Any Updates on Mark Basile's Study?

[JSanderO]

If some truther has dust from the world trade center and can prove its chain of custody and that it hasn't been tampered with, I will personally pay for its chemical composition to be tested in a reputable independent lab. We could have it done next week.

This may be the saddest and most transparent long con of them all. How people can look at 6 years of failure to do an independent study and not see the conmen for what they are is beyond me.

The question is why? Are they really con men or do they BELIEVE their own BS? And this belief drives them to commit all manner of intellectual "dishonesties"? I think Gage is really doing much better in his 911 career than he was as an architect... but the others? Hard to figure out that one? Huge waste of human resources involved in scamming people.

 

[jaydeehess]

If some truther has dust from the world trade center and can prove its chain of custody and that it hasn't been tampered with, I will personally pay for its chemical composition to be tested in a reputable independent lab. We could have it done next week.

This may be the saddest and most transparent long con of them all. How people can look at 6 years of failure to do an independent study and not see the conmen for what they are is beyond me.

Many actually do believe, and I use the 'belief' term literally, that this was a massive plot by an extra-governmental(either third party or rogue inside faction) organization, and that many large scale events like this are as well.

Certainly Balsamo of PfT qualifies in that regard. Seems that Szamboti does as well. Its a fringe extreme right, and extreme left belief, with minor differences between the two.

Gage? Yes, I think he has to convince himself that this is the case in order to continue. I agree with JSO that he is probably doing as well or better financially, as a speaker for AE911T than he was as a low level architect in the USA. However there is the 'hero' factor there as well. He has a cadre looking up to him as the leader in the 911truth movement. He avoids the tact that a Fetzer or A.Jones takes and thus remains more 'mainstream', and he gets to jaunt around the world.

 

[Criteria]

What we have here, then, is a test of intellectual integrity, and Basile and Ziggi are failing.

Of course correct... with all the money that AE raises... they could fund several studies of samples from the 911 samples to multiple independent labs who have no skin in the game.

Dear Lab,
Please find samples of some material we would like a comprehensive chemical analysis of. I thank you in advance for your timely report.
Thank you,
John Doe.

Easy peasy!

Dear customer,

Thank you for your submission.

We would like to accept your business but in all conscience we have to advise you that without more specific instructions regarding what you hope to find, a “comprehensive chemical analysis” will likely create a substantial billing and still not determine every substance contained in your ‘dust sample’.

—

Not so “easy peasy”. That dust represents microscopic particles of all that was once the World Trade Center.

Mark Basile has to submit his sample with a request that guarantees the lab will duplicate the key aspects of the 2009 Bentham paper — without revealing what it is that he expects them to find.

When it comes to 9/11, everyone has “skin in the game.”

 

[DGM]

Mark Basile has to submit his sample with a request that guarantees the lab will duplicate the key aspects of the 2009 Bentham paper

Could you site those and show how they were documented in the paper? In other words, which test prove they found "thermite"?

 

[skyeagle409]

Over 16 seconds for collapse is not high speed. Thermite is a fantasy started by Jones, and remains evidence free.

Mark Basile's Study is a complete waste of time. Dust sample results found no evidence of thermite and yet, the money continued to flow in.

 

[skyeagle409]

​

Not so “easy peasy”. That dust represents microscopic particles of all that was once the World Trade Center.

And yet, no evidence of thermite was ever found in earlier dust sample examinations, which simply means that no further dust sample investigation is warranted.

 

[benthamitemetric]

​

Dear customer,

Thank you for your submission.

We would like to accept your business but in all conscience we have to advise you that without more specific instructions regarding what you hope to find, a “comprehensive chemical analysis” will likely create a substantial billing and still not determine every substance contained in your ‘dust sample’.

—

Not so “easy peasy”. That dust represents microscopic particles of all that was once the World Trade Center.

Mark Basile has to submit his sample with a request that guarantees the lab will duplicate the key aspects of the 2009 Bentham paper — without revealing what it is that he expects them to find.

When it comes to 9/11, everyone has “skin in the game.”

The paper came out 6 years ago. 6 years. He's had more than enough time to outline a reasonable series of tests. I imagine a competent chemist would be able to think through such a list in consultation with other interested parties/experts in a weekend.

 

[WilliamSeger]

Mark Basile has to submit his sample with a request that guarantees the lab will duplicate the key aspects of the 2009 Bentham paper — without revealing what it is that he expects them to find.

Absolutely wrong. Duplicating the "key aspects of the 2009 Bentham paper" is obviously not the problem, since "truther scientists" seem to be incapable of properly interpreting those results, even if we take them at face value. There are perfectly straight-forward ways of determining whether or not the chips are thermitic, and the problem is that the Harrit team didn't use any of them and instead relied on faulty reasoning. Why repeat such an inadequate study?

 

[traxy]

The paper came out 6 years ago. 6 years. He's had more than enough time to outline a reasonable series of tests. I imagine a competent chemist would be able to think through such a list in consultation with other interested parties/experts in a weekend.

Actually it was 8 years ago, not 6.

The entire scope of the project as outlined by Mark himself consisted of separating some suitable chips and sending them to a lab for identification. Since he already knew how to separate the chips based on the initial paper, this should have taken no time at all.

How much longer do his donors have to wait Ziggy?

 

[benthamitemetric]

Actually it was 8 years ago, not 6.

The entire scope of the project as outlined by Mark himself consisted of separating some suitable chips and sending them to a lab for identification. Since he already knew how to separate the chips based on the initial paper, this should have taken no time at all.

How much longer do his donors have to wait Ziggy?

I stand corrected--8 years. In the time that some people can graduate from high school and obtain a PhD in chemistry, Mark Basile can't figure out which tests he wants a lab to perform on these chips? Can anyone defending him really believe this nonsense?

 

[DGM]

Absolutely wrong. Duplicating the "key aspects of the 2009 Bentham paper" is obviously not the problem, since "truther scientists" seem to be incapable of properly interpreting those results, even if we take them at face value. There are perfectly straight-forward ways of determining whether or not the chips are thermitic, and the problem is that the Harrit team didn't use any of them and instead relied on faulty reasoning. Why repeat such an inadequate study?

I said it years ago. Why not just submit the papers data to qualified labs and universities and get a proper "peer review" from experts in the field?

Fact is, the paper does not release all the data (I wonder if it was national security concerns.....). The "fact" I love the best is they claim not all chips are "thermite", you need special knowledge to chose the right ones, although they can't document a separation procedure to determine this.

 

[GlennB]

Fact is, the paper does not release all the data (I wonder if it was national security concerns.....). The "fact" I love the best is they claim not all chips are "thermite", you need special knowledge to chose the right ones, although they can't document a separation procedure to determine this.

MM or Criteria (or both?) made this point nmerous times. The Bentham crew "knew" which were the correct candidate chips, but didn't explain how.

 

[DGM]

MM or Criteria (or both?) made this point nmerous times. The Bentham crew "knew" which were the correct candidate chips, but didn't explain how.

This was an admission that only came about after a couple people tried to recreate the study.

I'm still waiting for an updated separation criterion based on their admission so the study can be duplicated. I won't hold my breath..............

 

[jaydeehess]

​

Dear customer,

Thank you for your submission.

We would like to accept your business but in all conscience we have to advise you that without more specific instructions regarding what you hope to find, a “comprehensive chemical analysis” will likely create a substantial billing and still not determine every substance contained in your ‘dust sample’.

—

Not so “easy peasy”. That dust represents microscopic particles of all that was once the World Trade Center.

Mark Basile has to submit his sample with a request that guarantees the lab will duplicate the key aspects of the 2009 Bentham paper — without revealing what it is that he expects them to find.

I thought Mark Basile was submitting red grey chips not a composite dust sample.

Even if it is a dust sample, you said that there would be a "request that guarantees the lab will duplicate the key aspects of the 2009 Bentham paper ", which would include the separation of component particles, and not a full and complete study on all the constituents of the dust.

 

[jaydeehess]

I stand corrected--8 years. In the time that some people can graduate from high school and obtain a PhD in chemistry, Mark Basile can't figure out which tests he wants a lab to perform on these chips? Can anyone defending him really believe this nonsense?

10 years, a nice round decade, sounds good.

Once again I ask posters to recall how fondly truthers feel toward NIST taking a few years to complete the WTC7 final report (even though NIST stated clearly why this would be the last of all reports to be completed).

 

[DGM]

I thought Mark Basile was submitting red grey chips not a composite dust sample.

Even if it is a dust sample, you said that there would be a "request that guarantees the lab will duplicate the key aspects of the 2009 Bentham paper ", which would include the separation of component particles, and not a full and complete study on all the constituents of the dust.

You screwed up..........

Criteria, was only responding to the one post not the issue as a whole.

<looks down at my signature>

 

[jaydeehess]

You screwed up..........

Criteria, was only responding to the one post not the issue as a whole.

<looks down at my signature>

Yep, caught that. He was straw-manning JSO's "some material", and "comprehensive chemical analysis".

Neither is at issue since it's not supposedly a case of random dust material, nor, according to Criteria (the lab will duplicate the key aspects of the 2009 Bentham paper) a case of a full and intensive chemical analysis.

 

[pgimeno]

The "fact" I love the best is they claim not all chips are "thermite", you need special knowledge to chose the right ones, although they can't document a separation procedure to determine this.

I don't remember that from the paper. My recollection is that along the paper, all chips they found were treated as if they were thermite, and that only later did some people in this forum (and probably others) start to claim that you need that special knowledge.

If I'm wrong, could you point me to a paragraph in the paper where they say you need special knowledge to tell thermitic chips apart?

 

[WilliamSeger]

The "fact" I love the best is they claim not all chips are "thermite", you need special knowledge to chose the right ones, although they can't document a separation procedure to determine this.

Yep, and why can't someone with that "special knowledge" just help Basile get this show on the road, since his psychic abilities seem to be failing him?

If Basile himself can't find any thermite -- which is what his study morphed into -- then my "update on the Mark Basile Study" is that it has failed to confirm the Bentham paper claims, without needing confirmation from an independent lab. The unneeded money can now be returned; no hard feelings.

 

[DGM]

I don't remember that from the paper. My recollection is that along the paper, all chips they found were treated as if they were thermite, and that only later did some people in this forum (and probably others) start to claim that you need that special knowledge.

If I'm wrong, could you point me to a paragraph in the paper where they say you need special knowledge to tell thermitic chips apart?

Your recollection is correct. There is no mention of this in the paper.

This was an excuse made after the paper was published.