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

Miragememories said:
I was quoting R.Mackey the resident NASA scientist.

To the best of my knowledge Henry had to work with unsorted WTC dust and not pre-selected chips.

MM
Click to expand...
So, Jones just sent him dust that hadn't been separated by the methods explained in the paper? Why would someone wanting independent confirmation do that?
 
Still arguing about "wrong chips"? Good god. It's a side show. A classic distraction to hide the fact that the Bentham authors refuse to release samples and test results. It's transparent to most that they know they are frauds.

But hey, why get them to face reality when their minions like MM will come here all day to make up excuses for them?
 
Last edited:
Mohr:
Sunstealer claims that Henryco said his chips from Jones were not thermitic. On this same page, Senenmut quotes Henryco as saying, the "composition is compatible with the nanothermite chips" but his chips did NOT react to produce iron and silicon rich microspheres. I need to get up to speed on the henryco story, which I am not well versed in. Did he get his chips from Jones? Which experiments did he perform on the chips, and what did he conclude about them?
Click to expand...

We already went over this Mohr, a couple of weeks back. Henry concluded that his red/gray chips are thermite judging by the composition.

The problem is he did not have successful ignition, but he did not try to ignite red/gray chips, he only had red/red chips for that. The problem with those chips is that they already had spheres attached to them, which means they could have been chips that had already been ignited, and thus "dead" or inactive chips.

Very inconclusive and a bit sloppy. He did not do further experiments to resolve his problem and did not publish, so his stuff is pretty much out of the picture.

Sunstealer says all kinds of things, just ignore

For the record, I am asking around about al-oxide in the iron spheres, and I told your buddies I would admit to my cousin that Harrit et al have thermite if someone confirms that they had al-oxide. Would you also concede if you had this proof? Your buddies are obviously too afraid to answer.:boggled:
 
Last edited:
jtl said:
Mohr:

We already went over this Mohr, a couple of weeks back. Henry concluded that his red/gray chips are thermite judging by the composition.

The problem is he did not have successful ignition, but he did not try to ignite red/gray chips, he only had red/red chips for that. The problem with those chips is that they already had spheres attached to them, which means they could have been chips that had already been ignited, and thus "dead" or inactive chips.

Very inconclusive and a bit sloppy. He did not do further experiments to resolve his problem and did not publish, so his stuff is pretty much out of the picture.

Sunstealer says all kinds of things, just ignore

For the record, I am asking around about al-oxide in the iron spheres, and I told your buddies I would admit to my cousin that Harrit et al have thermite if someone confirms that they had al-oxide. Would you also concede if you had this proof? Your buddies are obviously too afraid to answer.:boggled:
Click to expand...

I love the way that you never link to what you are talking about :D

Is this what your talking about ?
Heryco: Problems with the nanothermite hypothesis
40 nm Al nanoparticules oxydize very fast in the open air! It is impossible for the chips to keep reactive 7 years after 9/11 if these particules were not efficiently protected by an appropriate coating. And even in this case the reactivity of chips tested by the authors after 7 years is very questionnable. http://www.darksideofgravity.com/Aging.pdf
I could not confirm a reaction producing molten iron. I was told that my red-red chips may have already reacted on 11/9, or be deactivated by heat, humidity and oxygen of the air ( natural aging). But if my chips are the same as those S.Jones &co discovered and studied in the dust, shouldnt mine have remained reactive as long as their owns (but K Ryan also confirmed the presence of red-red inactive chips in his samples)? Indeed in their initial publication, S Jones and co clearly state that all their chips reacted when heated producing molten iron and dont even mention the existence of red-red chips.
My critical way of analysing the nanothermite hypothesis and suggesting other ways resulted as far as I'm concerned in a genuine total embargo on WTC dust (I asked for other samples since other independent searchers willing to confirm my vs Jones results in Europe would need this material). This behaviour is unthinkable specially for searchers of the 11/9 truth.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks Sunstealer. I blush to admit that I had actually not put Henryco and Frédéric Henry-Couannier together as the same person in my mind! I have looked at Frédéric Henry-Couannier's stuff and commented on it in my YouTube video. While I mention his failure to confirm nanothermite, I also believe that we can't draw many conclusions from such incomplete research. But he was refused chips from Jones for further study and this of course is yet another red flag for me as a journalist. If I am not mistaken, in different places he has said that nanothermite can't be confirmed and that there is evidence of nanothermite in the dust.
 
jtl said:
Maybe you are not the best candidate for the frontman of a debunking campaign.
Click to expand...


You see, this is where your delusion shines.

There is no "frontman" because there is no "campaign".

There are people that chose as a hobby to counter Woo (that would be you). Your problem is we are the only ones paying any attention to you. If we ignore you our "campaign" is done (and so is yours). It really must suck for you to depend on the ones that you claim are trying to stop you.
 
Last edited:
jtl said:
Have you made that phonecall to Millette yet? Remember he said call back in April? Is he going to submit the paper to a journal this month or is he still blowing you off? If he says "call again in "#$%" we can safely assume that the preliminary paper will not be published, as suspected. Give us some straight answers please.
Click to expand...

There is not really much point, truthers have not Responded to Millette's work.

The truth movement is dead
 
jtl said:
Have you made that phonecall to Millette yet?
Click to expand...

Is there a time frame or a rush? I don't believe Millette has any form of a deadline, none that I've seen imposed here anyway. I actually believe he was told to take whatever time is needed to do the project correctly.

jtl said:
Remember he said call back in April?
Click to expand...

Maybe my reading comprehension is a bit off, did he say it would be done in April? Was he just saying to give him a call for an update? Can scientific papers only be submitted within the first 2 quarters of a new year?

jtl said:
Is he going to submit the paper to a journal this month or is he still blowing you off?
Click to expand...

I don't believe he's been blowing anyone off. From what I've seen of Chris's and Jim's conversations he's been very cordial, and informative. Why must it have a negative spin? He's a busy man, runs a lab, has actual paying jobs, and I don't see why anyone would see this is Millette blowing Mr. Mohr off.

jtl said:
If he says "call again in "#$%" we can safely assume that the preliminary paper will not be published, as suspected. Give us some straight answers please.
Click to expand...

Why could we safely assume that? Who's suspected it? I haven't seen anyone express that apart from yourself. As far as "give us", no one is asking these questions but you. Certainly not the people that actually contributed their own money to assist in this study. Unless I'm mistaken, I don't believe you actually were apart of that, were you?
 
Last edited:
plague311 said:
"Is there a time frame or a rush? I don't believe Millette has any form of a deadline, none that I've seen imposed here anyway. I actually believe he was told to take whatever time is needed to do the project correctly."
Click to expand...

Time?

Hmm.
  • Pickup and log WTC dust sample from personal supply.

  • Place magnet in plastic baggy.
  • Drag magnet through the dust.

  • Empty all collected chips into an isolation pile.

  • Using direct viewing and/or microscope, remove reasonable red/gray chip candidates.

  • With any large enough chips rough-measure their resistivity, and choose any with very low readings of around 10 ohms.

  • Prepare and place best candidates into the test oven and raise previous temperature upper limit from 400C to 450C.

  • Examine the residue.

If the results do not support the findings of Dr. Harrit et al, Dr. Millette announces his initial findings and in all conscience can finish the paper when he feels like it.

Given how good it would be for his company's reputation, it is odd that having already decided to investigate the 2009 Bentham Paper findings, Dr. Millette shows no interest or curiosity in giving his investigation a little more time.

He certainly has easy access to everything else he needs.

On the other hand, if he found finds, high-purity iron microspheres in the residue, Dr. Millette cannot casually dismiss such knowledge away.

plague311 said:
"...no one is asking these questions but you. Certainly not the people that actually contributed their own money to assist in this study. Unless I'm mistaken, I don't believe you actually were apart of that, were you?"
Click to expand...

Speaking for myself, I am one of those people who in 'good faith' contributed money towards Millette's study.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
  • Pickup and log WTC dust sample from personal supply.

  • Place magnet in plastic baggy.
  • Drag magnet through the dust.

  • Empty all collected chips into an isolation pile.

  • Using direct viewing and/or microscope, remove reasonable red/gray chip candidates.

  • With any large enough chips rough-measure their resistivity, and choose any with very low readings of around 10 ohms.
Click to expand...
  • Examine the extracted chips under SEM and BSE and create XEDS maps of them.
  • Discard 100% of them as not matching chips a) to d), thus obviating the need to...
    Miragememories said:
    • Prepare and place best candidates into the test oven and raise previous temperature upper limit from 400C to 450C.

    • Examine the residue.
    Click to expand...
    ... and therefore proving that the resistivity test does not produce chips matching chips a-d which were ubiquitous according to the paper, and thus proving that the resistivity test was cherry-picked among chips that didn't have anything to do with chips a-d.

Yeah, he could do that, but what for?
 
Miragememories said:
Time?
Click to expand...

Hi MM, would you care to state for me the amount of time it took for the Bentham paper to be completed? From start to finish, the entire thing. Thanks.

Miragememories said:
Hmm.
  • Pickup and log WTC dust sample from personal supply.

  • Place magnet in plastic baggy.
  • Drag magnet through the dust.

  • Empty all collected chips into an isolation pile.

  • Using direct viewing and/or microscope, remove reasonable red/gray chip candidates.

  • With any large enough chips rough-measure their resistivity, and choose any with very low readings of around 10 ohms.

  • Prepare and place best candidates into the test oven and raise previous temperature upper limit from 400C to 450C.

  • Examine the residue.

If the results do not support the findings of Dr. Harrit et al, Dr. Millette announces his initial findings and in all conscience can finish the paper when he feels like it.
Click to expand...

I hilited the part that was relevant and struck the part that wasn't listed in the paper as a method of collecting the correct chips. You make it sound really easy, maybe you should go through the process as well? I am going to assume that you aren't a scientist, as such you have absolutely no idea at all what work goes into the processes Dr. Millette has taken. If you have a degree relevant to judge Dr. Millette, by all means present it. I will absolutely apologize, wholeheartedly.

Miragememories said:
Given how good it would be for his company's reputation, it is odd that having already decided to investigate the 2009 Bentham Paper findings, Dr. Millette shows no interest or curiosity in giving his investigation a little more time.
Click to expand...

The truth movement is a fringe group of society. I don't believe that this paper is going to be a massive boost to his reputation. It might help a little bit, but most of the professional world already knows that there was no CD on 9/11. This isn't going to come as a blockbuster shock to anyone. I would refer to it as another nail in an already nailed coffin.

Miragememories said:
He certainly has easy access to everything else he needs.
Click to expand...

I would imagine he does, and I don't think his lack of equipment, knowledge, or ability is restraining him from completing the dust study. I believe his commitment to continuously paying customers and other obligations take precendence over this project that he decided to take on.

Miragememories said:
On the other hand, if he found finds, high-purity iron microspheres in the residue, Dr. Millette cannot casually dismiss such knowledge away.
Click to expand...

Hasn't that portion already been done? I apologize for my ignorance but I was under the impression all of the study portion of it has been done. It's been presented to his peers before. Is the study still in progress, or is it just waiting for a paper?

Miragememories said:
Speaking for myself, I am one of those people who in 'good faith' contributed money towards Millette's study.

MM
Click to expand...

More than one person, myself included, has offered to send you a full refund since you are displeased. Tell me how much you paid, a place to send it too, and I'll get it to you. No sense in paying for something that you don't want.

On a side note though you're only one of the, at least, 25 people that contributed who wants results now. All the while not holding the Bentham authors to the same ridiculous standard.
 
plague311 said:
I hilited the part that was relevant........................
Click to expand...


If the results do not support the findings of Dr. Harrit et al,...................
Click to expand...

You could have saved alot of typing. Harrit et al own data does not support their conclusions.

Just once I'd like a "truther" to show it does. Just to start (in the paper), what documented chips do they claim to be "thermetic"? Odd question? In a normal paper it would be unheard of, in this paper, no one knows.
 
Miragememories said:
On the other hand, if he found finds, high-purity iron microspheres in the residue, Dr. Millette cannot casually dismiss such knowledge away.
Click to expand...

Can we add this to the list of things that Harrit et al. themselves didn't find?

A conventional quantitative analysis routine was used to estimate the elemental contents. In the case of this iron-rich spheroid, the iron content exceeds the oxygen content by approximately a factor of two, so substantial elemental iron must be present. This result was repeated in other iron-rich
spheroids in the post-DSC sample as well as in spots in the residue which did not form into spheres. Spheroids were observed with Fe:O ratios up to approximately 4:1.
Click to expand...

So, assuming that we can disregard the other constituents, that's about 80% iron. On what planet would that constitute "high-purity iron"?

(I actually found a company that advertises "high purity (99.5%) iron microspheres." They also advertise a product with "about 95% iron content." Can anyone guess how that classify that? Right in one: low purity.)
 
Miragememories said:
Time?

Hmm.
  • Pickup and log WTC dust sample from personal supply.

  • Place magnet in plastic baggy.
  • Drag magnet through the dust.

  • Empty all collected chips into an isolation pile.

  • Using direct viewing and/or microscope, remove reasonable red/gray chip candidates.

  • With any large enough chips rough-measure their resistivity, and choose any with very low readings of around 10 ohms.

  • Prepare and place best candidates into the test oven and raise previous temperature upper limit from 400C to 450C.

  • Examine the residue.

If the results do not support the findings of Dr. Harrit et al, Dr. Millette announces his initial findings and in all conscience can finish the paper when he feels like it.

Given how good it would be for his company's reputation, it is odd that having already decided to investigate the 2009 Bentham Paper findings, Dr. Millette shows no interest or curiosity in giving his investigation a little more time.

He certainly has easy access to everything else he needs.

On the other hand, if he found finds, high-purity iron microspheres in the residue, Dr. Millette cannot casually dismiss such knowledge away.



Speaking for myself, I am one of those people who in 'good faith' contributed money towards Millette's study.

MM
Click to expand...
So on the one hand you criticize Millette for not performing the exact same tests as Harrit et al, but then go on to say he should do a test that wasn't in Harrit et al.

MM - If Millette took one or a number of his chips that he has identified as being the same material as chips a-d, the same chips he has identified as containing kaolin and epoxy and therefore paint and heated them to 700°C at 10°C per minute and found iron microspheres as a product, would you accept that Harrit et al have paint?

If not, why not?
 
jtl said:
You are not confident enough to demand right here and now that Millette completes the mere formality of submitting the paper to a journal.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
What's the rush? Your cause is not going anywhere.

BTW: When are you going to thank us for giving you the only attention you've ever got?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom