Chain of Custody

[sheeplesnshills]

Why aren't they expected?

Because his "god" said so.......

 

[chrismohr]

Only thing i could find were some of her loose allegations that some documents were post dated and acceptable exposure limits changed. Dust samples soaked in water before testing which she alleges decreased alkalinity. Just gave it a quick read though. Nothing about chain of custody. Another was her incredulity that a number of samples had the exact same alkalinity.

I saw the incredulity about alkalinity. My question to anyone who wants to look at this and do a real fact check, is this: are there any allegations against Jim Millette besides the fact that he said "lots of iron" instead or "lots of iron-rich microspheres" in a study he coauthored on environmental hazards of the WTC rubble and dust? I didn't see any chain of custody challenges either.

 

[RedIbis]

Your response is BS actually. I have a lot of experience as a journalist and journalists write about things they are not experts about all the time! To be precise, I rejected about half of those 25 or so people and labs etc I approached; the other half recused themselves, saying they were not qualified to do what I asked. But I promise you, I use my powers of discernment well and have exposed many things in my journalistic life. I don't need to be a doctor to look up a hospital's infection rates before choosing a hospital to go to, for example. Everyone I talked to, I asked and asked until I got a clear picture of who I was looking for.

As a journalist you probably have a sense when someone is changing his story. You went from saying that you personally rejected "over two dozen" scientists. Now you're saying that rejected about a dozen and the other half recused themselves. That's quite a shift.

 

[Ivan Kminek]

Chris, nanothermite for CD of WTC and 911 generally should be my hobby, not a kind of self-torture Therefore, I am not willing to read elaborate complaint of lady named Cate Jenkins. It has 134 pages and it seems to contain mostly not important and not interesting doubts about slight discrepancies in some measurements of pH (acidity/alkalinity) of WTC dust samples. Nanothermites (and paints) are definitely more interesting
Jim Millette's papers are mentioned several times in this complaint, according to text search.
On p. 64, paper No 52 is cited in which Jim participated. Lower, there is a procedure described for preparation of samples for measurements of pH used in this paper; it looks correct and adequate. Etc. No real objections from Cate Jenkins were perhaps presented in connection with Jim Millette's work (she should have anyway more useful things to do (as well as me) If it is really so important, Jim passed this quest as a honest scientist, I think) I have much more problems with Cate Jenkins in this context

 

[Justin39640]

As a journalist you probably have a sense when someone is changing his story. You went from saying that you personally rejected "over two dozen" scientists. Now you're saying that rejected about a dozen and the other half recused themselves. That's quite a shift.

He rejected that half cause they told him they were unqualified... better? (probably not)

 

[DGM]

As a journalist you probably have a sense when someone is changing his story. You went from saying that you personally rejected "over two dozen" scientists. Now you're saying that rejected about a dozen and the other half recused themselves. That's quite a shift.

This is what happens when you spend too much time trying to find anomalies.

 

[Miragememories]

"It is not the size that I was considering.

Given the level of pulverization that existed at the WTC site, it was perfectly understandable that there would be iron particles in the dust.

What is not expected/understandable, is iron-rich microspheres."

"Why aren't they expected?"

"The production of elemental (pure) iron is a chemical extraction and or electrolytic deposition procedure. Iron is not naturally found in its pure, elemental form. To obtain pure iron, its ore must be heated, deslagged, and either injected with oxygen (Bessemer process) or arc melted at elevated temperature to produce low carbon steel. Any fire hot enough to melt iron would typically yield a coalesced mass, not the very small, uniform diameter spheres. Subsequent processing would be necessary to produce the spheres. Alternatively, one could dissolve in acid, treat chemically to remove impurities, and electrolytically extract the pure metal. Subsequent processing again required to produce the small spheres."

http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp.pdf
"Moreover, the RJ Lee report provides provocative data regarding the abundance of observed iron-rich spheres. A WTC dust sample acquired at 130 Liberty Street shows a “mean of composition” of “Fe spheres” of 5.87% which is very high compared with “Fe spheres” found in ordinary building dust of only 0.04%. As the report notes, the WTC dust has unusual identifying characteristics – in particular, the WTC dust in this sample has nearly 150 times (5.87/0.04) the amount of iron-rich spheres as ordinary dust (where Fe spheres can arise from micrometeorites, for example)."

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...agazines-science-of-controlled-demolitions/2/
"But Steven E. Jones, Jeffrey Farrer, Gregory S. Jenkins, Frank Legge, James Gourley, Kevin Ryan, Daniel Farnsworth, and Crockett Grabbe studied the “high-iron, relatively low oxygen spheres” found in the WTC dust and found that they “are unlike spheres gathered from cutting structural steel with an oxyacetylene torch.”
http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp.pdf

Hope this helps with your question.

MM

 

[DGM]

"The production of elemental (pure) iron is a chemical extraction and or electrolytic deposition procedure.......................

MM

Besides them telling you so, what makes you think there was "pure iron". Could you quote a part of their data?

 

[tsig]

"The production of elemental (pure) iron is a chemical extraction and or electrolytic deposition procedure. Iron is not naturally found in its pure, elemental form. To obtain pure iron, its ore must be heated, deslagged, and either injected with oxygen (Bessemer process) or arc melted at elevated temperature to produce low carbon steel. Any fire hot enough to melt iron would typically yield a coalesced mass, not the very small, uniform diameter spheres. Subsequent processing would be necessary to produce the spheres. Alternatively, one could dissolve in acid, treat chemically to remove impurities, and electrolytically extract the pure metal. Subsequent processing again required to produce the small spheres."

http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp.pdf
"Moreover, the RJ Lee report provides provocative data regarding the abundance of observed iron-rich spheres. A WTC dust sample acquired at 130 Liberty Street shows a “mean of composition” of “Fe spheres” of 5.87% which is very high compared with “Fe spheres” found in ordinary building dust of only 0.04%. As the report notes, the WTC dust has unusual identifying characteristics – in particular, the WTC dust in this sample has nearly 150 times (5.87/0.04) the amount of iron-rich spheres as ordinary dust (where Fe spheres can arise from micrometeorites, for example)."

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...agazines-science-of-controlled-demolitions/2/
"But Steven E. Jones, Jeffrey Farrer, Gregory S. Jenkins, Frank Legge, James Gourley, Kevin Ryan, Daniel Farnsworth, and Crockett Grabbe studied the “high-iron, relatively low oxygen spheres” found in the WTC dust and found that they “are unlike spheres gathered from cutting structural steel with an oxyacetylene torch.”
http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp.pdf

Hope this helps with your question.

MM

You think there was a Bessemer furnace operating in the buildings or under the pile?

 

[NoahFence]

You're asking for honesty.

Not gonna happen.

 

[RedIbis]

This is what happens when you spend too much time trying to find anomalies.

I probably spend too much time here anyway, but Chris' project interests me. I've said more than once that I think his desire to learn more about the composition of the dust is sincere and necessary.

Unfortunately, his methods have to be put through the same scrutiny that any other investigation would undergo, tedious as that might be. I've simply found some of his statements to be specious. I know you guys don't like it when one of your own is held to such a high standard.

 

[DGM]

I probably spend too much time here anyway, but Chris' project interests me. I've said more than once that I think his desire to learn more about the composition of the dust is sincere and necessary.

Unfortunately, his methods have to be put through the same scrutiny that any other investigation would undergo, tedious as that might be. I've simply found some of his statements to be specious. I know you guys don't like it when one of your own is held to such a high standard.

Why is it "unfortunate"? I have no problem with any of the scrutiny.

How is his deciding to use the labs that are willing or capable of doing the job pertinent to this study?

Why don't you wait for the the study to be done before you try to fault it?

 

[NoahFence]

I probably spend too much time here anyway, but Chris' project interests me. I've said more than once that I think his desire to learn more about the composition of the dust is sincere and necessary.

Unfortunately, his methods have to be put through the same scrutiny that any other investigation would undergo, tedious as that might be. I've simply found some of his statements to be specious. I know you guys don't like it when one of your own is held to such a high standard.

The same scrutiny that the farcical Ryan "study" went through?

Right....

 

[RedIbis]

Why is it "unfortunate"? I have no problem with any of the scrutiny.

How is his deciding to use the labs that are willing or capable of doing the job pertinent to this study?

Why don't you wait for the the study to be done before you try to fault it?

The material, Millette's access, the provenance are all relevant questions before the investigation begins.

 

[DGM]

The material, Millette's access, the provenance are all relevant questions before the investigation begins.

Were these addressed in the same manor before Jones/Harrit started their work? I don't remember anyone grilling them, could this be a double standard?

 

[DGM]

RedIbis:
Could you show where the Jones/Harrit methods of testing was discussed or an invitation to the "opposing side" was proposed before the study? Seems to me, this study if far more "open" then theirs.

 

[NoahFence]

The material, Millette's access, the provenance are all relevant questions before the investigation begins.

Please show the same documentation as it pertains to the Ryan "study" - or apologize for character assasination.

Maybe you're afraid that Millette will "make out like a bandit"?

 

[A W Smith]

The material, Millette's access, the provenance are all relevant questions before the investigation begins.

Were these addressed in the same manor before Jones/Harrit started their work? I don't remember anyone grilling them, could this be a double standard?

RedIbis:
Could you show where the Jones/Harrit methods of testing was discussed or an invitation to the "opposing side" was proposed before the study? Seems to me, this study if far more "open" then theirs.

Special pleading logical fallacy. RedIbis has been caught in it.

 

[BasqueArch]

"The production of elemental (pure) iron is a chemical extraction and or electrolytic deposition procedure. Iron is not naturally found in its pure, elemental form. To obtain pure iron, its ore must be heated, deslagged, and either injected with oxygen (Bessemer process) or arc melted at elevated temperature to produce low carbon steel. Any fire hot enough to melt iron would typically yield a coalesced mass, not the very small, uniform diameter spheres. Subsequent processing would be necessary to produce the spheres. Alternatively, one could dissolve in acid, treat chemically to remove impurities, and electrolytically extract the pure metal. Subsequent processing again required to produce the small spheres."
http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp.pdf

Or produced by the high temperatures of welding , and perhaps inherent in Portland cement. (to be tested)

"Moreover, the RJ Lee report provides provocative data regarding the abundance of observed iron-rich spheres. A WTC dust sample acquired at 130 Liberty Street shows a “mean of composition” of “Fe spheres” of 5.87% which is very high compared with “Fe spheres” found in ordinary building dust of only 0.04%. As the report notes, the WTC dust has unusual identifying characteristics – in particular, the WTC dust in this sample has nearly 150 times (5.87/0.04) the amount of iron-rich spheres as ordinary dust (where Fe spheres can arise from micrometeorites, for example)." http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...agazines-science-of-controlled-demolitions/2/

Add micrometeorites to the list of expected sources of iron microspheres in buildings. The higher number of these spheres in the WTC dust is due to the background dust samples taken pre-9/11 by RJ Lee from the surfaces of finished buildings with finished floors, walls, ceilings. The collapse of the Towers liberated the micrometeorites, welding and cement iron-rich spheres not captured by the surface sampling of the finished buildings. You would think Jones would note this crucial difference. Also note that these background buildings ordinary dust samples were collected from different buildings, in different cities, before 9/11, proving that these iron spheres are ubiquitous and existed before the collapse of the Towers, without being produced by therm*te demolition.

"But Steven E. Jones, Jeffrey Farrer, Gregory S. Jenkins, Frank Legge, James Gourley, Kevin Ryan, Daniel Farnsworth, and Crockett Grabbe studied the “high-iron, relatively low oxygen spheres” found in the WTC dust and found that they “are unlike spheres gathered from cutting structural steel with an oxyacetylene torch.”
http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp.pdf

How are they unlike? Jones does not provide samples or tests of these “unlike spheres gathered from cutting structural steel with an oxyacetylene torch.”
“high-iron, relatively low oxygen spheres” are a type iron oxide, the result of atmospheric corrosion.

All elemental iron turns to iron oxide when exposed to sufficient time.oxygen and water.

If therm*te can produce elemental iron spheres without oxidizing so can micrometeorites, welding and portland cement.

The existence of elemental iron or iron oxide spheres in the WTC dust are not proof of the use of therm*te.

 

[plague311]

I probably spend too much time here anyway, but Chris' project interests me. I've said more than once that I think his desire to learn more about the composition of the dust is sincere and necessary.

Unfortunately, his methods have to be put through the same scrutiny that any other investigation would undergo, tedious as that might be. I've simply found some of his statements to be specious. I know you guys don't like it when one of your own is held to such a high standard.

As odd as it is for me to say this, I completely agree with RedIbis. The tests that, some of us here, are funding SHOULD be put through the same scrutiny that any test of this nature should be put through. To the best of my knowledge this is going to happen, as well. By people with knowledge, education, and experience in this field. It's called the "peer review" system, which Harrit et al. "kind of" did, but Millette plans on fully doing.

Now, RedIbis, if you would like to state your occupation, experience, education, and history with this type of study I think most people here would listen. If any of what you provide is relevant. If you have none, then wait for the peer review. No part of this study needs to be checked against your standards.