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

[thedopefishlives]

only thing i can think of is that it got blown off at a high rate and cooled down quickly?? i dont think anyone has found large chips yet. they are all very small....probably from being blown apart???

Or maybe it's paint that flaked and spalled in tiny little pieces?

 

[BasqueArch]

Yes, that is one of the many problems with the argument jtl and Ziggi are trying to make: You really have to guess what the data actually is.


Yes, that is another of the many problems with the argument jtl and Ziggi are trying to make: Since there are so many different kinds of chips, it is totally useless to present single data points for chips that are otherwise left uncharacterized.


And here you fall into a trap that was perhaps deliberately laid by Ryan for you to fall into: This chip does not in any way whatsoever conform to the description of the chip for which FTIR-data is shown:

"Sample JM12 is a 2mm multi-colored interconnected network. It has dark bands and a light white coating"

Can you show us in the image you posted where that chip...
- is "2 mm"
- is "multi-colored"
- is an "interconnected network"
- "has dark bands"
- has "light white coating"?

See, this chip is not Sample JM12! It is obvious, right in your face, screaming at you "HEY SENEMUT!!! LOOK AT ME!! READ THE *********** DESCRIPTION!! I AM DIFFERENT!!!!!!!!!!!!", but you truthers just don't see that! Why, Senemut, why are you so blind??

@ jtl: Can YOU see that the FTIR "teaser" is not from a red-gray chip like the one shown by Senemut? YES or NO? Just checking if you are blind and/or illiterate, too.

Spanx - Just out of interest Chris, what is Harrit's challenge.

The challenge is clear.
Harrit et al need to do another complete study of thermitic 2mm multi-colored interconnected network chips that have dark bands and a light white coating.

Chris. Will you be collecting money for this?

 

[chrismohr]

Just out of interest Chris, what is Harrit's challenge.

Harrit's challenge is for someone to take a known "prosaic paint," cook it up, and show the production of iron-rich microspheres after they burn at regular hydrocarbon-fire temperatures. And yes, I am trying to find someone to do what looks to me like a not-terribly-complicated experiment of this kind. And two people have said "maybe" so this may yet happen.

Say, a couple years ago a guy with a vast collection of dust (over 250,000 samples as I recall) showed us some iron-rich microspheres that had been created in a regular fire. Does anyone know how I can recontact that guy?

BasqueArch I got a great laugh out of your post! I think I'll pass on collecting money for "Harrit's study." I doubt he'd want money from us anyway!

 

[Oystein]

only thing i can think of is that it got blown off at a high rate and cooled down quickly?? i dont think anyone has found large chips yet. they are all very small....probably from being blown apart???

Even if there were larger flakes of this material to begin with, only dust travelled to and settled at the four locations where the dust samples were collected.
In a video I saw today for the first time (link in other thread), Mark Basile said that the largest chips he found were in the Janette McKinley sample. This is also the sample that was collected closest to GZ. I suppose larger particles don't travel as far as smaller dust particles.

Also, with the chips beimg only 0.1 mm thin, any larger chips would be much at risk of breaking. The larger the sheet, the smaller it's chance of surviving intact.

 

[Miragememories]

"Looking at the FTIR's above, it certainly looks to me like we are talking about different chips with different properties. There must be an incredible variety of different kinds of chips in the WTC debris. As for iron-rich microspheres being created by the heating experiments performed by Harrit et al, I am continuing to ask around about that. I doubt a chemist could answer that without doing an experiment, and I would love to see such a relatively simple experiment performed. I'll keep you all posted if I find out anything but this research is not easy for someone who doesn't have a lab and the skill set required to answer Harrit's challenge directly. But I have managed to find two people with access to labs who might just do an experiment to answer this question. Maybe. They don't owe me any favors and I'm not willing to part with more money, so I'll have to convince them it's an interesting experiment for them to do!"

How much would Millette charge if the chips were pre-selected for him, from his own stash?

All he has to do is provide the oven for those chips and allow it to go to 430C, just 30C more than in his own testing.

Post ignition (430C) iron-rich spheres found in the residue provide the necessary evidence that for a moment in time, the immediate temperature rose high enough to produce 'molten iron', ~1370C.

Such a finding would require an explanation.

The 2009 Bentham Paper makes it quite clear the methods that were followed in discovering and observing the 'chips of interest'.

Anyone with a few tools, particularly someone who had their own supply of WTC dust like Dr. Millette, CEO of his own laboratory, could easily investigate the path previously taken by Dr. Harrit et al.

By ignoring the low-resistivity electrical test, and then not-heating to 430C, Dr. Millette avoided any risk of controversy.

