The Serious 9/11 Arguments Compilation.

Why you posting stuff you have no clue about. Jesus awhile ago you said 720c was not hot, but 200c is enough to collapse a 47 floor building according to NIST and you, oh D'oh

. You have no proof of cut columns. I don't even know what you mean by this?

Thermite claims are not fraudulent, you just not smart enough to understand the science or just low IQ

originally posted by: Jesushere
neutronflux If i had to correct every mistake you made in this thread and called you on your whataboutery in this thread, I will be here all day. I posted a reputable source where temperatures were shown between 400f up to 2800f. Continue on though believing temperatures never got above 1300c

I want the NASA Proof you said existed.
You!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

neutronflux Nasa exposed this event for what it really is anyway. When images were taken hot spots showed up in excess of 1300c on Sep 16th and could have been hotter on Sep 11th

When I looked up the NASA proof of 1300c, I fount this.

Initial Estimates from AVIRIS of the Temperature and Fractional Areas of Fires at the World Trade Center Disaster
Robert O. Green,1 Roger N. Clark,2 Joseph Boardman,3 Betina Pavri,1 Chuck Sarture1 1Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology
Pasadena, California 91109
2U.S. Geological Survey
3Applied Imaging and Geophysics LLC

aviris.jpl.nasa.gov...

RESULTS
The algorithm was applied to the highest intensity spectrum from each of the eight hot-fire areas identified. Figure 9 shows a portion of an AVIRIS image of the World Trade Center disaster site acquired on the 16th of September. The eight hot-fire areas identified are labeled A to H. Table 1 shows the corresponding locations of the hot-fire areas and the derived temperature and fractional area for the analyzed spectra. Temperatures range from 700 to 984 K, and fractional areas range from 1.5 to 18 % for the 16th of September data sets.

984k is equal to 1312F.

I want you to quote the NASA proof of 1300c you claim existed.

a reply to: Jesushere

Can you actually quote a study that actually labeled a specific hotspot being 1300c? Can you cite an actual log of recorded hotspots at the WTC being 1300c? How big were the hot spots? What type of thermal imager was used? Hand held firefighter’s thermal camera? An actual police helicopter thermal imaging device with emmistivity set to find people buried in the pile?

So many factors on a generic single state of 2800F you throw out with no record of it being a recorded survey? Makes you wonder why there is not an actual recoded survey you can cite.

I have found a few conspiracist’s PDFs that claim the 2800F temperature, but actually don’t provide a footnote where that temperature came from, or what calibrated device measured that temperature?

TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT AND THERMAL IMAGING CAMERAS

www.fireengineering.com... ml

A number of factors affect the accuracy of NCTM, including the material being measured, its temperature, the humidity of the room, atmospheric interference (such as smoke or steam), the cleanliness of the sensor lens, the distance to the material, the angle at which the surface is measured, and other conditions. The two most important factors influencing the accuracy of NCTM are emissivity and distance-to-spot ratio.

The fly overs were good indications where the hottest spots were in relations to each other and the pile. Because of the jumble of materials in the WTC pile, emissivity, and distance to spot ratio, the flyover thermal imaging was probably not accurate.

originally posted by: Jesushere
. You have no proof of cut columns. I don't even know what you mean by this?

Thermite claims are not fraudulent, you just not smart enough to understand the science or just low IQ

Just for you, again

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Here is Jim Millette's latest reply to the new 9/11 Truth chant that "he didn't do DSC so his testing is invalid":

Chris,

My assessment of the situation is that researchers performed DSC on some WTC chips and found what they thought was an exothermic reaction. They then formed a hypothesis that this might be caused by thermite materials in the dust. As is required in scientific inquires their hypothesis was testable. They set out to confirm their hypothesis by testing the chips. Their microscopical analysis showed some results that they concluded were consistent with thermite or nano-thermite. I was asked to analyze the materials to see if I could confirm or not confirm their conclusion. My initial tests showed similar findings in terms of the characteristics of the chips. However, additional testing following analytical forensic methods showed that the chips were not thermite or nano-thermite. We repeated the tests on 4 different samples from different locations and found the same result – not thermite. It seems to me that the ball is now in their court. The DSC testing can suggest a type of material based on thermal properties but cannot be used to prove the existence of thermite. If they believe that the DSC results clearly show an exothermic reaction they need to come up with another testable hypothesis as to what the chips are as they are not thermite.

Jim

Anything that burns and produces more heat than it uses for the reaction is exothermic. Burning paint chips are exothermic.

Please cite Harrit where he published results using an experiment that would conclusively prove thermite. Like trying to ignite his dust sample in an inert atmosphere.

And the other problems with is thermite paper.....

Harrit’s paper was published in a pay to play journal.

Harrit’s paper was unethically published as peer reviewed with the referee bypassed. And at least one of the persons that was part of the paper’s peer review was consulted while the paper was written.

Harrit’s work never completed the discovery process. His lab results and conclusions were never verified by independent labs. He never opened the paper up to public comments.

The paper claims the red chips cannot be “ordinary paint” which is meaningless. I could not find what type of paint Harrit tested and why? And I found no evidence Harrit tried to explain what paints and primers were used at the WTC. I could not find any efforts by Harrit to ensure his control paint samples were representative of what was used at the WTC.

It is total BS that his samples, composed of who knows what from the dust created by the collapse of over 1,400,000 tons of buildings on 9/11, had every red chip act the exact same way, and each of his red chips was proof of “thermite”.

The only thing his analysis by exothermic reaction shows, is some how all his red chips burned with the same energy. Harrit made no effort to create control samples from chemicals and paints specificly used to build the WTC, and compare those results to the red chips.

Harrit claims thermite from exothermic reactions that are common to many materials. I made the claim that saying something was thermite by an exothermic reaction is like a person believing they have cancer because of back pain. Or because there are wheel tracks on a dirt road, you think it had to be a Yugo?

Harrit has made no effort to publish the results of trying to ignite his WTC samples in an inert atmosphere to test for truly thermite type reactions. The first thing most analysts would probably do for a go / no go test.


Harrit has not published any testing that would prove conclusively there was thermite in his sample. He only has material that released more energy than it consumes to create the reaction. That could be be anything that burns, like paint chips which ignite easier than thermite. Thermite takes something like a magnesium fuse that burns around 3400f to set it off.

originally posted by: Jesushere
Why you posting stuff you have no clue about. Jesus awhile ago you said 720c was not hot, but 200c is enough to collapse a 47 floor building according to NIST and you, oh D'oh

Quote where I said anything like the sort.

Quote where I said 720 is not hot.

Quote where I said WTC 2 steel buckled because of heat. The outer columns buckled by inward bowing caused by contracting floor trusses that pulled on the outer vertical columns, drawing them inward.

More false arguments by.

A couple other items of thought for you. Thermite burns at at 4,000 degrees Fahrenheit, so where are the thermal images of thermite burning. However, there are many reasons sources of fuel trapped in a pile would produce flames reading as hotspots around 2800F.

So why is there no recorded logs of hotspots of 2800F you can cite? Was the 2800F just raw data not corrected? Where was the hotspots? What equipment was used? How accurate was the equipment? Was it properly calibrated for Emmistivity of a mixed pile of rubble? Was the air born thermal imager properly calibrated for distance to spot ratio while it was at altitude?

I can quote a US president there is 57 states? But the calibrated and corrected data logged on a map shows there are 50 states.......

While there are valid explanations why there would be open flames at the WTC pile burning a 1300c. But there is no evidence of any heat at the WTC reached 4,000F which is the burning temperature of thermite. And there is no evidence steel columns melted. Or there was missing steel outer columns or core columns missing because they melted away.

a reply to: Jesushere

I think you placed yourself in a hole? You keep talking about thermal imaging, and you just put all faith in a debunk basket that just bit you? I think you talked about thermal imaging before the WTC buildings collapsed? You talked about the daily thermal imaging of the WTC rubble? You talked about the WTC pile getting hotter between two surveys? Yet, the is no thermal imaging that shows thermite burning at 4,000F.

So, the one claim of 2800F with no actual cited documented logged study is inaccurate for the previous mentioned reasons.

Or the thermal imaging is accurate, but shows there is no thermal imaging proof thermite was burning. That means the more likely cause of the 2800F was the partial combustion of office items gasifying in a depleted oxygen atmosphere, then creating a 1300c flame once it reach an area of fresh air.

a reply to: Jesushere

You

Mohr also lied about studies contacted by other people chemist named Frédéric Henry-Couannier and R.J. Lee Group. He claimed the RJ group tested for thermatic material and found nothing this a a deliberate lie the group never tested for thermite and neither did NIST.

You didn’t list this study?

www.machinedesign.com...

But this claim took a hit this spring when the microscopy consulting firm MVA Scientific Consultants in Duluth, Ga. released a study of these chips collected from WTC dust.

-break-

Their conclusion: There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles that you would expect to see from a thermite burn. They say the red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon-steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments. And there is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, so the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite.

And WTC conspiracy theorists' claim that microscopic spheres of iron found in WTC dust could only have been formed with thermite was recently debunked by a group called New Mexicans for Science and Reason who pointed out that very small metal particles have a much lower melting point than bulk material. Wires and filaments from electronics in the WTC are the likely source of the microspheres. The NMSR group even produced a YouTube video showing how to create your own microspheres by burning steel wool: www.youtube.com...

You can read the MVA report here: dl.dropbox.com...

James Millette and MVA Scientific Consultants have no indication of elemental aluminum in WTC dust. No elemental aluminum, no thermite. Has Harrit ever produced evidence of elemental aluminum from his samples?

For the red / grey chips to, “They say the red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon-steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments.” Millette has similar results.

I thought this was of interest

Another primer at the WTC: LaClede Standard Primer

oystein-debate.blogspot.com...


Claims that Niels Harrit proved that some red-gray chips in the WTC dust are not WTC primer are basing this claim on the FALSE assumption that Tnemec was the only primer used. In fact, I will show that the chips that Harrit proved to not be Tnemec look very much like LaClede Standard Primer.

Break

Conclusion

I have shown that Harrit's argument, re-gray chips (a)-(d) can't be primer because they are not consistent with Tnemec, falls flat on its face, because Tnemec was not the only primer used on WTC steel.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere

Can you actually quote a study that actually labeled a specific hotspot being 1300c? Can you cite an actual log of recorded hotspots at the WTC being 1300c? How big were the hot spots? What type of thermal imager was used? Hand held firefighter’s thermal camera? An actual police helicopter thermal imaging device with emmistivity set to find people buried in the pile?

So many factors on a generic single state of 2800F you throw out with no record of it being a recorded survey? Makes you wonder why there is not an actual recoded survey you can cite.

I have found a few conspiracist’s PDFs that claim the 2800F temperature, but actually don’t provide a footnote where that temperature came from, or what calibrated device measured that temperature?

TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT AND THERMAL IMAGING CAMERAS

www.fireengineering.com... ml

A number of factors affect the accuracy of NCTM, including the material being measured, its temperature, the humidity of the room, atmospheric interference (such as smoke or steam), the cleanliness of the sensor lens, the distance to the material, the angle at which the surface is measured, and other conditions. The two most important factors influencing the accuracy of NCTM are emissivity and distance-to-spot ratio.

The fly overs were good indications where the hottest spots were in relations to each other and the pile. Because of the jumble of materials in the WTC pile, emissivity, and distance to spot ratio, the flyover thermal imaging was probably not accurate.

On Sept. 12, 2001, a small group of SH&E professionals from Bechtel Group Inc., led by Stewart Burkhammer, a professional member of ASSE’s National Capital Chapter, arrived in New York City to assist the city and state of New York in the emergency recovery effort after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. The sights and experiences of the days and weeks that followed are described here in order to provide fellow SH&E professionals with a brief account of the extraordinary challenges encountered at Ground Zero.

One of those professionals was
Jeffrey W. Vincoli, CSP, CHCM, is an ES&H manager for corporate assessments and audits with Bechtel Construction Operations Inc., Frederick, MD. He is a professional member of ASSE’s Cape Canaveral Chapter and chairs the Society’s PDC Planning Committee. He will discuss his Ground Zero experience on June 11, during a general session at ASSE’s 2002 PDC in Nashville, TN

QUOTE
The debris pile at Ground Zero was always tremendously hot. Thermal measurements taken by helicopter each day showed underground temperatures ranging from 400ºF to more than 2,800ºF. The surface was so hot that standing too long in one spot softened (and even melted) the soles of our safety shoes. Steel toes would often heat up and become intolerable. This heat was also a concern for the search-and-rescue dogs used at the site. Many were not outfitted with protective booties (Photo 13). More than one suffered serious injuries and at least three died while working at Ground Zero. The underground fire burned for exactly 100 days and was finally declared “extinguished” on Dec. 19, 2001.


What grounds are there to disbelieve him? If thermal measurements were taken each day well then that information has never got released to the public, why not? Just like everything about 9/11 transparency is lacking in the investigation.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Jesushere
. You have no proof of cut columns. I don't even know what you mean by this?

Thermite claims are not fraudulent, you just not smart enough to understand the science or just low IQ

Just for you, again

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Here is Jim Millette's latest reply to the new 9/11 Truth chant that "he didn't do DSC so his testing is invalid":

Chris,

My assessment of the situation is that researchers performed DSC on some WTC chips and found what they thought was an exothermic reaction. They then formed a hypothesis that this might be caused by thermite materials in the dust. As is required in scientific inquires their hypothesis was testable. They set out to confirm their hypothesis by testing the chips. Their microscopical analysis showed some results that they concluded were consistent with thermite or nano-thermite. I was asked to analyze the materials to see if I could confirm or not confirm their conclusion. My initial tests showed similar findings in terms of the characteristics of the chips. However, additional testing following analytical forensic methods showed that the chips were not thermite or nano-thermite. We repeated the tests on 4 different samples from different locations and found the same result – not thermite. It seems to me that the ball is now in their court. The DSC testing can suggest a type of material based on thermal properties but cannot be used to prove the existence of thermite. If they believe that the DSC results clearly show an exothermic reaction they need to come up with another testable hypothesis as to what the chips are as they are not thermite.

Jim

Anything that burns and produces more heat than it uses for the reaction is exothermic. Burning paint chips are exothermic.

Please cite Harrit where he published results using an experiment that would conclusively prove thermite. Like trying to ignite his dust sample in an inert atmosphere.

And the other problems with is thermite paper.....

Harrit’s paper was published in a pay to play journal.

Harrit’s paper was unethically published as peer reviewed with the referee bypassed. And at least one of the persons that was part of the paper’s peer review was consulted while the paper was written.

Harrit’s work never completed the discovery process. His lab results and conclusions were never verified by independent labs. He never opened the paper up to public comments.

The paper claims the red chips cannot be “ordinary paint” which is meaningless. I could not find what type of paint Harrit tested and why? And I found no evidence Harrit tried to explain what paints and primers were used at the WTC. I could not find any efforts by Harrit to ensure his control paint samples were representative of what was used at the WTC.

It is total BS that his samples, composed of who knows what from the dust created by the collapse of over 1,400,000 tons of buildings on 9/11, had every red chip act the exact same way, and each of his red chips was proof of “thermite”.

The only thing his analysis by exothermic reaction shows, is some how all his red chips burned with the same energy. Harrit made no effort to create control samples from chemicals and paints specificly used to build the WTC, and compare those results to the red chips.

Harrit claims thermite from exothermic reactions that are common to many materials. I made the claim that saying something was thermite by an exothermic reaction is like a person believing they have cancer because of back pain. Or because there are wheel tracks on a dirt road, you think it had to be a Yugo?

Harrit has made no effort to publish the results of trying to ignite his WTC samples in an inert atmosphere to test for truly thermite type reactions. The first thing most analysts would probably do for a go / no go test.


Harrit has not published any testing that would prove conclusively there was thermite in his sample. He only has material that released more energy than it consumes to create the reaction. That could be be anything that burns, like paint chips which ignite easier than thermite. Thermite takes something like a magnesium fuse that burns around 3400f to set it off.

