In the scientific world it is now up to you to disprove what he has established. Sniping and whining from the sidelines cuts no ice on this subject any more.
So accept what he says or try to rebutt it in in the traditional time-honoured way.
'Accept or rebut' is not how it works in science. Things don't pass into general acceptance overnight with one publication. Especially not when it is such a lame theory (no-one has successfully demonstrated how thermite, much less nanothermite, could even be used in a demolition like that).
Let's be clear: Even if Benthem Open was credible, getting a peer-reviewed article published isn't a set of goalposts as much as it is a hurdle. Another crucial obstacle to acceptance is getting a result independently replicated. Given that there are a whole plethora of other research labs that have been analysing WTC dust (mainly from the air quality perspective) and not one has reported any thermitic material, that one doesn't look too hopeful.
'Accept or rebut' is not how it works in science. Things don't pass into general acceptance overnight with one publication. Especially not when it is such a lame theory (no-one has successfully demonstrated how thermite, much less nanothermite, could even be used in a demolition like that).
Let's be clear: Even if Benthem Open was credible, getting a peer-reviewed article published isn't a set of goalposts as much as it is a hurdle. Another crucial obstacle to acceptance is getting a result independently replicated. Given that there are a whole plethora of other research labs that have been analysing WTC dust (mainly from the air quality perspective) and not one has reported any thermitic material, that one doesn't look too hopeful.
Interestingly the labs that performed the toxological studies of the 9/11 dust have reported finding the iron microspheres but never mentioned the red/grey chips. I find that very interesting.
Interestingly the labs that performed the toxological studies of the 9/11 dust have reported finding the iron microspheres but never mentioned the red/grey chips. I find that very interesting.
"If you want to investigate the conditions described above, you won't find anything in the media. But Google something like 'WTC7' and you will find a flood of information. There are tens of thousands of people who have a feeling something is wrong.
Interestingly the labs that performed the toxological studies of the 9/11 dust have reported finding the iron microspheres but never mentioned the red/grey chips. I find that very interesting.
FYI, iron microspheres are not a sign of thermite - there are all sorts of sources of them and they're a common sight in filter samples from urban environments the world over. It's only woomongers operating outside their fields like Jones and Harrit that jump to the wrong conclusions.
FYI, iron microspheres are not a sign of thermite - there are all sorts of sources of them and they're a common sight in filter samples from urban environments the world over. It's only woomongers operating outside their fields like Jones and Harrit that jump to the wrong conclusions.
I came across a Danish interview of Niels Harrit today, from the program 'Good Morning Denmark' April 07, 2009.
I could not believe the total rubbish that he was putting out there. Starting with a complete denial that the plane impacts and fires had anything to do with the WTC tower collapses !?! he behaved like a person untouched by reality.
The most astonishing and disturbing statements he made were these: (according to the translation)
'There has never been a forensic investigation of this event. (9/11)
No evidence has been put forward. No one has been formally charged.
The police and FBI have not charged anyone, and no-one is 'wanted'.
So who is crazy here?' He asks in response to the interviewer's question.
He seems unaware of Khalid Shiek Mohammed, who I think was at the top of the FBI's most wanted list.
And oblivious to the trial of Zacharias Mousawi, the '20th hijacker'.
He seems oblivious to a great deal of truth and reality. Must be nice being a leader in the 9/11 truth movement - you can just say whatever you like without any real evidence, and the truther cult laps it up like warm milk.
There's not much truth in 9/11 truth it seems.
I've annotated the video with my usual snide comments. Enjoy:
there isnt any
but theres evidence he organized an attack on the US involving Hijacked planes being used in kamikaze attacks on the world trade center in NY and the pentagon
a fourth mission crashed in PA when the passengers tried to retake the plane
hes not being charged with anything related to nanothermite
there isnt any
but theres evidence he organized an attack on the US involving Hijacked planes being used in kamikaze attacks on the world trade center in NY and the pentagon
a fourth mission crashed in PA when the passengers tried to retake the plane
hes not being charged with anything related to nanothermite
No, you missed it. Two months ago, a really stupid guy who pretends to be a famous scientist from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries got all hot and bothered about a bunch of frauds who published nonsense about red paint chips in a fake journal. Several people on this forum, including a materials scientist, exposed the scam. The stupid guy was too stupid to realize that he had been hoodwinked, but when asked why his heroes will never submit their fraudulent "work" to an independent lab, he clammed up.
No, KSM certainly didn't line the WTC with nanothermite. It is equally certain that nobody did.
Incorrect. A 'team of scientists' claimed to have found nano-thermite. It doesn't make it a fact and repeating it ad infinitum won't make a blind bit of difference.
I normally wouldn't bother getting on my high horse about this but the abuse of this common misconception really ticks me off. Just because something is published, doesn't make it so. You get incorrect conclusions just as much as correct ones getting through peer-review all the time and it takes much more than a single paper before something gets established as fact. In hindsight, it is easy to point fingers at seminal papers or presentations but it's not like they changed the world overnight. For example, Einstein's 1905 papers are revered as a leap forward in physics, but it's worth remembering it took decades before the general scientific community took them seriously.
General acceptance is a process that doesn't simply stop at peer-review. Independent validation of results is a crucially important step and unless that happens (which, given everything, is looking woefully unlikely), I can confidently predict that Harrit et al will forever languish in the well-populated dustbin of fringe science.
the flat earth society's website does seem a little "tongue in cheek"
ive also heard that the reason for the flat earth argument isnt the argument itself but to show that you can take any subject and debate forever without a clear winner
maybe 911 truth is the same thing and were all being fooled for the sake of an example like that, and all "truthers" are reallllly smart
i doubt it lol
also you have to think that paper was 2 months ago
time to compile a paper, have it submitted and reviewed is gonna take a while
So do you also hold the opinion that no forensic investigation has been done, or that neither police or the FBI have charged anyone connected to the crimes of 9/11?
Don't you think Harrit is just a wee bit delusional? Maybe that's the norm for truthers, I don't know. Happily I don't know many of them personally
Alien, how would you describe what a proper forensic investigation into the collapses of the three buildings in NYC on Sept. 11, 2001 would look like and do?
As for the FBI, we know that they have stated publicly that they don't have any hard evidence against Osama Bin Laden for the crimes of 911 and have not charged him for any crime related to 911. Have they formally charged anyone else in this regard?
I don't know of any police department which has charged anyone for crimes committed in relation to 911. Do you? I realize the issue really is the FBI and only answer here as it was in your question.
As for Harrit's sanity I can't judge. I can only look at the facts we have.
As for the FBI, we know that they have stated publicly that they don't have any hard evidence against Osama Bin Laden for the crimes of 911 and have not charged him for any crime related to 911. Have they formally charged anyone else in this regard?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
