The sad case of Niels Harrit

[LSSBB]

Looks to me like you don't know about Sir Elton and REO Speedwagon.

Maybe he dicks his own potatoes.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Maybe he dicks his own potatoes.

When he's not juicing the piglet, of course.

Dave

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Just one question, does anyone know the name of Mrs Mackinlay's boyfriend who does welding metal Sculpture I remember a picture of him next to a sculpture covered in red metal flake paint.
The picture was taken about a week or two before 9/11/2001.

I would love to know if that red paint was aluminum metal flake, I ignited a comersal aluminum metal flake paint under argon.

Wonder if Jones's whole load of bull started out based on one contaminated sample of dust?
That would be the greatest joke on the truthers ever.

 

[Oystein]

Just one question, does anyone know the name of Mrs Mackinlay's boyfriend who does welding metal Sculpture I remember a picture of him next to a sculpture covered in red metal flake paint.
The picture was taken about a week or two before 9/11/2001.

I would love to know if that red paint was aluminum metal flake, I ignited a comersal aluminum metal flake paint under argon.

Wonder if Jones's whole load of bull started out based on one contaminated sample of dust?
That would be the greatest joke on the truthers ever.

The MacKinlay specimen in Harrit et al - chip a) - is a picture-perfect example of LaClede primer paint on structural steel. It contains very little Al, all of it in the form of kaolin clay. No other source of Al. This is perfectly clear from the data presented (especially Figures 8 through 11). It even has the traces of strontium and chromium that Ivan and I predicted for LaClede paint chips. They found chips with practically identical properties and appearance in the other three dust samples, too.

The thermite fantasy is a fantasy.
And so is the red metal flake paint fantasy. Although the metal flake fantasy at least has a higher a-priori likelihood of being plausible.

It is certainly true that some paint chips in the total dust came from sources other than structural steel, such as fire trucks, fire extinguishers, cars, pieces of art, etc. The exceedingly vast majority of such red-gray chips however must come from the steel skeleton, simply because there was so vastly more structural steel surface than all other artefacts with red paint on steel combined. Of course any specific sample such as the MacKinlay sample might be significantly contaminated with red-gray flakes not from the WTC, however this has a very slim chance of occurring, too, plus the data most clearly shows the similarity between chip a) (MacKinlay) and chips b)-d) (non-MacKinlay), to effectively rule out your fantasy.

it doesn't matter what fancy effects you find in your fun experiments.
Just as it doesn't matter what fancy things the likes of Jon Cole do and find in their experiments.

 

[Redwood]

The MacKinlay specimen in Harrit et al - chip a) - is a picture-perfect example of LaClede primer paint on structural steel. It contains very little Al, all of it in the form of kaolin clay. No other source of Al. This is perfectly clear from the data presented (especially Figures 8 through 11). It even has the traces of strontium and chromium that Ivan and I predicted for LaClede paint chips. They found chips with practically identical properties and appearance in the other three dust samples, too.

The thermite fantasy is a fantasy.
And so is the red metal flake paint fantasy. Although the metal flake fantasy at least has a higher a-priori likelihood of being plausible.

It is certainly true that some paint chips in the total dust came from sources other than structural steel, such as fire trucks, fire extinguishers, cars, pieces of art, etc. The exceedingly vast majority of such red-gray chips however must come from the steel skeleton, simply because there was so vastly more structural steel surface than all other artefacts with red paint on steel combined. Of course any specific sample such as the MacKinlay sample might be significantly contaminated with red-gray flakes not from the WTC, however this has a very slim chance of occurring, too, plus the data most clearly shows the similarity between chip a) (MacKinlay) and chips b)-d) (non-MacKinlay), to effectively rule out your fantasy.

it doesn't matter what fancy effects you find in your fun experiments.
Just as it doesn't matter what fancy things the likes of Jon Cole do and find in their experiments.

 

[Criteria]

The MacKinlay specimen in Harrit et al - chip a) - is a picture-perfect example of LaClede primer paint on structural steel. It contains very little Al, all of it in the form of kaolin clay. No other source of Al. This is perfectly clear from the data presented (especially Figures 8 through 11). It even has the traces of strontium and chromium that Ivan and I predicted for LaClede paint chips. They found chips with practically identical properties and appearance in the other three dust samples, too.

The thermite fantasy is a fantasy.
And so is the red metal flake paint fantasy. Although the metal flake fantasy at least has a higher a-priori likelihood of being plausible.

It is certainly true that some paint chips in the total dust came from sources other than structural steel, such as fire trucks, fire extinguishers, cars, pieces of art, etc. The exceedingly vast majority of such red-gray chips however must come from the steel skeleton, simply because there was so vastly more structural steel surface than all other artefacts with red paint on steel combined. Of course any specific sample such as the MacKinlay sample might be significantly contaminated with red-gray flakes not from the WTC, however this has a very slim chance of occurring, too, plus the data most clearly shows the similarity between chip a) (MacKinlay) and chips b)-d) (non-MacKinlay), to effectively rule out your fantasy.

it doesn't matter what fancy effects you find in your fun experiments.
Just as it doesn't matter what fancy things the likes of Jon Cole do and find in their experiments.

And when people educated in the subject like Dr. Millette and Dr. Harrit disagree with your amateur guesswork you continue pretending that you have a better grasp of the subject than they do.

The fantasy is all yours.

 

[beachnut]

9/11 truth followers come to support lies and fantasy with talk, no evidence.

And when people educated in the subject like Dr. Millette and Dr. Harrit disagree with your amateur guesswork you continue pretending that you have a better grasp of the subject than they do.

The fantasy is all yours.

Nope, thermite is a fantasy. A dumbed down fantasy of 9/11 truth biggest liars, a fantasy supported by nuts on 9/11 like Harrit. Harrit, A paranoid conspiracy theorist who fools gullible 9/11 truth followers. Followes, who fight back at rational people with projection.

There is zero evidence for the Harri fantasy of hundreds of pounds of thermite used on 9/11 to do the destruction; Harrit is nuts on 9/11. Posts filled with fantasy trust in Harrit's lies about 9/11, would be signs of gullibility based no practical chemistry knowledge.

Jone/Harrit paper offers no proof of thermite, it fooled the 9/11 truth followers.

Poor Niels Harrit was found to be a nuts on 9/11 by a court. Lucky for you only nuts at Loose Change like JFK and Preston fall for lies dumbed down as far as Niels Harrit can take them... hundreds of pounds of thermite used but no damage to any WTC steel, Harrit's insane fantasy fails due to one thing; evidence. 9/11 truth followers can't do chemistry. Any lay person can see Harrit is not using chemistry, he uses woo, and fools a fringe few.

9/11 truth followers come to support lies and fantasy with talk, no evidence.

 

[Mark F]

And when people educated in the subject like Dr. Millette and Dr. Harrit disagree with your amateur guesswork you continue pretending that you have a better grasp of the subject than they do.

The fantasy is all yours.

All this talk of thermite, thermate, super thermite, super duper mega nano thermite, etc, etc, etc,... is completely pointless and irrelevant.

There was no controlled demolition of any structure on 9/11 and certainly none done with any nature of therm_te. So WTF cares?

 

[Oystein]

And when people educated in the subject like Dr. Millette and Dr. Harrit disagree with your amateur guesswork you continue pretending that you have a better grasp of the subject than they do.

The fantasy is all yours.

Millette certainly never disagreed with anything I wrote in the post you quoted. Why can you never write anything that is correct? You are always wrong about most everything.

You are also wrong to think that Harrit is "educated in the subject". He is not. He fell for Steven Jones's hoax because he - like Jones, like Ryan, like Legge, like Farnsworth, like Gourley, like Larsen - was not educated in the relevant fields of studies at all. This stupid group of crazies didn't recognize hematite under the microscope, they didn't recognize kaolin clay - how stupid and uneducated is that for 9 people pretending to study dust using SEM and XEDS?!?

Sunstealer recognaized kaolin one day after "Harrit et al" was published in April 2009. Harrit is so incredibly stupid, he still doesn't get it, 8 years later, despite habing received thorough schooling several times.

Millette proved kaolin clay 100%.
Harrit found strontium and chromium in the MacKinlay chip a)
Farrer found strontium and chromium in the MacKinlay chip a)
Both Harrit and Farrer are too coward to admit what this means - kaolin, traces of strontium and chromium amidst red iron oxide pigments. Perhaps too stupid.

 

[Criteria]

"Millette certainly never disagreed with anything I wrote in the post you quoted.

Why can you never write anything that is correct?

You are always wrong about most everything."

Millette most certainly did not agree with a finding of LaClede paint in the red chips he analyzed.

"OK but Jim Millette specifically said to me, unequivocally, NO STRONTIUM CHROMATE.

It was clear to me that he looked and he did not find it. I wouldn't bet my nuts on it being LaClede..."

Strontium chromate was a prerequisite for establishing the presence of LaClede primer paint.

 

[DGM]

This will be funny................

 

[Oystein]

Millette most certainly did not agree with a finding of LaClede paint in the red chips he analyzed.

He didn't analyze the MacKinlay dust, not chip a), did he?
Dang, Criteria, I poked you with the nose into that context - why did you get it wrong yet again? You always get almost everything wrong, doesn't that annoy you like hell?

Strontium chromate was a prerequisite for establishing the presence of LaClede primer paint.

Would have been, yeah. Harrit et al, because they were all utterly, helplessly incompetent, failed totally to employ any able method of analysis to figure out the chemistry and crystallinity of the pigments and the binder. They had not the slightest *********** clue what the hell they were looking at. Complete idiots. However:

• Harrit found traces of strontium and chromium.
• Farrer found traces of strontium and chromium.
• Finding strontium and chromium is consistent with, and is predicted from, the LaClede theory

-> Please acknowledge explicitly these three facts, Criteria!
They had no idea whether or not there was a chromate or an oxide or a silicate in the red material, because they employed 0% of the necessary education and experience to find out such things.

 

[beachnut]

Millette most certainly did not agree with a finding of LaClede paint in the red chips he analyzed.

Strontium chromate was a prerequisite for establishing the presence of LaClede primer paint.

There was not thermite in the dust, Jones and Harrit lied. Jones and Harrit failed to do the correct test to see they are liars with their conclusion not backed by the paper. Jones did not like war, he lied about thermite. Jones got fired for spewing nonsense without evidence. 9/11 truth followers fooled by old men who lie. It is kind of sad, Jones might not know he is a liar, or he does not care and is the classic BS artist, making up BS as he goes.

Liar, or clueless = for Jones, and Harrit

There was no thermite damage to WTC steel. You have no evidence, and you have no clue you have no evidence. Talk and a fake conclusion in a vanity paper are not evidence.

 

[Criteria]

Millette most certainly did not agree with a finding of LaClede paint in the red chips he analyzed.

”He [Millette] didn't analyze the MacKinlay dust, not chip a), did he?”

So you are not interested in Millette’s finding that the 9/11 WTC dust that he investigated was “unequivocally” not LaClede paint because you are convinced that your armchair knowledge and IT expertise give your analysis supremacy?

Your hubris is noted.

Strontium chromate was a prerequisite for establishing the presence of LaClede primer paint.

”Would have been, yeah.

Dr. Harrit et al, because they were all utterly, helplessly incompetent, failed totally to employ any able method of analysis to figure out the chemistry and crystallinity of the pigments and the binder.

They had not the slightest *********** clue what the hell they were looking at.

Complete idiots.”

Are you one of Trump’s speech writers?

 

[Oystein]

So you are not interested in Millette’s finding

Since we were discussing the MacKinlay dust sample and specimen, no, I am (for the moment) not interested in the other samples and specimens that Millette looked at.

You, Criteria, are not interested in the findings of your heros, or else you would have explicitly acknowledged these three facts:

• Harrit found traces of strontium and chromium.
• Farrer found traces of strontium and chromium.
• Finding strontium and chromium is consistent with, and is predicted from, the LaClede theory

-> Please acknowledge explicitly these three facts now, Criteria, to start rebuilding from scratch the totally missing credibility of yours!

that the 9/11 WTC dust that he investigated was “unequivocally” not LaClede paint

So what if it wasn't? No problem at all - there were many different kinds of red paint chips in the dust. Harrit et al presented at least SIX (6) different kinds of red-gray chips that they pulled from their four dust samples. One clearly was LaClede primer, the other five were not. One of the other five was Tnemec Red. The other four were not. There were many kinds of red paint in the dust, as there were many kinds of red-gray chips.
Harrit and Jones were too stupid, or too dishonest, to tell you this.

Are you one of Trump’s speech writers?

My English (a foreign language to me) is a lot better than Trump's.

 

[skyeagle409]

​

So you are not interested in Millette’s finding that the 9/11 WTC dust that he investigated was “unequivocally” not LaClede paint because you are convinced that your armchair knowledge and IT expertise give your analysis supremacy?

Dust samples were examined by experienced organizations who have stated for the record that they found no evidence of thermite in their samples. That explains why no such evidence has been found after all of these years.

Once again, thermite is not effective which is why demolition companies do not use thermite for the demolition of tall steel-framed buildings.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

The MacKinlay specimen in Harrit et al - chip a) - is a picture-perfect example of LaClede primer paint on structural steel. It contains very little Al, all of it in the form of kaolin clay. No other source of Al. This is perfectly clear from the data presented (especially Figures 8 through 11). It even has the traces of strontium and chromium that Ivan and I predicted for LaClede paint chips. They found chips with practically identical properties and appearance in the other three dust samples, too.

The thermite fantasy is a fantasy.
And so is the red metal flake paint fantasy. Although the metal flake fantasy at least has a higher a-priori likelihood of being plausible.

It is certainly true that some paint chips in the total dust came from sources other than structural steel, such as fire trucks, fire extinguishers, cars, pieces of art, etc. The exceedingly vast majority of such red-gray chips however must come from the steel skeleton, simply because there was so vastly more structural steel surface than all other artefacts with red paint on steel combined. Of course any specific sample such as the MacKinlay sample might be significantly contaminated with red-gray flakes not from the WTC, however this has a very slim chance of occurring, too, plus the data most clearly shows the similarity between chip a) (MacKinlay) and chips b)-d) (non-MacKinlay), to effectively rule out your fantasy.

it doesn't matter what fancy effects you find in your fun experiments.
Just as it doesn't matter what fancy things the likes of Jon Cole do and find in their experiments.

Maybe you should research a little more before making comments,
https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/strontium_chromate#section=Top

Aluminum metal flake paint has a Laclade base and since the dust sample came from an apartment in which a welder sculptor lived that liked to use metal flake paint, I am wondering if the sample should have been used at all?

Obviously spray painting would have caused some adherence of microscopic paint particles to clothing.

There could have been tons of microscopic paint chips similar to Laclade an amost exact formula except for the aluminum metal flakes.
I am simply wondering if the samples from this perticular apartment are likely to have been contaminated by the work habits of the people who inhabited the room.
Seeing this sample came from settled dust on a window seal.
No one knows what other dust or contamination was there before the towers collapsed.
Remember chips were ignited and not tested, so if these samples were contaminated, by the occupancy in the residence then that sample would have to have been tossed out of the
Testing for the tests to be valid.
That is a major problem for the Harrit & Jones paper cross contamination, from an easily documented source, of one of the main sample in the study.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I agree that the majority of the chips are Laclade, but cross contamination is a possibility in the MacKinlay
Sample. It was the first sample Steven E. Jones received, while he was still a physicist at BYU.
Could Jones and Farrer have stumbled on an Aluminum metal flake paint chip early on in the MacKinlay sample, and then misidentified the rest of the Laclade chips as Thermite, based on the reaction of that chip and it's similarity to Laclade?
These whole stupid theories might have simply been based on the chance finding of a known material that should have been tossed out by an actual investigation do to possibilities of contamination of the sample.
Though I do suspect that Jones was simply a fraud all along, I have to give him benefit of doubt, though it is very hard now to do so. Just helping a young Student who has asked me questions on why I believe people become conspiracy theorists, he is writing his psychology paper for College on conspiracy theorists.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

​

So you are not interested in Millette’s finding that the 9/11 WTC dust that he investigated was “unequivocally” not LaClede paint because you are convinced that your armchair knowledge and IT expertise give your analysis supremacy?

Your hubris is noted.

​

Are you one of Trump’s speech writers?

Criteria I would ask you where the evidence is for Thermite in the dust samples, and where is it in the steel, and what is the average concentration and types of microscopic spherical particles in the dust, not from cutting, Magnetic photo copier developer, or likewise manufactured by humans prior to 9/11/2001, and Not from flyash in the Concrete from Lansing New York Fly Ash?

Please give me an answer to that question, since you know the RJ Lee report was months after Cutting commenced with Oxygen Lances with steel and Aluminum wires inside.

I have pointed out that a paint existed that fits all the bill for Thermitic reactions so unless you can show me the expected damage pattern of cutting steel under intense loading with Thermite, you have no case, for an new investigation of anything!

It even has Strontium Cromate, and the resistance and appearance is drasticly different than Laclade paint, or Tremec paint.
It fits everything described by the truth movement until you can exclude a chance finding via Science, you have no case, especially since a main sample was likely contaminated by it.

 

[beachnut]

...
Are you one of Trump’s speech writers?

This is your evidence for thermite. You can't produce more than a fake paper by nuts in 9/11 truth.

Where is the evidence of thermite on WTC steel, and you produce BS a weak personal attack using clownstick as your foil.

I'll bet you had to reach really far to pull that one out of the truther logic ether.

Perhaps thermite believers should read the jones/harrit nut case paper, the source of the dust is thermite fantasy claim before thermite believers make bigger fools of themselves than they already have.

Bottom line, the thermite claim has never shown evidence on WTC steel. More over Harrit says hundred of the tons (is he insane), and there were no tons of iron, a thermite product you ignore in your fruitless support of the insane claim of thermite by Harrit: Trump would say, SAD, and this time he would be right, which is sad.

Stuck with the eternal gish gallop of BS, you can't produce evidence, never will, thermite was used on 9/11. Trump would say, "sad" - Harrit lied, you believe. The paper made up the conclusion of thermite, and fooled you.