Dave,
The only person who will be capable of "baffling 'em with BS" is Harritt.
I'd suggest hammering home 3 points re: Farrer, Harrit, et al.
1. Why did they invent their own,
NON-conclusive test methods (that just reveals elements), when there are cheap (about $70/sample), conclusive tests (X-ray diffraction, that reveals the pre- & post-reaction compounds) for thermite that are done routinely by qualified forensic labs all around the country (for arson cases)?
2. Not one of the Farrer, Harrit, Jones et al authors had ever performed a single forensic analysis for thermite prior to this paper. They are all amateurs
in this specific field.
Don't let Harrit claim that his other, unrelated photo-chemistry background makes him an expert in this field.
The very fact that he - as the researcher with the most closely related experience - sanctioned the use of inconclusive (i.e., "incompetent") test method, when there are cheap, conclusive tests readily available, proves that he's not an expert!
3. Lots of scientific reports are simply sloppy &/or wrong. They fade into oblivion when others attempt to replicate them, but fail. Or, far more commonly, when real experts look at the report, immediately realize that it's incompetent, and simply ignore it. Which is exactly what has happened to Ferrar, Harrit et al.
So the true test of validity of any scientific testing is not the original work, but rather independent, competent replication & confirmation of the original work.
It's now been (3? 4?) years since Jones, Harrit et al began their "thermite chips" work. Where is the independent confirmation?
Given 1) incompetent methodology & 2) amateur status of authors, & 3) lack of independent, competent confirmation, Farrer, Harrit et al. is a non-entity.
Don't let him hijack the discussion into techno-babble. Move on to the next topic. Tell him to get back to you once somebody competent has published something that matters.
Tom
PS. The absolute, 100% proof that there was no thermite used is the complete absence of any "thermite cut" columns in the debris. All the columns were in their as-manufactured 3 story lengths. (With a small number of 1 & 2 story lengths immediately below & above the mechanical floors).
This proof has not been destroyed, shipped off to China, melted down, etc. It exists today in the tens of thousands of publicly available photographs of the rubble pile.
If, as Steven Jones has
stated explicitly (see pg 23 of that doc or
this video), a significant percent of the columns on every floor were cut, then somewhere between 1/4 & 3/4th of all the column remnants in the debris pile would have to have "cut" or "blown apart" into 1 story lengths.
None of these short stubs are visible.
All of these cut columns would have clearly visible damage to their ends characteristic of the cutting method used. If Jones et al had managed to cut a sample vertical column using thermite, you'd be able identify the cut from 20' away visually. Or from 1/2 mile away (with a telephoto lens).
I've poured over hundreds of hi-res photos from ground zero. I've not found a single one of the 10s of thousands of columns which has any of these clearly visible features.
Where are the tens of thousands of cut columns in the rubble pile?
Where are the tens of thousands of ragged melted or exploded ends?
Note that the above (IMO, conclusive) argument against thermite applies as well to any type of explosive.