These were two easily-performed tests.

But based on the seriousness of the findings of Dr. Harrit et al in their 2009 Bentham Paper, if Dr. Millette replicated their controversial findings, he would, like it or not, become attached to the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Tough decision ya think?

It seems quite reasonable to assume Dr. Millette knew exactly what he would see as he went over familiar ground using familiar methods.

MM

 

[jtl]

Mohr: Looking at the FTIR's above, it certainly looks to me like we are talking about different chips with different properties. There must be an incredible variety of different kinds of chips in the WTC debris.

I have to congratulate you for saying out loud what your buddies dare not, because it is obvious that the FTIR´s are different, and Millette does not have the same chips.

That video is about 2 years old and Kminek says in another thread that he mentioned it something like a year ago on JREF, but apparently it has simply been ignored all this time. But you and others here have made all kinds of accusations about Harrit et al hiding their results.

When we were talking about Harrit´d data, your buddies accused him of using incompetent methods, but now that we have a result from a method they deemed competent(FTIR), they ignore it and try to debunk it using Harrit´s old "incompetent" XEDS method.

How about you?

As for iron-rich microspheres being created by the heating experiments performed by Harrit et al, I am continuing to ask around about that. I doubt a chemist could answer that without doing an experiment, and I would love to see such a relatively simple experiment performed.

I have to congratulate you again for saying what you buddies dare not.
Do not forget to mention that the material starts out with fully oxidized iron and ends up with iron that is LESS oxidized(reduced) and even elemental iron.

But I have to wonder why you do not simply ask Millette to do this experiment given that you already paid him?

 

[Spanx]

With the red/gray chips and iron-rich spheres, we were "lucky" in that these were attracted by a strong magnet, and I was able to concentrate them fairly easily.

Perhaps jtl could explain the meaning of the above quote ? and why the red/gray chips collected by Millette's strong magnet are not the same chips ?

 

[chrismohr]

JTL I'll break my silence with you to clarify that all three FTIR's look different to me: Millette's, Tilltson/Gash's, and Harrit/Jones's. The Millette FTIR seems to be scaled completely differently and would have to be rescaled for any comparison to make sense. And I would need an independent expert to help me understand these readings. As for the experiment of cooking paint chips that had been painted onto iron or steel and seeing if paint primer plus steel alone can create iron-rich microspheres, I am happy to see what the results are either way. And I will take to heart your advice to have them note if we start with iron oxide and end up with much higher concentrations of pure iron after heating. Believe me, I have still not forgiven Bush/Cheney for their unncessary $2 trillion war that has cost hundreds of thousands of human lives (mostly Iraqi civilians) and it would not upset me in the least to see those butchers nailed for treason. So while I'm pretty sure I'm right, if I am proven wrong in all this, that would be just fine. I might add that my accusations of Harrit/Jones/Ryan withholding data etc come from bitter experience; the way Kevin Ryan refused my request was with real hostility. And MM one of the main reasons I hired Jim Millette was because of his repeated assurances that as for thermite, "if I find it I'll publish it." He has been hired many times in arson cases to offer his analysis, and he has often given his clients information they do not want to hear. I told him exactly what you said to me just now, if he finds thermite he'd become a "Truther" and he assured me over and over that he would just publish whatever he finds and let the red-grey chips fall where they may.

 

[Oystein]

How much would Millette charge if the chips were pre-selected for him, from his own stash?

All he has to do is provide the oven for those chips and allow it to go to 430C, just 30C more than in his own testing.

Post ignition (430C) iron-rich spheres found in the residue provide the necessary evidence that for a moment in time, the immediate temperature rose high enough to produce 'molten iron', ~1370C.

Such a finding would require an explanation...

Nobody made such a finding as nobody heated any sample to (just) 430 °C.
Farrer heated his to 700 °C
Jones much much more.
Basile has no idea how much he heated his.

Why 430 °C? Nothing interesting will happen there, except some burning of organic matrix.

 

[Oystein]

I have to congratulate you for saying out loud what your buddies dare not, because it is obvious that the FTIR´s are different, and Millette does not have the same chips.

That video is about 2 years old and Kminek says in another thread that he mentioned it something like a year ago on JREF, but apparently it has simply been ignored all this time. But you and others here have made all kinds of accusations about Harrit et al hiding their results.

When we were talking about Harrit´d data, your buddies accused him of using incompetent methods, but now that we have a result from a method they deemed competent(FTIR), they ignore it and try to debunk it using Harrit´s old "incompetent" XEDS method.

How about you?



I have to congratulate you again for saying what you buddies dare not.
Do not forget to mention that the material starts out with fully oxidized iron and ends up with iron that is LESS oxidized(reduced) and even elemental iron.

But I have to wonder why you do not simply ask Millette to do this experiment given that you already paid him?

What a shameless liar you are.

 

[pgimeno]

I have to congratulate you for saying out loud what your buddies dare not, because it is obvious that the FTIR´s are different, and Millette does not have the same chips.

That's right. Millette doesn't report having chips multi-colored with dark bands and a light white coating. Neither does the Bentham paper, which only refers to red/gray chips. Thus by that reasoning, the Bentham paper does not have the same chips tested with FTIR either. Good work! You've debunked the Bentham paper.

 

[Miragememories]

"How much would Millette charge if the chips were pre-selected for him, from his own stash?

All he has to do is provide the oven for those chips and allow it to go to 430C, just 30C more than in his own testing.

Post ignition (430C) iron-rich spheres found in the residue provide the necessary evidence that for a moment in time, the immediate temperature rose high enough to produce 'molten iron', ~1370C.

Such a finding would require an explanation.

The 2009 Bentham Paper makes it quite clear the methods that were followed in discovering and observing the 'chips of interest'.

Anyone with a few tools, particularly someone who had their own supply of WTC dust like Dr. Millette, CEO of his own laboratory, could easily investigate the path previously taken by Dr. Harrit et al.

By ignoring the low-resistivity electrical test, and then not-heating to 430C, Dr. Millette avoided any risk of controversy.

These were two easily-performed tests.

But based on the seriousness of the findings of Dr. Harrit et al in their 2009 Bentham Paper, if Dr. Millette replicated their controversial findings, he would, like it or not, become attached to the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Tough decision ya think?

It seems quite reasonable to assume Dr. Millette knew exactly what he would see as he went over familiar ground using familiar methods."

"Nobody made such a finding

as nobody heated any sample to (just) 430 °C.

Farrer heated his to 700 °C

Jones much much more.

Basile has no idea how much he heated his.

Why 430 °C?

Nothing interesting will happen there,

except some burning of organic matrix."

Lying does not give you greater respect.

"...I received a sample of dust in January of 2008 and basically started working with the material. I found iron-based micro-spheres, just as he [Dr. Jones] had done and I also found the red/gray chips that he had spoken of. I then began to do some analytical work on them and I found that their composition was basically exactly what he had described.

I was hoping to conduct some experiments with these chips but I have not been able to get access to a differential scanning calorimeter.

I created an apparatus where I could basically control energy input to the chips.

Heating them resistively on a stainless steel heater strip to an ignition temperature.

Not over-heating them but just bringing them up to the ignition temperature and then analyzing the resultant products.

And what I can confirm also is that these chips, the red layer is thermitic, it does produce molten iron and I've seen it with a number of chips that Jeanette McKinley supplied to me and I've also seen it in an independent sample which was also supplied to me from a museum in NYC which as asked to remain anonymous at this point in time.

But I have independently seen thermitic activity within two separate independent samples of WTC dust. And I plan to look at more in the next month or so and keep on going.

If you take these chips and section them, and look at them before you ignite them, there are no iron micro-spheres, there are no iron particles, there are no iron films contained in these chips. It is only after you bring them up to their ignition point and they go through their thermitic reaction, that liquid iron is produced and the energy is released."

"Dr. Farrer found that the iron and oxygen are in a phase that is Fe2 O3. Dr. Farrer conducted studies in the differential scanning calorimeter (DSC), and found that the material ignites, reacts vigorously at a temperature of approximately 430 ̊C, consistent in each sample."

"... When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 ̊C...That thermitic reactions from the red/gray chips have indeed occurred in the DSC (rising temperature method of ignition) is confirmed by the combined observation of 1) highly energetic reactions occurring at approximately 430 ̊C, 2) iron-rich sphere formation so that the product must have been sufficiently hot to be molten (over 1400 ̊C for iron and iron oxide), 3) spheres, spheroids and non-spheroidal residues in which the iron content exceeds the oxygen content. Significant elemental iron is now present as expected from the thermitic reduction-oxidation reaction of aluminum and iron oxide... the evidence obtained in the DSC analyses is more compelling that a thermitic reaction actually occurs as in that case ignition is observed when the red material is heated to no more than 430 ̊C."

MM

 

[NoahFence]

wow.

Someone needs a binkie.

 

[Ivan Kminek]

MM: Sigh.... Please, try to concentrate.
Here is an exact quote from Bentham paper:

"The DSC tests were conducted with a linear heating rate of 10 ̊C per minute up to a temperature of 700 ̊C."

What part of this very clear sentence you still do not understand???

 

[Oystein]

Lying does not give you greater respect.

MM

I am not the one who is lying.

What temperature did Mark basile bring his samples to, how do you know, and how did he measure it?
(Prediction: MM will run away from this question and pretend I never asked it)
Fact is: Basile doesn't know what reaction happened at which temperature.

Farrer, Jones: Yeah, some reaction occurred at 430 °C (organic material burned on air). But some reaction also occurred at 270 °C, some reaction occurred at 380 °C, some occurred at 480 °C, some occurred at 650 °C.
And they heated those chips to 700 °C.


So I was right:


nobody heated any sample to (just) 430 °C.

Farrer heated his to 700 °C

Jones much much more.

Basile has no idea how much he heated his.

 

[jtl]

- After bothering myself with some reading of Ryan's "FTIR spectrum" of multicolored WTC chip, I register bands with those approximate wavenumbers (approximate owing to miserable quality of the spectrum):
870 cm-1 (strong)
1100 cm-1 (strong)
1360 cm-1 (strong)
1570 cm-1 (weak)
1650 cm-1 (weak)

Conclusion: FTIR spectrum of Ryan's WTC chip is not consistent with Viton A

Inspector Clouseau!

Kminek, you play around with the numbers a bit and assign your own estimates, that you think are far-out enough from Viton to debunk Ryan.

The problem with your method of assigning strict values with weak or strong peaks, is that anyone could do the same thing and also "debunk" Gash´s FTIR, because it is obviously not the same as Viton. Gash´s material has Viton in it, or maybe some compound based on Viton, but the material itself is not Viton. The came can be said for Ryan´s material, it is certainly not Viton, but it probably has some compound in it that is based on Viton.

It is so funny how you see no similarity between Ryan´s and Gash´s FTIR´s, but you thought that the washed MEK chip was identical to Tnemec even without Zn, Ca

I am sure you guys will discuss this FTIR information in the same "professional" manner you discussed your Tnemec theories, so go ahead and rant, you have no more credibility.

 

[Spanx]

Thanks for ignoring post 2307 jtl

Just the answer I was looking for

 

[Oystein]

...
It is so funny how you see no similarity between Ryan´s and Gash´s FTIR´s, ...

Can you tell us all that you know about Ryan's chip?

What did it look like? Please quite the EXACT description Ryan gave! Was it a red-gray chip, looking like chips a-d? Looking like the MEK-soaked chip in the Bentham paper?

Give reasons!

 

[beachnut]

Inspector Clouseau!

...

911 truth can't match FTIR.
No on 60 Minutes? Was it the lack of knowledge on DSC? Or the inability to realize the FTIR don't match, like the DSC?

How can anyone find thermite at a site that no thermite was used?
The reason Millette found no thermite.

 

[Ivan Kminek]

Inspector Clouseau!

Kminek, you play around with the numbers a bit and assign your own estimates, that you think are far-out enough from Viton to debunk Ryan.

The problem with your method of assigning strict values with weak or strong peaks, is that anyone could do the same thing and also "debunk" Gash´s FTIR, because it is obviously not the same as Viton. Gash´s material has Viton in it, or maybe some compound based on Viton, but the material itself is not Viton. The came can be said for Ryan´s material, it is certainly not Viton, but it probably has some compound in it that is based on Viton.

It is so funny how you see no similarity between Ryan´s and Gash´s FTIR´s, but you thought that the washed MEK chip was identical to Tnemec even without Zn, Ca

I am sure you guys will discuss this FTIR information in the same "professional" manner you discussed your Tnemec theories, so go ahead and rant, you have no more credibility.

Jtl, since my last post on FTIR of Gash and Ryan dissappeared (in the Abandon All Hope, probably because of my last sentence on your address), just short repetition.

You claimed that spectrum of Ryan's chips is a match with Gash's spectrum of "superthermite", made of Viton and iron oxide. But there is simply no such match

Here are original spectra of Viton A and "superthermite" from Gash's paper:

As you can see, bands corresponding to Viton A are marked by asterisks in the spectrum of nanocomposite (superthermite). They have those wavenumbers:
883 cm-1 (strong)
1205 cm-1 (strong)
1398 cm-1 (strong)

On the other hand, bands in multicolored Ryan's chip have ca those wavenumbers:
870 cm-1 (strong)
1100 cm-1 (strong)
1360 cm-1 (strong)
1570 cm-1 (weak)
1650 cm-1 (weak)

Except perhaps the first band, all other bands clearly does not correspond to Viton A, hence Ryan's chip has nothing common with Viton A, according to FTIR spectra No match whatsoever...
Try to concentrate next time