• 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.

Any Updates on Mark Basile's Study?

I guess there's still no progress.

I wonder whatever happened to the $1000 that was awarded after the "physics challenge".

It was there one day and no trace the next. :rolleyes:

ETA:

Dr. Griscom won by default and was awarded the $1000 prize, which he donated towards further experiments being done on the WTC dust (see: markbasile.org), to see if the 2009 Bentham study results are repeatable. (Replication is fundamental to the scientific method.)
Click to expand...
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-s...dr-david-griscom-wins-911-physics-debate.html

I'm thinking the check bounced.
 
Last edited:
Seriously? Mr Basile still hasn't done the study? This has become a charade; I was actually hoping he'd do it and publish the damn results!
 
alienentity said:
Seriously? Mr Basile still hasn't done the study? This has become a charade; I was actually hoping he'd do it and publish the damn results!
Click to expand...

The whole thing is fantasy, if any of the truth movement had the magical thermite chips they would publish the results.

They don't and can't.

At least the $5000 was raised and that was the goal achieved.
 
alienentity said:
Seriously? Mr Basile Jim Millette still hasn't done the study?

This has become a charade; I was actually hoping he'd do it and publish the damn results!
Click to expand...

At least Mark Basile has good reasons for progressing slowly.

Unlike Millette, Mark doesn't own his own lab along with a supply of U.S. government provided 9/11 WTC dust.

Of course the apologists for Millette here quite willingly accept his short comings as long as his beliefs continue to support theirs.

Too funny...and pathetic.
 
From March:

DGM said:
Does anyone else find it interesting that the "Physics challenge" prize sponsored by A.N.E.T.A was donated to a study that A.N.E.T.A was the chief promoter? Everyone does know that markbasile.org is owned by A.N.E.T.A.?
Click to expand...
 
Miragememories said:
At least Mark Basile has good reasons for progressing slowly.

Unlike Millette, Mark doesn't own his own lab along with a supply of U.S. government provided 9/11 WTC dust.

Of course the apologists for Millette here quite willingly accept his short comings as long as his beliefs continue to support theirs.

Too funny...and pathetic.
Click to expand...

Just out of interest, how long do you think it should take to send some dust samples to an independent Lab ?
 
Miragememories said:
... Too funny...and pathetic.
Click to expand...
The failed lie of thermite is pathetic, not funny.

What did Mark do with the money? Like Gage, Mark can't do the study, it will ruin the big lie. The Jones paper proved no thermite, how will Mark fake his results to fool the fringe few thermite 911 truth faith based believers.
 
Spanx said:
Yep, he has no samples to test.
...
Click to expand...

Not true, according to the "Mark Basile Progress Report, August 2014", which was still the latest bit of information several days ago when I last visited the non-expired site. It started thusly:

I presently have seven samples of World Trade Center dust and am going through the material screening for particles of interest. Five samples have been screened completely. Two are still ongoing and expected to be completed in about a month.

A number of the samples have red/gray chips of various size and composition
using EDX (energy dispersive x-ray) for analytical comparison.
Click to expand...
HOWEVER, he continues right away, stating:
Some images are attached as Figures 1a through 1d which show chips from a few of the samples with scale bars to show the size range of the chips being found
Click to expand...
The problem here is that Figre 1d shows the very same chip that he already presented prominently - and burned! - back in hois 2010 video. To the left Fig 1d, to the right a snapshot from the 2010 video (click to enlarge):



This kinda diminishes my trust that the other figures show new and presently available material.

Here they are anyway, for posteriority:




Now, he said that by September, he should have finished sifting visually through all of his samples and have separated all red-gray chips therein.

He then proposed to continue thusly:

FIRST
Once visual screening and sorting is completed the red/gray chips will be evaluated for the presence of reactivity with production of molten iron. ... A number of chips have been screened, but more need to be evaluated. The goal here is to find the best candidates for outside facility work.

The thermal screen test has been changed from my early system which was a stainless steel resistive heater strip that could heat the particles being screened, to a small tube furnace where the chips in a container are heated to 450 degrees C in air or nitrogen.
Click to expand...
So: He proposes to BURN samples before sending them off to a lab - and to NOT analyze (and perhaps not even report on!) the chips that don't react!?
(In fairness I should add that I remember him saying - don't have a source, I think he told me directly the one time when I called him on the phone - that one could split one chip in two, if two different sets of tests need to be done)


And THEN:
Once the best candidates are found, work will move to the phase where funds will be expended using independent facilities. Once funds begin to be spent monthly accountings will be made, no funds have been spent and all will be accounted for publicly.
Click to expand...
This would mean NONE of the money has been spent yet. A source of delay may be this:
I am interested in obtaining as many samples as possible. Anyone interested in donating a sample can contact dust4evidence@gmail.com to discuss your sample. If after the discussion phase your sample is to be accepted for work then shipping information will be provided.
Click to expand...
IF someone contacted him, offering more dust, THEN conceivably he may delay the lab phase until he has received and sifted through additional samples.
 
Oystein said:
”…The problem here is that Figure 1d shows the very same chip that he already presented prominently - and burned! - back in his 2010 video. …This kinda diminishes my trust that the other figures show new and presently available material… He proposes to BURN samples before sending them off to a lab - and to NOT analyze (and perhaps not even report on!) the chips that don't react!?

I should add that I remember him saying - …that one could split one chip in two, if two different sets of tests need to be done)

…This would mean NONE of the money has been spent yet. ..”
Click to expand...

I’ll cut to the chase.

You acknowledge that Mark Basile has 9/11 WTC dust.

You are upset that Mark did not use new photography from his latest work.

Like the caption says, the selected photographs are used because they represent the typical appearance of candidate 9/11 WTC dust chips before they are ignited.

Photographs are not test results.

You then fake an argument that Mark Basile needs to have his selected chips pre-analyzed by an independent lab before they are ignited.

That is rendered as total bs when you quickly recall a direct communication with Mark Basile where he clearly informed you that he was able to preserve half of a candidate chip.

The rest of your post is rambling speculation that simply ignores the fact that Mark’s research, by necessity, is part time.

Like the rest of us, Mark Basile has to devote a lot of his time to making a living wage.
 
If he has the chips, independent lab and the money, why not just send them off and get them analysed.

He doesn't need to do any more than that if it is a truly independent analysis.

how many years should this take ?
 
Spanx said:
If he has the chips, independent lab and the money, why not just send them off and get them analysed.

He doesn't need to do any more than that if it is a truly independent analysis.

how many years should this take ?
Click to expand...
The problem is they have no defined chip selection criteria that guarantees the chips are the correct ones. The Harrit paper is so poorly done that it can not be reproduced. This has been proven by the fact no one to date has been able to duplicate the results.

I don't think this is by mistake. Harrit has the definitive data but refuses to release it. Whatever happens with the Basile study doesn't matter, they always have the "wrong chips" out.
 
Last edited:
Miragememories said:
I’ll cut to the chase.
Click to expand...
What's your freaking problem, dude??
Miragememories said:
You acknowledge that Mark Basile has 9/11 WTC dust.
Click to expand...
Yes, I acknowledge he has, what's your damned problem?
Miragememories said:
You are upset that Mark did not use new photography from his latest work.
Click to expand...
What is your FSM-damned problem, silly? No, I am not upset at that at all, I just notice and point out!
Perhaps it's poor writing and/or editing, but to me the text I quoted sounds as if he says he is showing current samples, because the immediate context contains zero references to past work, it only talks about his ongoing work of finding new chips in the sampled he has.
Miragememories said:
Like the caption says, the selected photographs are used because they represent the typical appearance of candidate 9/11 WTC dust chips before they are ignited.
Click to expand...
Do you have reading comprehension problems, boy??
No, neither the captions (I did not quote from the captions) nor the text I quoted nor any other passage of this status report say this at all.
Miragememories said:
Photographs are not test results.
Click to expand...
And where is the problem with this? Why do you make up strawmen? I didn't claim at all that they are!
Miragememories said:
You then fake an argument that Mark Basile needs to have his selected chips pre-analyzed by an independent lab before they are ignited.
Click to expand...
Huh? I don't get your problem! What the hell are you talking about??
We all want the chips to simply be analyzed by an independent lab! I don't want them pre-analyzed at all! Not by a lab, and absolutely NOT by Mark Basile!

Tell me, MM, why should he discard chips that don't ignite, and keep from us any analytical results from those? Such as what they are, how they differ from those that ignite, and what proportion burns and doesn't burn?

Or don't you agree that the red-gray chips aren't all the same material??
Miragememories said:
That is rendered as total bs when you quickly recall a direct communication with Mark Basile where he clearly informed you that he was able to preserve half of a candidate chip.
Click to expand...
What went wrong with you?? Problematic childhood?

You don't get it. I remember something from 2 or 3 years ago. But it would be "rambling speculation" if I assumed that this is his plan, as he does not mention this in the test proposal and does not mention this in the status report - at all! I mentioned this to be FAIR to good old Mark! Now, do you want me to go on rambling speculations? I guess not, because...
Miragememories said:
The rest of your post is rambling speculation that simply ignores the fact that Mark’s research, by necessity, is part time.

Like the rest of us, Mark Basile has to devote a lot of his time to making a living wage.
Click to expand...
You are full of probems you need to address, consulting perhaps certain professionals. Listen, did you not get it, did you really fail so badly at reading comprehension, that in the paragraph you are refering here to I am actually DEFENDING Basile? Or are you being nasty on purpose? You certainly do remember that I have more than once defended Basile here in the past!? (And I will again in a following post! I hope you'll give credit where credit is due!)
 
Last edited:
JayUtah said:
Not if the money to do the promised work was raised in advance and given to him. Then that would be his wage and he should do the work.
Click to expand...

Incorrect.

Basile won't keep any of the money as compensation, he contributes his own work for free.
All the money is intended to cover expenses Basile will incur, particularly the lab fees.
 
Spanx said:
If he has the chips, independent lab and the money, why not just send them off and get them analysed.

He doesn't need to do any more than that if it is a truly independent analysis.
Click to expand...

This, exactly this.

Mark Basile should tell everybody clearly and equivocally - the independent lab, us, truthers, Harrit, Jones and the rest of the gang:

Red-gray chips pulled from WTC-dust with a magnet are several different materials, with different elemental compositions, that will react differently when heated. Please keep this FACT in mind when analysing chips or interpreting other people's analysis!!

We need to know the composition of all the different kinds of chips - those that do ignite, and those that don't! Only if we look at ALL the chips can we be certain what they ALL are! Only then will there be clarity and peace (and Harrit, Jones and the gang will be served the ridicule that befits their astounding level of shame).
 
JayUtah said:
Not if the money to do the promised work was raised in advance and given to him. Then that would be his wage and he should do the work.
Click to expand...
I don't think this is accurate. My guess is that he has collected only enough to cover the costs of lab tests, no wages for himself personally. I too get in heat for being too slow... for example, earlier this year, I tried to get someone to analyze campfire ash (still waiting) and to try to get answers from fire chemists about iron-rich spheres (great answers but it took seven months or so). And of course the two years or more I have been waiting for Jim Millette to put out a published paper, something MM and others have repeatedly taunted me about. But Millette is now a "volunteer" unless we come up with thousands more $$$s, as are almost all of us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom