Frank Greening's Latest dust study.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Let us list the number of steel frame building bought down by controlled demolition, using some type of thermite: 0

Exactly the Amount of evidence for thermite in the dust at this point.

 

[Oystein]

... aluminum in paint isn't new, ... aluminum flake metal paint ... then again aluminum based paints actually contain both aluminum and iron oxide. ... more fuel Aluminum flake paints? ...

None of the red-gray chips contain any elemental aluminium whatsoever. Your "aluminum flake metal paint" is a fantasy almost as wrong as Jones' nano-thermite hoax. I say "almost", because your are honestly wrong, while Jones is a fraud.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

It is most important is that we focus on the ‘hands-on’ findings of Dr. Harrit et al.

No peer-reviewed paper has shown that those findings are unfounded.

The big unanswered question remains; what was that, or any amount of supposedly-secure military engineered nanotechnology doing on the grounds of the World Trade Center?

I really don't have to discus the red grey chips at all until you can exp!ain, why Jones and Harrit's chips violation the law of thermal dynamics, the paper can not be taken as Science not even if it was peer reviewed by Einstein, Newton, and Maxwell themselves personally.
A paper to be valid should not violate the laws of thermal dynamics for a given mass of components.
When you explain how Harrit and Jones do this I will listen about these red Grey chips, good luck.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

None of the red-gray chips contain any elemental aluminium whatsoever. Your "aluminum flake metal paint" is a fantasy almost as wrong as Jones' nano-thermite hoax. I say "almost", because your are honestly wrong, while Jones is a fraud.

Agree Jones is a fraud, but that does not change the fact if there is any doubt, that morally and ethically I have to give it to him, even though I would rather be drawn and Quartered, or eaten by a grizzly bear.

 

[jaydeehess]

It is most important is that we focus on the ‘hands-on’ findings of Dr. Harrit et al.

No peer-reviewed paper has shown that those findings are unfounded.

The big unanswered question remains; what was that, or any amount of supposedly-secure military engineered nanotechnology doing on the grounds of the World Trade Center?

I think the implications of the Harrit paper should be explored.
So once again I ask:
What percentage of unreacted thermite would be expected, and given the concentration of unreacted thermite in the dust, what extrapolation can be made to determine a ballpark number for the quantity of thermite used in these 2 (3) buildings?
Criteria? Ziggy?

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

The red nano-thermitic material was indeed based on technology from US military labs

You may need to cast your net in wackier waters if you intend to maintain the revenue stream.

I'd go with: "The red nano-thermitic material was indeed adapted from suppressed Alien tech."

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

You may need to cast your net in wackier waters if you intend to maintain the revenue stream.

I'd go with: "The red nano-thermitic material was indeed adapted from suppressed Alien tech."

I would go broader, the Aliens did 9/11, because Bush was a reptilian over lord.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

None of the red-gray chips contain any elemental aluminium whatsoever. Your "aluminum flake metal paint" is a fantasy almost as wrong as Jones' nano-thermite hoax. I say "almost", because your are honestly wrong, while Jones is a fraud.

It also may surprise you Oystein that I agree with you none of the chips tested has shown signs of elemental aluminum, infact the energy spike from the DSC, shows the chips violate the laws of thermal dynamics for a chip containing aluminum as a major fuel source.
To much energy per mass to be a metal based fuel, and you can't get more energy from a system than it contains.
You would think that Jones being a physicist would have caught onto that.
Now can we get back to discussion of Frank's paper?
I should also point out that the Idea these samples are contaminated, is theory, unsubstanciated and that because of the time factor, first collected and bagged the samples may be less contaminated, than any other sample collected.
If as such they are uncontaminated, durring the event samples, then they totally falsify the fly ash theory, and RJ. Lee's 2012 Letter.
As well as the theories of Controller demolition, in World Trade Center 2.
Does anyone have any objection to viewing the paper on it's scientific contents?

 

[jaydeehess]

I think the implications of the Harrit paper should be explored.
So once again I ask:
What percentage of unreacted thermite would be expected, and given the concentration of unreacted thermite in the dust, what extrapolation can be made to determine a ballpark number for the quantity of thermite used in these 2 (3) buildings?
Criteria? Ziggy?

Since the proponents of "thermite in the towers" can't or won't deign to address this, can anyone else help me out?

The dust sample contained, supposedly, these red/gray chips which are leftover, unreacted termite.
What percentage of a thermite load would not remain unreacted?
Multiply that by the percentage of dust that would contain this material and mulitply by the total amount of dust to arrive at the total leftover amount. Solve for total loaded into the buildings.

Above we learn that another dust sample is from a time period between tower collapses. If we could learn the concentration of any marker material in that dust and in dust from post wtc1 collapse then we can determine how much of that marker material is from each collapse and make good estimates on how much are pre911 and irrelevant.

Here's the thing that bothers me; if we use this data to come up with a ridiculously large amount of thermite in the buildings then it points to this as a stupid theory.

If as we might expect, only a small fraction of thermite fails to react and thermite is proposed to have been in all of the several samples Harrit used, then it points
If a large amount would be expected to remain unreacted then it points to a very very unreliable compound and one wonders about the competence of the person who devised this plot

 

[Criteria]

”What percentage of a thermite load would not remain unreacted?”

You ask for gross speculation to answer an irrelevant and unanswerable question.

Zero nano-thermite should have been found in the dust!

 

[GlennB]

You ask for gross speculation to answer an irrelevant and unanswerable question.

Zero nano-thermite should have been found in the dust!

That's right, and none ever has been.