View Full Version: Professor Steven Jones Thread

July 7th People's Independent Inquiry Forum > 911 > Professor Steven Jones Thread


Title: Professor Steven Jones Thread
Description: Professor's paper not peer-reviewed


The Antagonist - November 29, 2006 04:11 AM (GMT)
I've encountered the name Professor Steven Jones a lot in connection with the events of 11th September 2001, although I don't specifically remember reading anything that he's ever written, or listening to, or watching anything he's said, except for the link below. However, it appears that Mr Jones has been claiming a 9/11 article of his has been peer-reviewed when, in fact, no such thing is the case.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVlMonWMMzg

Maybe someone who is familiar with Jones' work could provide a little more context and background to this revelation?

Edit: If this is the guy that claims Jesus visited America, then don't worry about providing further context.

matt - November 29, 2006 10:56 AM (GMT)
QUOTE
If this is the guy that claims Jesus visited America, then don't worry about providing further context

yes, yes he is

Kier - November 29, 2006 10:59 AM (GMT)
LOL I found that out, too, from asking around this morning. I think Jones' cold fusion work and the fact that he's a Mormon has kind of been his undoing, in terms of getting people to take him seriously. Although Judy Woods and the beam weapon theory might take the heat off him for a while !

matt - November 29, 2006 11:41 AM (GMT)
cold fusion has been seriously 'op-ed' why ? why bother ? it's all nonsense right ? well, i'm not so sure...jones has made it clear that 'his' fusion is the 'real' one (even though it does not work), and somewhat tastily, that discredits him before he even starts talking about the strange collapse of the wtc complex

some are of the opinion that what he's been lined up to do to the ask awkward questions movement is the same exact thing as with fusion - i.e. there is something to it in both cases, and he's not what he pretends to be

anyone who's looked into sonoluminescence, cavitation and similar physical 'oddities' knows that there really is some strange shit in the physical universe that we don't yet grasp

bottom line, is why go to so much trouble to discredit something that should be able to discredit itself - i think the answer is self evident

lol, wtf do they mean by 'beam weapons', that's been seriously doing the rounds at BFN too... http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopi...&highlight=beam http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopi...&highlight=beam ...as far as i can tell you, scalar* weapons in orbit might have been used to assist the fall of the towers, but as i was saying to someone the other day - "so what, no way to prove it, better to move on to what you can prove"

*sixth post down page

fedor - November 29, 2006 05:01 PM (GMT)
I'm not to fond of the space beams theory but whatever was used to destroy the WTC complex is beyond anything thing we've witnessed in public before.

HUMINT has some good analysis.

http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/

suspecta - November 30, 2006 10:32 AM (GMT)
I've seen a dvd of a long Steven Jones lecture and thought it was absolutely brilliant; he's very, very passionate about this subject. He delivered the evidence painstakingly and at great length, interspersed with little bursts of humour and incredulity at the idea of anybody ever thinking they could get away with it without detection or at the very least suspicion.

It's very unfortunate that he's a Mormon but it really shouldn't make any difference. All religions require you to believe fantastical stuff and to be quite honest I don't think Mormonism is any more bizarre than any other religion including Christianity. After all, George Bush is supposedly a born-again; say no more. Ahmedinejad wrote a brilliant letter yesterday and he's a devout Muslim. Being a devout practtioner of any religion doesn't seem to warp your thinking particularly in my view - unless you're a born-again Christian :lol: and I've even met some decent left wing born-agains (though not many).

As for the beam theory, I'm encountering more and more people who believe it; it's hardly doing the cause any good and could all be part of a deliberate disinformation campaign. Who knows? It's all getting very confusing out there, that's for sure.

Anyway, to anyone attempting to rubbish Steven Jones because of his Mormonism a sharp reply mentioning George Bush's bizarre religious views ought to redress the balance. And he needs to get that report peer-reviewed - pronto.

Suspecta

Bridget - November 30, 2006 10:37 AM (GMT)
QUOTE ("suspecta")
Ahmedinejad wrote a brilliant letter yesterday

I was looking for this yesterday and it wasn't on his blog, do you have a link?

Kier - November 30, 2006 11:15 AM (GMT)
Hi Suspecta,

It's a good point about the religion being irrelevant, and GWB being a christian, but most people I've discussed Jones with feel the same way about Bush as they do about Jones anyway! People unfortunately do judge on aspects other than someone's specific research, and his statement that Jesus went to America is pretty off-putting for those who can't see the relevance of religion. A lot of people can't reconcile science and religion at all, so you can see how it might make his peers, and others, sceptical over his work.

You say yourself "All religions require you to believe fantastical stuff", so can you see why ohers might think his theories about the WTC might be considered "fantastical stuff" too, if he's capable of believing in such things? It shouldn't make a difference, you're right, but it does.

Kier


Dave52 - November 30, 2006 12:00 PM (GMT)
Improbable Collapse is his work, I found it an excellent documentary on the collapse of the twin towers and wtc7.

Google Video Here

Although the 911 Mysteries is also excellent.

911 Mysteries Google Vid here

I don't know much about Prof Jones' background, or his other beliefs, but that shouldn't get in the way of his input into the 9/11 Scholars thing.

matt - November 30, 2006 12:03 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Dave52 @ Nov 30 2006, 12:00 PM)
I don't know much about Prof Jones' background, or his other beliefs, but that shouldn't get in the way of his input into the 9/11 Scholars thing.

no Dave, you're right it shouldn't, but unfortunately it can and is being used against him

Dave52 - November 30, 2006 12:25 PM (GMT)
I agree, there are quite a few things that I hear (or read) about "truthers", and I shake my head. There seems to be quite a lot of people who set themselves up for ridicule in this business.

But on the flip side, if someone believes that a magic beam weapon was used to bring down those towers it is their right to say so. I've started getting into the Illuminati subject. Do I think that inter-dimensional lizard beings are running the world? Probably not, but Icke has alot of other interesting things to say. Incidently, it's not just Icke that I'm looking at, I just use him as he's a classic example of an easily ridiculed character.

:rolleyes:

matt - November 30, 2006 01:15 PM (GMT)
what i think there is a lack of, is a lack of people qualified/willing/determined/focused/motivated/independant enough to drive this thing forward, but who at the same time don't 'start believing', or have long held beliefs in sparkly elves of some description or other

icke is a classic example, he does as you say, have strong info on the whole masonic thing, but 'patching' and phase-shifting-other-dimensional-beings is simply too kooky...and notice also how he actually goes some way to distancing himself from those claims, saying "i know this is 'loony' talk, but i'm just telling you what i've been told"

alan watt is another who has a lot of insight into the masonic thing, but his whole dowdy "they're chemtrailing us to death" illuminati trip is another scare-op...it is likely, very likely, in fact to some degree proven that various masonic orders are used to control, disseminate plans, organise and structure influence and so on, invisible tendrils running through many disparate elements of society, but the idea that this 'pyramid' is some indestructible force, is to my mind, nonsense, they 'sit atop' of all of us, they are therefore in a potentially very weak position

if only the good prof had no religious beliefs and had no previous with the ridiculed fusion thing, if only a certain truther had not 'begun' to have leanings towards a certain religion

the beam weapon thing is quite dodgy, as i've said before, a scalar wave (invisible/silent/very difficult to detect) might have been useful, if sent from directly above from an orbiting platform, but so many posters on this subject are talking about 'beams', as far as i know, it is not a 'beam', and one poster elsewhere was referring to 'beamers' fitted into the wtc7 - just makes no sense to me, but 'discombobulating' the wtc twins from above makes some logical sense

a scalar wave is akin to a localised, focused earthquake, or infrasound/sonic fluctuation which can be increased in intensity until the resonance overcomes the structural integrity of say, a reinforced concrete building, suppose that the steel skeleton had been 'dissected' moments before, and you can see how what i describe could be what we all saw on our tvs back then

*but as with my masons speculations, this is based on what knowledge of scalar energy etc that i have, i'm not getting religious at anyone :rolleyes:

suspecta - November 30, 2006 02:10 PM (GMT)
Hi Bridget

Here's the letter:

QUOTE
Editor's note: This is the full text of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's open letter to "the American People," as supplied to CNN.]

(CNN) -- In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

O, Almighty God, bestow upon humanity the perfect human being promised to all by You, and make us among his followers.

Noble Americans,

Were we not faced with the activities of the US administration in this part of the world and the negative ramifications of those activities on the daily lives of our peoples, coupled with the many wars and calamities caused by the US administration as well as the tragic consequences of US interference in other countries;

Were the American people not God-fearing, truth-loving, and justice-seeking, while the US administration actively conceals the truth and impedes any objective portrayal of current realities;

And if we did not share a common responsibility to promote and protect freedom and human dignity and integrity;

Then, there would have been little urgency to have a dialogue with you.

While Divine providence has placed Iran and the United States geographically far apart, we should be cognizant that human values and our common human spirit, which proclaim the dignity and exalted worth of all human beings, have brought our two great nations of Iran and the United States closer together.

Both our nations are God-fearing, truth-loving and justice-seeking, and both seek dignity, respect and perfection.

Both greatly value and readily embrace the promotion of human ideals such as compassion, empathy, respect for the rights of human beings, securing justice and equity, and defending the innocent and the weak against oppressors and bullies.

We are all inclined towards the good, and towards extending a helping hand to one another, particularly to those in need.

We all deplore injustice, the trampling of peoples' rights and the intimidation and humiliation of human beings.

We all detest darkness, deceit, lies and distortion, and seek and admire salvation, enlightenment, sincerity and honesty.

The pure human essence of the two great nations of Iran and the United States testify to the veracity of these statements.

Noble Americans,

Our nation has always extended its hand of friendship to all other nations of the world.

Hundreds of thousands of my Iranian compatriots are living amongst you in friendship and peace, and are contributing positively to your society. Our people have been in contact with you over the past many years and have maintained these contacts despite the unnecessary restrictions of US authorities.

As mentioned, we have common concerns, face similar challenges, and are pained by the sufferings and afflictions in the world.

We, like you, are aggrieved by the ever-worsening pain and misery of the Palestinian people. Persistent aggressions by the Zionists are making life more and more difficult for the rightful owners of the land of Palestine. In broad day-light, in front of cameras and before the eyes of the world, they are bombarding innocent defenseless civilians, bulldozing houses, firing machine guns at students in the streets and alleys, and subjecting their families to endless grief.

No day goes by without a new crime.

Palestinian mothers, just like Iranian and American mothers, love their children, and are painfully bereaved by the imprisonment, wounding and murder of their children. What mother wouldn't?

For 60 years, the Zionist regime has driven millions of the inhabitants of Palestine out of their homes. Many of these refugees have died in the Diaspora and in refugee camps. Their children have spent their youth in these camps and are aging while still in the hope of returning to homeland.

You know well that the US administration has persistently provided blind and blanket support to the Zionist regime, has emboldened it to continue its crimes, and has prevented the UN Security Council from condemning it.

Who can deny such broken promises and grave injustices towards humanity by the US administration?

Governments are there to serve their own people. No people wants to side with or support any oppressors. But regrettably, the US administration disregards even its own public opinion and remains in the forefront of supporting the trampling of the rights of the Palestinian people.

Let's take a look at Iraq. Since the commencement of the US military presence in Iraq, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed, maimed or displaced. Terrorism in Iraq has grown exponentially. With the presence of the US military in Iraq, nothing has been done to rebuild the ruins, to restore the infrastructure or to alleviate poverty. The US Government used the pretext of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but later it became clear that that was just a lie and a deception.

Although Saddam was overthrown and people are happy about his departure, the pain and suffering of the Iraqi people has persisted and has even been aggravated.

In Iraq, about one hundred and fifty thousand American soldiers, separated from their families and loved ones, are operating under the command of the current US administration. A substantial number of them have been killed or wounded and their presence in Iraq has tarnished the image of the American people and government.

Their mothers and relatives have, on numerous occasions, displayed their discontent with the presence of their sons and daughters in a land thousands of miles away from US shores. American soldiers often wonder why they have been sent to Iraq.

I consider it extremely unlikely that you, the American people, consent to the billions of dollars of annual expenditure from your treasury for this military misadventure.

Noble Americans,

You have heard that the US administration is kidnapping its presumed opponents from across the globe and arbitrarily holding them without trial or any international supervision in horrendous prisons that it has established in various parts of the world. God knows who these detainees actually are, and what terrible fate awaits them.

You have certainly heard the sad stories of the Guantanamo and Abu-Ghraib prisons. The US administration attempts to justify them through its proclaimed "war on terror." But every one knows that such behavior, in fact, offends global public opinion, exacerbates resentment and thereby spreads terrorism, and tarnishes the US image and its credibility among nations.

The US administration's illegal and immoral behavior is not even confined to outside its borders. You are witnessing daily that under the pretext of "the war on terror," civil liberties in the United States are being increasingly curtailed. Even the privacy of individuals is fast losing its meaning. Judicial due process and fundamental rights are trampled upon. Private phones are tapped, suspects are arbitrarily arrested, sometimes beaten in the streets, or even shot to death.

I have no doubt that the American people do not approve of this behavior and indeed deplore it.

The US administration does not accept accountability before any organization, institution or council. The US administration has undermined the credibility of international organizations, particularly the United Nations and its Security Council. But, I do not intend to address all the challenges and calamities in this message.

The legitimacy, power and influence of a government do not emanate from its arsenals of tanks, fighter aircrafts, missiles or nuclear weapons. Legitimacy and influence reside in sound logic, quest for justice and compassion and empathy for all humanity. The global position of the United States is in all probability weakened because the administration has continued to resort to force, to conceal the truth, and to mislead the American people about its policies and practices.

Undoubtedly, the American people are not satisfied with this behavior and they showed their discontent in the recent elections. I hope that in the wake of the mid-term elections, the administration of President Bush will have heard and will heed the message of the American people.

My questions are the following:

Is there not a better approach to governance?

Is it not possible to put wealth and power in the service of peace, stability, prosperity and the happiness of all peoples through a commitment to justice and respect for the rights of all nations, instead of aggression and war?

We all condemn terrorism, because its victims are the innocent.

But, can terrorism be contained and eradicated through war, destruction and the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocents?

If that were possible, then why has the problem not been resolved?

The sad experience of invading Iraq is before us all.

What has blind support for the Zionists by the US administration brought for the American people? It is regrettable that for the US administration, the interests of these occupiers supersedes the interests of the American people and of the other nations of the world.

What have the Zionists done for the American people that the US administration considers itself obliged to blindly support these infamous aggressors? Is it not because they have imposed themselves on a substantial portion of the banking, financial, cultural and media sectors?

I recommend that in a demonstration of respect for the American people and for humanity, the right of Palestinians to live in their own homeland should be recognized so that millions of Palestinian refugees can return to their homes and the future of all of Palestine and its form of government be determined in a referendum. This will benefit everyone.

Now that Iraq has a Constitution and an independent Assembly and Government, would it not be more beneficial to bring the US officers and soldiers home, and to spend the astronomical US military expenditures in Iraq for the welfare and prosperity of the American people? As you know very well, many victims of Katrina continue to suffer, and countless Americans continue to live in poverty and homelessness.

I'd also like to say a word to the winners of the recent elections in the US:

The United States has had many administrations; some who have left a positive legacy, and others that are neither remembered fondly by the American people nor by other nations.

Now that you control an important branch of the US Government, you will also be held to account by the people and by history.

If the US Government meets the current domestic and external challenges with an approach based on truth and Justice, it can remedy some of the past afflictions and alleviate some of the global resentment and hatred of America. But if the approach remains the same, it would not be unexpected that the American people would similarly reject the new electoral winners, although the recent elections, rather than reflecting a victory, in reality point to the failure of the current administration's policies. These issues had been extensively dealt with in my letter to President Bush earlier this year.

To sum up:

It is possible to govern based on an approach that is distinctly different from one of coercion, force and injustice.

It is possible to sincerely serve and promote common human values, and honesty and compassion.

It is possible to provide welfare and prosperity without tension, threats, imposition or war.

It is possible to lead the world towards the aspired perfection by adhering to unity, monotheism, morality and spirituality and drawing upon the teachings of the Divine Prophets.

Then, the American people, who are God-fearing and followers of Divine religions, will overcome every difficulty.

What I stated represents some of my anxieties and concerns.

I am confident that you, the American people, will play an instrumental role in the establishment of justice and spirituality throughout the world. The promises of the Almighty and His prophets will certainly be realized, Justice and Truth will prevail and all nations will live a true life in a climate replete with love, compassion and fraternity.

The US governing establishment, the authorities and the powerful should not choose irreversible paths. As all prophets have taught us, injustice and transgression will eventually bring about decline and demise. Today, the path of return to faith and spirituality is open and unimpeded.

We should all heed the Divine Word of the Holy Qur'an:

"But those who repent, have faith and do good may receive Salvation. Your Lord, alone, creates and chooses as He will, and others have no part in His choice; Glorified is God and Exalted above any partners they ascribe to Him." (28:67-68)

I pray to the Almighty to bless the Iranian and American nations and indeed all nations of the world with dignity and success.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran
29 November 2006


cheers

Suspecta

numeral - April 4, 2009 01:18 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
Chemical Physics Journal: Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center

By: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James on: 04.04.2009 [00:43 ] (290 reads)

This is a major breakthrough as it is a peer reviewed scientific paper which proves that 911 was an inside job. The international scientific community cannot ignore this.

informatron

Formally published in a peer-reviewed Chemical Physics journal, today:

“Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen


The paper ends with this sentence: “Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”

In short, the paper explodes the official story that “no evidence” exists for explosive/pyrotechnic materials in the WTC buildings.

What is high-tech explosive/pyrotechnic material in large quantities doing in the WTC dust? Who made tons of this stuff and why? Why have government investigators refused to look for explosive residues in the WTC aftermath?

These are central questions raised by this scientific study.

Author Professor Steven Jones comments:
http://911blogger.com/node/19761



Abstract


We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 °C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.

The Open Chemical Physics Journal
Volume 2
ISSN: 1874-4125

Full article available for down load:

http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content....0001/7TOCPJ.SGM


soulshoes - April 4, 2009 10:50 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
THE 21st CENTURY BEHAVIOR OF STEVEN E. JONES

Suddenly, in late 2005, a self-professed "good friend" of Jim Hoffman's appeared on the 9/11 scene (and even in the mainstream media). He was a PhD physics professor and fusion expert at BYU who'd decided that he could breathe new life into a stale old WTC "thermite" controlled demolition limited-hangout that had been kicked around the internet for years without ever gaining much popularity.

There were at least two problems with his approach: the highly-unconventional ""Ground Zero"" evidence clearly pointed to some kind of exotic weaponry or energy release, and, same as Hoffman, he continually sided with the government and media regarding what hit the towers, even as he insisted -- proved -- that "planes" could not account for what had happened to the towers.

The name of that physicist is Steven E. Jones.

So then we had two very intelligent men, Hoffman and Jones, both well-promoted by the "truth movement", both behaving inconsistently (ie, selectively and/or intellectually dishonestly) regarding their opposition to the government's and media's lies of 9/11.

Further, Doctor Professor Jones has insisted that we can rule out all possibility of any kind of nuclear devices having been involved in the annihilation of the WTC skyscrapers due to the fact that no large radioactive signature had been detected at ""Ground Zero"". (3) 

But the logic behind that is based upon the 50 year old truth that a (radioactively dirty) fission reaction is needed to trigger a (relatively clean) fusion reaction. However there is little reason to believe that nuclear technology had not, as of 2001, advanced beyond that of the 1950s. Nevertheless, that seems to be the basis for Jones' having told people that they can rule out all nuclear possibilities.

It is our opinion that this constitutes a pattern, a history, of deceit; of having falsely ruled out the possibility of fusion without fission, and Dr. Jones has been dishonest.

matt - April 5, 2009 04:16 PM (GMT)
worth bearing in mind that there is an issue with light projection during daylight, and this rather complicates twin tower npt

numeral - April 12, 2009 09:40 AM (GMT)

Factual 7 - December 8, 2010 07:17 PM (GMT)
From: http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/index....osition=186:186

The Problem with Microspheres

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steven Jones claims that the discovery of metallic microspheres found within the WTC dust is proof of the use of thermite to destroy the 3 towers. While I personally would like to see proof of foul play discovered and the soulless perpetrators of such an objectively conscienceless act exposed, are microspheres the "smoking gun" Steven Jones claims?

Frank Greening, PhD Chemist, has asked some thought-provoking questions concerning possible multiple origins of these said micro-spheres. I've attempted to to stimulate an open discussion between Steven Jones and Frank Greening on this subject to help us all get to the bottom of this issue. After posting the arguments of Frank Greening on the Scholars for 9-11 Truth and Justice forum, I was summarily expunged from the group with no explanation.

So much for open debate.


Listed below is a summary of possible objections to considering WTC microspheres as a "smoking gun". I do hope that one of our truth-seeking readers manages to get Steven Jones to reply to these objections.

Ignoring them does not bolster his case.
When I e-mailed Frank to sum up his objections to the microspheres argument, he wrote me the following reply:


You ask me for a list of objections to the notion that iron-rich microspheres in samples of WTC dust are evidence for the use of thermite to bring down the Twin Towers. I think my main objection is that there appears to be a whole variety of microspheres with different chemical signatures. This suggests that most of the microspheres have a natural, chaotic, origin from many different source materials, all of which have simple explanations for their presence in the WTC remains.

However, I do need to see more X-ray spectra with an indication of how abundant a particular type of sphere is. (I think Jones claims to have analysed "hundreds" of particles!) Right now I think I have seen about 8 spectra and, as I say, these spectra are all quite different - some have Si, some do not; some have S, some do not; some have Ca, some do not; some have Cu, some do not...... and so on.

There ARE certain types of microspheres that would perhaps be hard to explain in the debris of an "ordinary" office fire, but so far I have not seen any in the analytical data on the WTC dust published by Jones or anyone else.

Cheers,

Frank


Frank and Steven's E-mail Exchanges
Frank posted on the JREF forum on 12-26-07

Quote:
Some Recent E-mail Exchanges with Steven Jones

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steven,

I would like to contribute to this research, so I will answer your questions
about OXYGEN, etc.......

It is well known that oxygen is not well characterized by EDX, especially
EDX done on old instruments. In fact, if you look in McCrone's book, which
was published in 1973, none of the samples show oxygen peaks! Thus we have
entry 432 "Zinc Oxide" which only has peaks for zinc! Clearly, the absence
of oxygen peaks does not mean the absence of oxygen in the sample! The
spectra in McCrone's book were probably recorded with an electronic "gate"
to eliminate low energy X-rays entirely. This was done because so-called
pulse pile-up of low-energy X-rays in first generation EDX instruments
caused detector saturation. Thus the low-energy peaks were not recorded.
This is why the lightest element reported in any sample listed in McCrone's
book is Na with an X-ray at 1.04 keV. Nevertheless, McCrone's Particle Atlas
remains a very useful source of X-ray data of dusts, minerals, etc.

Even using a modern EDX instrument I would be very careful about quoting a quantitative oxygen number. Why is this? Well, light elements like carbon,
oxygen and nitrogen emit very low energy X-rays ~ 0.5 keV or less. These
X-rays are not very penetrating and have trouble escaping from the surface
of the sample and passing through the window of the detector. However,
oxygen also tends to chemisorb on the surface of many materials, enhancing
the oxygen peak. The net result is that oxygen is not reliably measured by
EDX. For this reason I used Auger electron analysis, with a touch of
argon-ion sputtering to removed chemisorbed species, to quantify elements
like C, O, N, in fly ash. This technique does not use X-ray emission to
detect elements.

Now as for the particular spectrum in McCrones's book I forwarded to you, it was just one example of a combustion-related material that has microspheres
and high iron. I will forward the spectrum of the incinerator ash as well.
It shows microspheres and iron is present in significant concentrations too.
But please remember McCrone's sample was NOT magnetically separated. I am
quite sure a magnetically separated ash sample, such as the one you have for
the WTC dust, would show high iron by definition!

And one final point, my good friend Carrol Sanders has reminded me that fly ash is frequently used as aggregate in lightweight concrete, so microspheres may have been present in the Twin Tower's concrete even before the fires of 9/11. Given that so much concrete was pulverized during the collapse of the towers, fly ash debris would be present in large amounts in the rubble pile.

Regards, Frank

----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Jones
To: greening
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2007 12:10 AM
Subject: Re: Query

Frank,

1. As you read my query, you'll notice that I said I thought some sort of
cooperation could be worked out -- with you. When I made reference to those "hell-bent" on discrediting discoveries I was not thinking about you , but rather two or three others, out of perhaps a couple hundred collaborators I have worked with. I learned to be very careful before forming
collaborations.

At the same time, it is true I would have to get to know you better before
establishing a full collaboration if such were desired.

2. "Al : Si : S : K : Ca : Ti : Fe = 8 : 10 : 2 : 1 : 4 : 1 : 5"

a. Where is the oxygen? Oxygen is a major component of almost all the
iron-aluminum spheres in the WTC dust I have studied -- often the PRINCIPAL component.

b. How do these "fly-ash" spheres form, given the high melting point of
iron (about 1530 C)? Do the incinerators use forced-air?

Thanks for your comments, which I will consider more tomorrow.

Steven
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------

Frank,

1. The plot you provided is from burning COAL, not paper, plastics, wood
etc. Or are you saying there was coal in the WTC?

2. Where is the oxygen in the spectrum? The oxygen content is
significant, yet the spectrum appears to be skewed, cut off at low X-ray
energies... please explain -- how much Oxygen was present? Oxygen must be
present in a spectrum to provide a match with spectra I have shown -- not
the case in the one example you provided!

All of the iron-aluminum spheres I have found in the WTC dust show abundant
OXYGEN. Often O is the principal element in the spheres.

3. Can you get a Fe-O-K-Al-Si spectrum (with oxygen, O) and sphere
production from burning office materials? A few examples please -- if you
can do it.

4. This coal (your reference) was burned at high temperatures -- the
caption refers to "high stoker temperature." This is a significant
difference from the WTC fires -- or -- Are you claiming such high temps
occurred in the WTC fires? Hot enough to produce iron-rich spheres? (Iron
melts at 1538 C)


Steven J


Reply sent Dec 25th:

Steven,

So, Steven, may I review where we presently stand in this debate. You have carried out EDX analysis of samples of WTC dust and claim that two types of particles detected by you in the dust serve as evidence for the use of thermite/thermate incendiary devices during the destruction of the towers. These particles are microspheres and thin “chips” that are iron and aluminum-rich. Since thermite is essentially a mixture of iron oxide and aluminum, and spherical particles are evidence of melting, you believe that Fe and Al in microspheres can only be attributable to thermite residues. (Am I correct so far?)

Now here you have me at a disadvantage because you have not published or made any of your EDX spectra available to me. The best I have to work with are video clips of some talks you have given where you show some overheads of EDX spectra. If I am to really get to grips with your research I need to see copies of the spectra. And, by the way, I notice you immediately posted the spectrum I sent to you on 9//blogger, but did not post one of your spectra for comparison. Why not? My spectrum is from a book that is readily available in any good science library, but the same cannot be said about your spectra.

Anyway, to return to the debate, I have countered your argument that the WTC dust contains thermite residues with the suggestion that your particles are more likely to be fly ash from the combustion of materials in the Twin Towers. As evidence I have offered two examples of EDX spectra that I found in McCrone’s Particle Atlas. In one of my e-mails I gave you some approximate peak height ratios from these spectra as an indicator of the elemental ratios in the samples because the Particle Atlas does not give any quantitative analytical data.

I know full well that peak height ratios in EDX spectra are not directly proportional to the elemental concentrations in the sample. There are X-ray absorption and emission coefficients that need to be considered which are sample-matrix dependent. Nevertheless, peak height ratios do offer some approximate indication of the sample composition, especially for elements with similar atomic weights. Thus I have at least demonstrated that iron and aluminum-rich microspheres may be produced by the combustion of carbonaceous materials such as coal, wood, cardboard and paper.

Now I see you are quibbling about me sending you the spectrum of coal ash, asking me somewhat rhetorically: Was coal being burnt in the Twin Towers? Here, I would say you are missing my point which is that the mineral matter in natural carbon-based fuels forms an ash residue after the fuel is combusted that always contains Al, Si, K, Ca, and Fe – precisely the most abundant elements, (after the ubiquitous oxygen), in your WTC samples as revealed by their EDX spectra!

And here it is my turn to quibble with a statement you made in your Boston talk of Decembe15th, 2007. In this talk you compare the EDX spectra of red chips and microspheres found in WTC dust samples with the spectrum from commercial thermite and claim that all the spectra are essentially the same because they show peaks from O, Al, Fe, K, and Si. Now this is indeed quite strange because Si is definitely NOT an ingredient of commercial thermite. What is even stranger is that in your Boston talk you do not mention S as a component of the microspheres. Yet sulfur was so important to you just a few months ago – you know, back when you claimed that S was a key ingredient in the thermate variety of thermite used to demolish the Twin Towers. Now apparently, S has undergone a transmutation into Si! Perhaps this is why in your Boston talk you use the word “thermite” in place of your usual “thermate”. So what is it Steven: thermite or thermate?

But the presence of Si in your samples is indeed very significant because Si is always found in the ash produced by the combustion of wood, paper or municipal waste. So let’s focus on ash from these materials because wood, paper and municipal waste would be quite similar to the office combustibles feeding the WTC fires. Furthermore, municipal solid waste MSW combustor ash is well characterized. See for example:

http://www.tfhrc.gov/hnr20/recycle/waste/mswcal.htm

Thus we see that MSW ash typically contains up to 21 % Si, 8 % Ca, 8 % Fe, 1 % K and 5 % Al. Spherical particles up to 60 microns in diameter have also been reported in MSW incinerator ash formed when this type of waste material is burned at ~ 1000 deg C:

http://suwic.group.shef.ac.uk/posters/p-ash.pdf

There is also considerable data available on the properties of ash from the combustion of pulp and paper waste. See for example:

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/o...32/MQ64248.pdf

Here we find that Si, Al, Ca and Fe are the main elements found in ash produced by burning pulp and paper wastes. In addition the major portion of the fly ash thus derived is formed as molten droplets of fused inorganic material found in the as-received pulp and paper feed. It is reported that fusion of minerals such as quartz, feldspar and clay results in the formation of glassy spherical particles.

So, Steven, I think you need to eliminate all of these naturally occurring spherical particles that are routinely formed in office fires – particles like your WTC microspheres that are rich in Si, Al, Ca, Fe, and K - before you start suggesting that such particles could only come from thermite, (themate?) combustion residues.

Frank


----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Jones
To: greening
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2007 11:16 AM

Subject: High temps needed to form iron-rich spheres, meaning of ratios
"Only the very lowest melting substances form spheres." -- quoting directly from the figure caption of the spectrum you sent. I agree with THAT comment. The caption also mentions "metal foil" as part of the incinerated material, and I suspect melted aluminum would be present. NOT melted iron! Which leads again to the question I posed to you yesterday, based on the first spectrum you sent, which you seem to have thus far neglected:

4. This coal (your reference) was burned at high temperatures -- the caption refers to "high stoker temperature." This is a significant difference from the WTC fires -- or -- Are you claiming such high temps occurred in the WTC fires? Hot enough to produce iron-rich spheres? (Iron melts at 1538 C)

With regard to the lack of oxygen peaks in the older EDX machine you showed, I understand the difficulty these machines had -- and accept your explanation that an older EDX system was used for these spectra. The version I am using was installed very recently and is state-of-the-art. I will ask the lab director how good the oxygen percentages are in this new system.

Meanwhile, this new system does provide percentages of Fe, Al, Oxygen, etc.
So I have to ask -- what is the meaning of the ratios you provided, e.g.,

"Al : Si : S : K : Ca : Ti : Fe = 8 : 10 : 2 : 1 : 4 : 1 : 5"

When you answer this, we can make more direct comparisons with the percentages provided by the new EDS system. (Take your time as I'm traveling to be with family for Christmas. Merry Christmas! btw, and I wish you a speedy recovery as a friend tells me you had surgery recently.)

Thanks for the conversation.

Steven

PS -- some time ago, we crushed a concrete sample obtained from the WTC rubble, used magnetic concentration, and looked for iron-rich spheres. There were NONE found.

A fellow with the username "Crazy Chainsaw" posted via the JREF forum on 12-26:




Quote:
Frank at that time I did not know that magnetite was removed from fly ash used in concrete by magnetic drum separation.
Basically a big barrel filled with magnets that rolls over the fly ash, and picks out the magnetite so it can be sold.
Basically the same technique used by Dr. Jones. However there are certain uses of Fly ash that do not use magnetic drum separation.
Most of those use dry fly ash directly from the boilers.
They include addition of fly ash in slurry walls to increase the strength of those walls, and as drilling mud.
Filler and road base, soil stabilization, asphalt paving, and others, I also as you do believe the fires would have created micro spheres on their own from Chlorides and sulfates, similar to those in waste incinerators.
Dr. Jones has to show that the micro spheres are unique to thermite, or he has no evidence at all.
I am still working on a list of wire insulation plastics, Used in the towers, I would much rather research things that go boom when heated anyway.
That does seem to be what I am good at, well the next move is of course left up to Dr. Jones, he needs to show some evidence that he actually has any evidence.




Frank, posted 12-26:

Quote:
I do not believe that a temperature of 1536 deg C (or higher!) is necessary to form iron-rich microspheres. These type of particles are formed in incinerators that never get above 1200 deg C. In fact most of the chemistry involved in forming microspheres takes place in the temperature range 600 - 1000 deg C, well within the range of temperatures expected for the WTC fires. Think about it, if a waste incinerator gets above 1536 deg C the incinerator walls, which are usually made of carbon steel or low alloy steels, will melt!



Frank, 12-26:


Quote:
The formation of iron-rich microspheres below the m.p. of pure iron at ~ 1537 deg C is a complex process but is possible in an environment containing HCl/Cl2 and SO2/SO3 in the presence of O2 and H2O. Iron is transported as a volatile di or tri-chloride. FeCl2 has a m.p. of 677 deg C and allows "active" corrosion to occur with iron wastage rates as high as 100 g/m^2 per hour. The iron chloride is relatively unstable and decomposes but the iron does not wind up as a pure iron microsphere. As the very least it will be oxide (probably Fe3O4) coated and alloyed with other metals such as Al. Fly ash usually contains mullite, Al6Si2O13. This readily combines with iron oxide at ~ 1000 deg C to form an iron-rich aluminosilicate microsphere on cooling. Other elements such as K and Ca are also readily incorporated into these melts. This is the chemistry of CLAY minerals! As long as Jones' microspheres contain Si and/or K and Ca, they are NOT derived from thermite.



More Greening-Jones E-mails
Frank, posted 12-27
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 317 Quote:
: More Greening/Jones E-mails
Location: Chicago
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Items
Steven,

I guess you didn't spend too much time reading my last e-mail! You know the part where I said:

"Thus we see that MSW ash typically contains up to 21 % Si, 8 % Ca, 8 % Fe, 1 % K and 5 % Al. Spherical particles up to 60 microns in diameter have also been reported in MSW incinerator ash formed when this type of waste material is burned at ~ 1000 deg C".

I also provided a link to a site that includes micrographs of microspheres in MSW ash. Did you check the link out? I guess not!

And as for coal fired boilers, a little research will show you that iron-rich microspheres are a well documented component of coal fly ash even though pulverized coal combustion temperatures are less than 1400 deg C. So you must accept that iron-rich microspheres do not need temperatures of 1538 deg C or higher to form in a coal/wood/paper combustion environment. If you cannot accept this fact there is no point in continuing this "debate"

The formation of iron-rich microspheres below the m.p. of pure iron at ~ 1537 deg C is a complex process but is possible, indeed probable, in an environment containing HCl/Cl2 and SO2/SO3 in the presence of O2 and H2O. The WTC fires produced lots of HCl from the combustion of PVC and oxides of sulfur were present from sources such as lead acid batteries, residual fuel oil and gypsum. In such a chemical soup, iron is transported as volatile di or tri-chlorides. FeCl2 has a m.p. of 677 deg C and allows "active" corrosion to occur with iron wastage rates as high as 100 g/m^2 per hour. The iron chloride is relatively unstable and eventually decomposes but the iron does not wind up as a pure iron microsphere. At the very least it will be oxide coated, (probably with Fe3O4), and alloyed with other metals such as Al. Fly ash usually contains mullite, Al6Si2O13. Pure mullite has a high m.p., ~ 1828 deg C, but small additions of K2O and/or CaO lower the m.p to below 1200 deg C. These complex Al/Si/K/Ca/O phases readily combine with iron oxide at ~ 1000 deg C to form iron-rich calcium/potassium aluminosilicate microspheres on cooling. Steven, as long as your microspheres contain Si and/or K and Ca, they are NOT derived from thermite.

And on the topic of Si in commercial thermite, I was always under the impression that thermite is a mixture of finely divided iron oxide and aluminum with small amounts of accelerants/oxidizers based on K, Mn Sr or Ba compounds. You, on the other hand, claim this is NOT the case simply because you detected Si in your thermite combustion residues. Did you carry out your thermite tests in a sand pit? I ask this question not to be facetious; I simply wonder why anyone would add a silicon compound to thermite! Anyway, please provide a reference for your assertion that thermite usually contains Si - a manufacturer's analysis sheet would be helpful in this regard.....

One final comment:

May I recommend that you read two very interesting articles by Ken Kosanke et al.:

"Characterization of Pyrotechnic Reaction Residue Particles by SEM / EDS" in J. Forensic Sci. 48(3), 531 (2003)

"Pyrotechnic Reaction Residue Particle Analysis" in J. Forensic Sci. 51(2), 296 (2006).

These articles discuss the problem of identifying pyrotechnic reaction particles in the presence of soil or "dirt". On page 535 of the first article we read:

"Although a little too simplistic to make it a general rule, most common geologic particles will have silicon and calcium as the most prevalent X-ray peaks, whereas pyrotechnic material will generally have little, if any, of these elements present."

Then on page 299 of the second article we see two EDS spectra labelled as "Dirt" and "Dirt plus pyrotechnic reaction residues". The spectra are essentially identical with peaks, (in order of intensity), identified as: Si, Al, Fe, Ca, K, S.

We can debate this in the New Year, if you wish, but until you can show me that iron-rich microspheres COULD NOT be present in the WTC dust without "added" thermite, I think we won't have much to talk about!

Regards,

Frank


----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Jones
To: greening
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2007 11:55 PM
Subject: Re: High temps needed to form iron-rich spheres, meaning of ratios

Frank,

Your latest response ignores (again) my questions in (4.) below.

Further, you state: "Now this is indeed quite strange because Si is definitely NOT an ingredient of commercial thermite."

This statement is demonstrably incorrect, and indeed I demonstrated that Si is in fact a component of the sample of commercial thermite I tested -- both in the unreacted thermite sample (in with iron oxide chips) and in the spheres which formed from reacting the commercial thermite. This observation I made was and is important to the discussion. Experiments trump authoritative statements from you or anyone else.

I am leaning to suggest we take this discussion to a forum, such as PhysOrg, beginning January 2 (as I leave town tomorrow once more, and then will be with family for New Years' eve and day). This would also permit further posting of PPT slides, or EDS plots and SEM images, as I did some time ago on a forum of STJ911.org.

Let's think about this... Jan. 3 would be as soon as I could reasonably begin such a public discussion.

Steve

PS -- Carroll -- you will have to flesh out your question about PAC's and ferric chlorides, put into context of the WTC destruction, so I can fathom what you are asking when you say "What about PAC's..." etc.

Steven J

On Dec 24, 2007 9:16 AM, Steven Jones wrote:

"Only the very lowest melting substances form spheres." -- quoting directly from the figure caption of the spectrum you sent. I agree with THAT comment. The caption also mentions "metal foil" as part of the incinerated material, and I suspect melted aluminum would be present. NOT melted iron! Which leads again to the question I posed to you yesterday, based on the first spectrum you sent, which you seem to have thus far neglected:

4. This coal (your reference) was burned at high temperatures -- the caption refers to "high stoker temperature." This is a significant difference from the WTC fires -- or -- Are you claiming such high temps occurred in the WTC fires? Hot enough to produce iron-rich spheres? (Iron melts at 1538 C)

With regard to the lack of oxygen peaks in the older EDX machine you showed, I understand the difficulty these machines had -- and accept your explanation that an older EDX system was used for these spectra. The version I am using was installed very recently and is state-of-the-art. I will ask the lab director how good the oxygen percentages are in this new system.

Meanwhile, this new system does provide percentages of Fe, Al, Oxygen, etc.
So I have to ask -- what is the meaning of the ratios you provided, e.g.,

"Al : Si : S : K : Ca : Ti : Fe = 8 : 10 : 2 : 1 : 4 : 1 : 5"

When you answer this, we can make more direct comparisons with the percentages provided by the new EDS system. (Take your time as I'm traveling to be with family for Christmas. Merry Christmas! btw, and I wish you a speedy recovery as a friend tells me you had surgery recently.)

Thanks for the conversation.

Steven

PS -- some time ago, we crushed a concrete sample obtained from the WTC rubble, used magnetic concentration, and looked for iron-rich spheres. There were NONE found.

On Dec 24, 2007 7:39 AM, greening wrote:

Here is the incinerator ash spectrum. You will note that the caption reads "partly burned paper, wood, plastic, etc...

Frank



Frank posted on 12-28-07


Quote:
Chainsaw:

We occasionally found maghemite in corrosion films on our nuclear reactor pipework. It is difficult to identify unequivocally because its XRD pattern is a lot like magnetite.

Metamars:

You can analyse microspheres using a wide variety of techniques. Surface analysis using electron or ion beams allows you to look at the detailed structure of each particle and has resolution down to 1 micron or less. The other way to go is to do a destructive wet chemical dissolution of a sample, (followed by AA or ICP), to get a total (average) elemental composition of a bunch of microspheres. This approach would be useful to get information on minor elements such as Mn, Cu, Ni, V, Ti, Zn, Pb, etc. These minor elements could provide useful "fingerprints" that might help explain the origin of the spheres. I used to have access to all these techniques, but I doubt that I could get a "freebee" from my old buddies to analyse WTC dust.

By the way, I think the combustion of computers and other electronics, as well as paint pigments and plastic "fillers" could all contribute to the formation of iron-rich microspheres. I still say that thermite should give only Al, Fe and O residues with very little Si, K, Ca and Ti. Jones need to focus on particles that have no Si, K, Ca, Ti..... that's if he can find such particles!



and



Quote:
One point I would like to clarify is that there are obviously several different types of iron-rich microspheres in the WTC dust. Some appear to be similar to fly ash and consist of iron-calcium-potassium alumino silicates. Others are mostly aluminum-iron alloys with an oxide coating -these would be of greatest interest! There are also some that are almost pure iron which are probably cutting/welding debris. Right now Prof. Jones is sitting on a set of spectra obtained from many such particles. We need to see ALL of these spectra and classify them according to their major/minor peaks and relative occurrence in the set of spectra. I trust that Prof. Jones will show us EVERYTHING he has in this regard and NOT be selective.


Frank, on 1-15-08:

Quote:
Chainsaw:

Only time will tell if Dr. Jones will share any more information with us....

By the way, here is another thought on this topic:

There are probably many minor, or trace, elements to look for in the WTC microspheres whose concentrations relative to a major element like Fe or Al could provide key forensic evidence as to the contribution of a particular source, ( e.g. paint, ash, electronics, welding fume, thermite, etc), to the total mass of microspheres.

However, energy dispersive X-ray analysis is not sensitive enough to detect and quantify with sufficient precision many of the elements I am thinking of. Thus I would use other analytical techniques (e.g., AA, ICP, NAA, etc), to get some concentrations for some key minor (i.e. less than say 1 %) elements.

Thus I would look for Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Ni, Cu, Zn, Sb and Mo in the microspheres and compare the values with the concentration to Fe. This could potentially tell you where the Fe is coming from, (e.g. structural steel, galvanized steel, welding electrodes, etc). Also I would analyse for Ag and compare it to Al. Why this one? Well did you know that the aluminum alloy facade on the Twin Towers was actually an Al-Ag alloy specially developed for this purpose by Alcoa. No Ag in microspheres containing Al means the Al is not coming from the Al facade....



Frank on 1-16:

Quote:
Lapman:

Dr. Jones has sent me some EDS spectra of WTC dust but I have agreed not to discuss them on a public forum such as this so I will keep my word...


TAM asks on 1-16:

Quote:
You know I respect the "keeping quiet" out of respect for his request...that is not the issue.

The issue, in my opinion, is his (Jones) DELIBERATE refusal to make his samples and data PUBLIC for INDEPENDENT scrutiny with resulting refutation OR confirmation of his findings.

And yes, I am aware that such things go on, but I am also aware of how WEAK any conclusions produced from such FLAWED science are.

Can any one, ANY ONE, give me one GOOD, VALID reason why Jones would continue to keep his samples private and unexposed to independent analysis? If his findings are legitimate, would not an independent analysis confirming them be THE BEST THING THAT COULD EVER HAPPEN TO THE TRUTH MOVEMENT???



and Chainsaw answers:

Quote:
It is a publication issue, the material must not be made available before publication.
If published it will be available though the publication, Dr. Greening is also I believe thinking of doing a publication, so some of his evidence as well can not be released.
My work will probably not be published so I do not think it matters that much.



while Frank remarks:

Quote:
Perhaps Jones is simply being very careful and following in the foot steps of NIST:

"I'll trade you my microsphere report for your WTC 7 report".

I can tell you this, however, that I have not seen enough data from Dr. Jones to carry out any scientific assessment of the origin of the WTC microspheres.

But on the other hand Jones is not obliged to show me anything!




Frank posts on 3-1-08:

Quote:
Sizzler:

I am still researching the WTC dust as best I can! I just wish Jones would publish all his spectra and let everyone have a look at them. He is not helping anyone by acting coy!

I have tried to engage Jones in a serious debate on the WTC dust and I think the record shows that I have not attacked him personally. Nevertheless Jones did not answer my last e-mail to him (from about 2 months ago) so I am somewhat stymied in commenting further on his research.

As it now stands I see Jones prevaricating and flip-flopping on these microspheres. So I have plenty of questions and very few answers....... How abundant are the spheres really? How does Jones rule out welding/cutting debris in the dust from construction activities? Do the spheres all contain K and S, and/or Si? Has Jones considered AlFeSi eutectic melting? What about the Mn content? Has he or anyone else tried XRD on some samples to look for species such as FeAl2O4 or AlFe2?

If Jones really thinks he is onto something he should just spell it out.



The last we hear of Frank on this issue is on 3-14:

Quote:
Sizzler:

The Figure 5 spectrum is what I would expect for welding fume. I say this because of the Mn enrichment relative to Mn in A-36 or A-242 structural steels.


To which Sizzler, who argues for CD, replies:

Quote:
And he characterizes it as being "rather typical".

hym...



At this point the thread, and this interesting argument, just "up and died".


Inconclusive Conclusion
Dearest reader, it seems pretty clear to me that we have an interesting debate going on over the question of microspheres...or rather we would if Steven Jones would actually participate in it.

Pretending that Frank Greening doesn't exist does not bolster Steven's case.



What we do not have, however, is the clear-cut "smoking gun" that Steven Jones claims.



This is the editor's opinion. I post the e-mail exchange in it's entirety so that you can form your own opinion.

Inconclusive Conclusion
Dearest reader, it seems pretty clear to me that we have an interesting debate going on over the question of microspheres...or rather we would if Steven Jones would actually participate in it.

Pretending that Frank Greening doesn't exist does not bolster Steven's case.



What we do not have, however, is the clear-cut "smoking gun" that Steven Jones claims.



This is the editor's opinion. I post the e-mail exchange in it's entirety so that you can form your own opinion.

StefZ - December 11, 2010 01:05 PM (GMT)
There are a couple of posts written by an academic metallurgist refuting the 9/11 nanothemrite claims here...

http://climateguy.blogspot.com/2010/11/pee...n-911-cant.html

http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/2010/1...-harrit-et.html

until Harrit or Jones get round to addressing those criticisms I personally wouldn't even refer to the possible use of nanothermite on 9/11 at all




* Hosted for free by InvisionFree