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

Hi, Spanx, the link is here.

Ziggi Zugam seems to be disappointed that his very elaborate article written with J. M. Talboo has not been discussed here in JREF. I think that he is awaiting some our "analyses", but as I already wrote, basically all that stuff had been already debated here before.

And it seems that even Oystein and Sunstealer do not care about nanothermites and WTC chips anymore (at least until the moment when anything substantially new is published in this "nanothermite matter")...
 
Last edited:
Hehe;) I've just noticed that in the heading of Millette's spectra, there are words "SensIR IlluminatIR".

This is a clear evidence for truthers that Jim Millette is a member of Illuminati!:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Spanx said:
Thanks Ivan,

I just don't understand why they are getting so angry ;)
Click to expand...

I don't think that Ziggi Zugam is especially angry in his responses (and Adam Taylor is apparently a very polite and nice guy, much more polite than me;)).

I would even say that Ziggi has been able to learn some things and he is slightly more polite than formerly on The911Forum and later on Oystein's blog.

Interesting is perhaps one dialog:
Me: "Here, I cordially agree with you that the real new study of the red/gray chips would be much, much better. So, do not be so shy and ask Dick Gage for the necessary money!"

Ziggi: "Kminek, don´t worry about ae911 funding, Gage has already offered the $$ but Basile wants to try to get the $$ independently. I presume that if that fails, he will seek help from ae911."


Well, we'll see...
 
Last edited:
Ivan Kminek said:
"I can make again some other partial "prediction" how such Basile's FTIR could look. If measured chips would be the same as Bentham chips (a) to (d) and the most of Millette's chips, they should show similar FTIR as was measured by Jim Millette (upper spectrum):

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=1092&pictureid=8036[/qimg]

If the measured chips would be something else, they can be basically anything, but most probably chips of Tnemec."
Click to expand...

Unfortunately for your arguments, you make too many assumptions.

Dr. Millette reports that the red chips he chose, were of a material that could not behave like the chips highlighted in the 2009 Bentham paper.

Scientists who contributed to the 2009 Bentham paper have posted that an unfamiliar eye and a magnetic will find a large collection of chips in the 9/11 WTC dust that would pass the initial isolation procedure.

If we accept Dr. Millette's findings about the chemistry of his chip selections, we must accept what is known about the chemical behaviour of such material.

Could his chips also ignite at ~430C?

And when burned, would such a material produce iron-rich micro-spheroids in the residue?

No.

Because Dr. Millette claims the chips he examined could not exhibit thermitic behaviour like those studied in the 2009 Bentham paper.

Do you believe Mark Basile, Dr. Jones, Dr. Harrit, Dr. Ferrer etc. are all lying and that Dr. Millette cannot be mistaken about having well-matched
his chip selections to theirs?

Dr. Millette is the one scientist in the whole group who refuses to observe the results of heating his chips to ~430C.

And you are too proud to back away from a paint hypothesis that is also debunked by the Bentham paper.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
Unfortunately for your arguments, you make too many assumptions.

Dr. Millette reports that the red chips he chose, were of a material that could not behave like the chips highlighted in the 2009 Bentham paper.

Scientists who contributed to the 2009 Bentham paper have posted that an unfamiliar eye and a magnetic will find a large collection of chips in the 9/11 WTC dust that would pass the initial isolation procedure.

If we accept Dr. Millette's findings about the chemistry of his chip selections, we must accept what is known about the chemical behaviour of such material.

Could his chips also ignite at ~430C?

And when burned, would such a material produce iron-rich micro-spheroids in the residue?

No.

Because Dr. Millette claims the chips he examined could not exhibit thermitic behaviour like those studied in the 2009 Bentham paper.

Do you believe Mark Basile, Dr. Jones, Dr. Harrit, Dr. Ferrer etc. are all lying and that Dr. Millette cannot be mistaken about having well-matched his chip selections to theirs?
Dr. Millette is the one scientist in the whole group who refuses to observe the results of heating his chips to ~430C.

And you are too proud to back away from a paint hypothesis that is also debunked by the Bentham paper.

MM
Click to expand...

Yes, I think they are all lying, and I think Millette cannot be mistaken about having well-matched his chip selections to theirs.
 
Miragememories said:
Could his chips also ignite at ~430C?
Click to expand...


Miragememories said:
Dr. Millette is the one scientist in the whole group who refuses to observe the results of heating his chips to ~430C.
Click to expand...

So if this "430C" ignition/heat test is so all important like you claim and needed to be done to make sure the right chips were tested, how can Harrit and his cronies say that all four samples were thermitic when they only tested 3 of the 4 samples in the DSC.

On page 20 is Fig. (19). In that figure they tested 2 samples from MacKinlay, 1 sample from Intermont, and 1 sample from White.

They missed the Delassio/Breidenbach sample!
 
Gamolon said:
So if this "430C" ignition/heat test is so all important like you claim and needed to be done to make sure the right chips were tested, how can Harrit and his cronies say that all four samples were thermitic when they only tested 3 of the 4 samples in the DSC.

On page 20 is Fig. (19). In that figure they tested 2 samples from MacKinlay, 1 sample from Intermont, and 1 sample from White.

They missed the Delassio/Breidenbach sample!
Click to expand...

Missed?

They just did not use it.

How does that alter the results of those they used?

MM
 
Miragememories said:
Missed?

They just did not use it.

How does that alter the results of those they used?

MM
Click to expand...

They didn't test it. It's not in the report. Period.

Any chips from the Delassio/Breidenbach sample used in any tests cannot be considered the "right chips" because the DSC results of those chips are not in the paper.

Again, they were not tested.
 
Miragememories said:
Missed?

They just did not use it.

How does that alter the results of those they used?

MM
Click to expand...

They only tested one chip in the paper for resistivity. How do they know all the other chips were the right chips? Was the chip tested for resistivity put through the DSC?
 
Ivan Kminek said:
Interesting is perhaps one dialog:
Me: "Here, I cordially agree with you that the real new study of the red/gray chips would be much, much better. So, do not be so shy and ask Dick Gage for the necessary money!"

Ziggi: "Kminek, don´t worry about ae911 funding, Gage has already offered the $$ but Basile wants to try to get the $$ independently. I presume that if that fails, he will seek help from ae911."


.
Click to expand...

I guess this would explain 911debunkerschannel promoting Mark Basile on the Ae911truth youtube message board.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZEvA8BCoBw&feature=youtube

It's interesting to see that they are so particular as to where the money comes from ?
 
Gamolon said:
"They didn't test it. It's not in the report. Period."
Click to expand...
Gamolon said:
"They only tested one chip in the paper for resistivity. How do they know all the other chips were the right chips? Was the chip tested for resistivity put through the DSC?"
Click to expand...

Their washroom breaks were not in the report either but I am certain they took them.

Not all data gets published.

Get over it.

MM
 
Last edited:
DGM said:
"It's too bad they left out the data that would have proved what they had.

Maybe if you ask nice they will finally release it. :rolleyes:"
Click to expand...

Mark Basile plans to release FTIR data and more when he finishes funding his current research on the WTC 9/11 dust.

They do not come much more trustworthy than Mark.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
Their washroom breaks were not in the report either but I am certain they took them.

Not all data gets published.

Get over it.

MM
Click to expand...

Washroom breaks were not an important aspect to determining what were the correct chips right MM? DSC results were according to you.

So important that they didn't put them in the report.

They didn't test that sample so they could not be sure they had the right one.

Get over it.
 
Last edited:
Ivan Kminek said:
On the other hand, FTIR of nanoaluminum should show strong, broad bands at ca 3050-3300 cm-1, belonging to aluminum oxide (alumina), since the substantial portion of alleged aluminum in such thin platelets must be inevitably oxidized; see e.g. McCrone Atlas:
Click to expand...

Shouldn't aluminum of whatever size all look the same with FTIR, since oxidation of the surface to Al2O3 proceeds to a depth of ~5nm, and then stops? (And, of course, the aluminum itself is invisible.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom