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

[DGM]

Sorry about that.

Not a problem

The fact still remains. "Nano" or other-wise, the thermite reaction can not exceed the theoretic maximum. Chemistry is funny that way.

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

Here's another blog post attacking Dave Thomas (and me to an extent) re the DSC readings Jim Millette considered not worth doing:
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/03/matching-peaks-part-2-dave-thomas.html

Thanks for the info, Chris. From all the attention we're getting over there, seems like we're getting under their skin.

Does anyone know of a link to the actual DSC curve at Livermore (LLNL) that supposedly shows nanothermite reacting at 530 deg C? I would like to check it out. Zugam provides a link to the LLNL front door. While a search from that portal for nano-thermite pulls up results like this , trying to find this specific graph is like searching for a needle in a haystack.

Here's what I got at LLNL:

Your search - nano-thermite 530 - did not match any documents.

I imagine Zugam is just being cagey because the actual paper says nothing of the sort,and he doesn't want his bluff exposed.

I should comment on all this at "Debunking the Debunkers" - oh wait, they don't allow such things at that particular bastion of Truth and Freedom.

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

Negative review of Harrit

Whilst trying to chase Zugam's wild goose, I came across this interesting article.

Peer review of Harrit et al. on 911 - Can't see any nanothermite?

The authors also provided differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) measurements of bi-layer grey-red flakes and observed exothermic peaks at approximately 420 C (degrees Celsius) for all four WTC dust samples.

There are more problems with all of this than I have the patience to outline but here are some main points.

• The Al slugs would give inhomogeneous background Al signals in the EDXA spectra. This was not considered or discussed in the paper. There could be no or little Al in the red-layer.
  
• The carbon adhesive tape will give inhomogeneous background C signals in the EDXA spectra. This was not considered or discussed in the paper. There could be no or little C in the red-layer.
  
• There is as much or more Si (silicon) in the EDXA results than Al in all the red-layer results and Si and Al are closely correlated in their spatial distributions (e.g., their Figure 10). No probable explanation is given for this. This is not consistent with the presence of metallic Al.
  
• Oxygen (O) is more closely spatially correlated with Al and Si than with Fe (e.g., their Figure 10). No probable explanation is given for this. This contradicts the conclusion of the presence of metallic Al.
  
• No effort was made to estimate the Fe:Al elemental ratio in the red-layer. Synthetic thermite or nanothermite would have a ratio of 1:1. The point is never discussed.
  
• The exothermic peak in the DSC traces occurs at a temperature (420 C) approximately 90 C below the temperature for the thermite reaction. No explanation is proposed for this. Chemical activation energies of known reactions cannot be so sample dependent, whether nano-sized or not. This is not the thermite reaction.
  
• In the reacted product (after heating in DSC), no Al-oxide is observed as a residue, as required by the thermite reaction. No explanation is given for this.
  
• The obvious needed measurement of X-ray diffraction was not used to confirm the solid mineral species (oxides or metals). This is unacceptable in a materials chemistry paper. This is not considered by the authors.
  
• Much is made of the fact that Fe-rich spheroids are present after reaction but there is no discussion of the grey-layer or of the origin of the Si-rich spheroids. Heating causes many things and there is an exothermic reaction so the conclusions about the presence of Fe-rich spheroids (which are reported to contain oxygen) as evidence for the thermite reaction is tenuous.

Here is an alternative explanation for the observations reported by Harrit et al.

Steel rusts. Rust crusts crack and blow off the steel when physically disrupted.

Rusting steel is one of the most studied materials science problems in engineering.

Lots more there, and much of it confirming Millette's work, go check it out!

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

And Another One...

Miraculous ‘Unexploded’ Active Super Thermite Burns at 430? Professor, PhD, Steven E Jones’ Search for ‘Truth’

Jones’ miraculous, super-duper, double top secret nanothermite burns at 430 C according to his research. There is no doubt high explosives will burn. But, if they burn, they can’t be around later to explode. Unless or course its magical, miraculous, ‘matter’, then, and only then, can it burn and then be around later to explode. An inhaled lit cigarette produces 400 to 780 C. A match burns at 600 to 800 C.

and

The above statements clearly show that purity, uniformity and equal dispersal of all reactants is vital for adequate performance. Remember, PURITY – has ONLY the necessary elements needed to complete a thermite reaction – no extra elements – no impurities, Uniformity – one section of thermitic material should have almost exactly the same ratio of elements as any other section of thermitic material. It’s important when we start to see all the impurities and ‘areas of concentration’ in these so called – pure, uniform active thermite chips.

and

“Fig. (19). Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC) traces for four red/gray chip samples found in World Trade Center dust collections.” There is no doubt something burned in the DSC. There is also no doubt that the amount or what burned is NOT the equal. 1. They ignite at different heats. They release different amounts of energy. If they were all the same, they would all burn at exactly the same temperature and give exactly the same amount of heat. For me, something like MEK is responsible. It burns at 404 when it is the only sampling. Varying amounts of residual MEK or hydrocarbon would produce these results. Now, supposedly, these were not the chips soaked in MEK. But, one thing we know is if this was truly ‘nano thermite’ it would be pure and it would all burn exactly at the same temperature and always give the same amount of heat.

 

[Africanus]

Thanks for the info, Chris. From all the attention we're getting over there, seems like we're getting under their skin.

Does anyone know of a link to the actual DSC curve at Livermore (LLNL) that supposedly shows nanothermite reacting at 530 deg C? I would like to check it out. Zugam provides a link to the LLNL front door. While a search from that portal for nano-thermite pulls up results like this , trying to find this specific graph is like searching for a needle in a haystack.

The DSC graph is part one of Tillotson's publications:

Journal of non-crystalline Solids, 285 (2001), 338 - 345.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002230930100477X

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

The DSC graph is part one of Tillotson's publications:

Journal of non-crystalline Solids, 285 (2001), 338 - 345.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002230930100477X

OK, thanks!

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

Mackey 2009

Hmmm, looks like Ryan Mackey explained why the nano-thermite has a lower-temperature peak than normal thermite waaaaay back in 2009:

The advantages of the nanothermite -- the real nanothermite made by Tillotson and his team -- are that it is more uniform and predictable, has a relatively fast reaction time, and has a substantially LOWER ignition temperature than normal thermite, yet high relative to some other compounds including explosives. However, it has an extremely low energy density, about 1/30th that of ordinary gasoline, and 1/3 that of TNT.

What you would want in the WTC case is something with inordinately high energy density, an extremely high thermal stability, and a very low reaction rate. Real nanothermite does not fit this bill at all.

What Dr. Jones has found is a substance that burns readily in air, ignited at ordinary fire temperatures, and has a wildly varying energy content albeit in no way competitive with normal combustibles like wood or paper, let alone jet fuel or gasoline. This is not a match to nanothermite, nor does it have properties advantageous or even faintly usable for any WTC demolition scenario.

It is, however, utterly consistent with organics containing sphere-like and plate-like structures of aluminum and iron, and their oxides, at decidedly larger-than-nano sizes. Like paint. Paint burns. Paint burns in air with a similar ignition temperature and a comparable energy density, and not being designed to burn would burn somewhat unpredictably depending on how it was dried and its substrate. Perfect bloody match to what Dr. Jones found.

 

[beachnut]

sure it does....
looks awfully similar to:
[URL]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_2854450f1b21e84975.jpg[/URL][URL]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_2854450fd8c715f054.jpg[/URL]

You show rust. It means my 66 mustang battery box was attacked by thermite?
The evidence you show is proof of no thermite - it is corrosion in fire.
You are using corrosion at temperatures of 1000C and below to support a fantasy of thermite. You debunk yourself and don't understand you did it all by yourself. A JREF stealth debunker.

You can't explain how thermite can melt steel, but only rusts steel on 911, no melted steel. Please show some more corroded steel, it helps save time debunking the thermite fantasy.

How will you debunk a reality paper? You failed to debunk the Millette paper. Why?

 

[Redwood]

And Another One...

Miraculous ‘Unexploded’ Active Super Thermite Burns at 430? Professor, PhD, Steven E Jones’ Search for ‘Truth’

LOL! The author, "Ed Ward, MD", is a mini-nuker who attacks BOTH Judy Wood and Steven Jones! (And Christopher Bollyn, too.) Trutherism has reached its terminal phase, with an ever-shrinking following dominated by the kookiest of the kooky. The kook remnant has riven into multiple factions who attack each other tooth and claw. Who will dominate this pathetic bunch of cultists in the end? Mini-nukers, maxi-nukers, nano-thermiters, DEWers, or maybe something else entirely? Anyone care to offer odds?

 

[tsig]

Here's another blog post attacking Dave Thomas (and me to an extent) re the DSC readings Jim Millette considered not worth doing:
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/03/matching-peaks-part-2-dave-thomas.html

From the link:

the above argument is non-sense because nano-thermite/super-thermite materials have completely different characteristics than traditional thermite!

If nano-super-thermite has completely different characteristics than regular thermite why are they using tests that detect regular thermite and why would they think those tests are able to detect this super special thermite?

 

[chrismohr]

Hi Dave,
I know about Denis Rancourt and will be quoting him in my upcoming video. Dr Ed Ward si a new one for me. And I knew about Ryan Mackey, but in my video most of the quotes challenging the Harrit/Jones paper actually come from people in 9/11 Truth. Ed Ward is an advocate for mininukes bringing down the WTC buildings, but parts of his critiques of the thermite theory are amazingly similar to our critiques! As I say in my video text, the Harrit/Jones paper has created more controversey within 9/11 Truth than any other theory embraced by Richard Gage I can think of. And it's not just the mininuke/death ray crowd, it's also more moderate people like Mark Hightower.

 

[gmanontario]

Did anyone else read that name as Dr. Ed Wood? More appropriate I would say.

 

[Senenmut]

You show rust. It means my 66 mustang battery box was attacked by thermite?

The evidence you show is proof of no thermite - it is corrosion in fire.
You are using corrosion at temperatures of 1000C and below to support a fantasy of thermite. You debunk yourself and don't understand you did it all by yourself. A JREF stealth debunker.

why in the world would you subject your car to 1000C?

You can't explain how thermite can melt steel, but only rusts steel on 911, no melted steel. Please show some more corroded steel, it helps save time debunking the thermite fantasy.

How will you debunk a reality paper? You failed to debunk the Millette paper. Why?

actually the eutectic could have been far hotter than the minimum of 940C. remember, sisson could only get "little" metal to dissolve in 24 or 48hrs even at 1100C temp.

 

[Senenmut]

What I notice is it looks nothing like your previous examples.

Your previous examples have thinning of the cross sectional thickness. That pic shows the parent metal of the web still intact but melted through.

The carrot (or whatever is being sliced and diced) is being shaved by the edge of the material rather than cut through straight down (perpendicular to) the web.

Hey it's your fantasy though, you choose who wins between Superman and Batman by giving them whatever magical powers you want!

im just showing how thermite can create that "razor" sharpness.

 

[beachnut]

im just showing how thermite can create that "razor" sharpness.

Why was no 911 steel exposed to thermite? The corroded steel you showed was a result of fires at and below 1000C, not near the temperature thermite does it damage at. How hot is thermite? The steel photos you posted showed steel corroded in fires, not thermite damage.

The sad thing is 911 truth followers believe the silly conclusion from Jones. Why can't those followers of 911 lies debunk Millette's paper? After 12 years of lies, what evidence do you have? Show the corroded steel, it debunks thermite. Do it again.

 

[Porkpie Hat]

im just showing how thermite can create that "razor" sharpness.

But that's not what the picture shows.

The thickness of the web is unchanged and the carrot is being shaved by the edge of the hole.

That's not consistent with the pictures you posted previously which showed a loss of thickness.

Sorry, you just aren't going to find a mindless fool to fall for it.

 

[Senenmut]

But that's not what the picture shows.

The thickness of the web is unchanged and the carrot is being shaved by the edge of the hole.

That's not consistent with the pictures you posted previously which showed a loss of thickness.

Sorry, you just aren't going to find a mindless fool to fall for it.

im guessing a different type of thermitic device if you haven't been keeping up

 

[NoahFence]

How come this magical mystery thermite stuff hasn't made its way into the industries that can benefit from it yet? It's been 12 years!

 

[thedopefishlives]

How come this magical mystery thermite stuff hasn't made its way into the industries that can benefit from it yet? It's been 12 years!

Because military, that's why. DUH.

 

[Justin39640]

im guessing a different type of thermitic device if you haven't been keeping up

Or the acid attack that it looks like.