Chain of Custody

[superlogicalthinker]

You should get right on it, the JREF members here have shown you how it's done.

Already sent out the email

 

[DGM]

Well then what are the reasons in your opinion. I asked yesterday.

What is the motivation for the Betheam scientist then?

No idea. I don't know them personally. Do you?

These new tests are because they did do it right in the first place.

Sure about this sentence big guy?

Actually yes. The tests they did were not definitive for what they were trying to achieve. Their own data disputes their findings.

 

[plague311]

"So, where was the neutral scientist in Jones et al's studies? "

What would be so hard about it other than the costs? I'm sure the 9/11 commiunity can raise the funds required cover thier end of the experiment.

It's as simple as Millette looks.....our scientist looks. They both look at the same thing at the same time in the same room using the same equipment!

What does it matter in the slightest that the 9 sccientists didn't have a neutral person? The request was just made by me right now. It would be a great way for both sides to get true results. Results that could finally be indisputable.

SLT, I have given you completely rational explanations why this isn't plausible, and other people have given you even more. Just because you refuse to accept them doesn't make your point valid.

You want a troofer scientist involved, in Millette's lab to "accompany" him in his research. That's not how it's done. Unlike Harrit, et al. this paper will be reviewed by Millette's peers. If you, personally, decide not to accept the results because someone on "your side" didn't get to be apart of the experiments than it's your horse, beat it to death all you want. However, just because you made the request doesn't make it a rational one, or one that should be honored. I'm sorry, it just seems like too much to ask from someone that's already accommodated well beyond what he should.

Like Chris said, if this is done, where does it stop? When is it enough? You want pre-released chain of custody, a troofer there, what next? For us to pay for a troofer lab to have it done again? It's been stated that Harrit et al. spoke of other tests needing to be done and have done absolutely nothing in the past years.

 

[superlogicalthinker]

Why is the motivation so important to you? Do you think that the results will change depending on the beliefs of the scientist who does the test?

Dont jump in a conversation when you no not what it's about.

I asked yesterday what the motivation of Jones et al would be if not to bring justice to the 9/11 famileys or to bring light to a crime against humanity?

 

[NoahFence]

The request was just made by me right now. It would be a great way for both sides to get true results. Results that could finally be indisputable.

The results of this will be indisputable. It's the real peer review process that makes it that. Not the farce that the Harrit/Jones "peer review" went through.

I suggest that you spend less time posting here, and more time sending emails to whatever twoofie scientist you want to stand with Millete in this test, requesting his presence.

See, it's like the thermite / explosives in the towers.

You can't will it to be so. You have to actually do something.

 

[superlogicalthinker]

No idea. I don't know them personally. Do you?



Actually yes. The tests they did were not definitive for what they were trying to achieve. Their own data disputes their findings.

These new tests are because they did do it right in the first place.
read closer dude. doulbe positve in there. lol

 

[superlogicalthinker]

SLT, I have given you completely rational explanations why this isn't plausible, and other people have given you even more. Just because you refuse to accept them doesn't make your point valid.

You want a troofer scientist involved, in Millette's lab to "accompany" him in his research. That's not how it's done. Unlike Harrit, et al. this paper will be reviewed by Millette's peers. If you, personally, decide not to accept the results because someone on "your side" didn't get to be apart of the experiments than it's your horse, beat it to death all you want. However, just because you made the request doesn't make it a rational one, or one that should be honored. I'm sorry, it just seems like too much to ask from someone that's already accommodated well beyond what he should.

Like Chris said, if this is done, where does it stop? When is it enough? You want pre-released chain of custody, a troofer there, what next? For us to pay for a troofer lab to have it done again? It's been stated that Harrit et al. spoke of other tests needing to be done and have done absolutely nothing in the past years.

I just posted before saying that the funds can probably be raised to have one of our scientists to accompany his studies. All Millette has to do is agree to have him there.

If the money can be raised on the "twoofie" end and Millette agrees to another professional along side, is there any objections to my request?

And it is a rational request and it should be honoured.

 

[DGM]

These new tests are because they did do it right in the first place.
read closer dude. doulbe positve in there. lol

Whoops.

I think you know what I meant. Like I said, I have no problem with their data.

 

[plague311]

I just posted before saying that the funds can probably be raised to have one of our scientists to accompany his studies. All Millette has to do is agree to have him there.

If the money can be raised on the "twoofie" end and Millette agrees to another professional along side, is there any objections to my request?

And it is a rational request and it should be honoured.

No, it's not. I don't believe it is for the reasons previously stated.

That being said, if Millette does agree to something as ridiculous as this, and troof comes up with the cash, then all the more power to it.

I know I wouldn't want someone standing beside me in a situation like this.

Like I said, I'll send you a stick and you can keep beating that dead horse.

 

[plague311]

These new tests are because they did do it right in the first place.

Sure about this sentence big guy?

This will probably get removed, but I find it mildly entertaining that you are correcting peoples sentence structure/grammar considering the battle I put forth to translate your butchering of the English language.

 

[superlogicalthinker]

Interesting Information

I just recieved this about Jim Milette in a personal email:

"Millette and his colleagues published the official reports on the WTC dust, and his involvement appears to be a means to defend their past work. EPA whistleblower Dr. Cate Jenkins used the phrase "deliberate misrepresentation" with regard to their studies in which samples were manipulated through pre-conditioning to lower the pH before testing."

Millette's name shows up in Jenkins' report four times because he participated in several EPA-funded studies that Jenkins has charged with fraud.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/DrJenkinsRequestsSenateInvestigationOnWTCdust.pdf

"Millette did a lot of the analytical work on the WTC dust for these government teams, and was the leader in the laboratory for the official reports. These same scientists collaborated on the official WTC dust signature study and made the deliberate decision to not report iron spheres, despite iron spheres being a prominent and unusual component".

 

[DGM]

I just recieved this about Jim Milette in a personal email:

"Millette and his colleagues published the official reports on the WTC dust, and his involvement appears to be a means to defend their past work. EPA whistleblower Dr. Cate Jenkins used the phrase "deliberate misrepresentation" with regard to their studies in which samples were manipulated through pre-conditioning to lower the pH before testing."

Millette's name shows up in Jenkins' report four times because he participated in several EPA-funded studies that Jenkins has charged with fraud.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/DrJenkinsRequestsSenateInvestigationOnWTCdust.pdf

"Millette did a lot of the analytical work on the WTC dust for these government teams, and was the leader in the laboratory for the official reports. These same scientists collaborated on the official WTC dust signature study and made the deliberate decision to not report iron spheres, despite iron spheres being a prominent and unusual component".

Your reason to believe this is not "damage control"?

You guys are really worried about this study.

You need to start thinking outside the box.

 

[NoahFence]

Excellent! So you have your out. Now go away.

 

[plague311]

Excellent! So you have your out. Now go away.

Exactly, then quit wasting your time here.

No one here cares if you have any faith in the study or not. I am not being sarcastic or over doing it.

No one here cares if you believe it or not.

 

[triforcharity]

"So, where was the neutral scientist in Jones et al's studies? "

What would be so hard about it other than the costs? I'm sure the 9/11 commiunity can raise the funds required cover thier end of the experiment.

It's as simple as Millette looks.....our scientist looks. They both look at the same thing at the same time in the same room using the same equipment!

What does it matter in the slightest that the 9 sccientists didn't have a neutral person? The request was just made by me right now. It would be a great way for both sides to get true results. Results that could finally be indisputable.

That is what the "peer review" is for. Do you not understand this process?

And, Harriet et al's study has already been done. Too late for that, eh?

Yeah, go play with your cars kid.

 

[twinstead]

"Millette did a lot of the analytical work on the WTC dust for these government teams, and was the leader in the laboratory for the official reports. These same scientists collaborated on the official WTC dust signature study and made the deliberate decision to not report iron spheres, despite iron spheres being a prominent and unusual component".

Are those iron spheres indeed an "unusual component"? Do you have any original thoughts on the subject?

 

[NoahFence]

That is what the "peer review" is for. Do you not understand this process?

He doesn't understand the process because his only experience in it is the Harrit/Jones paper, which is pretty much the exact opposite of what "Peer Review" is.

 

[DGM]

I just recieved this about Jim Milette in a personal email:

At this point I think the best thing you guys could do is submit your paper to a real journal before he does. What do you think, Good Idea? They can't all be "in on it".

 

[beachnut]

I propose that we organize a 9/11 Truth scientist ( Basille, Ryan, Roberts...ect) to over see Millettes testing.

Kevin Ryan has already brought up the word "deceptive" in regards to the tests.

How do we know that if thermitic material is found that Millette actually comes out and says so?

Is it possible to have a 9/11 scientist involved in this study?

That would eliminate room for skepticism involving the documenting of the tests while they were being completed.

Plus, to have another professional involved is better in my opinion, you never know what one person might miss and the other pick up behind him.

You want a crazy person on 911 issues to oversee a test on dust, which the crazy person thinks is thermite, when there is zero evidence of thermite products at the WTC? All scientists/engineers sympathetic to 911 truth are morons on 911 issues, paranoid conspiracy theorists unable to be rational on 911.

No WTC steel found with thermite product fused to it. Means thermite claim is a lie, not related to the collapse of the WTC buildings. Fire did it, makes Chain of Custody for dust a non-player, and your claims of thermite remain in fantasy-land, insane nonsense made up by Jones.

If you think you have evidence to support your claims of thermite, you need to apply for a Pulitzer. Why are you wasting time spewing failed logic supporting idiots who lie due to ignorance, when you could take all their work and do an end run to the Pulitzer? What is stopping you from taking action? Did you try CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, etc? Do you have a plan? Are you going to take action? What is your goal? 10 years of failure, no action.

 

[plague311]

DATE: May 6, 2007

Part 1 of this complaint contains new evidence of additional falsifications of pH testing of WTC
dust, in addition to the allegations of fraud raised in my 8/22/06 and 10/25/06 complaints to your
Congressional delegation1, 2 as well as to the EPA Inspector General (IG).3

I am showing dates from going on 5 years ago. Did the person who personally emailed you say if anything came from these accusations? So far all I'm seeing is a failed attempt at discrediting Millette, and an accusation that they withheld information.

Like my mom used to say, don't point fingers cause you have 3 pointing right back at you.