The AE911 thing does convince me I need to keep pushing the DSC issue with Dr. Millette before he releases his final study. I agree it is not a scientific necessity once the chemical determination of no thermite is made, but it may be necessary just as a way of doing parallel research to the Harrit study.
I echo Oystein's thoughts on this.
We know that Millette's chips with EDX spectra identical to samples a-d in the Harrit et al paper are primer paint.
We know samples a-d are primer paint. 3 years ago I did the analysis and came to the conclusion that kaolin was present and that the gray layer was steel.
If you read the truther responses you will see that some of them consider Millette's work to actually debunk the primer paint hypothesis simply because his chips that match Harrit's chips are not Tnemec Red 99.
We already know that both sets are not Tnemec Red 99.
Truthers do not seem to understand this. Truthers do not even acknowledge that LaClade joist primer paint was used even though we have shown the relevant documentation. Here it is again
Truthers think that only one red paint was used in the whole of the WTC complex.
These are simple ideas that have been explained over and over and over yet they still refuse to acknowledge the fact that more than one red primer paint was used in the WTC.
Truthers believe that this
is the same as this
They will quote this as proof
Prior to soaking the chip in MEK an XEDS spectrum was
acquired from an area of the red-layer surface. The resulting
spectrum, shown in Fig. (14), produced the expected peaks
for Fe, Si, Al, O, and C. Other peaks included calcium, sulfur,
zinc, chromium and potassium. The occurrence of these
elements could be attributed to surface contamination due to
the fact that the analysis was performed on the as-collected
surface of the red layer. The large Ca and S peaks may be
due to contamination with gypsum from the pulverized wallboard
material in the buildings.
Harrit et al page 17.
even though it's wrong. You will be able to see particles of contaminant on the surface using the SEM. Truthers don't understand how a SEM works and what it's capable of achieving.
When you show them this (Fig 14, Harrit et al v Tnemec Red 99 from Jones)
they run and hide.
Secondly as Oystein points out, we have no idea which chips Farrer used in the DSC tests. Harrit et al considered ALL red chips to be the same material even though their own data shows this is not correct.
There is absolutely no point in performing DSC on Millette's chips (which match samples a-d) unless we know what the hell we are comparing them with!
We all know what will happen if the DSC curve for Millette's samples isn't an exact match for the 4 curves in Harrit et al. Truthers will scream until they are sick that the curves don't match and that this is proof that Millette is a shill/fraud/liar, that Jones did have super nano-thermite, that the JREFers were afraid of the test and the glorious knights of the truth movement outed them all, etc etc.
Stop allowing the truthers to dictate.
We, as well as the truthers, know that Harrit et al carried out FTIR but did not include the results in the paper. Why not?
We know that Harrit et al carried out TEM XRD studies but have not published the data. Why not?
It's time for the truthers to apply the same level of criticism to Harrit et al as they do to Millette's work. Why aren't the truthers doing more to get Harrit et al to release their FTIR and TEM data?
I suggest you forget about DSC until further data from Harrit et al is forthcoming. The ball is in their court.