The red/grey chips are unique and there no valid explanation for what they are other than military grade nano-thermite. All other possibilities have been debunked. Primer paint used doesn't ignite at low temperatures and doesn't release fine grade Iron Microspheres, a byproduct of a thermite reaction. You have read these debunking sites and came away believing they know what they are writing about. Already told do you read? Harrit tested all primer paints listed as being used on the steel, by NIST ( Source not good enough?) this topic was in his published paper and, obviously, you never read this as you keep writing untruthful things. What you have not noticed here is Chris Mohr and Dr Millette confirmed Harrit findings that the chips have thermite properties, but it not necessarily thermite according to them. What they really saying here we don't believe the building was brought by nano-thermite so the red/greys had to be something else, but we don't know what that is, but Harrit should additional testing? However, they don't say what additional testing they referring to so it's a strawman.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Jesushere
Why you posting stuff you have no clue about. Jesus awhile ago you said 720c was not hot, but 200c is enough to collapse a 47 floor building according to NIST and you, oh D'oh

Quote where I said anything like the sort.

Quote where I said 720 is not hot.

Quote where I said WTC 2 steel buckled because of heat. The outer columns buckled by inward bowing caused by contracting floor trusses that pulled on the outer vertical columns, drawing them inward.

More false arguments by.

A couple other items of thought for you. Thermite burns at at 4,000 degrees Fahrenheit, so where are the thermal images of thermite burning. However, there are many reasons sources of fuel trapped in a pile would produce flames reading as hotspots around 2800F.

So why is there no recorded logs of hotspots of 2800F you can cite? Was the 2800F just raw data not corrected? Where was the hotspots? What equipment was used? How accurate was the equipment? Was it properly calibrated for Emmistivity of a mixed pile of rubble? Was the air born thermal imager properly calibrated for distance to spot ratio while it was at altitude?

I can quote a US president there is 57 states? But the calibrated and corrected data logged on a map shows there are 50 states.......

While there are valid explanations why there would be open flames at the WTC pile burning a 1300c. But there is no evidence of any heat at the WTC reached 4,000F which is the burning temperature of thermite. And there is no evidence steel columns melted. Or there was missing steel outer columns or core columns missing because they melted away.

Quote where I said 720 is not hot.
You did I saw it. Did you edit your post?

Quote, where I said WTC 2 steel buckled because of heat. The outer columns buckled by inward bowing caused by contracting floor trusses that pulled on the outer vertical columns, drawing them inward.

There not outer columns, that's the perimeter wall you looking at in the GIF video.

Again you don't understand Harrit work at all. He's not claiming it standard thermite. The red/chips are nanometers in size and ignite at lower temperatures the chips can only be nano-thermite. Standard thermite requires very high temperatures to get going and ignite.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere

You

Mohr also lied about studies contacted by other people chemist named Frédéric Henry-Couannier and R.J. Lee Group. He claimed the RJ group tested for thermatic material and found nothing this a a deliberate lie the group never tested for thermite and neither did NIST.

You didn’t list this study?

www.machinedesign.com...

But this claim took a hit this spring when the microscopy consulting firm MVA Scientific Consultants in Duluth, Ga. released a study of these chips collected from WTC dust.

-break-

Their conclusion: There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles that you would expect to see from a thermite burn. They say the red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon-steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments. And there is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, so the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite.

And WTC conspiracy theorists' claim that microscopic spheres of iron found in WTC dust could only have been formed with thermite was recently debunked by a group called New Mexicans for Science and Reason who pointed out that very small metal particles have a much lower melting point than bulk material. Wires and filaments from electronics in the WTC are the likely source of the microspheres. The NMSR group even produced a YouTube video showing how to create your own microspheres by burning steel wool: www.youtube.com...

You can read the MVA report here: dl.dropbox.com...

James Millette and MVA Scientific Consultants have no indication of elemental aluminum in WTC dust. No elemental aluminum, no thermite. Has Harrit ever produced evidence of elemental aluminum from his samples?

For the red / grey chips to, “They say the red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon-steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments.” Millette has similar results.

I thought this was of interest

Another primer at the WTC: LaClede Standard Primer

oystein-debate.blogspot.com...


Claims that Niels Harrit proved that some red-gray chips in the WTC dust are not WTC primer are basing this claim on the FALSE assumption that Tnemec was the only primer used. In fact, I will show that the chips that Harrit proved to not be Tnemec look very much like LaClede Standard Primer.

Break

Conclusion

I have shown that Harrit's argument, re-gray chips (a)-(d) can't be primer because they are not consistent with Tnemec, falls flat on its face, because Tnemec was not the only primer used on WTC steel.

The papers are online if you find the quote RJ group tested for thermite I stop posting!

www.machinedesign.com...
The link to this group paper is broken please provide a valid source for this, to read it.

Yes, Harrit found elemental aluminium in his dust samples. You say Milette did not find this can you quote that, please.

Primer paint does not match the composition of the red/grey chips anyhow it's actually a ridiculous claim by people on the JREF forum the chips are painted. Harrit carried out DSC tests it actually a lie by Skeptics to say he hasn't done this. And the clue for Skeptics should have been no primer paint when heated releases Iron Microspheres. If they believe otherwise then write up a paper about this and release it for peer-review.

neutronflux Carbon nanotubes were discovered in the lungs and bodies of first responders. The medical personnel recommended further testing in their paper what could have caused this. It was an unexpected finding for them.

Links between nano-thermite and carbon nanotubes is established science now.

a reply to: Jesushere

Yes, Harrit found elemental aluminium in his dust samples. You say Milette did not find this can you quote that, please.

Then cite the research that found it?

The reaction of thermite
Fe2O3 + 2 Al → 2 Fe + Al2O3

Please cite the study Harrit found Al, elemental aluminum? And then had that result independently verified.

a reply to: Jesushere

Quote where I said 720 is not hot.
You did I saw it. Did you edit your post?

So now two false allegations by you? Can you provide the quote or not?

There not outer columns, that's the perimeter wall you looking at in the GIF video.

911research.wtc7.net...

The towers' perimeter walls comprised dense grids of vertical steel columns and horizontal spandrel plates

The outer columns of the towers were the perimeter walls. How many falsehoods do you have to push to make your fantasy work.

a reply to: Jesushere

Primer paint does not match the composition of the red/grey chips anyhow

How would Harrit know? He did not take all effort to ensure he had representative samples of all coatings used st the WTC

oystein-debate.blogspot.com...

Another primer at the WTC: LaClede Standard Primer
Abstract
There was not only one steel primer used on WTC tower structural steels, but at least one other primer:

LaClede Standard Primer is a zinc-free paint formulation with which the floor joists of the twin towers were painted.

The painted area of these LaClede-painted floor joists in both towers was roughly 600,000 m2 while Tnemec is only known to have been specified for about 400,000 m2 of perimeter column surface. For the rest of the structural steel – core columns, hat truss and others, a total of 300,000 m2 the primer used isn't known.

Claims that Niels Harrit proved that some red-gray chips in the WTC dust are not WTC primer are basing this claim on the FALSE assumption that Tnemec was the only primer used. In fact, I will show that the chips that Harrit proved to not be Tnemec look very much like LaClede Standard Primer.

neutronflux Chemist Mark Basille also confirmed elemental aluminium was present in the red/grey chips. Why would they be lying when they are independent people? You do not realise Dr Millette is a government spokesperson and he was involved in the official government dust study. Are you expecting the people involved in cover-ups to tell you the truth? Dr Millette work is flawed anyhow because he ignored the abundance of Iron Microspheres found in the dust.

Both men clearly talk about this in their presentations.
www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: Jesushere
neutronflux Chemist Mark Basille also confirmed elemental aluminium was present in the red/grey chips. Why would they be lying when they are independent people? You do not realise Dr Millette is a government spokesperson and he was involved in the official government dust study. Are you expecting the people involved in cover-ups to tell you the truth? Dr Millette work is flawed anyhow because he ignored the abundance of Iron Microspheres found in the dust.

Both men clearly talk about this in their presentations.
www.youtube.com...

Please cite where Harrit found elemental aluminum in the WTC dust. Elemental aluminum is not like aluminum oxide.

The reaction of thermite is Fe2O3 + 2 Al. The Aluminum has to be in pure form for thermite to work. Please cite where Harrit found pure unreacted aluminum in his samples?

a reply to: Jesushere

Or is the below a blatant false statement?

Yes, Harrit found elemental aluminium in his dust samples.

a reply to: Jesushere

Like this being a false statement?

neutronflux Nasa exposed this event for what it really is anyway. When images were taken hot spots showed up in excess of 1300c on Sep 16th and could have been hotter on Sep 11th.