "
I, Niels Harrit, see that there are actually signals, but I am too dumb and unexperienced to make sense of them, so I'll add a little vague talk to fool the gullible, like Criteria, into believing they are not there because we don't want to see them".
You need to acknowledge at this time, explicitly, that Harrit is correct:
- There are signals of strontium in Figure 7a / 5b
The signal is "minute" alright, indicating that there is only a "trace" of strontium - precisely as would be expected from LaClede paint chips, which were spedified to contain about 1% of strontium chromate by weight.
*

His point is well taken. When doubled from 10 keV to 20 keV, the noise is amplified and it becomes clear that the minute signals for “sulfur, calcium, chromium and strontium” are not discernible from the signals that are only noise.
They are not easily discernibly by eyesight, and certainly not to such unexperienced observes such as yourself, or Dr. Harrit or Dr. Jones, who are amateurs, absolute beginners, in this.
But they are discernible by the software that comes with the XEDS equipement and that runs statistical analysis on the complete raw data. It automatically put the labels "Sr" (twice), "Cr" (twice), "Ca" (twice), and "S" (once) there because it detected statistically significant
signals for these four elements.
Harrit truthfully reports these
signals in his whitepaper, and correctly calls them "
signals", which you need to acknowledge explicitly at this time.

What lie?
Figure 5 is not Fig. (7).
Figure 5 includes Fig. (7).
It compares chip (a) SEM XEDS (fig. (7) from “Harrit et al” [Active Thermitic Material Found in WTC Dust] on the left top and taken beam energy 10 keV) to SEM XEDS of chip (a) taken beam energy 20 keV.
The lie that you repeat again, now citing your inept, FAILED reading of Harrit et al., that the spectra in 5a/7a and 5b were taken at different (10 and 20 keV) beam energies.
I already quoted Harrit's own caption of Figure 5 of "Why..." to you. Here the relevant bit:
"Right: The same spectrum as in frame (a)"
I put a little emphasise to the important word - that both 5a and 5b show the SAME spectrum. The one done at 20 keV beam energy. Which you need to acknowledge at this time.
* Footnote: Actually, the K-alpha and K-Beta signals for
Strontium at 14.2/15.8 keV respectively are so minute because all signal levels beyond 10 keV fall to minute levels when beam energy is 20 keV. There would be quite a major signal at about 1.8 keV, the Sr L-alpha, if it weren't for the large signals for Si at 1.74 and 1.83 keV (
K-alpha and K-beta os silicon, respectively), which bury the strontium L-alpha and L-beta. If you take a close look at Figure 7, you can see in (a), (b) and (d) quite clearly, and in (c) less clearly, that the right "shoulder" or slope of the Si-peak is wider, less steep than its left shoulder. This would be expected from the presence of some Strontium, which peaks very lightly to the right of Silicon, and thus adds to the right side of the Si-peak.
