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

[chrismohr]

Chris why do it?

How far do you want to follow these clowns?

I recall at the start of your video series and/or the Millette study cautioning about the need to draw the line in the sand. How would you or we know when we had gone far enough? And how would the line get drawn?

I think we are past that point. Obviously you don't.

So do you think that a line should be drawn at some stage?

When?

I actually have a goalpost in mind here but will keep it to myself for now. Obviously I have gone way way beyond what any normal person would do when confronting a belief that fails to stand up to scientific scrutiny over and over again. I have even gone way beyond my own originally stated goal, as you have said. But I enjoy asking an open-ended question like the quote from Harrit about Iron proving thermite. I knew that couldn't possibly be true but asking it on this forum gave me some very clear answers.

Bottom line I'm still having fun. Beachnut I hope you were kidding when you asked me if I was paid to debate Gage. I've gotten that accusation from the 9/11 Truth side, people who think I'm being paid by the government. No one is paying me nothing from either side. Cheers all!

 

[grandmastershek]

the "bentham team" actually did the work [without including anyone competent in the field to assist them], did get peer-reviewed [in a fake journal that used someone already in agreeance with them] , and have never been debunked by anyone [aside from just about anyone who has chimed in on the subject]!

Mm

ftfy

 

[Africanus]

Niels Harrit: "any material producing elemental iron from iron oxide must be thermitic." Is this true?

Chris, could you please provide a reference for this quote? It seems to be quite weird to me.

 

[jtl]

Mohr: Niels Harrit: "any material producing elemental iron from iron oxide must be thermitic." Is this true?

Why don´t you go talk to that independent chemist we mentioned before? Your buddies here treat you like a mushroom and it is starting to go beyond being funny to being sad.

Harrit is telling you the most basic truth, and this is the reason why I tried to get you to talk to a chemist to learn about the basic premise of Harrit´s paper, the thermite reaction:

Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide that produces an exothermic oxidation-reduction reaction known as a thermite reaction. If aluminium is the reducing agent it is called an aluminothermic reaction. Most varieties are not explosive, but can create bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small area for a short period of time

.

This is why Harrit´s paper focuses on identifying iron-oxide in the composition of the chips before ignition and reduced iron after igniton, because the definition for this INTERNAL process is "thermite reaction". Notice that the source for the heat and energy is not external, but the internal reaction of two metals.

In their desperation or ignorance, your buddies try to confuse you with an external reduction process, where some kind of external combustion furnace is used to heat iron-oxide to reduce it. As we have been through before, you also don´t actually get pure iron this way, as discussed around page 43 and thereabouts. And I repeat what I told you then:

Mohr, first of all notice my responses to Sunstealer about his blast furnace and bloomery theories, low temp carbon reduction etc. Also go back to my responses to his assertion that Millette identified Tnemec when Millette actually says the opposite. I want you to realize that if any of you would give such misleading information in a scientific paper you could be in serious trouble, even facing charges of fraud, if the paper actually passed peer review which is unlikely.

It don´t know if you noticed that your buddies like to use words like "kooks", "clowns" and "charlatans" to describe Harrit et al, and pretty much all "truthers", but you should realize that one actually uses such words for anonymous forum trolls that call scientists names, repeat misleading woo-woo, and are incapable of refuting scientific papers with actual published research.

confronting a belief that fails to stand up to scientific scrutiny over and over again....quote from Harrit about Iron proving thermite. I knew that couldn't possibly be true but asking it on this forum gave me some very clear answers.

Yeah right, you have admitted you do not understand the chemistry involved, but yet you "KNEW" that it could not POSSIBLY be true.

If I had to use the same kind of language your buddies use, I would be forced to use some really colorful words for you and your buddies

 

[beachnut]

I actually have a goalpost in mind here but will keep it to myself for now. Obviously I have gone way way beyond what any normal person would do when confronting a belief that fails to stand up to scientific scrutiny over and over again. I have even gone way beyond my own originally stated goal, as you have said. But I enjoy asking an open-ended question like the quote from Harrit about Iron proving thermite. I knew that couldn't possibly be true but asking it on this forum gave me some very clear answers.

Bottom line I'm still having fun. Beachnut I hope you were kidding when you asked me if I was paid to debate Gage. I've gotten that accusation from the 9/11 Truth side, people who think I'm being paid by the government. No one is paying me nothing from either side. Cheers all!

Gage doesn't pay you? Who is paying you to suffer the woo? I am kidding; that would be a weak story MacGuffin/plot, rarely used.

You can't debate someone's fantasy; you will be in a Gish Gallop, goal post moving contest. Although I won a debate supporting Santa Claus with my 12 year old daughter, when she was about to spread the debate to her little sisters - it was an easy win to prove Santa was real.

It will be harder to stop Gage, Jones and Harrit spreading fantasy; they may be insane on the issue unable to give up their position, or they know it is fake, and they are playing the game. That is my interest, do they know they are liars, or are they insane on this issue? A question that may never be answered.

Good luck - happy Monday, aHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHh

Why don´t you go talk to that independent chemist we ...
It don´t know if you noticed that your buddies like to use words like "kooks", "clowns" and "charlatans" to describe Harrit et al, and pretty much all "truthers", ... you and your buddies

There was no thermite used on 911. This means Harrit is spreading lies. That makes Harrit a liar. Jones made up the story thermite was used on 911. That is a fantasy. Jones is spreading a fantasy about thermite, and there is nothing you can do but complain he called nuts for spreading a fantasy. Jones is very personable, but he spreads a fantasy, a lie. Gage repeats crazy claims made by Harrit and Jones. Your buddies spread lies based on fantasy. How can they be more anti-intellectual on 911 issues?

The real truthers are not your buddies, they spread lies. good luck

Millette found no thermite, Harrit lied and said they found thermite, but they found dust. We have rational Millette, and someone who lies about their findings. You have the liars, "we" have the truth. Ironic you are in 911 truth, but you have fantasy and lies. Truth?

Funnier, you have not found a real chemist who can explain why Jones' paper failed at the conclusion. Figured out DSC yet? Or why their samples don't match the energy output for thermite? Cat got your chemistry? Wow, you googled thermite, but you can't figure out Harrit's conclusion is fake. Funniest, the reduced iron after the "vermiculite" like dust burned was iron oxide and other stuff you get from fire burning dust. How do you spread this much BS, and then accuse Chris of the same; it is called projecting. Why is 911 truth so darn gullible?

 

[ozeco41]

I actually have a goalpost in mind here but will keep it to myself for now. Obviously I have gone way way beyond what any normal person would do when confronting a belief that fails to stand up to scientific scrutiny over and over again. I have even gone way beyond my own originally stated goal, as you have said. But I enjoy asking an open-ended question like the quote from Harrit about Iron proving thermite. I knew that couldn't possibly be true but asking it on this forum gave me some very clear answers.

Bottom line I'm still having fun. ....

Thanks Chris - I'll try to curb my impatience.

 

[jtl]

Mohr: Here's a variation on an interesting challenge from Niels Harrit: has anyone demonstrated formation of iron rich spheres from heating up primer paint painted on steel or iron chips?

A variation? This IS the challenge. Harrit´s paper from 2009, page 28, in plain English:

To merit consideration, any assertion that a prosaic sub-
stance such as paint could match the characteristics we have
described would have to be accompanied by empirical dem-
onstration using a sample of the proposed material, including
SEM/XEDS and DSC analyses.

The next question is very interesting:

Is this something Ivan or anyone else here can do?

Why have you not asked this question here before? What did Millette say when you asked him?

Do you understand that so far the answer to your question and Harrit´s challenge is "no"?

 

[beachnut]

A variation? This IS the challenge. Harrit´s paper from 2009, page 28, in plain English:

Why have you not asked this question here before? What did Millette say when you asked him? ...

Harrit says...

To merit consideration, any assertion that a prosaic substance such as paint could match the characteristics we have described would have to be accompanied by empirical demonstration using a sample of the proposed material, including SEM/XEDS and DSC analyses.

Why DSC? Does this mean Harrit has no clue what DSC is? Does he know he did not find thermite? No, he has a fantasy, and lives in a fantasy world as it pertains to 911.

It is funny, the DSC for the dust samples do not match thermite. How does Harrit explain that? He can't because he has no clue. Clueless, or he expects the standard 911 truth is incapable of seeing the difference, and is completely free of science, and chemistry.

... Do you understand that so far the answer to your question and Harrit´s challenge is "no"?

Harrit is debunked on 911, by fire and collapse, yet he makes up lies.

Iron Micro-spheres in the Context of the World Trade Center Dust
Well, let’s start with the basics. The World Trade Center was a building with many iron‐based components. There were structural components such as beams and electrical conduit. There were building contents such as desks and file cabinets.

Now, the building is hit by two jet airplanes resulting in a fire fed by jet fuel. The electrical system is compromised resulting in high voltage, high amperage electrical arcing between the wires and the conduit. The fire is in a building with a central core of elevator shafts that act like a chimney efficiently providing the oxygen needed for combustion. The air and other gasses are flowing with hurricane force speeds. The fire is sufficiently hot to exceed the plastic strength of the structural steel and the building collapses.

What about the iron microspheres? The iron has a thin layer of rust flakes that can be easily removed by sticky tape. The iron is heated red hot or hotter and subjected to hurricane force blast furnace like wind. The iron flakes are liberated as small particles and some iron is vaporized. Like drops of water, the iron flakes form molten spheres that solidify and the fume also condenses into spheres, the most efficient geometrical form. Incidentally, iron is not the only material that formed spheres during the event. Some building material is made of minerals containing aluminum and silicon and alumino‐silicate spheres were also observed in the dust.

The formation of iron and other type spheres at temperatures obtainable by the combustion of petroleum or coal based fuels is not a new or unique process. These spheres are the same as iron and alumino‐silicate spheres in the well‐studied fly ash formed from contaminants in coal as it is burned in furnaces.
Rich Lee

Iron spheres were expected in the WTC fires and collapse, Harrit hopes 911 truth followers will not upset his fantasy, and remain gullible. 911 truth survives by new gullible people "signing up" and the rational waking up and leaving, upset they were fooled by the lies.

Millette can't find thermite when there was no thermite used on 911. What happened, can't anyone in 911 truth google DSC? They figured out thermite is real, so they trust nuts like Jones and Harrit, but can't do anything to stop the delusion of the inside job, etc.

You are not reading the thread, you could learn Harrit is not telling the truth if you tried.

 

[chrismohr]

Chris, could you please provide a reference for this quote? It seems to be quite weird to me.

For now let's give Harrit the benefit of the doubt and assume he can't mean that thermite was used in the making of iron for 2000 years! Let's assume rather that he means that the reaction itself when the red-grey chips were heated created iron-rich spheres and that means thermite.

 

[beachnut]

For now let's give Harrit the benefit of the doubt and assume he can't mean that thermite was used in the making of iron for 2000 years! Let's assume rather that he means that the reaction itself when the red-grey chips were heated created iron-rich spheres and that means thermite.

There is no doubt Harrit has a fantasy on 911.

The fact is iron is still made now, makes his catch all gish gallop false. In addition, the iron spheres were not pure Fe. When you "debate" him you need a ref to herd in the gish gallop of BS.

Where did the quote come from? Email?

 

[chrismohr]

There is no doubt Harrit has a fantasy on 911.

The fact is iron is still made now, makes his catch all gish gallop false. In addition, the iron spheres were not pure Fe. When you "debate" him you need a ref to herd in the gish gallop of BS.

Where did the quote come from? Email?

It came from a private email. But for years he has been saying regular paint doesn't create iron microspheres when heated.

 

[beachnut]

It came from a private email. But for years he has been saying regular paint doesn't create iron micro-spheres when heated.

Thanks. So paint can't have Fe in it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZ9wSD4Hcys


http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...agazines-science-of-controlled-demolitions/3/

Has Jeremy R. Hammond changed his mind yet? Why is he not doing anything with his inside job knowledge. It is crime to know 911 was an inside job and withhold evidence in a mass murder. Wait, Hammond has hearsay and crazy 911 truth science. I can't believe he can publish stuff that stupid.

Project Censored Award for Outstanding Investigative Journalism 2010, wow, he got an award from a group which hosted Jones fantasy as being possible.
http://www.illinoistimes.com/Springfield/article-4202-over-the-line.html
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/apps/p...c=pg&AID=/20061104/NEWS/611040304/1033/NEWS01
It looks like Project Censored can't do science to save their reputation - Project Censored should have listened to the Department of Physics and Astronomy at SSU. When I did projects with thousands of people attending, I did my homework, 16 hour word days, Project Censored didn't.

He took the eutectic and says it can't form in a office fire when the study says it formed at 1000C and less. He can't comprehend the eutectic, so he trusts 911 truth nuts to think for him. Ignorance is personified by Hammond on 911 issues. His stupid article hurts, I am taking a few aspirins. I know it is old, has he become rational yet?

 

[Redwood]

................

This is why Harrit´s paper focuses on identifying iron-oxide in the composition of the chips before ignition and reduced iron after igniton, because the definition for this INTERNAL process is "thermite reaction". Notice that the source for the heat and energy is not external, but the internal reaction of two metals.

In their desperation or ignorance, your buddies try to confuse you with an external reduction process, where some kind of external combustion furnace is used to heat iron-oxide to reduce it. As we have been through before, you also don´t actually get pure iron this way, as discussed around page 43 and thereabouts.

Where has Harrit ever claimed, much less published any data, that indicate that pure iron was produced? Is it XRD? XEDS? Since he claims to have at least 20 liters of dust, he shouldn't have any problem getting a sufficiently large sample. As an acolyte, you must have citations at your fingertips.

Mohr, first of all notice my responses to Sunstealer about his blast furnace and bloomery theories, low temp carbon reduction etc. Also go back to my responses to his assertion that Millette identified Tnemec when Millette actually says the opposite. I want you to realize that if any of you would give such misleading information in a scientific paper you could be in serious trouble, even facing charges of fraud, if the paper actually passed peer review which is unlikely.

Fraud? I don't think you know what it means.

 

[jtl]

Mohr: For now let's give Harrit the benefit of the doubt and assume he can't mean that thermite was used in the making of iron for 2000 years! Let's assume rather that he means that the reaction itself when the red-grey chips were heated created iron-rich spheres and that means thermite.

Oh my goodness, a lot of people have been giving you the benefit of doubt but you cannot hide no Mohr(sorry for the pun)that you really do not understand the thermite thing at all.

I am sorry for my comment before, when I suggested to Kminek that you and Millette together took him "for a ride"(and everyone else that contributed to the study), it is now obvious that Millette took you for a ride, and maybe it was even one of your "buddies" here that brought you to Millette. Perhaps one of those anonymous ones that like to peddle woo-woo and call Harrit et al names?

What a mess, but you can probably get your money back from Millette and maybe support someone else that is willing to do the ignition tests. Maybe Basile since everyone, even Oystein, seems to agree that he is capable and honest.

 

[beachnut]

Frustrated 911 truth; runs out of "evidence", aka, hearsay

Oh my goodness, a lot of people have been giving you the benefit of doubt but you cannot hide no Mohr(sorry for the pun)that you really do not understand the thermite thing at all.

Where is the evidence for thermite? You seem to of run out of hearsay, and fantasy. When you should be providing evidence, you make puns.

I am sorry for my comment before, when I suggested to Kminek that you and Millette together took him "for a ride"(and everyone ... your "buddies" here that brought you to Millette. Perhaps one of those anonymous ones that like to peddle woo-woo and call Harrit et al names?

Harrit is a nut on 911, but don't worry, your hero might not be nuts on other topics.
What do you call someone who lies about 911? I call him a nut because he did not produce evidence for thermite, he ignored the evidence.

What a mess, but you can probably get your money back from Millette and maybe support someone else that is willing to do the ignition tests. Maybe Basile since everyone, even Oystein, seems to agree that he is capable and honest.

DSC from the paper you support with talk did not match thermite. Simple pattern recognition. I asked some 5 year old kids if they matched, they said no match. Then I showed them the energy chart. They said they did not match.

5 year olds debunk Harrit - 911 truth followers failed.

Summary of findings - Harrit was wrong, Millette was right. Why? Because on 911 not a single piece of steel was touched by thermite. Case closed, except for true believers in woo.

http://www.nmsr.org/nmsr911.htm
Why can't 911 truth followers wake up quicker? The rational intellectual truthers rummage around for a little while, then wake up and are better at critical thinking skills than most. Of course they have to attack Millette, don't blame 911 truth for being frustrated, attacking the messenger is all that is left. What is the half-life of truthers? jtl, that is science, don't worry, you might not have a half-life...

 

[Spanx]

Oh my goodness, a lot of people have been giving you the benefit of doubt but you cannot hide no Mohr(sorry for the pun)that you really do not understand the thermite thing at all.

I am sorry for my comment before, when I suggested to Kminek that you and Millette together took him "for a ride"(and everyone else that contributed to the study), it is now obvious that Millette took you for a ride, and maybe it was even one of your "buddies" here that brought you to Millette. Perhaps one of those anonymous ones that like to peddle woo-woo and call Harrit et al names?

What a mess, but you can probably get your money back from Millette and maybe support someone else that is willing to do the ignition tests. Maybe Basile since everyone, even Oystein, seems to agree that he is capable and honest.

You and Remo make a good team

 

[Ivan Kminek]

Oh my goodness, a lot of people have been giving you the benefit of doubt but you cannot hide no Mohr(sorry for the pun)that you really do not understand the thermite thing at all.

I am sorry for my comment before, when I suggested to Kminek that you and Millette together took him "for a ride"(and everyone else that contributed to the study), it is now obvious that Millette took you for a ride, and maybe it was even one of your "buddies" here that brought you to Millette. Perhaps one of those anonymous ones that like to peddle woo-woo and call Harrit et al names?

What a mess, but you can probably get your money back from Millette and maybe support someone else that is willing to do the ignition tests. Maybe Basile since everyone, even Oystein, seems to agree that he is capable and honest.

Hehe
Chris: Jim Millette surely deserves his money, and even much more, since he did exactly what he was ordered to do: he analyzed red/gray chips which corresponded to "Bentham chips (a) to (d)", and unambiguously identified their main components, namely non-thermitic kaolinite as a source of Al and Si signals in XEDS spectra. We deeply appreciate the work of this forensic expert, thanks again.

It's interesting how Jtl tries to attribute the typical dishonest behavior of truthers to Jim Millette
Since it is pretty normal that truthers are highly paranoid, endlessly accuse and attack each other, hide important data, refuse to bring additional evidence, distort the available evidence, it is pretty normal that truthers endlessly lie, cheat, make fakes, etc.
Now, Jtl basically dares to accuse Jim Millette of the similar dishonest behavior. Silly. Pathetic. Unacceptable.
Or... just funny?

 

[Oystein]

It's interesting how Jtl tries to attribute the typical dishonest behavior of truthers to Jim Millette
Since it is pretty normal that truthers are highly paranoid, endlessly accuse and attack each other, hide important data, refuse to bring additional evidence, distort the available evidence, it is pretty normal that truthers endlessly lie, cheat, make fakes, etc.
Now, Jtl basically dares to accuse Jim Millette of the similar dishonest behavior. Silly. Pathetic. Unacceptable.
Or... just funny?

Like Dr. Harrit said (at 9:18):

If you cannot attack the science, you can always attack the integrity of the authors, and this is basically what they are doing

(Harrit of course engages in the same behaviour - in the very same video, staring at 3:50, he insinuates that Marie Pileni, former editor-in-chief of the Bentham journal where Harri et al. was published, was compromised by her professional affiliations and resigned because of that. Bare-assed assertion and slander )

 

[chrismohr]

Hehe
Chris: Jim Millette surely deserves his money, and even much more, since he did exactly what he was ordered to do: he analyzed red/gray chips which corresponded to "Bentham chips (a) to (d)", and unambiguously identified their main components, namely non-thermitic kaolinite as a source of Al and Si signals in XEDS spectra. We deeply appreciate the work of this forensic expert, thanks again.

It's interesting how Jtl tries to attribute the typical dishonest behavior of truthers to Jim Millette
Since it is pretty normal that truthers are highly paranoid, endlessly accuse and attack each other, hide important data, refuse to bring additional evidence, distort the available evidence, it is pretty normal that truthers endlessly lie, cheat, make fakes, etc.
Now, Jtl basically dares to accuse Jim Millette of the similar dishonest behavior. Silly. Pathetic. Unacceptable.
Or... just funny?

I couldn't be happier with Jim Millette's work. He did over $6000 worth of work for $1000, as Mark Basile and his team have discovered to their dismay now that they are looking for a new lab. On top of that, his preliminary report on WTC dust has gotten more readership than many published papers, since he has taken it around to at least two forensics conferences and done public presentations. Not only that, but there are large numbers of grad students at these conferences who are on various forensic internships and training programs who have attended his lectures or otherwise used his paper as an object lesson in their studies. And to my knowledge, not one of these sharp grad students or his own forensic colleagues numbering in the hundreds at his lectures have disagreed with the conclusions of Millette's paper. My only wish is that his lab business would keep him less busy. Since he is the GM of MVA Scientific Consultants, he has to attend to business before he can finish his work on the WTC dust.

Ivan, I had asked about the Neils Harrit challenge to find the creation of iron-rich microspheres on known paint primer stuck to steel or iron during heating. I will also ask Dave Thomas and others about this, it seems like such an experiment should be possible to do.

 

[chrismohr]

Thanks for the Dave Thomas link Beachnut! I learned a few new things from it and will congratulate him now on his work.