• 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.

The sad case of Niels Harrit

First of all: Harrit has not even mentioned Millette's report, which rebutted the conclusions of "Bentham paper". He therefore presented himself as a cheater in this interview.

I liked the music of Frank Zappa, as usually, that's all...
 
Last edited:
Sunstealer said:
Harrit was simply a name that Jones etc could use to front their paper because BYU wouldn't entertain them. Harrit doesn't understand the paper that uses his own name as lead author. Was Harrit present or did he perform any of the experiments? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
He points out how all the microscopic and EDS work was done in BYU labs, and we know that Farrer did the DSC test somewhere outside of his BYU department. So none of the analytical work was done by Harrit. I don't know that he ever said anything to the effect that he studied those chips in any way, beyond pulling out some particles with a magnet inside a dust bag (he showed that at the Toronto hearings).
But he claims that "four or five" of them shared equally in the work: Some do the hands-on experimentation, some contribute logic, literature and what not. I have no idea if and what Harrit claims to have contributed. Could be the stuff about the LLNL "superthermite", although I have a feeling that this comes more from Kevin Ryan. Also not clear who the fifth is when he talks about "four or five". Jones, Farrer, Ryan, Harrit of course (although Ryan, too, did none of the experiments presented in the paper, he is known to have fiddled with chips, and also prepared some nanothermite, none of which is relevant to the paper). I think Farnsworth assisted Jones in the lab. As for Legge, Roberts, Gourley and Larsen, I am sure they did nothing at all except add their insignificant names.

Sunstealer said:
He's a typical truther who cannot focus on a single issue. He doesn't realise that by invoking things like thermate and saying that some chips weren't reactive, he contradicts the very work, data and conclusions he expounds in his own paper. It's hilarious, the poor bloke is all over the place. He's just another looney-toons. He hasn't the first clue what he's talking about.
Click to expand...
Or he focusses on a single, but the wrong, issue :p
 
Ivan Kminek said:
First of all: Harrit has not even mentioned Millette's report, which rebutted the conclusions of "Bentham paper". He therefore presented himself as a cheater in this interview.
Click to expand...
Did you listen to the second hour? :confused:

Ivan Kminek said:
I liked the music of Frank Zappa, as usually, that's all...
Click to expand...
Yeah, was nice touch to finish off this nonsense with something entertaining ;)
 
Oystein said:
As for Legge, Roberts, Gourley and Larsen, I am sure they did nothing at all except add their insignificant names.
:p
Click to expand...

This cracked me up... What could these characters have done in this study or how could they have contributed in any significant manner? Gourley is an intellectual property attorney in TX. Roberts claimed to have been a former technical writer.

Why add these slackers to what was supposed to be a serious scientific study? Having these names as co authors is like a billboard announcing the paper is a scam.
 
Oystein said:
Did you listen to the second hour? :confused:
Click to expand...

Sorry, Oystein, I was in impression that you have already summarized the whole interview above. On the other hand, the guy from Niels Harrit "fan page" wrote me: "I have listened to the interview, and Niels details the birth of the nanothermite paper very good. There is no mentioning of Milette, for the reason described above."


Alleged reason is that Millette's report has not been peer-reviewed yet.

(I have listened only to about the first ten minutes)
 
Last edited:
JSanderO said:
This cracked me up... What could these characters have done in this study or how could they have contributed in any significant manner? Gourley is an intellectual property attorney in TX. Roberts claimed to have been a former technical writer.

Why add these slackers to what was supposed to be a serious scientific study? Having these names as co authors is like a billboard announcing the paper is a scam.
Click to expand...
That's because according to truther math, the more people that are wrong about a claim the closer to being right that claim is.
RT=right; WG= wrong
RT = 1- (1/ WGn)
Bentham Thermite RT =1- (1/9) =1- .1111 wrong = .8889% right
AE 911T RT =1- (1/1900) =1- .0005 wrong = .9995% right
 
JSanderO said:
This cracked me up... What could these characters have done in this study or how could they have contributed in any significant manner? Gourley is an intellectual property attorney in TX. Roberts claimed to have been a former technical writer.

Why add these slackers to what was supposed to be a serious scientific study? Having these names as co authors is like a billboard announcing the paper is a scam.
Click to expand...

Very good point.

Legge is still a somewhat prolific 9/11 "researcher", having more recently done work on flight AA77 (and supporting the orthodox notion that, yes, AA77 was flown into the Pentagon exactly as the commonly accepted story has it), and is (or was for a while?) co-editor of the "Journal of 9/11 Studies". He had 9 articles there published between June 2006 and June 2008, some of them as sole author. So he's got some name recognition value and street cred. One of these articles, "Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction" (January 2008) already included as authors 7 of the 9 "ATM" authors: Jones, Farrer, Gregory Jenkins, Legge, Gourley, Ryan, Farnsworth, and Crockett Grabbe (Grabbe, but not Jenkins, was also acknowledged in ATM).

The only other "article" Gourley (attorney) is credited with at the JoNES is a letter to NIST appealing a decision. Gourley is not the claimant in this appeal - several are named - but only the attorney writing the letter. Consequently, NIST distributes their reply to several, with Gourley only in Cc.
But he had the balls to publish a "Discussion" of a Bazant paper in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics in 2007 :D According to that paper, he has a B.S. in Chemical Engineering.
Also co-authored Kevin Ryan's "Environmental Anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials." The Environmentalist. August 2008

Gregg Roberts' only "article" at the JoNES is an annotated transcript of a debate between SE Jones and Leslie Robertson. Roberts calls himself "Associate Editor of [Jim Hoffman's] 911Research".

I have yet to find a single mention of Bradley R. Larsen anywhere outside the paper.
 
Oystein said:
ETA: Oh - and the second hour is behind a paywall. Lost on the world then ;)

ETA2: Download the audio of hour 1 while it's still free: http://rediceradio.net/radio/2013/RIR-130528-nielsharrit-hr1.mp3
(or ask me if the link goes dead - I have downloaded)
Click to expand...

These guys are out to save the world, and they want payment to hear their propaganda?? Shouldn't they be shouting it from the rooftops, if not paying others to listen? Next thing you know, they'll be hawking DVDs of their stuff.;)
 
JSanderO said:
This cracked me up... What could these characters have done in this study or how could they have contributed in any significant manner? Gourley is an intellectual property attorney in TX. Roberts claimed to have been a former technical writer.

Why add these slackers to what was supposed to be a serious scientific study? Having these names as co authors is like a billboard announcing the paper is a scam.
Click to expand...

Gourley is the chairman of the "International Center of 9/11 studies". The Center claims to fund scientific research:

Funding Scientific Research

The Center has funded a number of specific research projects, including laboratory analysis of data obtained under FOIA, and chemical analysis of World Trade Center debris.
Click to expand...

Source: http://www.ic911studies.org/Projects.html

I think that the center funded the study and Gourley is included in the author's list in order to hide this. Usually organizations that funded the research are listed in the "acknowledgements" section. If no organizations are listed there the research was only funded by university resources. Listing the center there would challenge the independency of the research team.
 
You need balls to author a technical paper when you don't have a degree in the subject nor have actually assisted in conducting the experiments/research or trials.

They don't care.
 
Niels Harrit loses in court! When the Danish journalist called Niels Harrit and the 911 truthers 'fools' (tosser), Harrit took the journalist and the weekly Weekendavisen to court for defamation seeking DKK 25000 (4500 USD) in damages. Harrit was his own attorney and brought in WTC dust, grilling the journalist Søren Villemose, on his knowledge of the WTC collapse. To know avail. Today, 13 sept., the Danish court threw out Harrits lawsuit, and Harrit was assessed DKK 15000 (2700 USD) in court costs. Ouch!
 
steveDK said:
Niels Harrit loses in court! When the Danish journalist called Niels Harrit and the 911 truthers 'fools' (tosser), Harrit took the journalist and the weekly Weekendavisen to court for defamation seeking DKK 25000 (4500 USD) in damages. Harrit was his own attorney and brought in WTC dust, grilling the journalist Søren Villemose, on his knowledge of the WTC collapse. To know avail. Today, 13 sept., the Danish court threw out Harrits lawsuit, and Harrit was assessed DKK 15000 (2700 USD) in court costs. Ouch!
Click to expand...

:D Yep! Link to the thread about it:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=250892

Link to an article about it:
http://jyllands-posten.dk/kultur/ECE5950487/dom-man-ma-godt-kalde-9-11-skeptiker-en-tosse/
 
Criteria said:
Troll much?

Was it necessary to awaken a thread that had been dormant for several years just to announce that speaking tours are costly?
Click to expand...
who posts in dormant threads... lol, Rule 911-119i, don't post in dormant threads

Harrit lies about 9/11, they are no speaking tours, they are tours of lies dumbed down for conspiracy theorists who fail to think for themselves. Gullible audience. How many tons of thermite are in Niels Harrit fantasy version of 9/11?
 
Last edited:
Criteria said:
Troll much?

Was it necessary to awaken a thread that had been dormant for several years just to announce that speaking tours are costly?
Click to expand...

Not nearly as dormant as Mark Basile's lab tests that will prove poor Niels so sadly wrong.
 
Criteria said:
Troll much?

Was it necessary to awaken a thread that had been dormant for several years just to announce that speaking tours are costly?
Click to expand...

Looks to me like you don't know about Sir Elton and REO Speedwagon.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom