• 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

Hi all

I do not know whether this has been discussed elsewhere, but I would appreciate if anyone could correct or confirm my points in the following:

When I read Harrit et al's paper, "Active Thermitic...", it seems quite clear that:

1. They claim that the nanothermite is only to be found in the red layer of the red/grey chips.

2. They also claim that the red layer has some Al and some FeO (amongst other ingredients) BUT in nano size.

3. After heating/igniting whole chips (both red and grey layers), they find iron rich spheres in micro size.

4. They also say that iron rich (micro)spheres in the residue is a clear sign of thermite.

Now, I spot two major flaws here, unless I have overlooked something:

A: How can residue from the whole chip prove anything that only applies to the red layer?

B: How can nano sized particles in the red layer lead to residue (iron rich spheres) of micro size - a thousand times bigger - unless the grey layer is part of the residue, in which case the residue does not apply to the red layer only, and thus does not prove nano thermite?

Please comment.

Kind regards,
Steen
 
Steen, if you use the forum search, using the keywords 'active thermitic' you should be able to find some very comprehensive threads critiquing the paper. Hope that helps.

Chris Mohr: I've sent a PM to you regarding making a video on the Millette paper.
 
Hi Alienentity

Thanks for your reply.

I do indeed subscribe to the threads concerning Active thermite, wtc dust, and the likes.

I simply cannot remember, and the threads are quite long, if the issue I mention of ironspheres suddenly turning a thousand times bigger has ever been addressed.

So to begin with,I just want to know, if I am the first to notice it or if I may have got it wrong somehow.

Kind regrads,
Steen
 
Has anyone ever seen this "peer-review" by a 9/11Truth believer (of sorts; he has stated that Building 7 was a CD but the Twin Towers came down as a result of plane crashes and fires)? He has actually published dozens of legitimate peer reviewed scientific papers. This was a first impression of the 2009 Thermitic Paper:

Denis Rancourt, a 9/11 Truth physicist who has published over 100 peer-reviewed articles, in 2009:
“Peer review” of Harrit et al. on 911 –titled Can't see any nanothermite?

“When steel rusts… it grows a crust composed of … stratified micro-layers with successive layers of different iron-oxide species… typically form as nanoparticles and have the same needle and nanoflake-like morphologies as observed here.

When these iron-oxyhydroxides are heated in a DSC they undergo a solid to solid exothermic reaction … at a temperature of approximately 400 C. …

Looks like our boys may have been discovering the properties of rusted steel....

If I had been a reviewer … I would have required that they …look for the Al-oxide residue after reaction.

In my opinion the Open Chemical Physics Journal did a very sloppy job on this paper, especially given the importance of 911 as a historic event and societal phenomenon.”
 
OK so does anyone have anything substantive to say? This interpretation doesn't look the same as Sunstealer's. Ivan, Sunstealer, anyone who is NOT an amateur, does Rancourt's PROFESSIONAL opinion hold up to scrutiny? (See post 530 above)
 
How many times do we need to remind ourselves that the test of the truth of a claim is "Is it True?"

NOT:
1) If it is peer reviewed;
2) How big a degree/how many degrees the claimant has; OR
3) Whether it is posted under the authors real name.

If it is true AND:
a) Not peer reviewed OR
b) The author has zero degrees OR
c) It is published under a username.

THEN IT IS STILL TRUE.

IF it is FALSE then, whether it is:
l) Peer reviewed OR
m) The author has multiple doctorates OR
n) It is published under the author's real name...

...it is still FALSE

Peer review AND degrees held AND any of the other sideline issues are at best supporting evidence.

If the claim is true then all the other stuff is irrelevant.

I claim that the cloudless daytime sky is blue.

That claim happens to be true and there is no magic to stop it being blue simply because:
x) My claim is not published in a peer reviewed paper;
y) My degrees are in engineering and law - not meteorology; AND
z) ozeco41 is not my real name;

Peer review cannot change the truth or falsity of a claim.
Possession of degrees cannot change truth or falsity of a claim.
Real name or pseudonym cannot change the truth or falsity of a claim.
 
chrismohr said:
OK so does anyone have anything substantive to say? This interpretation doesn't look the same as Sunstealer's. Ivan, Sunstealer, anyone who is NOT an amateur, does Rancourt's PROFESSIONAL opinion hold up to scrutiny? (See post 530 above)
Click to expand...

I don't know but this bit certainly does:

chrismohr said:
If I had been a reviewer … I would have required that they …look for the Al-oxide residue after reaction.
Click to expand...
It should be obvious to anyone even if uneducated in the matter. The silence on Al-oxide is only comparable to the noise on iron-rich microspheres, even if the Tillotson-Gash experiment that they were trying to reproduce clearly discerned both by PXRD.

The residue of an iron oxide + aluminium thermite reaction is BOTH aluminium oxide and pure iron. If one of them isn't present in the residue, then it's NOT a thermite reaction, period.

So I'm completely sure he got that bit right.
 
pgimeno said:
I don't know but this bit certainly does:


It should be obvious to anyone even if uneducated in the matter. The silence on Al-oxide is only comparable to the noise on iron-rich microspheres, even if the Tillotson-Gash experiment that they were trying to reproduce clearly discerned both by PXRD.

The residue of an iron oxide + aluminium thermite reaction is BOTH aluminium oxide and pure iron. If one of them isn't present in the residue, then it's NOT a thermite reaction, period.

So I'm completely sure he got that bit right.
Click to expand...
I'm confident of that too... what I notice tho is that he doesn't mention paint on rusted steel, just the rust part. Being a self-admitted amateur, I don't want to comment much more, just want to put it out there for substantive comments...
Rev Chris Mohr
 
chrismohr said:
Has anyone ever seen this "peer-review" by a 9/11Truth believer (of sorts; he has stated that Building 7 was a CD but the Twin Towers came down as a result of plane crashes and fires)? He has actually published dozens of legitimate peer reviewed scientific papers. This was a first impression of the 2009 Thermitic Paper:

Denis Rancourt, a 9/11 Truth physicist who has published over 100 peer-reviewed articles, in 2009:
“Peer review” of Harrit et al. on 911 –titled Can't see any nanothermite?

“When steel rusts… it grows a crust composed of … stratified micro-layers with successive layers of different iron-oxide species… typically form as nanoparticles and have the same needle and nanoflake-like morphologies as observed here.

When these iron-oxyhydroxides are heated in a DSC they undergo a solid to solid exothermic reaction … at a temperature of approximately 400 C. …

Looks like our boys may have been discovering the properties of rusted steel....

If I had been a reviewer … I would have required that they …look for the Al-oxide residue after reaction.

In my opinion the Open Chemical Physics Journal did a very sloppy job on this paper, especially given the importance of 911 as a historic event and societal phenomenon.”
Click to expand...

He's right about the damning lack of Al2O3 product, but the part about generic rust reactions is confused. Apparently, he's referring to the grey iron oxide layer adhering to the nanothermite paint chips. That could theoretically dismutate into metallic Fe and various metallic oxides, but the resinous paint chips contain only unreactive kaolin (aluminum silicate) and hematite (Fe2O3). Clearly, the energy release if from combustion of the organic resin base.
 
chrismohr said:
Has anyone ever seen this "peer-review" by a 9/11Truth believer (of sorts; he has stated that Building 7 was a CD but the Twin Towers came down as a result of plane crashes and fires)? He has actually published dozens of legitimate peer reviewed scientific papers. This was a first impression of the 2009 Thermitic Paper:

Denis Rancourt, a 9/11 Truth physicist who has published over 100 peer-reviewed articles, in 2009:
“Peer review” of Harrit et al. on 911 –titled Can't see any nanothermite?

“When steel rusts… it grows a crust composed of … stratified micro-layers with successive layers of different iron-oxide species… typically form as nanoparticles and have the same needle and nanoflake-like morphologies as observed here.

When these iron-oxyhydroxides are heated in a DSC they undergo a solid to solid exothermic reaction … at a temperature of approximately 400 C. …

Looks like our boys may have been discovering the properties of rusted steel....

If I had been a reviewer … I would have required that they …look for the Al-oxide residue after reaction.

In my opinion the Open Chemical Physics Journal did a very sloppy job on this paper, especially given the importance of 911 as a historic event and societal phenomenon.”
Click to expand...

Hi Chris

Interesting. Do you have a direct link to some of those quotes?

And what do you think of my points about micro vs. nano in #525

Kind regards
Steen
 
Steen,
As an amateur I try not to render independent opinions on technical matters. What I try to do is summarize the content of what I read and sift through the conflicting claims to see what has credibility.
 
chrismohr said:
"Has anyone ever seen this "peer-review" by a 9/11Truth believer (of sorts; he has stated that Building 7 was a CD. . . This was a first impression of the 2009 Thermitic Paper:"
Click to expand...

Denis Rancourt said:
“Looks like our boys may have been discovering the properties of rusted steel....

If I had been a reviewer … I would have required that they …look for the Al-oxide residue after reaction.”
Click to expand...

"The finding of aluminum-oxide in some spheres is expected for thermite reactions since elemental aluminum fuels the reaction by grabbing oxygen from the iron-oxide."

Sitting-Bull @911Blogger said:
"it's not necessary to find Al traces everywhere, because the aluminum can reach its boiling-point and evaporate as gas.

Harrit et al. still found spheres with aluminum, but some nit-pickers complain that the authors do not specify that it is in fact oxidized.

Although some may claim that this argument falsifies the thermite hypothesis, it is clearly a dead-end because conventional combustion would also leave the aluminum oxidized, so how could it not be oxidized?"
Click to expand...

Denis Rancourt and the whole issue about the Al-oxide has been addressed repeatedly.

It would not be news to any investigative journalist worth their salt.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
Denis Rancourt and the whole issue about the Al-oxide has been addressed repeatedly.

It would not be news to any investigative journalist worth their salt.

MM
Click to expand...

Wow, I never expected that Sitting-Bull would refute the whole thermite theory. :D

Harrit didn't find aluminum oxide in the DSC residue in 2009. So independent of its origin, aluminum oxide was not present.

Case closed.
 
Miragememories said:
"The finding of aluminum-oxide in some spheres is expected for thermite reactions since elemental aluminum fuels the reaction by grabbing oxygen from the iron-oxide."
Click to expand...
Except the amount of Al found was not nearly sufficient to claim it's a result of a thermite reaction. It should be in a proportion of nearly 1:2 by volume IIRC with respect to iron.


ETA:
Miragememories said:
Sitting-Bull @911Blogger said:
Harrit et al. still found spheres with aluminum, but some nit-pickers complain that the authors do not specify that it is in fact oxidized.

Although some may claim that this argument falsifies the thermite hypothesis, it is clearly a dead-end because conventional combustion would also leave the aluminum oxidized, so how could it not be oxidized?"
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
He totally misses the point. The point of checking for aluminium oxide with an analysis method that can show chemical bondings, is to prove that the aluminium is not combined with something else, like silicon. Kaolin is an aluminium silicate.
end ETA


Miragememories said:
Sitting-Bull @911Blogger said:
"it's not necessary to find Al traces everywhere, because the aluminum can reach its boiling-point and evaporate as gas.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Except that's not how thermites work.

"The thermites are characterized by almost complete absence of gas production during burning, high reaction temperature, and production of molten slag."​
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite#Types

Miragememories said:
Denis Rancourt and the whole issue about the Al-oxide has been addressed repeatedly.
Click to expand...
As repeatedly as wrongly. Handwaving the lack of aluminium oxide as evaporation is ridiculous. That lack has never been properly addressed.
 
Last edited:
pgimeno said:
Except the amount of Al found was not nearly sufficient to claim it's a result of a thermite reaction. It should be in a proportion of nearly 1:2 by volume IIRC with respect to iron.
ETA:

He totally misses the point. The point of checking for aluminium oxide with an analysis method that can show chemical bondings, is to prove that the aluminium is not combined with something else, like silicon. Kaolin is an aluminium silicate.
end ETA



Except that's not how thermites work.

"The thermites are characterized by almost complete absence of gas production during burning, high reaction temperature, and production of molten slag."​
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite#Types


As repeatedly as wrongly. Handwaving the lack of aluminium oxide as evaporation is ridiculous. That lack has never been properly addressed.
Click to expand...


Actually, it's ~2:1 alumina:iron by volume. The ratio would be even greater if, as some truthers claim, the alumina were to mostly form as fine particulate matter instead of a slag. (It doesn't.)

Originally Posted by Jetblast
All very manageable through the kept gates of the media and government. Did you see the CIA-controlled Discovery Channel program "Gatekeepers"? Now they are openly bragging about it.
Click to expand...


BasqueArch said:
You're confused.

The Discovery Channel is controlled by the FBI, and is the CIA miffed about that program.
The CIA controls the Weather Channel and the Clinton clan controls the Playboy Channel .
Snoop Dogg and Flavor Fav keep the very large manually operated gates that the silent multimillion obedient media and government employees sheepishly crawl through daily.

Remind us again how this relates to "Truther responses to Millette WTC Dust paper" ?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Don't forget that the Hunting Channel is controlled by Cheney. He's gonna have a new show, "Stalking the Elusive Lawyer". :D;)
 
You-Tube:


' 9/11 WTC-chips are not paint and produce a thermite reaction: '



Harrit says the chips do not contain zinc and therefore cannot be paint chips.


He also says soaking in MethylEthylKetone separates the silicon from the aluminum showing they can't exist in a bound state and therefore can't be kaolin.


Why doesn't someone just show a microscopic comparison of solgel thermite and WTC primer paint?
 
Jetblast said:
Why doesn't someone just show a microscopic comparison of solgel thermite and WTC primer paint?
Click to expand...

Harrit refers to Gash's paper "Making nanostructured pyrotechnics in a beaker" which contains a TEM micrograph of Gash's sol-gel MIC. The morphology of the iron oxide part of Gash's sol-gel nanothermite differs markedly from Harrit's "nano thermite" (Gash: spheroidal - Harrit: crystalline).

If you want to compare Gash's MIC to WTC primer paint, you need a sample of the different primer paints (there exist at least two primers - Tnemec and LaClede Primer). I don't know, if any steel still exists where you could get a sample from.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom