by Scott Creighton (reposted from April 07,2009)
Nearly one year ago, in May of 2008, I made a mistake; a mistake that I will correct at this time.
On May 25th of 2008 I wrote… An Open Letter to Steven E. Jones, Jeffrey Farrer, Gregory S. Jenkins, Frank Legge, James Gourley, Kevin Ryan, Daniel Farnsworth, and Crockett Grabbe On the Subject of Detonator Cord.
The letter deals primarily with the possibility that detonator cord which consists of the high-explosive PETN, was used to pulverize the concrete floor systems in the Twin Towers and that the iron-rich spheres that Jones had discovered in the Ground Zero dust may in part be the missing trusses from those very floor systems.
(look at that one on the right. That has the relative detonation velocity equivalent of 1 stick of dynamite for every 5-6 feet. Imagine what 3 or 4 lengths of this stuff run 4 feet apart under the floor pans and above the trusses would do to each floor. Now THAT would explain the missing floors and the dust all over lower Manhattan. Too bad no one in the Truth movement wants to test for it.)
We know that a “fiber optic cable” installation project was underway for years prior to the demolition of the towers. Look at those “cables” up there. You could conceivably run those cables all day in an office and tell people it was new “fiber optic” lines, and no one would think twice about it.
Marvin Bush was a principle of that company from 1995-2000. According to it’s CEO after the trade center attack, Barry McDaniel, they still held the security contract “up to the day the buildings fell down”. Which means the same company that installed the “fiber optic” cables and had connections to the Bush administration through not only Marvin Bush but also through Wirt Walker, maintained absolute control of the buildings engineering and access.
Without rehashing my argument for the use of detonator cord (det cord) in the destruction of the towers, let me just hit the high-lights for arguments sake.
Det cord has a detonation velocity higher than that of TNT (about 1.6 times the power of TNT by mass). The detonation velocity of det cord (PETN) is 8,400 meters per second which makes it a rather powerful high-explosive. One of the most powerful. It is also very stable with medium range friction sensitivity and traits make it useful in the demolitions industry. With a relative effectiveness factor of 1.66, it is very useful to the industry, in fact.
You will notice in Steven Jones’ new paper, that he isn’t capable of producing an estimate for the detonation velocity of the “thermitic material” he is studying. That’s odd isn’t it? Because detonation velocity is very important in this application; demolition.
Thermite and thermate would not be classified as a “high explosive” but rather a low-explosive. They are incendiary materials because though they burn at a relatively low rate of speed, the release a lot of energy when doing so.
That is why you keep seeing energy comparisons being made by Jones in his new paper – but that energy he mentions translates mainly to heat output, not to the potential of creating a shock wave. It’s that shock wave that produces the “explosive” effect that could pulverize concrete floors or shoot multi-ton steel beams across 300 feet of lower New York City. And it is the detonation velocity that creates the shock wave.
But while he does make those energy comparisons of some explosives to his “thermitic material”, he doesn’t include PETN in his comparison chart. “The heat of explosion(of PETN) is 5,862 kilojoules per kilogram, or 1.4 times that of TNT.”.
PETN by way of det cord, is commonly used in the demolition industry.
It is also commonly used by terrorists. Therefore standard tests have been developed over the years to identify the residual trace elements of PETN in criminal investigations.
This is what I was suggesting Steven Jones look into; testing the ground zero dust that he had/has in his possession for the trace elements of PETN or other high-explosives commonly used in the demolition industry.
To this day and to my knowledge Steven Jones has not run those tests.
Much to the dismay and amazement of many people looking for a real investigation of the events of 911, FEMA, USGA, NIST, and ultimately the FBI none of them ever tested for the presence of explosive residues in all their separate opportunities to do so. All of them have made a point at one time or another to openly make the statement that they have not tested for explosive residues in the dust or at the site. All of them have stated that remarkably, they have not run those tests.
And neither have we.
Back in May of 2008, my conversations with Jones moved beyond the 911 Blogger thread that I put the article up on. In an email response to me, he expressed an interest in looking into this further, but then he referred the matter to Greg Roberts and my discussion about the subject went forward with him.
At long last, after being told that they were really more interested in pushing for political or legal action, Greg Roberts told me something quite amazing in one of his last emails to me.
“However, our detractors could be counted on to do their best to use a negative result against us for P.R. purposes. They would say that we have a non-scientific belief, since a negative outcome from an experiment fails to shake it. 😉 Thus, the potential costs of doing what you’re proposing and coming up empty-handed, or worse, must be considered.” Roberts
The idea that you wouldn’t run a scientific test, that is standard investigative procedure when an explosive is suspected, for any reason, let alone for “potential P.R.” consequences… was astounding to me.
To make a long story short, in May of 2008, the idea of testing verified Ground Zero dust in Jones’ possession for PETN residues came to an unceremonious halt. Even though Roberts had suggested they didn’t really NEED more evidence to support the call for a new investigation, they seem to have been working quite diligently since then on this new paper by Jones et al.
But either way, the tests that I would have liked to have seen the FBI and NIST and FEMA run… were ultimately rejected by our leading “Truth” researchers.
Now lets fast forward to this past weekend.
Out comes Jones new work and the Truth community is a buzz.
Jim Hoffman puts forward a rather implausible hypothetical demolition scenario which I spent 20 hours or so going through and making suggestions. Some of which he actually seems to have incorporated in his work. But still the notion that illegal immigrants running around with 1.8 million ceiling tile bombs and fully functional kicker charges disguised as fire extinguishers in a working office, well that still seems a little far fetched if you ask me.
But this evaluation of mine of Hoffman’s work seemed to get Jones’ attention again and so I used the opportunity to put the question to him again.
I also asked him how he got the dust from the Stardust Hotel and the Key Bank demo jobs that he mentions in his new work. And he informed me that he got it from the “CDs” which I took to mean the company that produced the demolitions; CDI.
There are serious questions that I have with his new work, and one of them is how he can make the statement that they don’t believe the towers were demoed via “conventional means”. Jones responded to that question by suggesting what I had suggested, that because it didn’t look like Building 7, they suspected it wasn’t “conventional”. But that more to do with the sequence of demolition process and nothing to do with the materials used.
And keep in mind, the idea to test the ground Zero dust for standard demolition industry explosives had been communicated to him, by me and others, nearly a year ago.
Another question I have with this new study of his – since he suggested in a comment on 911 Blogger that there may be an “upper limit” of 90 tons of this UNEXPLODED thermitic material and a lower limit of “tons”… what actual amount of this thermitic material would have been installed in the first place? I mean, if an “upper limit” of the unexploded material is still lying around… how much actually exploded? What percentage would have blown up the buildings? If even the lower limit of his weight estimate “tons” is true, and the exploded to unexploded ratio is around 9-1 or even 20-1 … what does that mean they actually installed in the towers? 20 – 50 tons? What if the “upper limit” is right? 300 – 400 tons?
All that weight resting on ceiling tiles?
And while we are at it, lets ask this question… since all the photos you present are of extreme close ups and magnified details… why is it, the photos of the actual lighting of the “thermitic material” is 10 feet away and an over the shoulder view where you can’t really see what the guy is doing?
But all that aside, what this thing really comes down to is this;
Why haven’t you tested for explosive residues in the samples of WTC debris that you have in your possession?
I asked you that question in the emails again this week, and what did I get in return?
You suggest I tell you how to run tests for trace elements of PETN. I should tell you?
I didn’t even finish college and I should tell this scientist how to test for PETN residue?
“Jones earned his bachelor’s degree in physics, magna cum laude, from Brigham Young University in 1973, and his Ph.D. in physics from Vanderbilt University in 1978. Jones conducted his Ph.D. research at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (from 1974 to 1977), and post-doctoral research at Cornell University and the Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility”
Now how odd is it that I should be the one to explain to a Ph.D scientist in possession of actual Ground Zero evidence, how to run scientific tests? A scientist, by the way, currently working at a leading university with an outstanding chemistry department from what I understand.
I am supposed to tell you how to run the tests?
Well, I did. 4 times and I gave him 3 options…
“I responded 3 times you your question about how to test for these explosive
1. I sent you PDFs and links to a place where you can purchase a registered
testing kit that uses a reagent process.
“Sirchie – Explosive Residue Test Kit – cat ERTT10”
2. And I sent you links to a company that you can send the materials off to
in order to have them test the samples in their labs.
“Leeder Consulting: Explosives Residue Analysis”
3. And I also sent you detailed information on how to use the Griess reagent
process, not only how to use the process but detailed information on the
preparation of the reagent itself.
“The key to selective and sensitive explosives trace identification by TLC
lies in the visualization reagent. Griess reagent, in a number of versions,
has proven to be the most popular means of visualization.”
One question, three clear and precise answers.”
The original emails I still have. All of the correspondence I still have. Each of the processes I list above in one of my last emails to Steven Jones, I gave him carefully laid out details as to the process. Each email included PDFs and images from either websites of suppliers of the testing equipment to the links to companies he could send a sample off to… I even researched forensic investigation text books and sent him links to the chapter on the Griess reagent test they could do in the lab themselves without anyone knowing.
All of this research I had to do myself, but I did it, hell I wanted to do it.
I am not a scientist, but I know the tests exist. And so does Jones.
The last email I received from Jones after sending all this info and the PDFs and the links…. contained this little gem at the end of it…
“I sometimes wonder if emails are getting through, the way you respond.”
So he responds to the emails I sent him that don’t include the facts I found about how he can test for the presence of explosive residue in the dust, but somehow, he is suggesting he isn’t getting the other emails that do have it?
And he hasn’t responded to the last one either that sums up all three potential test procedures.
That’s when it hit me.
Here we are, looking for some deep-secret governmental agency capable of producing some mystery explosive, that may or may not have even had the detonation velocity capable of destroying the concrete floors in the first place, while everyone makes a point to cover their asses in the case of a future investigation by clearly stating they never LOOKED for standard to the industry explosive residues in the WTC dust samples.
And now we can include the 911 Truth Movement in that long list of organizations who refuse to look for the most logical tell-tale evidence one would expect in an explosives investigation.
No Steven, you don’t need someone like me to tell you how to run a test for PETN residue or to research the procedure yourself. You have access to a great many more resources than I do. And you are smarter than I am.
No Steven, you are not going to convince me or anyone else that somehow only certain emails get through to you; just the ones with out the links to test facilities or forensic testing supply houses or the research I did on how to do the tests yourself.
No Steven, I don’t agree with your comment on 911 Blogger that Hoffmans “Hypothetical Demolition Theory” is “reasonable”. Controlled demo experts don’t hand 1.8 million separate ceiling tile bombs to illegal immigrants and tell them to run as fast as they can with them through an occupied building.
And no, Prof Jones, I don’t believe you any more. That much is pretty clear to me now.
Nearly one year ago, in May of 2008, I made a mistake; a mistake that I will correct at this time.
It is not a mistake I am likly to make again.
Filed under: 001 911 Writing, 002 Scott's 911 Writing, 911 investigations, 911 Scholarly Articles, fake war on terror, Scott Creighton, Steven Jones | Tagged: nanothermite, steven jones, Steven Jones' red herring |