• 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.

Debunk Alert: New Ryan/Jones Article in Peer Reviewed Journal

What a distorted pile of garbage!

Again Steven Jones excludes very important information to try and sway people over to his side.

Bottom of page 4 --

EPA’s Erik Swartz stated that 1,3-DPP was present at
levels ‘‘that dwarfed all others.’’ Swartz went on to say—
‘‘We’ve never observed it in any sampling we’ve ever
done’’ (Garrett 2003).

Now lets look at his reference -- http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hsair0911,0,471193.story?coll=ny-homepage-right-area

One molecule, described by the EPA's Erik Swartz, was present at levels "that dwarfed all others": 1,3-diphenylpropane. "We've never observed it in any sampling we've ever done," Swartz said. He said it was most likely produced by the plastic of tens of thousands of burning computers.

Funny that a person in the *truth* movement would leave that last line out.

RebIbis, your research skills are just like that of any other truther. You already know how you want things to have happened so you immediately discard anything that doesn't fit your distorted agenda.

Face it Red, you don't have the slightest clue as to what happened on 9/11 because you have fallen victim to truth movement propaganda. I expect that your pride is now standing in the way of you ever being able to admit the truth or possibly even see it for that matter.
 
The Environmentalist does appear to be one of the many low (or no) threshold "scholarly" journals. The oddest thing is why would it accept an article so far from its stated purpose (i.e. the Earth and the environment).

At any rate, here is my summary of the article:

  1. Valiant researchers obtain air-quality data from the EPA under the FOIA.
  2. Pretty graphs are drawn by valiant researchers based on data.
  3. Thermite!

I don't think I left anything out.
 
Published in "The Environmentalist" and archived here, this article questions the "high levels of volatile organic chemicals as well as unusual species that had never been seen before in structure fires" found at the WTC site.

It's not hard to see where they're going with this. I expect the requisite wise cracks, but my general question would be why shouldn't we be concerned about these elevated levels and do they suggest the possibility of collapse by means other than impact, jet fuel, and gravity?

If the presence of these compounds and elevated levels did exist, could this explain why no construction has commenced at GZ? Other than some infrastructure, no commercial real estate exists in that block.

The full article can viewed in pdf form here.

Joneses Work is Ludicrous, RedIbis, Just how much oxygen does it take to cut a column at the World Trade center?
 
There's a lot of distraction from the point at hand here, and that is, should there be a concern that high levels of "energetic compounds" were found at GZ?


The paper cited contains no such claim that high levels (or any levels) of "energetic compounds" were found at GZ. Why should anyone be concerned about a nonexistent finding?

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Well, looks like I have to write some letters again...

This paper is a sham. References to works that are not reviewed, rampant speculation, and above all, no useful conclusion.

I do give Dr. Jones credit for one -- exactly one -- thing, however. He actually defines a hypothesis. Not a hypothesis for the whole WTC Towers collapse, mind you, just a hypothesis for the very limited scope of effects that he discusses here in detail. His hypothesis, i.e. that unknown "nano-composites" are to blame for the heat and chemical species seen at the Pile, has already been discounted due to superior (and preceeding) work by Lioy et al. among others.

Dr. Jones is moving closer to the scientific method with this paper, but unfortunately, by doing so he makes it much easier to refute his conclusions.

This paper, like the Bentham paper, should never have been published. I'm not surprised that it showed up here, rather than a more suitable publication. I'll be interested to see what their editors have to say about this, and will keep you informed.
 
The Environmentalist does appear to be one of the many low (or no) threshold "scholarly" journals. The oddest thing is why would it accept an article so far from its stated purpose (i.e. the Earth and the environment).


The short answer: $3,000 publication fee (eta: courtesy of Mick Harrison, the twoofer lawyer who represented Kevin Ryan in his failed lawsuit).


At any rate, here is my summary of the article:

  1. Valiant researchers obtain air-quality data from the EPA under the FOIA.
  2. Pretty graphs are drawn by valiant researchers based on data.
  3. Thermite!

I don't think I left anything out.


No, that looks about right.
 
Last edited:
Published in "The Environmentalist" and archived here, this article questions the "high levels of volatile organic chemicals as well as unusual species that had never been seen before in structure fires" found at the WTC site.


In addition to Boyle's Law, please name the other two laws that combine to form the combined gas law, then provide a brief description and at least five real-world examples for each. Next, describe the difference between the combined gas law and the ideal gas law, and describe why the ideal gas law is most accurate for monoatomic gases at high temperatures and low pressures.


It's not hard to see where they're going with this. I expect the requisite wise cracks, but my general question would be why shouldn't we be concerned about these elevated levels and do they suggest the possibility of collapse by means other than impact, jet fuel, and gravity?


Please analyze all ~1700 messages in this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66047, and choose twenty messages that best support the text quoted above, including a one paragraph summary of each. Then, write a short biography on the author of each chosen message, using whatever information you can find using Google. Finally, tie it all together with a short essay on how the background of each author contributes to his or her opinion, drawing heavily on comparisons to illustrate your point.


If the presence of these compounds and elevated levels did exist, could this explain why no construction has commenced at GZ? Other than some infrastructure, no commercial real estate exists in that block.


Name at least 100 literary characters with the initials GZ (use SH and TS if you run out), and explain in detail why you think the author chose those initials. Also include a short biography for each author, with at least one paragraph devoted to each member of the author's immediate family, plus any pets (past or present).


The full article can viewed in pdf form here.


List twelve bird species that are native to Western Africa and outline their migratory habits.


DEBUNKED.
 
Well, looks like I have to write some letters again...

This paper is a sham. References to works that are not reviewed, rampant speculation, and above all, no useful conclusion.

I do give Dr. Jones credit for one -- exactly one -- thing, however. He actually defines a hypothesis. Not a hypothesis for the whole WTC Towers collapse, mind you, just a hypothesis for the very limited scope of effects that he discusses here in detail. His hypothesis, i.e. that unknown "nano-composites" are to blame for the heat and chemical species seen at the Pile, has already been discounted due to superior (and preceeding) work by Lioy et al. among others.

Dr. Jones is moving closer to the scientific method with this paper, but unfortunately, by doing so he makes it much easier to refute his conclusions.

This paper, like the Bentham paper, should never have been published. I'm not surprised that it showed up here, rather than a more suitable publication. I'll be interested to see what their editors have to say about this, and will keep you informed.

LOL the MIC "scientist" doesnt like the articel :)
 
OK, this is from the perspective of a librarian who manages subscriptions to this kind of online material all day every day. (That would be me.) Springer is the real thing, as a publisher, one of the most serious names in scientific publishing. All I know about this journal particularly is what they say at the site:

Aims and scope
"Diminishing energy and non-renewable resources, toxic wastes, loss of agricultural land and potable water supplies are key concerns shared by industry, governmental leaders and environmental professionals. The conflict of interests and goals that was once a gap is now bridged by The Environmentalist. This journal acts as a catalyst for environmental education, identifying available educational opportunities, and providing necessary guidelines and the missing framework for defining the more viable management mechanisms useful to industry, governmental policy-makers and environmental professionals.

"The Environmentalist publishes the critical but constructive views of both industrialists and ecologists, through challenging guest editorials, in-depth articles, interviews and news and comments columns. The Environmentalist contains elements applicable to the education and training of mankind at one level or the other, be it formal or non-formal schooling, specialist training, retraining of decision makers or communication to the public at large."

Well, it's definitely "soft" as a science journal. Certainly an odd place to put an article purporting to provide a basic argument about "therm*te" or its ilk. Here is the editorial board, with lots of Guelphers (Guelphians? Guelphomatics?):

cda_displayimage.jpg

The Environmentalist

Co-Editor-in-Chief: J.T. Trevors; P.G. Kevan
ISSN: 0251-1088 (print version)
ISSN: 1573-2991 (electronic version)
Journal no. 10669
Springer US
Online version available
Online First articles available


Description
|
Editorial Board

Editorial Board

Co-Editors-in-Chief:
Peter G. Kevan
Depts. of Environmental Biology & Botany, University of Guelph, ON, Canada
Jack T. Trevors
Dept. of Environmental Biology, University of Guelph, ON, Canada

Associate Editorial and Advisory Board:

Ernesto I. Badano, Puebla, Mexico; F.J. Egea González, Almeria, Spain; Marc Habash, Guelph, ON, Canada; M. Kassas, Giza, Egypt; Jonathan Knight, Berkshire, UK; M. Lisowski, Charleston, IL, USA; J.W.S. Longhurst, Bristol, UK; H.F. Ludwig, Bangkok, Thailand; J.F. Potter, Guildford, UK; G. Rees, Farnborough, UK; P. Sibley, Guelph, ON, Canada; U.E. Simonis, Berlin, Germany; M. Pugh Thomas, Liverpool, UK; V.G. Thomas, Guelph, ON, Canada; D. Waite, Regina, SK, Canada
 
Holy CRAP! There was Benzene found at Ground Zero!?! Why didn't someone point this out earlier?
 
yeah. imagine that. Benzene.. You know, a principal component of combustion products produced by the burning of PVC (polyvinyl chloride).

PVC.. you know, common in HIGH RISE buildings, considering all those computer casings, filing cabinets, shelving, office supplies, xerox machines, piping, etc by the THOUSANDS in a 110 story OFFICE BUILDING.


Lets not forget the other uses, that Benzene is used in:
Nylon (some carpet contains nylon)
Certain rubbers
Drugs
dyes
lubricants
pesticides (wonder how many times, the WTC has been the subject of routine extermination of pests in the 30+ years since their construction).



A concern?

Guess Red has never worked in an office.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom