• 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

Again you show your ignorance of well established and accepted techniques that are used in industry and labs across the world on a daily basis. Oystein's and Almond's calculations based upon data published by NIST on Laclade composition using well defined Monte-Carlo simulation show just how wrong your ignorant statement is.

The results are an incredible match for spectra in Fig 7. I was surprised myself. If you showed those calculations and the results along with Fig 7 to any metallurgist or materials engineer with SEM experience he'd say that Laclade is an extremely good candidate for the red layer material in chips a-d.
have you or almond or ivan tried to do what the document said and create the paint using the anodic technique of electroplating?

do you believe someone could "fake" a document? take for instance what private intel agencies do:
"Specifically, the plan called for actions to “sabotage or discredit the opposing organization” including a plan to submit fake documents and then call out the error. As for Greenwald, it was argued that he would cave “if pushed” because he would “choose professional preservation over cause.” That evidently wasn’t the case."

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/the-real-war-on-reality/?_r=2&

one can look at those created fake documents from a few different angles and how an intel agency can use those said fake documents.

is that leclade document real?? who knows. the company will not reply to my email months upon months back and I remember ivan said they did not reply to him either.

what ivan is going to have to prove is that leclade can be formed by the electroplated process and look similar to millettes chips.
 
Last edited:
Anyone who has done any DIY or repaired a car or for that matter done any painting at all will be able to figure out why paint in multiple layers is present.

It's a testament to Jones' myopia and religious belief that he can't work out for himself why painted surfaces become layered in paint (due to multiple applications - oh there I've said it.)

from my above response, do you honestly believe they electroplated multiple times and just so happened to form that multi layered chip?
 
Secondly the DSC test is flawed anyway because there are 2 completely different materials in each chip - a gray metallic layer and a red epoxy based layer. You can't learn much from the use of DSC which is a weight based experiment when you don't know what weight each of the two layers makes up. This has been explained at least half a dozen times before.


do you think they should take the gray layer off and then ignite in the dsc?

He would be far better of doing what Millette did and using low temperature ashing to separate out pigment particles and then examine them, thereby positively identifying the pigment.
I agree on that too but with a chip that has been cut in half. then one can use the half that did ash to use in a dsc or in the contraption basile has made to see if iron and silicon rich microspheres form. or if the chip is big enough, do all three tests just so one can get the dsc measurements as well.
 
as with the fake documents link I posted, I would not be surprised if the intel agencies also thought about using "fake" materials that could be created to “sabotage or discredit the opposing organization" if millettes chips are shown not to be able to produce iron and silicon rich microspheres.......;)
 
as with the fake documents link I posted, I would not be surprised if the intel agencies also thought about using "fake" materials that could be created to “sabotage or discredit the opposing organization" if millettes chips are shown not to be able to produce iron and silicon rich microspheres.......;)
The "opposing organization", you can't name, also made thermite that does not leave iron behind, or evidence of being used. Of course when you have fantasy, the fantasy of thermite, anything is possible in the faith based 911 truth movement based on lies, delusions, and BS.

Millette paper identified what his dust was, Jones paper shows sample which don't match thermite in energy, and a DSC that does not match thermite, but faith based followers believe in the delusional conclusion. Next life 911 truth faith based followers need to take and master chemistry and reading comprehension.

Funny the iron spheres are iron oxide, not a product of thermite. oops, 911 truth followers let others do their thinking.

Love it when 911 truth uses opinions as their guide for what is going on. Opinions, wow, he uses fantasy, the Matrix, good one. Fantasy used to support the fantasy inside job done with super fantasy thermite which leaves no products. The iron rich spheres are from the WTC fires. darn, 12 years and debunking 911 truth is too easy.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/the-real-war-on-reality/?_r=3
 
Last edited:
Senenmut:

1) In your pretty weird world based on so called "Truth", everything must be indeed faked! For instance, paint coatings on hundreds of million of cars worldwide, made allegedly almost exclusively by electrocoating, are just plain illusions. They do not exist/are all faked! As well as hundreds of patents on electrocoated epoxies, just another bunch of fakes! All photos and other data in NIST reports are faked as well. The apparent red color of WTC1/WTC2 floor trusses is indeed an illusion as well. It definitely cannot be any real paint! It could be, e.g. just continuous layer of billions of red tiny termites, who knows? Why to paint this steel with a good red anticorrosive primer, nonsense!

2) All red paint chips on rust look quite similar to Millette and Harrit's chips at some magnification, I hope I will show you soon.

3) Laclede Steel Company bancrupted in 2001, therefore I am not sure that you can have a valid email address. I suspected that "Laclede paint" could be made by Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company, but I was not sure. And later, I found references that real pioneers in eletrocoating were Ford Motor Company and others. They started to employ this amazing technology already in fifties.
 
Last edited:
Excellent questions. I doubt you'll get an answer, because they raise one more and they won't like any of the options.

There are only two possibilities as I see it:

a) The chip selection criteria include a protocol not mentioned in the paper's isolation section, like looking for a specific shade of red they don't specify, as Miragememories advocates. As GlennB noted, that would make the paper unreproducible and therefore bad science.

b) The chip selection criteria are as specified in the isolation section of the paper and don't include separation of chips considered thermitic from those which are not, but instead consider all chips thermitic without distinguishing them. Given that there's no effort of characterizing each kind of chip on which an analysis is performed because all are considered the same thing, that makes the paper bad science.

Which is it?
File that under duh.

I hate to be right. :rolleyes:
 
Senenmut:

1) In your pretty weird world based on so called "Truth", everything must be indeed faked! For instance, paint coatings on hundreds of million of cars worldwide, made allegedly almost exclusively by electrocoating, are just plain illusions. They do not exist/are all faked!

lets see ya make some from anodic electrocoating that resembles millettes chips!

[2) All red paint chips on rust look quite similar to Millette and Harrit's chips at some magnification, I hope I will show you soon.
NO. show us electrocoated red paint on rust that resembles millettes. I think that would be alittle more accurate since you think lecleade was made by electrocoating. have you not tried to get some eletrocoated paint chips yet?

[3) Laclede Steel Company bancrupted in 2001, therefore I am not sure that you can have a valid email address. I suspected that "Laclede paint" could be made by Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company, but I was not sure. And later, I found references that real pioneers in eletrocoating were Ford Motor Company and others. They started to employ this amazing technology already in fifties.
in the fifties, it was research.....

"PPG was active in the first research directed toward the development of a electrophoretic paint in 1957 at the Ford Motor Company under the direction of Dr. George Brewer. This research was designed to develop a method for improving corrosion protection on hard-to-reach parts of car bodies. PPG filled the Ford Wixom tank in 1964 with anodic electrocoat."

in the late 60's is when the wtc's were starting to be built so it would be a brand new technology.

http://www.ppg.com/coatings/autooem/products/electrocoat/Pages/default.aspx
 
Millette paper identified what his dust was....
yep, I believe you that he identified his stuff but you cant say that millette's chips are the same as jones' chips b/c he did not follow the scientific method to show the 2 types of material are the same....

"Reproducibility is the ability of an entire experiment or study to be reproduced, either by the researcher or by someone else working independently. It is one of the main principles of the scientific method."

so beechnut, what did jones and crew do that millette did not do? since millette did not reproduce the entire experiment, can one say for sure that they are the same material? I will go with "similar" until millette gets the nerve up and does the other experiments jones did.

or vice versa, if jones replicated some of millettes studies and finds his results are different (different material), that would be good too.
 
yep, I believe you that he identified his stuff but you cant say that millette's chips are the same as jones' chips b/c he did not follow the scientific method to show the 2 types of material are the same....

"Reproducibility is the ability of an entire experiment or study to be reproduced, either by the researcher or by someone else working independently. It is one of the main principles of the scientific method."

so beechnut, what did jones and crew do that millette did not do? since millette did not reproduce the entire experiment, can one say for sure that they are the same material? I will go with "similar" until millette gets the nerve up and does the other experiments jones did.

or vice versa, if jones replicated some of millettes studies and finds his results are different (different material), that would be good too.

Excellent.

Please show us the test or tests from the Bentham paper that Harrit and his group did to every chip extracted from their four dust samples that proves all the chips were the same.

1. All the chips declared to be thermite had red/gray layers? CHECK
2. All the chips declared to be thermite were attracted to a magnet? CHECK

Which test/tests, in addition to the criteria above, need to be done in order to make sure they are the right chips?
 
Redwood: I think that also identifying of "elemental" Al is a part of Basile's "protocol", in the form of planned ESCA (XPS) measurements.

I know almost nothing about XPS, but the corresponding wiki entry X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy says e.g.:

"The photo-emitted electrons that have escaped into the vacuum of the instrument are those that originated from within the top 10 to 12 nm of the material." In other words, only very thin surface layer is reliably analyzed.

It seems that XPS is able to recognize somehow the "bonding" of the elements (e.g. whether the element is in an "elemental form" or in the form of some compound). But, since all aluminum particles are inevitably covered with the aluminum oxide layer with the thickness ca 5 nm, I doubt that the XPS search for elemental aluminum in those stacking Al/Si platelets with the thicknesses ca 40 nm can provide conclusive results... But I can be wrong and I am lazy to learn more in this respect now.

Anyway, it is just loss of time to study again those Al/Si-based platelets in Bentham chips (a) to (d), which were proven to be kaolinite by Jim Millette. If Basile still thinks that there is some Al metal in some red/gray chips, he should definitely look elsewhere:cool:

Ivan, Millette's methods are rock-solid, and I can't imagine what Basile wants with something like XPS. XRD is reliable, and there's a huge database of XRD for a myriad of materials.

In my former life as an industrial chemist, XRD was something you hired out others to do. We were experienced in "quick, dirty, cheap, and accurate enough" tests, like the one I mentioned way back for Cr+6.

The simple inert atmosphere ignition test I sketched out is the kind of improvised "QDCAE" I often did. Millette's methods are sort of a Cadillac approach, and mine are more of a Hyundai.
 
Stay tuned Sunstealer and Ivan and Ergo and MM and Senenmut and Redwood etc for a very exciting new YouTube video from a friend of ours! Believe me you will not want to miss it...
 
yep, I believe you that he identified his stuff but you cant say that millette's chips are the same as jones' chips b/c he did not follow the scientific method to show the 2 types of material are the same....

This is a total train-wreck of thinking. Basile+Bentham described very clearly their selection criteria. Millette followed them.

They are the same chips according to B+B.

Let me stress that - They are the same chips according to B+B. Not according to me, you, Madonna or Nelson Mandela, but according to B+B.

That Millette's results don't match B+B does not mean that he failed to follow the 'scientific method'. Dear FSM :rolleyes:
 
This is a total train-wreck of thinking. Basile+Bentham described very clearly their selection criteria. Millette followed them.

They are the same chips according to B+B.

Let me stress that - They are the same chips according to B+B. Not according to me, you, Madonna or Nelson Mandela, but according to B+B.

That Millette's results don't match B+B does not mean that he failed to follow the 'scientific method'. Dear FSM :rolleyes:

it sounds like ya got a problem with science. it makes perfect sense.

"Reproducibility is the ability of an entire experiment or study to be reproduced, either by the researcher or by someone else working independently. It is one of the main principles of the scientific method."
 
Stay tuned Sunstealer and Ivan and Ergo and MM and Senenmut and Redwood etc for a very exciting new YouTube video from a friend of ours! Believe me you will not want to miss it...

come on man, the suspense is killing me....you gotta tell us who it is and what its about!!:D
 
Stay tuned Sunstealer and Ivan and Ergo and MM and Senenmut and Redwood etc for a very exciting new YouTube video from a friend of ours! Believe me you will not want to miss it...

Is this like when I was a kid and I got three guesses what my birthday present was?:)
 
Is this like when I was a kid and I got three guesses what my birthday present was?:)
No, I don't mean to torture you, I just want to give everyone a heads-up that some actual new data is coming very soon, and don't just burn out and drop away from this thread before it arrives! Anyway I think Thursday or Friday all will be revealed... and yes Redwood it will be a nice birthday present for you. Three guesses: 1) a new experiment blowing away one of the central tenets of 9/11 Truth 2) revelation of formerly confidential insider information unflattering to the 9/11 Truth cause 3) a new experiment whose data adds ambiguity to the entire debate. Senenmut maybe not so much a birthday present for you, but I know you like challenges so you might enjoy it too.
 
Last edited:
Chris: OK, I am curious too:cool: And btw, I just arranged some relevant experiment as well, but in my case, the results are still unknown and can be easily negative.
 
Heating of red/gray chips of four red paints from the yard of our chemical institute
Hi, all:cool:
As for me, I have had basically two remaining questions, regarding “mysterious” WTC red/gray chips investigated by Harrit et al and Millette:

1) If Bentham chips (a) to (d) were specifically Laclede primer paint on rust (which is very probable for many pretty good reasons), where are the strontium chromate crystals?

2) Is it a common phenomenon, that when the chips of red paints on rust flakes are heated up to 700 degrees C (heating rate 10 degrees per min), some shiny spherical/round objects are created from the rust („grey layers“)?


Whereas the first question remains basically unanswered, I have finally dediced to arrange some simple experiments, which can help to solve the second, pretty “important” question.

First, here is a repost of my contribution No 3491:
I just visited once again our yard and this time, I scrapped off using lancet only red paints from the rusted steel, from four independent sources, more specifically from some fence, some gate and two kinds of trolleys. Namely in the case of these trolleys, I would expect that the paint is a high quality primer, so perhaps with epoxy or alkyd binder. As for the red color, it can be caused by iron oxides, but can be also caused by lead stuffs.

Here is a photo of the chips, which were attracted with the magnet (about half of them). Then, I transferred them from the magnet to the beaker:


picture.php


This tuesday, I asked Dr. Slouf from our Polymer Morphology Department to shot some photos of the chips shown above (these were attracted with magnet, therefore, they are chips of paints on pieces of “magnetically active” rust). Here are shots at two magnifications, chips are placed on brass pedestal: (At the lower magnification, the viewing field is ca 10 mm, at the higher magnification, it is ca 1 mm)

picture.php


picture.php


As you can see, they look quite similar to Bentham chips:

picture.php


(No wonder, all red paint chips can look quite similar, although they originate from different sources, should have different composition and could be applied using different methods -including electroocoating (for Senenmut;).)

You may notice that the rust layers are not well apparent above. It is just matter of playing with the photo. Here is a photo after a simple correction, using just function AutoAdjust colors in IrfanView:

picture.php


Rust layers are already well visible, but other colors are not so realistic. This shows (among others), how easily can be the colors in micrographs changed and that it is nonsense to compare colors from various microscopes (to MM).

At higher magnification, nothing extraordinary. Just paint chips, like in Bentham paper or Millette study:cool:

Yesterday, I asked colleagues from the Department of Conductive Polymers to heat my “fine collection” of red/gray chips in their oven (I used this oven already two years ago for the heating of my Laclede paint imitation). They kindly heated my chips up to 700 degrees (heating rate 10 degrees/min, like in DSC experiments in Bentham paper. Looking just through magnifying glass, the most of chips were still red after heating, but generally darker.

Unfortunately, Dr. Slouf left for his holiday today, so I asked another colleague, Dr. Babic, who kindly microscoped my chips after heating. His microscope is not so good, but basically suffices. (For better photos, we have to wait some week or so. Dr. Babic again microscoped chips at two magnifications:
Here is a scale for the lower magnification:

picture.php


It follows from this shot that the whole viewing field corresponds to 700 microns, since the distance between larger ticks is 100 microns.
Some photo of chips at this magnification is here:

picture.php


After a closer look, some shiny round objects are hardly visible, but they are somehow resolved at 8x higher magnification:

picture.php


picture.php


picture.php


picture.php


And here is for comparison the “infamous” Fig. 20, Bentham paper

picture.php


I would say that in all these photos, some shiny round objects (formed from the rust layers) are somehow visible. Therefore, their formation from red paints (or perhaps from any paint) on rust, when heated up to 700 degrees C, seems to be a quite common phenomenon:o) My results so far are not conclusive (I have to wait for the better microscope), round objects in Fig. 20 from Bentham are definitely better "developed"). But I am quite sure that when looking really closely (with a better microscope), I would find the better "examples", it's just a matter of patience... For now, that's all, Dr. Babic was in hurry and had to left for the rest of week...

Thank you for your attention:cool:
(And many thanks also to my colleagues, which helped me quite a lot with these “groundbreaking experiments”)

(It would be interesting to measure XEDS of these round objects, we have necessary device in our institute, but I think there is hardly any doubt here: these objects should mostly originate from gray layers, like in Bentham paper;) And it does not really matter if the content of iron is higher in them because of some partial reduction).
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom