• 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.

Truther responses to Millette WTC Dust paper

alienentity

Illuminator
alienentity
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
4,325
Predictably, 9/11 Truthers are variously avoiding the results of Dr Millette's study by attacking him, Chris Mohr and Oystein; by misrepresenting what the paper says; by pretending that it doesn't make any difference to the 'Official Story' etc....

Once again confirming that they aren't really interested in a real investigation, if the results aren't to their liking.

Here's one exchange on AboveTopSecret
Some examples:
'None of this proves the collapses were from plane impacts and fire. It doesn't address the physics of sagging trusses for example...All we have to do is prove that fire and plane impacts could not have caused it, and we have done that already. '
Click to expand...

The fact that they believe there to be an epoxy attached to the iron oxide proves that the iron oxide was "painted on" in strategic locations to weaken elevator and core structure.
Click to expand...

Are they serious? The closest sample was 0.2 miles away from ground zero and taken 17 days later. after 6 days of rain and 1 day of snow.

totally useless IMO
Click to expand...

And the character assassination and misinformation on 911blogger:

Milette is being paid $1000 to debunk the nanothermite paper by German JREFer "Oystein". He will complete the assignment as requested and paid for.
Click to expand...

Don't be fooled by Chris Mohr's fake civility and Millette's supposed impartiality.
Click to expand...

Oystein has been coming around the911forum and has made his intentions and methods quite clear. Facts be damned.
Click to expand...

And handwaving and blanket denials of the 'don't confuse me with the facts' ilk..
The findings as published in the Active Thermitic Materials paper are not commensurate with any sort of 'paint'. The only thing which would explain the findings without nano-thermite would be scientific fraud."
Click to expand...

And misunderstandings of science..
the formation of metallic-iron-rich spheres upon ignition of the red material -- which demonstrates very high temperatures and that a thermitic reaction has occurred.
Click to expand...

He promises to do lab tests to determine what they are, but if he tries to claim they're paint, he's lying. These chips are not paint.
Click to expand...

One standout is in one of the posts by Dr Steven Jones, who is obviously confused about what metric 'proves' thermitic behavior..
Dr. Farrer has ignited a paint sample in a DSC and the paint sample showed a much broader thermal spike, indicating a relatively slow heat-release (compared to the red/gray chips)
Click to expand...

To which I would add that what Jones posits is irrelevant to the question of whether the chips are thermitic - if there is no elemental aluminum then what is the supposed reaction??? It's chemistry, not magic.
 
Last edited:
Don't be fooled by Chris Mohr's fake civility and Millette's supposed impartiality.
Click to expand...
OpoQQ.jpg

Chris Mohr is a SAINT! If anything he's too nice with the TM.
 
Holy Thermite, if they found some dust with jet fuel on it, the thermal would be tens times the heat energy of thermite;
Then 911 truth nuts, Jones and Dolts, would claim a NWO compound 10 times the heat energy of thermite.

911 truth = failure
 
LSSBB said:
Oystein, where'd you get a 1000 bucks??? And what did Chris do with all our money?//
;)
Click to expand...

How much did it cost Jones and Harrit to get their work published? I wonder if the fact that there is a difference between funding research that will then be submitted to peer-review for publication and doing crappy research and then paying to have it published will be lost on Truthers.

Le sigh.
 
Well we all knew it was going to happen.

The 9/11 Truth Movement is not interested in truth, and never have been. This is but yet just another example of the 9/11 Truther equivalent of a 8 year old holding his hands over his ears and yelling 'nah nah nah nah I can't hear you! nah nah nah'.

Thank god this movement isn't growing.
 
Well, just as I asked on Chris Mohr's thread: WHY haven't the scholarly members of the truth movement done this themselvesm before? Supposedly, they want a "new and impartial investigation into the events of 911", they got a phantom kangaroo version of it with their own members. Considering the amount of money that Richard Gage, Dr. David Ray Griffin, and the other scholars of 911 truth make: $1,000 should be easy to come up with and the means by which Oystein and Chris Mohr went about this (I didn't realize reading Mohr's thread, that Oystein participated) could have been accomplished by them long-ago.

It's perfectly clear to me that the "truth movement" is not interested in truth at all. There is nothing that they have done to further their cause or to give validity to it. This totally and completely shuts down ALL of their claims regarding the collapses of the buildings.

Also, the blatant disregard for the facts resulting from this investigation on other forums is shocking. The whole point of the investigation, was NOT to prove that plane impacts, sagging floor trusses, or fire were the cause: it was specifically to directly answer the claims that nano-thermite was involved. The results of the study CLEARLY prove that there was no "thermite/nano-thermite demolition"; but primer paint and pigmentation, mostly of an expoxy-based resin and kaolin clay. Precisely what we've ALL been saying this whole time.
 
alienentity said:
"To which I would add that what Jones posits is irrelevant to the question of whether the chips are thermitic - if there is no elemental aluminum then what is the supposed reaction??? It's chemistry, not magic."
Click to expand...



alienentity:


Exactly! What Jones and Harrit et al acheived, was combustion; it was NOT a reaction. The dishonesty amongst the truth camp is outlandish!
 
'None of this proves the collapses were from plane impacts and fire. It doesn't address the physics of sagging trusses for example...All we have to do is prove that fire and plane impacts could not have caused it, and we have done that already."
I know I keep hounding away at it, but this statement is so full of ignorance it just jumps off the page.

It doesn't HAVE to explain sagging floor trusses and bowing perimeter columns. It is merely an unbiased analysis of the particles that the truth movement has been sounding off about for years!


Also, what I see in that other comment by Steven Jones is simply an attempt to once again distort true, forensic, analytical science. This is what that movement is known for.
 
Last edited:
Truthers don't understand the science or the data that Millette has produced nor do they want to. His data is identical to that of Harrit et al, but he goes further in the use of material characterisation techniques such as PLM, FTIR and TEM-SAED EDS.

The fact that none of these techniques show elemental Al is present, but show that kaolin is present is absolutely damning for the Harrit et al paper and truthers. I've been saying it from the start just a few days after the Bentham rubbish was published that kaolin is present. This confirms it. This FTIR spectra kills thermite dead.

picture.php


The problem is most people won't know what they are looking at or realise that modern FTIR uses a sample database to compare the spectra of the sample being analysed with hundreds of spectra from known materials.

So in the end truthers have got nothing so they will totally ignore the findings and use all of their usual tricks to cloud the waters.

I've always believed that if a country uses the words "democratic" and "peoples" in the title then you can bet that country is not a democracy. Same with "truthers", they don't want the truth, yet call themselves the opposite of what they want.

Evidence is their kryptonite.
 
Are they serious? The closest sample was 0.2 miles away from ground zero and taken 17 days later. after 6 days of rain and 1 day of snow.
Click to expand...

Yeah, NYC gets a lot of snow in September...
 
Do we know if Gage has responded to these findings yet? That should make for an interesting read...or listen.
 
I'm shocked at this example of shoddy work in a body of otherwise stellar truther research...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom