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

[Spanx]

BIG BALLS of soot perhaps? do the XEDS and we shall see.

Why bother ?

It's only you and MM left.

Why don't you do something ?

 

[Miragememories]

"...I am also sorry for leaving the impression that Millette was definitely going to do a peer-reviewed published piece on the chips.

I stand by my statement that I never hired Millette to go all the way to peer-review.

He did what I hired him to do, and did a great job of it.

I got overly excited when he told me he wanted to take it two further steps and present it at multiple forensics conferences and then publish it peer-reviewed.

Well, he took it one further step, gave it two major presentations in front of hundreds of people who gave it a 100% thumbs-up.

Even that is way more than I hired him to do, and adds a huge amount of credibility to his conclusion of NO THERMITE.

But again, my apologies for leaving the impression that a peer-reviewed paper was promised. It was intended, and everything seemed to go wrong as Millette tried to take that final big step he wanted to take."

I do wish you would not read more into something than is really there.

Millette was pre-obligated and already at work on those presentations months before you made your arrangement with him.

The fact that a seated audience of of his peers gave a predictably polite response to his lecture hardly represents peer review.

As I have said, there is little reason to question the quality of the work that Dr. Millette performed. His audience made the natural assumption that his findings were valid because they were told his chip selections were a match for those highlighted in the 2009 Bentham paper.

What his audience was not told, were the reasons why Dr. Millette's findings were not as ironclad as he wanted to make them appear.

Dr. Millette never talked about how it would be impossible for his chips to behave in the manner of the ones highlighted in the 2009 Bentham paper.

Dr. Millette never explained to his audience or anyone else for that matter, that if he heated his selections to ~430C that according to his findings, they would be reduced to simple ash, totally contradictory to the behaviour of the highlighted chips in the 2009 Bentham paper.

Obviously such issues would place Dr. Millette's findings in serious question, or, suggest that a number of respected scientists foolishly lied about something easily verified.

But since Dr. Millette will not discuss that problem, and as far as we know, did not entertain questions from his audience regarding that problem, disaster was nicely averted.

I don't think he deserves a 100% thumbs up.

"MM BTW which is it?

On the one hand you want Millette to cook his chips during a coffee break, and on the other hand you don't think that anything short of full pewer-review merits response.

Ya can't have it both ways.

If he cooked up the chips like you ask and the results didn't fit your beliefs, would you accept his results?"

YES, I do want Dr. Millette to post what he finds after heating his samples to ~430C. If he finds the simple ash residue that his pre-findings argue, we will have proof that his samples are a not match for the residue found by Dr. Harrit et al, and thus Dr. Millette will have shown that his chips are not the match that he claimed them to be.

Regarding peer review, unless Dr. Millette publishes his findings, whether they agree with the 2009 Bentham paper, or not, it is not a normal expectation, or incumbent on the authors of the original published paper to publish a response.

Until such time, his work remains 'preliminary', something that can only be informally speculated about.

"And also BTW, of COURSE Kevin Ryan didn't have to give over chips he thought were thermitic to Millette.

It just weakens the Jones/Harrit/Ryan position that Millette found the wrong chips."

Why do you ignore the legitimacy of Kevin Ryan not giving Dr. Millette 9/11 WTC dust because Dr. Millette already had his own? By not doing so, the chain of custody was established by Dr. Millette and no argument could be made that Kevin Ryan's dust was not what he said it was.

Our trust was given completely to Dr. Millette.

I suppose a workable solution would have been to let Kevin Ryan visit Dr. Millette's lab and help him identify 'chips of interest' from Millette's stash.

"In my opinion, Basile's upcoming study is also greatly weakened by the fact that he would not communicate with me or anyone else about develoiping a pprotocol we could all buy into.

He didn't have to talk with me, but his refusal to talk with me only weakens his credibility in my mind and in the minds of many of us here.

I am very bitterly disappointed about the lack of communication and unwillingness to work together that Basile, Ryan and others have shown."

What is there about Mark Basile's research that you feel negates it from the very start?

No doubt he would be inundated with advice if he sought out every party that was interested in this research.

At least he is working more openly than Dr. Millette was. Mark has stated what he plans to do and how he plans to do it.

What is bad about the protocol he described?

"When you say, "using the same reliable methodology, Millette totally rejected the possibility of this steel primer paint being a match for the LeClede formulation supported by Oystein and Kminek and and that he could not match to the 130 Tnemec steel primer paints listed.

Your other supposed expert and anonymous JREF consultant Sunstealer, claims the red chips are Tnemec steel primer paint," you're wrong wrong wrong and wrong.

Millette does not reject the possibility of his chips being LaClede; he is too conservative to proclaim that it is LaClede until he gets a verifiable sample to directly compare."

Need I remind you;

OK but Jim Millette specifically said to me, unequivocally, NO STRONTIUM CHROMATE. It was clear to me that he looked and he did not find it. I wouldn't bet my nuts on it being LaClede...

"Big difference. And I'm 99% certain Sunstealer no longer believes that the paint is tenemec."

Well he believes it so badly, it remains as part of his posting signature.

Proof of Tnemec red primer paint in Harrit et al paper
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6959549&postcount=536

"But you totally ignore the major point, that both Sunstealer (back in 2009) and Millette (in 2012) unequivocally say that the red-grey chips are definitely NOT THERMITE."

I certainly do not ignore that statement of opinion.

Until such time as either of them publish science-based evidence which validates their disapproval of the 2009 Bentham paper, they are left with nothing but unplublished opinions just like everyone else.

"At least Jones has responded to the Millette paper; Harrit is using the peer-review excuse... and I no longer assume good intention behind his choice to refuse all response to the science in Millette's paper.

Much less baffling when I stop making it my job to understand others' motivations."

That is far from true Chris. After the 2009 Bentham paper was published, Dr. Harrit wrote the paper WHY THE RED/GRAY CHIPS ARE NOT PRIMER PAINT which is the source of the XEDS spectra that Sunstealer so likes to misrepresent in this thread.

That paper by Dr. Harrit is quite pertinent to the later findings of Dr. Millette.

"But in Harrit's defense, I agree that he is NOT senile, and it's a term that depresses me when it is bandied about.

As a minister I have spent too much time with Alzheimer's patients, people with dementia, brain damaged veterans.

the mentally ill, suicide victims and their families, attempted suicides, depression, drug and alcohol addictions, prisoners, sociopaths, etc etc etc.

Niels and I are not likely to ever be friends, and we sure don't have much mutual respect, but senile?

That's insulting to both him and to people who in fact suffer from the horrors of a rotting brain.

It is quite regrettable that you felt it necessary to even acknowledge this shameful attack made by others here.

That has to be the scummiest form of argument.

MM

 

[NoahFence]

It's not an attack if its true.

What's worse?

"Harrit is a senile old con artist"
or
"Lets use the deaths of 3,000 people as a plaything"

pot, kettle, blah blah blah. grow up.

 

[chrismohr]

Hi again Senenmut,

I don't know the name of Millette's employee nor do I care. I think that would make a difference only if I believed it possible that somehow a psy-op was assigned to work at Millette's office just before I contacted him to ask if he'd like to analyze some WTC chips... and then conveniently leave to do nefarious work elsewhere once my misinformation campaign was over. Nor does it matter that Millette didn't name an assistant. He would say, "When you have spare time, clean these chips" or whatever. His employee simply executed the request. Journalists have to show some discrimination, you know. So no thank you, I am finished chasing down 9/11 CD dead ends. This story is a wrap now as far as I'm concerned. And yes, I did look into this thing of him heating the chips only high enough to prepare them without igniting them. I can't even remember all the details. But it turned out to be another in a string of questions that lead us nowhere. As I've been saying recently, I've drawn a line in the sand where I no longer am interested in chasing down every 9/11 Truth claim.

But in answer to another question, I found Jim Millette after asking some two dozen labs if they could do this materials characterization exercise on the red-grey chips. He had thought it would be interesting to explore these chips further, but there was never any concrete plan in place to go forward with the exercise until I asked.

 

[chrismohr]

MM Kevin Ryan refuseed to give chips he considered thermitic to Millette in a hostile way, not because Miellette had his own chips. And I did not say Basile's case is "negated from the very start," I said it was weakened due to his refusal to allow anyone outside of 9/11 Truth to have any input on the protocol. And Millette said no strontium chromate, but he did NOT say it is NOT LaClede. Not only was it not eliminated as a possibility, he went on an unsuccessful nationwide search for LaClede primer to compare to his chips. And as for Sunstealer's signature, wow. Sunstealer when you return could you explain this? Did you just not bother to change your signature line as new data came in, or do you believe it's tnemec paint?

 

[pgimeno]

And as for Sunstealer's signature, wow. Sunstealer when you return could you explain this? Did you just not bother to change your signature line as new data came in, or do you believe it's tnemec paint?

Sunstealer has been consistently saying that the MEK chip in the Harrit et al. paper did not match chips a-d, and matched Tnemec primer paint instead. That's what the post pointed to by his signature reflects, and is independent of Millette's findings regarding chips a-d (actually it's confirmed by Millette's findings, because Millette also found chips whose signature matches that of Tnemec, but didn't analyze them).

Among his reasons, the one which convinced me beyond doubt is that it can't be contamination because you don't get the signature for a completely different primer paint by chance if it were contamination. Also, the relative levels of Al and Si are not a match for chips a-d and are a match for Tnemec.

If you read the post linked by his signature, you will see that that's what he's saying, and not that chips a-d are Tnemec. It reads:

Proof of Tnemec red primer paint in Harrit et al paper.​

As expectable, MM has been misrepresenting Sunstealer by saying he ignored contamination as the source of the discrepancy with chips a-d. He did not; he discarded it after a careful examination and went through a detailed and well reasoned explanation on why, which MM ignored.

I am talking only about what I've seen and interpreted, of course, but I can search for several posts he's made in this regard to support this interpretation. For example, here's a quote from the linked post:

Now what's interesting is that Harrit et al claim that the MEK chip is identical to the samples a-d in the paper even though the compositions are radically different.
​

For the record, I also believe that Harrit et al. used chips of a very different nature along the paper, didn't characterize and separate them into homogeneous groups, and analyzed them without distinction, which is why the MEK chip is different to chips a-d and the resistivity test gives unexpected results, and some have a different kind of gray in their surface, some have Pb, some have white stripes, etc. and that the authors cherry-picked the results that confirmed their conclusion ignoring all opposite results.

 

[Miragememories]

"MM Kevin Ryan refuseed to give chips he considered thermitic to Millette in a hostile way, not because Miellette had his own chips."

Any hostility shown you by Kevin Ryan regarding your choice of Dr. Millette would appear to be justified when over two years later we can see how doggedly meekly Millette pursued the research findings of the 2009 Bentham paper.

"His [Dr. Millette] intention is to replicate the tests done in the Bentham study... The Bentham paper does not report on having done a normal envirnmental forensic study of the components so Dr. Millette will do that, plus everything they did, plus other tests as needed."

"And I did not say Basile's case is "negated from the very start," I said it was weakened due to his refusal to allow anyone outside of 9/11 Truth to have any input on the protocol."

Please explain how you feel Mark Basile's current research has been weakened?

What is he omitting from his current research which will "weaken" his findings?

"And Millette said no strontium chromate, but he did NOT say it is NOT LaClede.

Not only was it not eliminated as a possibility, he went on an unsuccessful nationwide search for LaClede primer to compare to his chips. "

How did his findings not eliminate it?

Even Ivan agreed that a finding of strontium was essential to making a finding of LaClede steel primer paint.

The fact remains Chris that Millette searched his samples for strontium and he could not find any.

"OK but Jim Millette specifically said to me, unequivocally, NO STRONTIUM CHROMATE. It was clear to me that he looked and he did not find it. I wouldn't bet my nuts on it being LaClede..."

"...if there is a version of LaClede that doesn't have strontium chromate, or if there is another test that shows strontium chromate, there is always the possibility Jim will look at that."

"...So, clearly only strontium detection can be good enough as the "final" proof of Laclede paint."

"And as for Sunstealer's signature, wow.

Sunstealer when you return could you explain this?

Did you just not bother to change your signature line as new data came in, or do you believe it's tnemec paint?

I am amazed that an investigative journalist never noticed the repeated signature of one of their resource people.

Sunstealer ignores contamination and sees signals buried in noise.

You are really straining what little credibility you have left Chris.

MM

 

[beachnut]

...
You are really straining what little credibility you have left Chris.

MM

LOL, you bring nonsense of thermite, no evidence, only talk. If you have so much evidence (you don't because the energy does not match, the DSC does not match) go get the Pulitzer.

You have talk from a paper, and the conclusion of thermite was made up.

You ignore the fact no thermite damage was found on any WTC steel.

You have no credibility because you present no evidence for thermite. You better read your paper again, it does not support the conclusion of thermite, it lied.

Millette's paper is solid science, you can't debunk it, you are suck attacking Chris out of desperation of 12 lost years of woo supporting liars and nuts like Harrit. How much thermite did Harrit say was used? Did he say lots? lol

Wait, Harrit can't figure out a 757 hit the Pentagon, and he makes up lies of thermite. Harrit has zero credibility on 911, like Jones, and the rest of the liars in 911 truth.

Explain again how thermite in their dust has less energy than thermite?
Gee, even paper beats thermite. You guys are putting thermite in your fantasy, when office contents did it with the heat energy of over 2,700 TONS of thermite. 911 truth, failure forever.

 

[Africanus]

And Millette said no strontium chromate, but he did NOT say it is NOT LaClede.

Chris, the acceleration Voltage, that Dr. Millette used for recording the spectra, was 20 keV, but the depicted spectra were only in the range of 0 to 10 keV. Did he look for Sr signals beyond 10 keV?

BTW, I think that chip 2 of sample L 1616 would be a good candidate for Laclede, as this chip contains a tiny signal for chromium.

 

[NoahFence]

You are really straining what little credibility you have left Chris.

MM

Credibility with whom exactly?

The scientific community? No.
Rational thinkers? No.
Truthers? He never had any credibility with truthers anyway, because he's an honest person. Truthers can't handle honesty.
You? You don't matter.

So who cares if he's "losing credibility"?

 

[Gamolon]

MM Kevin Ryan refuseed to give chips he considered thermitic to Millette in a hostile way, not because Miellette had his own chips. And I did not say Basile's case is "negated from the very start," I said it was weakened due to his refusal to allow anyone outside of 9/11 Truth to have any input on the protocol. And Millette said no strontium chromate, but he did NOT say it is NOT LaClede. Not only was it not eliminated as a possibility, he went on an unsuccessful nationwide search for LaClede primer to compare to his chips. And as for Sunstealer's signature, wow. Sunstealer when you return could you explain this? Did you just not bother to change your signature line as new data came in, or do you believe it's tnemec paint?

Chris,

Why is comparison of chips important at this point? According to Harrit's paper, if you extracted red/gray chips from any WTC dust pile with a magnet, those chips are supposedly thermitic.

If Harrit's paper is indeed true, Millette should not have found ANY "wrong chips" as Harrit, Jones, MM, and others have stated he did.

 

[chrismohr]

Africanus and Gamolon,
You make good points. Africanus, I think this was mentioned by either Oystein, Sunstealer or maybe even the late great Ivan: that Millette may not have found strontium because his measurements just didn't capture the weak signal. And Gamolon, Kevin Ryans's chips are important only if you allow Jones to move the goalposts, as he has done, now claiming all kinds of things that were not part of the paper's selection criteria. And Jim Millette would have liked to have chips Kevin Ryan believed were thermitic, just as he would have liked to have found real LaClede paint for comparison... much as a detective would like ten perfect fingerprints. Instead he went with the evidence he had and still built a very strong case against thermite. And as you will see when my video comes out, I have another reason why Kevin Ryan's chips for comparison are now utterly unnecessary (teaser).

 

[Senenmut]

Hi again Senenmut,

I don't know the name of Millette's employee nor do I care. I think that would make a difference only if I believed it possible that somehow a psy-op was assigned to work at Millette's office just before I contacted him to ask if he'd like to analyze some WTC chips... and then conveniently leave to do nefarious work elsewhere once my misinformation campaign was over.

since this study was already in the works, how did millette get interested in this?

Nor does it matter that Millette didn't name an assistant. He would say, "When you have spare time, clean these chips" or whatever.

assumptions noted....thats not very investigative is it. you said he was very interested in the chips. it would be nice to have a name so we can look into this guy.

His employee simply executed the request.

another assumption duly noted.

Journalists have to show some discrimination, you know. So no thank you, I am finished chasing down 9/11 CD dead ends. This story is a wrap now as far as I'm concerned.

a wrap? do you think scientifically? do you know what replication means?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducibility

And yes, I did look into this thing of him heating the chips only high enough to prepare them without igniting them. I can't even remember all the details. But it turned out to be another in a string of questions that lead us nowhere. As I've been saying recently, I've drawn a line in the sand where I no longer am interested in chasing down every 9/11 Truth claim.

its not a claim, it is an ASTM standard. one that millette said he followed. if he did not follow that ASTM standard and his paper said he did follow ASTM standards, then we have a problem. any "investigative" type person would wonder why he didn't just follow astm standards concerning the muffle furnace test and heat those chips to 450C.

But in answer to another question, I found Jim Millette after asking some two dozen labs if they could do this materials characterization exercise on the red-grey chips. He had thought it would be interesting to explore these chips further, but there was never any concrete plan in place to go forward with the exercise until I asked.

?? you asked two dozen labs if they could test the chips??? did these two dozen labs alreaday have chips?? if not, who was going to supply the chips?

 

[ergo]

a wrap? do you think scientifically? do you know what replication means? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducibility

I think he probably means something more like this ...

https://www.embroidables.com/Project-Ideas/Images/Big/Embroidered Gift Wrap.jpg

Breach of rule 5 removed. Do not hotlink images from other sites without permission.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles

It's so pretty you don't even want to open it.

 

[chrismohr]

Ergo, Senenmut and MM, all my old friends are back! To what do I owe this honor?
Senenmut, every journalist knows that part of the job is discernment. It's important to sift through the information and determine what is important. If I had to write a very short article I would say, Harrit/Jones found no elemental aluminum, therefore no thermite. Jones himself admitted this and expressed concern that Jeff Farrer's unpublished TEM data shows no elemental aluminum. He said he employed a second method using a different materials characterization technique and still found no elemental aluminum. Therefore no thermite. Millette found no elemental aluminum. Therefore, no thermite. You'll see in my upcoming YouTube video that I will address literally dozens of objections that have been thrown at the Millette study on every level. You and MM have already told me that I am not a good journalist. Maybe. As it is, the pile of **stuff** I deal with in my upcoming video will bore most viewers, and for you it will not be enough. But still... no elemental aluminum. No thermite. Sorry. That's the core issue here. Oh, and thanks so much for the pretty gift box Ergo!

 

[Gamolon]

a wrap? do you think scientifically? do you know what replication means?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducibility

And even without doing all the tests in Harrit's paper, Millette found different chips than what Harrit found. According to Harrit's paper, this was not supposed to happen.

Harrit's paper was NOT a paper written with tests on how to find thermitic material and separate it out. It was a paper written to prove a preconceived notion that all the red/gray, magnetically attracted chips were thermitic.

How do we know this? Because Harrit and his group did not publish one single sentence regarding tests results that showing something else. Every single test they did in the paper supposedly resulted in evidence that showed a thermitic material.

Thus, Harrit's paper basically concludes the following:

"Anyone extracting red/gray chips from a WTC dust pile with a magnet will find those chips to be thermitic material."

If you or anyone else wants to refute this, then please do so. I have asked many times for someone to point me to an entry in the paper that proves the above conclusion wrong, and not one person has stepped forward. Even Jones and Harrit refused to address this when I emailed them.

 

[tsig]

And even without doing all the tests in Harrit's paper, Millette found different chips than what Harrit found. According to Harrit's paper, this was not supposed to happen.

Harrit's paper was NOT a paper written with tests on how to find thermitic material and separate it out. It was a paper written to prove a preconceived notion that all the red/gray, magnetically attracted chips were thermitic.

How do we know this? Because Harrit and his group did not publish one single sentence regarding tests results that showing something else. Every single test they did in the paper supposedly resulted in evidence that showed a thermitic material.

Thus, Harrit's paper basically concludes the following:

"Anyone extracting red/gray chips from a WTC dust pile with a magnet will find those chips to be thermitic material."

If you or anyone else wants to refute this, then please do so. I have asked many times for someone to point me to an entry in the paper that proves the above conclusion wrong, and not one person has stepped forward. Even Jones and Harrit refused to address this when I emailed them.

When you set out on a quest to find thermite no one should be surprised when you find thermite.


(couldn't they use the chips to find out what was in the thermite then reproduce it so we could see it in action?)

 

[LSSBB]

When you set out on a quest to find thermite no one should be surprised when you find thermite.


(couldn't they use the chips to find out what was in the thermite then reproduce it so we could see it in action?)

"We set out on a Quest for the Holy Grail, but all we found was this drinking cup. Darn our luck." Yeah, ain't gonna hear that from our Knights of Truth.

 

[NoahFence]

You and MM have already told me that I am not a good journalist. Maybe. As it is, the pile of **stuff** I deal with in my upcoming video will bore most viewers, and for you it will not be enough.

If that ilk sees you as a bad journalist, you can rest assured reality is the complete opposite.

 

[Gamolon]

its not a claim, it is an ASTM standard. one that millette said he followed. if he did not follow that ASTM standard and his paper said he did follow ASTM standards, then we have a problem. any "investigative" type person would wonder why he didn't just follow astm standards concerning the muffle furnace test and heat those chips to 450C.

This doesn't matter one bit at the moment because Harrit has a much bigger problem.

Millette found DIFFERENT CHIPS where Harrit's paper concludes that there should only be ONE type (thermitic). How is this possible?! Harrit and Millette used the same two separation criteria, yet came out with opposite results:

1. Must have a red/gray layer
2. Must be attracted to a magnet