Finally there is an independent investigation, and not a word about it on ATS?

reply to post by plube


Of course you can wait for the final publication, but the chances are very high that the reviewers will pass the work without major changes. The person who did the work is a professional scientist who has many publications on his name. But sure, you may wait for the final report, I predict nothing drastic will change in the conclusions though.

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by TWILITE22

 

The only link to the Randi forum is that members of it were the primary funders. This included a couple of truthers on that site. The research itself is in no way linked to the Randi forum, and is done by an independent lab. It is presented on the American Association of Forensic Scientists 2012 convention. Its about as good as it can get.

edit on 1-3-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)

yes all that has been read....we know it is done at the request of a member of the jref.....also knowing of and reading much of Chris Mohr's stuff on the said forum....I know he is an Avid member there....and who he is and how he had the report funded matters not as i said this will go through the same character assassination process that the OSer's do to truthers......no news there...but please just cause you state who does the report and where it comes from...does not make it a valid report until it goes through peer review and questions get answered.

now what is and will ask you again.......have you seen the report yet?

I have made it real simple.

and if you have seen it....please link me to the actual report.....so then people can start to digest it...and look at it....is that not the same you ask of truthers.

and please don't just link me to JREF.....as i said those words are from Chris Mohr.....

not only that if you look at my quote from him you will see he says.....PRELIMINARY report to be posted.

Originally posted by -PLB-
On numerous threats I have read it over and over; truthers demand an independent investigation. Back on JREF, a bunch of JREFers (including some truthers) put together some money, and got the WTC dust samples tested by an independent lab. The results got in yesterday. The conclusion was that the red chips are not thermite, but a type of red paint. You can find the primilary report here: forums.randi.org...

Why isn't this big news in the truther world? Isn't the truth movement about finding the truth, no matter what this truth is? Or is it only about a certain "truth"?

Why has the truth movement been able to get this done itself, and why did a "debunker" have to organize this investigation? It only cost 1000 dollar in the end.

To me the answers are obvious by the way. But feel free to comment on it.

It should be obvious why it isn't big news- the truthers get their information exclusively from those damned fool conspiracy web sites pushing these "secret plots to take over the world" stories to make a fast buck, and they're certainly not going to mention anything that upsets their apple cart. Plus, if they do hear about this, I'll guarantee the truthers will simply brush it off as being "government disinformation" just like they do all the OTHER evidence that shows their conspiracy claims are bunk.

The more you discuss conspiracy theories with the truthers, the more it dawns on you that you're dealing with faith based logic here. They WANT these conspiracies to be true so they'll accept any thoroughly ridiculous claim using a biased rationale they would never use anywhere else. After all, your wife knowing someone, who knows someone who knows someone, who knows someone, who knows someone, who knows someone, who's cheating on her husband certainly doesn't mean your wife is cheating on you.

reply to post by plube


I will post a link as soon as it is available, don't worry. By the way, I don't think those are the words from Chris Mohr, but instead its the actual text from the report. Though I must admit its not really clear. Like I wrote above, if you are in doubt, just wait for the pdf.

reply to post by samkent


You know i will not go down the same arguments over and over again...so no point in that is there....the point is you stating this report is good....where i am saying i don't know either way....one....have not seen the report

two the person who is saying the report is so valid...has not shown the report ....he has Stated he will post it....he has stated who did the report......he has stated he will anounce when the Preliminary report will be posted(has not posted yet).

he stated no strontium was found...yet there should be....afterall...It's in the paint pigment.

So my question to you....why are you so willing to just believe.

Originally posted by plube
he stated no strontium was found...yet there should be....afterall...It's in the paint pigment.

This is not correct. Strontium is only present in a certain type of paint. It can easily be another type of paint without strontium. And it is still under question if the amount is enough to be detected in the used tests.

The main conclusion is that it isn't thermite, as no elemental Al was found. The material is identified as a paint, as all elements and ingredients expected in paint are present in the expected ratios and expected chemical bonds, and nothing is found that isn't known to be found in paint.

Originally posted by plube
So my question to you....why are you so willing to just believe.

This one is easy to answer. Because the work is done be a reputable scientist and is presented at a reputable conference. This is a pure argument from authority, and may of course turn out to be wrong. But since a final publication coming this will sort out soon enough. In the meanwhile I assume no foul play is going on. If the final publication is still not there in say 6 month, I will of course change my position.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


do you realise that your being pointed to a conspiracy website....that yes makes money from its members and if what Chris Mohr is saying it's members helped fund the report....But to me It matters not...Cause i want to see the Report...because as of now ....It is saying there are 4 samples of which samples were taken and no thermite was found.

Then you come in with a sweeping statement of how truthers are......PLB another question...IS this how your would like your thread to proceed....just as a truther bashing...or would you rather it be open discussion of a report that has not even been released yet.

I think i have been more than polite to both sides of the story so far...trying to make it fair and equal...even though i know where my thoughts lay.

Originally posted by plube
Then you come in with a sweeping statement of how truthers are......PLB another question...IS this how your would like your thread to proceed....just as a truther bashing...or would you rather it be open discussion of a report that has not even been released yet.

Well, in all fairness, my OP isn't really about the report, but about why the truth movement seems to be completely ignoring it. In that aspect, the post by GoodOlDave is completely on topic. Maybe when the final report is there, a new thread should be created to discuss it. In the meanwhile I don't mind at all to discuss it in this thread too.

I don't think it's being ignored at all. This same randi post was linked to on 911 Blogger yesterday.

The only problem is there's not much to discuss with just the text and no data (i.e. the figures and pictures which show the actual experimental data).

Later in the randi thread, chrismohr says a link to the full report will be posted later this morning.

I guess my question is: What's next for the truthers?

The biggest request from Truthers was "Why can't we get an independent investigation?"

Well, it appears that it was done. As mentioned in the OP, Dr. James Millette a member of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences completed an investigation.

Conclusions

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.

There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite.

So, what's next?

Originally posted by plube

 

do you realise that your being pointed to a conspiracy website....that yes makes money from its members and if what Chris Mohr is saying it's members helped fund the report....But to me It matters not...Cause i want to see the Report...because as of now ....It is saying there are 4 samples of which samples were taken and no thermite was found.

Yes I know it's a conspiracy web site. It may interest you to know that I visit quite a number of conspiracy web sites. ATS' motto is to deny ignorance, after all, and you cannot do that if you insist on only listening to one side of the story. That's why I read Jone's report and that's why I looked into this new report, so that I may have both sides of the argument and can make an informed opinion.

So, when, for example, source A claims there were no fires in WTC 7 while source B lists an interview with NYFD deputy fire chief Peter Hayden reporting out of control fires were burning in WTC 7, I will know who is lying unrepentently, and who is not.

Then you come in with a sweeping statement of how truthers are......PLB another question...IS this how your would like your thread to proceed....just as a truther bashing...or would you rather it be open discussion of a report that has not even been released yet.

It isn't so much truther bashing as it is making observations based upon personal experience. It is an indisputable fact that the main movers and shakers behind all these "secret plots" claims are those damned fool conspiracy web sites, as noone, but noone, watching the events transpiring on TV that day is instinctively going to think the planes were holograms or the buildings were destroyed by nukes in the basement. Someone needed to have come along and put the idea into their heads after the fact.

It's the entire reason why there are more alternative versions of "the real truth" than there are paparrazi following around Kim Kardashian- so many different conspiracy web sites are pushing so many different in-house conspiracy theories, from Richard Gage's "controlled demolitions" to Judy Wood's "Lasers from outer space" to Rob Balsamo's "no plane hit the Pentagon". There is unquestionably no way you can deny this.

I think i have been more than polite to both sides of the story so far...trying to make it fair and equal...even though i know where my thoughts lay.

I never said you were rude or overly zealous. I simply said you're getting bad information from conspiracy web sites because their incentive is to instigate false public unrest for their own profit, rather than any true desire to investigate the facts of 9/11, and there is no way they will ever report this or any other evidence that shows their claims are bunk. You yourself are simply the victim in their con game.

Paintman Jones' and his crack analytical team provided enough data in the Bentham paper to toast their own theory many times over. I enjoyed turning the spit on many occasions, but this analysis puts it away.

I expect many spin doctors spinning away about how the NWO Reptilian Builderberger Zionist analytical chemists, aided by the Mossad false flag operation, have used these hologram reports to hide the hush-a-boom explosives set off by space-borne energy weapons, aided by the dancing Israeli's distraction, after all that evidence planting [Was that a turbofan compressor being carried into the Pentagon under someones' jacket?].

Here's the full paper:

dl.dropbox.com...

It looks like the Harrit team won't be able to ignore this. Maybe they'll release more of the info they always hinted about.

reply to post by -PLB-

Just some standard questions, what exactly should be investigated, who should do this investigation, and when are you satisfied with the results? Any reader will notice that these questions will remain unanswered.

Standard answers:

1) Every single aspect up to and including clean up
2) Who should do it? Someone without a conflict of interest or with an axe to grind either way. Someone who is not on the US/Israeli/Corporate Government payroll. Someone who could be truly impartial.
3) I am satisfied with the results when the first 2 conditions are met.

Originally posted by -PLB-

Originally posted by plube
Then you come in with a sweeping statement of how truthers are......PLB another question...IS this how your would like your thread to proceed....just as a truther bashing...or would you rather it be open discussion of a report that has not even been released yet.

Well, in all fairness, my OP isn't really about the report, but about why the truth movement seems to be completely ignoring it. In that aspect, the post by GoodOlDave is completely on topic. Maybe when the final report is there, a new thread should be created to discuss it. In the meanwhile I don't mind at all to discuss it in this thread too.

Errrr.....as is MSM apparently...but if as you ascertain, the study supports the OS you'd think THEY would be
all over it....can you not achieve the slightest hint of objectivity??

Now it seems that Bob Graham and Bob Kerrey of the 9/11 Commission are just now, nearly 11 years out from the event, saying that they believe Saudi Arabia was involved.

Two former Senators who led inquiries into the 9/11 attacks have issued sworn statements that they believe the government of Saudi Arabia, a key U.S. ally in the fight on terrorism, may have played a role in the terror attacks ten years ago. "I am convinced that there was a direct line between at least some of the terrorists who carried out the September 11th attacks and the government of Saudi Arabia," said former Senator Bob Graham, a Florida Democrat, in an affidavit filed as part of a lawsuit brought against the Saudi government by families of Sept. 11 victims and others.

Graham led a 2002 Congressional probe of the attacks. 9/11 Anniversary: Airports, Amtrak Prep Watch Video Bob Kerrey, a Nebraska Democrat who served on the 9/11 Commission, said in a separate affidavit that "significant questions remain unanswered" about the role of Saudi institutions. "Evidence relating to the plausible involvement of possible Saudi government agents in the September 11th attacks has never been fully pursued."

abcnews.go.com...

Never been fully pursued? May have played a role? Seriously? Everyone has known that most of the purported hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and they are just bringing this up now? And "never been fully pursued" is a way of saying that for something that was supposed to be as conclusive as the 9/11 report there were things that they just didn't bother to investigate.

and yet this current conviction that Saudi Arabia was involved is contradicted by the Commission Report which

The commission also concluded 15 of the 19 hijackers who carried out the attacks were from Saudi Arabia, but found no evidence the government of Saudi Arabia conspired in the attacks, or that it funded the attackers.

en.wikipedia.org...

Which is it? And if they were so convinced that they are bringing it up now why did they not mention it as a possibility at the time of the investigations and report?

Yet more proof of the fact that we need a true independent investigation. And yet not a word about it from the OS'ers

Originally posted by coyotepoet
reply to post by -PLB-

 

Just some standard questions, what exactly should be investigated, who should do this investigation, and when are you satisfied with the results? Any reader will notice that these questions will remain unanswered.

Standard answers:

1) Every single aspect up to and including clean up
2) Who should do it? Someone without a conflict of interest or with an axe to grind either way. Someone who is not on the US/Israeli/Corporate Government payroll. Someone who could be truly impartial.
3) I am satisfied with the results when the first 2 conditions are met.

You can't investigate every single aspect. That is completely unrealistic. Any investigation should have a clearly layed out scope, else 3) will never ever happen. And 2 is extremely vague. Can you give concrete examples?

reply to post by SmokeyDawn


Thermite has only been a big issue in the truther world, its one of the very few subjects that has sciency looking research to back it up. The rest of the world, including all scientists, has never taken it seriously, so obviously it isn't news there.

well interesting stuff in the paper....and a lovely report....but i would like people to campare the reports both side by side....I am looking and finding that they both say the same things...and show similar chemical components..

but i will say i am not a chemist....but now what we need is for someone to collect the same samples...the samples from harit.....and the samples from the Millette papers and do the exact same tests indepently on all 8 samples....and it should be a blind study.

Millette paper

Harit paper

now as for all the bashing about the harit study...here they are side by side....if Harit et al was such a disasterous study then look at them side by and see which one seems the better documented study.

But besides that i hope someone with more skills than i will check them both out thoroughly and show the differences in the papers.....but like many online are saying this does not prove anything either way....as there will be it would seem even more questions than answers.