• 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.

Frederic Henry-Couannier? (trying to reproduce Jones' nanothermite analysis)

Oystein said:
Why? He was asked 4 years ago how it came that he couldn't find red-gray chips, and he clearly said then:
"i certainly lost the most interesting chips with this first extraction"

What difference does it make whether he threw them away intentionally, or forgot where kept the rest, or lost it in a puff of wind blowing over his desk? He doesn't say he "threw away his red gray chips", he says he "certainly lost" them.

What difference does his state of mind at the time make and whether he knew, or did not know, about red-gray chips, when he clearly states:
"i only used it to search for the microspheres"
So far whatever reason, he was not interested in red-gray chips at that time, AND "thought [he] would just need to reextract later some more material to look for the chips". Well, he found later he was mistaken, and couldn't find much more magnetically attracted stuff.


Why are you asking such questions? Do you believe that any answer today could alter the reality of 2009 that he "certainly lost the most interesting chips with this first extraction"? Do you believe in time travel and magic?
Click to expand...

I know u guys don't like asking the hard questions so ill email him myself.
is this the one you used?
fhenryco@yahoo.fr
 
Oystein said:
...
In my mind, Henryco not being able to find more than one red-gray chip can plausibly explained without recourse to any manipulation:

  • ...
  • One was from an indoor location, which larger and denser particles like nice red-gray chips might not have entered in sufficient quantitiy. We can't deduce from the Harrit et al paper if indoor samples had a large or small proportion of such chips. (I remember that someone from the Harrit team believed that red-gray chips may be more plentyful in locations closer to GZ, but I don't remember where I read or heard that).
Click to expand...

Yeeeehah, found it:

http://911blogger.com/news/2009-09-...ational-geographic-special-911#comment-215964
ProfJones said:
1. You are correct that the paper refrains from giving a tonnage estimate -- while stating correctly that the amount was "substantial." This is the best way to put it still until quite a bit more data is collected. I spent much of the afternoon today in the lab, looking at yet another WTC dust sample. Dr. Farrer and I agree that the further away the dust sample was collected from GZ, the fewer are the red/gray chips (which is the case with today's sample -- still there, but fewer than the MacKinlay sample for example). Our hypothesis is that the red/gray chips settle out of the dust faster than lighter material.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
DGM said:
What "hard question"?
Click to expand...
I had considered asking Henryco that question, and could not remember today if I had included it in my mails in recent days. I just checked - no I did not. The reason being:
a) I am fairly certain that he was already aware of the talk of red-gray chips at the time
b) It doesn't matter what he knew at the time; I was only interested in what he actually did with the samples. Mine is a fact-finding mission, not one of second-guessing the intentions of strangers 4.5 years ago.

DGM said:
I hope it's not something like proof no one switched the chips? That's known in this world as the "easy out'.
Click to expand...
I could live with that easy out in the current context of the other thread. IIRC it was Senemut (if not him, then MM) who first invoked Henryco's studies in the discussion about the Millette dust. If Senemut now feels that Henryco, or his samples, are not reliable, fine. Toss him out. We don#t need him for the Millette-debate, and don't need him much for the Harrit debate.

If Senemut tosses out Henryco, then I must insist he tosses him out completely.

If Senemut decides that Henryco's samples and statements are legit, then he must accept the FACTS presented. One of those FACTS is that Henryco lost all red-gray chips that he pulled out of Sample 1+2 when he first went through them with a magnet when looking for microspheres only.

This FACT, established as such by Henryco in Hune 2009, does not change in any way today, retroactively based on an answer about his recollection today of his state of mind in 2008. If he knew about red gray chips, then he lost most of them. If he did not know about red-gray chips, then he lost them, too. Whether or not he lost them is not conditioned upon his knowledge of red-gray chips.
 
Senenmut said:
did you ask if he know about the red gray chips at the time of the first magnetic sweep? that would be important to know.

did you ask what he did with the stuff of interest that was attracted to the magnet the first time around? did he just throw it away after he got the microspheres out. if he was looking at the "stuff of interest" under a microscope, he sure would have seen the red gray chips along with the microspheres. are u gonna fail to pin him down on what he actually did with the stuff of interest after he got the microspheres out?



it would be hard to believe he threw away his red gray chips if he knew about jones presentation in boston at the time.
Click to expand...

I think it's accurate to say that he wasn't aware of the importance of the red\gray chips and didn't realize their importance until a fair amount of time had past.

Like Oystein said, trying to figure out where they are is a moot point. If he had them, he wouldn't say so specifically that they are gone. He would pull them out of their hiding spot and start his research on them.
 
plague311 said:
Like Oystein said, trying to figure out where they are is a moot point. If he had them, he wouldn't say so specifically that they are gone. He would pull them out of their hiding spot and start his research on them.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget to cover the crucial bases. Would he have to mail them? :rolleyes:
 
been busy lately but I heard back from henryco. I doubt he would mind me posting his email.

me highlighted:


Did you know about the red gray chips at the time of the first magnetic sweep? oystein has stated that you know about the Boston presentation by Prof Jones where the apex of the presentation, in my opinion, is the discovery of the red gray chips.

henryco- "yes i knew about the red gray chips as far as i remember. But i first wanted to study the microspheres, because each time i was approaching the magnet i could easily extract a magnetized powder, so i thought that i would have the possibility to still search for the red gray chips later. moreover at the begining i did not know for sure how to identify the redgray chips because there was many rusty particles which looked like chips and it's only when i discovered my single red-gray chip that i realize how different it was from everything i had seen before with the optical microscope , very similar to Jones red gray chips, and actually very exceptionnal in my sample"


What did you do with the stuff of interest that was attracted to the magnet the first time around? Did you just throw it away after you got the microspheres out?


henryco- "i never separated the microspheres from the rest because there are so many microspheres in the magnetic part of the dust and sticked to rusty bigger particles. i repetedly just put some of the magnetic selected dust on the carbon scotch as i was told to do to perform the XEDS and throw away the rest but dont remember now if i always inspected it at the optical microscope before. Again as it was not difficult to extract new magnetized material each time i approached the magnet, it seemed to me that the sample was inexhaustible in redchips and microspheres."




did they get stolen, did you place them in a separate container for further research and then "lost" that container? If you were looking at the "stuff of interest" under a microscope, you sure would have seen the red gray chips along with the microspheres. Did you see any red gray chips in the "stuff of interest" while you were getting the microspheres out?

henryco- "As far as i remember no! there was many many rusty particles but then i realized that they had nothing to do with red gray chips ... as far as i remember there was a period of time where i didnt want to admit that there was no red-gray chips in my sample from the begining, hence the posts you remind me in your email. But later i had the opportunity to analyze new fresh samples and since there was not a single red-gray chip in them, i started to wonder what was wrong with my samples.

i still dont understand why you and oystein are loosing your time with all that...the nanothermite story was just invented for that: to make everybody loose one's time and discredit the whole 9/11 investigation




moreover i still consider very likely that my samples were studied and manipulated by french secret services before i got them"

best




f
 
Senenmut said:
i still dont understand why you and oystein are loosing your time with all that...the nanothermite story was just invented for that: to make everybody loose one's time and discredit the whole 9/11 investigation
best
f
Click to expand...

Thanks, Henryco;) (And thanks, Senenmut, for reposting Henryco's opinion.)
And why we have been loosing our time with all that? It was just kind of rather bizzare fun for us, we have learned some new things about polymers, paints and other materials, and (last but not least), we have thought that we should prove somehow that Bentham chips (a) to (d) explicitily declared to be nanothermite by Harrit et al, are indeed red primer paint on rust flakes, since they contain kaolinite instead of declared mystical platelet form of metallic aluminum (as Sunstealer stated already several days after publishing of the Bentham paper).

Generally, my opinion is the same as expressed by JSanderO:
"No one has explained why the WTC had to be leveled to the ground. Would a few planes slamming into it been enough to freak everyone out? Hundreds would have died for sure. No one would want to work there or rent there. They'd be a disaster to repair... and eyesore for years and years... not an empty hole. What is the reason to destroy them all and especially 7 which no one ever heard of and it had no PR value."
 
Last edited:
Senenmut said:
...the nanothermite story was just invented for that: to make everybody loose one's time and discredit the whole 9/11 investigation



moreover i still consider very likely that my samples were studied and manipulated by french secret services before i got them"
Click to expand...


Um, if there was no nanothermite to look for in the dust, what would the French secret service want with it? :boggled:
 
ergo said:
Um, if there was no nanothermite to look for in the dust, what would the French secret service want with it? :boggled:
Click to expand...

I guess the French secret service were in on it as well. Perhaps they have been editing semenut or Henryco's emails to confuse people. Or maybe I am an undercover truther trying to confuse myself into being a non truther :confused:

Or has someone edited my post :confused:

It won't be long before someone lets the cat out of the bag :D
 
WTC Dust said:
Frederick Henry-Couannier, Judy Wood, and Tracy Blevins are the three scientists who are proposing a non-thermitic process of WTC destruction that resulted in a cool dust cloud. So there's three of us. :-) I'd say 3 Ph.D.s beats 1,000 architects in this matter, especially since what was seen on 9/11 was advanced, secret technology. In this case, knowing how to build and destroy buildings doesn't help. What was required was research science, not general knowledge of building construction.
Click to expand...

Judy Wood is a Scientist? :jaw-dropp

http://youtu.be/rJZrj0leylc
 
Thanks to Senemut for posting Henryco's reply.

It confirms the FACT that HenryCo did go through his sample's repeatedly with a magnet, didn't look for or or care for red-gray chips on the first occasion(s), and then later wasn't able anymore to find any.
So nothing there to study.

His suspicion about secret services intercepting his samples is, as far as I can see, merely imagination and conjecture - he offers zero evidence for it.


Sorry for the late reply, I was without internet connection at home since June 04.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom