• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

WTC Dust Study Feb 29, 2012 by Dr. James Millette

Steen Svanholm said:
Hi Oystein

You said: "You are correct that surely the iron would oxidize fast, but I doubt it would oxidize completely."

My point was if it would oxidize enough to not be disinguishable from any iron oxide sphere.

But I guess from Ivans answer that even elemental iron residue from an actual thermitic reaction is difficult to distinguish from other iron oxide spheres.

Thus, it is a much better proof to perform the reaction in an inert gas.

Kindly,
Steen
Click to expand...

Absolutely, and of course.
Don't forget that in order to prove that iron was produced, you must have first shown that no iron was present - difficult to do when you don't analyse your gray iron/iron oxide layer and always have it present
Don't forget that in order to prove that any produced iron came from thermite reaction, you must also show that Al turned into Al oxide, and rule out other reactions.
Don't forget that more than half the mass of the red layer is organic matrix, with millions of possible reactions occurring.

So even if you manage to prove elemental iron, you haven't proven thermite yet.


By the way: Now that Ivan linked to the Tillotson and Gash paper, take a close look at its Fig. 4 - the PXRD result:

TG_Fig4_with_Al-Fe2O3.png


I inserted four values for the four interesting compounds, which I retrieved from the following XRD database:
http://webmineral.com/MySQL/xray.php
Type "Fe", "Al", "Fe2O3", "Al2O3" into the search field "Element", and look for the value in round parentheses in the first column of the search result. That's the main value for "Two Theta" that's plotted on the x-axis in Figure 4.

As you can see, the peaks at Two Theta for Fe and Al2O3 are very prominent (although the graph seems shifted right by 2 or three pixels), but there is nothing at the Two Theta values for Al and Fe2O3.

So this shows that not only did Tillotson and Gash find the expected thermite reaction products, it also shows that the reactants are mostly gone. Remember T&G knew exactly that their material contained 90% thermite (ca. 23% Al, ca. 67% Fe2O3, if they aimed at a stoichiometric mix - the rest organic residue of the gel process), so there is their proof that thermite changed into thermite products - all four substances are accounted for.

Contrast this to Harrit e.al. who
- did not prove metallic Al before the DSC test
- did not prove Al2O3 after the DSC test
- did not prove absence of metallic Fe before the DSC test
- only have vague evidence of some possible metallic Fe after the reaction
All they have is some proportion (of unknown quantitiy) of iron oxide before the test - AND they also have some proportion (again, of unknown quantity) of iron oxide after the test, so they
- did not prove that Fe2O3 was reduced during the test


Steen, it's good that you try to understand fine details, and what difference different test protocols would make. But there is so much more that they would have to change about their test designe to make definitive about thermite or no thermite!
 
Hi Pgimeno

Thanks for your response.

You may be right that the Jones thread is more appropriate. I chose this since I previously got useful answers about the same subject.

Perhaps I or we should start a thread for "technical beginners" like myself in the nano-thermite filed :-)

And yet, it is not completely irrelevant here, either, since my questions relate to Millette's conclusion that no (or not sufficient) Al was present in the test samples, seeing that this increases the burden of proof on Harrit.

I will have your suggstion in mind, thanks.

Kindly,
Steen
 
Hi again Oystein

Thanks again for a useful answer. I notice that you do an effort of explaining things on my layman's level. I appreciate this patience of yours very much.

Especially, bullet point overviews like these are useful to me:

"Contrast this to Harrit e.al. who
- did not prove metallic Al before the DSC test
- did not prove Al2O3 after the DSC test
- did not prove absence of metallic Fe before the DSC test
- only have vague evidence of some possible metallic Fe after the reaction
All they have is some proportion (of unknown quantitiy) of iron oxide before the test - AND they also have some proportion (again, of unknown quantity) of iron oxide after the test, so they
- did not prove that Fe2O3 was reduced during the test"

I need those for the regular truther debates here in DK, I participate in.

I am also aware that many other aspects of the "nano report" are quite problematic and would need to be tested otherwise. But everything has a season within debates and right now, the micro spheres are hot, mind the pun.

Kindly,
Steen
 
Ivan Kminek said:
Chris (and all):

Here is a photo of floor trusses stored in some large/tall hall.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=960&pictureid=7064[/qimg]

Hangar 17? Could anyone help to identify this place?
Click to expand...
Hi Ivan and all,

In our search for a known LaClede primer sample, I copied this picture and sent it to NIST people, who referred me to the Port Authority, who referred me to Nancy Johnson, who has written to me twice, "Chris, the Port Authority does not have possession of this or any similar WTC steel." We seem to be at a dead end. In any event, I am wondering if the very best sample would not be from the WTC steel anyway, but a known sample from one of those collectors of samples of particles (some of these scientists have collections of dust or chips or whatever numbering in the hundreds of thousands and use them for forensic analysis). But to my knowledge, even Millette has been unable to find anyone with a LaClede primer sample when asking people for them at the conferences where he gave a lecture on his dust study. I'm not sure if any other leads exist.
 
chrismohr said:
Hi Ivan and all,

In our search for a known LaClede primer sample, I copied this picture and sent it to NIST people, who referred me to the Port Authority, who referred me to Nancy Johnson, who has written to me twice, "Chris, the Port Authority does not have possession of this or any similar WTC steel." We seem to be at a dead end. In any event, I am wondering if the very best sample would not be from the WTC steel anyway, but a known sample from one of those collectors of samples of particles (some of these scientists have collections of dust or chips or whatever numbering in the hundreds of thousands and use them for forensic analysis). But to my knowledge, even Millette has been unable to find anyone with a LaClede primer sample when asking people for them at the conferences where he gave a lecture on his dust study. I'm not sure if any other leads exist.
Click to expand...

Well... thanks anyway, Chris:cool:
But Port Authority still should store "WTC meteorite/s", isn't it so? Those objects should contain some floor trusses remains, according to photos...

I doubt that any collector owns any piece of trusses, which can be unambigously identified.

Otherwise, since your inquiries to authorities/companies are being at least answered, you (or Jim Millette) may send some inquiry to electrocoating division of PPG industries, here.

Some questions can be:
- Had you manufactured red primer (formula LREP-10001) for electrocoating of WTC1/2 floor trusses?
- If yes, had been the same primer applied in some other buildings/constructions?
- Do you keep some samples of this paint?
(- My additional question: Is it possible that strontium chromate originally present in the primer was partially/completely depleted during course of time (forty years?)

But, the chance that such inquiry would lead to some really fruitful results/info is not really high, I think:confused:
 
Last edited:
Too bad, Chris :(

One work-around (in German, one would call it a "crutch") might be to just recreate the paint according to the recipe that we know. Problem of course would be that fresh paint might behave differently than aged paint. This would at least be interesting to test / compare thermal behaviour, if Millette plans to do thermal tests (not necessarily DSC - just some heating and burning to see if any spheres form)
 
Over in the Mark-Basile-Thread, I just posted excerpts from my (yet unfinished) transcript of a recent interview Mark gave. In it, he acknowledges that "The vast majority of [red chips pulled from WTC dust] actually are primer paint".

Frank Legge, too, has already acknowledged in writing (I'll write about that later) that some red-gray chips are paint. And Jones, likewise, has suggested that Millette may have looked at the "wrong" chips.

So their line of defense clearly is "we admit there is primer paint, but there is also nano-thermite, and Millette picked the wrong chips" (and they'll add that this was evil, deliberate deception by this creepy tool of the NWO overlords, or some such nonsense).

Which means we should get them to commit to a method on how to select the right chips - before destroying by fire of course.
And specifically, ask: How did Jeff Farrer select the chips he tested in the DSC?

They should give us an exact protocol of steps to follow. This was asked of Frank Legge - and he ran away. I asked this of Mark Basile - no reply yet. Someone asked Steven Jones - I haven't heard of an answer yet.
(Better yet, they should give us chips - and we know that Kevin Ryan ran away from that)
 
Last edited:
Oystein said:
"Over in the Mark-Basile-Thread, I just posted excerpts from my (yet unfinished) transcript of a recent interview Mark gave. In it, he acknowledges that "The vast majority of [red chips pulled from WTC dust] actually are primer paint".

Frank Legge, too, has already acknowledged in writing (I'll write about that later) that some red-gray chips are paint. And Jones, likewise, has suggested that Millette may have looked at the "wrong" chips.

So their line of defense clearly is "we admit there is primer paint, but there is also nano-thermite, and Millette picked the wrong chips" (and they'll add that this was evil, deliberate deception by this creepy tool of the NWO overlords, or some such nonsense).

Which means we should get them to commit to a method on how to select the right chips - before destroying by fire of course.
And specifically, ask: How did Jeff Farrer select the chips he tested in the DSC?

They should give us an exact protocol of steps to follow. This was asked of Frank Legge - and he ran away. I asked this of Mark Basile - no reply yet. Someone asked Steven Jones - I haven't heard of an answer yet.
(Better yet, they should give us chips - and we know that Kevin Ryan ran away from that)"
Click to expand...

Well I looked at your so-called "money quotes".

You are mining fool's gold.

The Bentham Paper authors have never denied the existence of other primer paints.

They acknowledge the obvious, the dust is the residue of everything that made up the WTC on 9/11.

No one questions that steel primer paint is usually red, so do you believe the scientists would not expect to find red steel primer paints in the WTC dust?

Dr. Jones as you know looked at primer paint samples.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
...
The Bentham Paper authors have never denied the existence of other primer paints.

They acknowledge the obvious, the dust is the residue of everything that made up the WTC on 9/11.

No one questions that steel primer paint is usually red, so do you believe the scientists would not expect to find red steel primer paints in the WTC dust?
Click to expand...
Ok, then you can surely explain to Dr. Millette how to separate thermitic chips from paint chips and thus select the thermitic chips?
And explain, in actionable detail, what Millette did wrong when he selected his chips?

In other words: Please give us a step-by-step recipe to detect and select thermitic chips from a bag of WTC dust.

Miragememories said:
Dr. Jones as you know looked at primer paint samples.
...
Click to expand...
Yes - and what did he conclude about the red-gray chips?
 
LSSBB said:
Here's a piece, not sure if it has the primer. Pretty close to home for me:

Oak Forest Now Home to 9/11 Steel Beam
Click to expand...

Another option would be to possibly reach out to Chrissy Maher to see what the process was exactly. She said it was rather difficult, and she might not have any desire to help, but one could try. I wouldn't have an issue contacting her if need be. She said it was rough but maybe a contact of hers could point us in the right direction.
 
Miragememories said:
... Dr. Jones as you know looked at primer paint samples.

MM
Click to expand...
He looked at Christ in the New World, both studies will not change perpetual failure, the product of 911 truth.

Bad for Jones there is no Pulitzer Prize for fooling people, spreading lies of thermite destroying WTC 1 and 2. Jones would be a winner.

Ironic, but expected, no one can use science to help Jones.
 
LSSBB said:
Here's a piece, not sure if it has the primer. Pretty close to home for me:

Oak Forest Now Home to 9/11 Steel Beam
Click to expand...

Whereas this memorial again does not contain floor trusses, you reminded me that hypothetically, some of the numerous memorials/sculptures may perhaps contain some little pieces of trusses still attached to the floor trusses connectors (many of connectors are depicted in NIST NCSTAR 1-3a).
But it's not very probable, since even in the NCSTAR 1-3a report, no pieces of floor trusses are clearly visible.

Here are some more interesting 911 memorials (I mean interesting from our specific point of view:cool:)

Memorial in Saratoga Springs:

picture.php


Memorial in "Christ Church", another view:

picture.php


Planned memorial in London:

picture.php
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom