• 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?

We are happy to report that Mark Basile´s red/gray chip study is finally back on track, after prolonged delays due to various problems that will not be detailed here
Click to expand...

Isn't this the same "movement" that rambles on about transparency?
 
Oystein said:
No word on what has been done. No word on when they will send samples. No word on if they have selected any specimens. No word on if they have selected any lab. No word on if and how the testing protocol has been changed from the original proposal (cue Rick, blabbing about this - I paraphrase - 'new (invented in the 1940s) Raman spectroscopy that Mark is looking into')

In other words: "Nothing has been done in one year. Sorry for procrastinating. The money looked real pretty in our bank account, thanks for throwing it at us!"
Click to expand...

In other words, Basile's donors still don't even have an excuse. Ziggi says that "encountering some 'friction' was not unexpected" by most of them, but I should think that all of them expected some progress by now on a completely straight-forward process, but they don't even get an excuse why there's been none? What kind of "friction" prevents sending the stuff to a lab and asking them to identify it, Ziggi?
 
Oystein said:
Mark Basile will (in addition to his own testing) delegate work to an independent lab (or several labs) sometime this fall, in order to confirm his own results - as promised in our fundraising campaign.

In other words: "Nothing has been done in one year. Sorry for procrastinating. The money looked real pretty in our bank account, thanks for throwing it at us!"
Click to expand...

I'm a bit confused. What is he testing? According to the original study he was only going to select chips and send them out to be identified, emphasis on independent verification of the material. Basiles' job was only to make sure they had the right chips. If he needs to do lots of testing to make sure they get the right chips, that's an admission that the original papers selection criterion is woefully lacking.

Naturally "truthers" wouldn't notice but, this "update" makes no sense. Sorry Ziggy, try again........ :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Oystein said:
[ETA]
Quite revealing of the truther mindset is this sentence: "Mark Basile will ... delegate work to an independent lab ... in order to confirm his own results".
The objective therefore is not analyze the red material and establish once and for all what it really is, and all its constituents (the identity of the organic binder, the identity of all the pigments, the exact composition of the gray oxidize structural steel layer) - no, the objective os to confirm their silly prejudice. They still don't grasp that among Mark's results was that he determined that the Al- and Fe- content is so extremely low (under 2 and 3%, respectively), compared to the organic content (>70%), that the observed exotherm reaction (the energy yield) must have been fulled to >99% by organic combustion on air - not a thermite reaction
[/ETA]

Perhaps Ziggi, when he reads this, can elaborate a bit on all the great things Mark hasn't done! :D
Click to expand...

When this project was first proposed, it sounded like Basile intended to just repeat the Harrit experiments, which would have been a waste of time since that paper failed to prove anything; their conclusions didn't follow from their data. Then, later it sounded like Basile understood that to support those conclusions, the independent labs needed to do probative tests that Harrit didn't do, such as: do the chips contain elemental aluminum; do they ignite in an inert atmosphere; is aluminum oxide produced? Now, Ziggi says Basile intends for the labs to "confirm his own results?" WTF? I guess we have to wait until October to find out what that means, but I'll be waiting with greatly lowered expectations that it was worth waiting for.
 
The whole thing is a nonsensical joke. Basile could get results inside 2 weeks if he wanted to. It really is the simplest thing in the world to get done.

What does "encountering some friction" mean? Why would there be any friction in the first place because all you are asking the lab(s) to do is provide quotes for the cost of doing the work to identify the material. Most would probably say they need to look at the sample in the SEM before deciding on further work, but that's not an issue.

SEM plus FTIR will do the job thoroughly. It's not even a days work.

Why have there been prolonged delays? It's laughable. I suspect they came up against the hard wall of reality when the labs they approached took one look at photographs of the chips and suggested procedures that would readily identify the material as red paint because that's exactly what the labs know the material is.

The fact that Ziggi has said they intend to delegate to the labs to confirm Basile's own results shows that they are probably dictating to the labs which tests and procedures they want done rather than tests that will positively identify the material.

Remember that they last thing these dishonest people want is the truth to be presented by a lab for all to see. They've invested too much to be shown up for the fools they are, so expect a massive fudge and a new round of fund raising.
 
For what it's worth, I approached some two dozen labs before finding Jim Millette. Some refused to deal with me at all because it was connected to 9/11. Some refused because they feared that if there WERE thermite, it would damage their equipment. Some just suggested they do the tests with whatever equipment their lab happened to have. I found it to be very challenging. Sunstealer you might have been able to easily find a competent tester but it was not so easy for me. I too experienced "friction" along the way.
 
beachnut said:
Mark took a remedial physics class and figured out his claims on 911 were idiotic BS based on ... idiotic BS, a recursive kind of ignorance. So he dropped the study, and drank the money...
Click to expand...

That would be the smartest move that any truther has done since the disappearance of the Buffet Slayer.
 
chrismohr said:
For what it's worth, I approached some two dozen labs before finding Jim Millette. Some refused to deal with me at all because it was connected to 9/11. Some refused because they feared that if there WERE thermite, it would damage their equipment. Some just suggested they do the tests with whatever equipment their lab happened to have. I found it to be very challenging. Sunstealer you might have been able to easily find a competent tester but it was not so easy for me. I too experienced "friction" along the way.
Click to expand...

Mark is a chemical engineer and works at (or perhaps used to work at) Waters, company that offers products and solutions for chemical analysis. Within his work environment, Mark has (or had) personal access to some of the analytical machinery we are talking about here. No doubt, Waters, and quite probably Mark himself, already have frequent contact to other professional analytical labs, so it should be relatively easy for Mark to find a suitable lab.

Perhaps some of the labs he contacted did a quick google seacht and determined that they have been contacted by a nutjob representing a weird fringe of irrational people, aiming to abuse their reputation for a wild goose chase with a foregone conclusion.
 
chrismohr said:
For what it's worth, I approached some two dozen labs before finding Jim Millette. Some refused to deal with me at all because it was connected to 9/11. Some refused because they feared that if there WERE thermite, it would damage their equipment. Some just suggested they do the tests with whatever equipment their lab happened to have. I found it to be very challenging. Sunstealer you might have been able to easily find a competent tester but it was not so easy for me. I too experienced "friction" along the way.
Click to expand...
For context, how did you approach the labs? Was it "can you test this for thermite?" or "I have these chips and I need to know what they are?" . The later in my opinion would be the way to go.
 
DGM said:
For context, how did you approach the labs? Was it "can you test this for thermite?" or "I have these chips and I need to know what they are?" . The later in my opinion would be the way to go.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but they might want background. If it were possible there was thermite, as mentioned above, there is the possibility of damaging equipment.
 
jaydeehess said:
Possibly, but they might want background. If it were possible there was thermite, as mentioned above, there is the possibility of damaging equipment.
Click to expand...
Thermite is not an unstable compound. Basic testing will tell them if it's something they need to be concerned with. What identifying technique would they use that would damage their equipment. Only a moron would light something on fire to see what it was. ;)
 
jaydeehess said:
Possibly, but they might want background. If it were possible there was thermite, as mentioned above, there is the possibility of damaging equipment.
Click to expand...

That's nonsense, IMO. The specimens are so tiny, the Al-content so low, the expected maximum energy yield from a hypothetical thermite reaction therefor so miniscule, that it would at most scratch a sample holder - not explode the chamber and machine. Don't know what such mounts cost, but can't be the world. Just bill it to the customer if they need to exchange such a spare part.
 
The only "friction" I can see is the lab not wanting to get into a patent fight. It would be like bringing a caramel colored liquid in and saying "What are the ingredients?".

You brought them a paint chip and you want the formula, It's that simple.
 
I did ask them to test for thermite rather than ask, what is this? And Oystein, at least two labs said they won't touch anything that might be thermite because of the damage it could cause.
 
chrismohr said:
I did ask them to test for thermite rather than ask, what is this? And Oystein, at least two labs said they won't touch anything that might be thermite because of the damage it could cause.
Click to expand...

I know, and it's nonsense. Perhaps you didn't tell them, or they didn't understand, how tiny the specimens would be, and that they were already known to contain only a small proportion of Al.
 
It was nonsense, I agree, but for me it was definitely "friction" as well!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom