Mick West, owner of the website Metabunk, is perhaps the most influential demolition denier on the internet today.
In late 2018, West published the 36-minute video titled "Debunking 9/11 Microsphere Myths." According to West, he chose to take on the subject of iron microspheres in the World Trade Center (WTC) dust because it is a key point of evidence for so-called "9/11 conspiracy theorists."
As with all of his materials, West’s video has the air of being convincing but is actually replete with obfuscations and outright falsehoods. Here, we dispel these obfuscations and falsehoods one by one for the purpose of demonstrating that the iron microspheres constitute irrefutable evidence that incendiaries were used in the destruction of the three WTC towers on 9/11.
1. There is no other explanation besides thermite for the abundance of iron microspheres in the WTC dust.
2. The iron spheres are not the only evidence of thermite in the WTC dust. They are simply supporting evidence. Much additional evidence of extreme temperatures, unaccounted for in the WTC official story, is documented in the paper "Extremely High Temperatures During the World Trade Center Destruction."
3. And in "Ground Zero Part 1, Part 2, Part 3" of 9/11: Explosive Evidence — Experts Speak Out.
[NOTE: See "Extremely High Temperatures During the World Trade Center Destruction" and "High-Temperature Thermitic Reactions."]
https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/technical-articles/articles-by-ae911truth/690-refuting-a-demolition-denier-s-false-claims-about-iron-microspheres?fbclid=IwAR0hNBWBzzB3yhKZvt_36h8iLDWM2_DumbuQk2ZG-RGSIJwwPRjmFIBqvT0
This sort of misleading explanation is typical of the leading Debunkers (check out the link for the rest of the article). They bring up examples that do not fit what actually happened. They will say, what happened is exactly like what we see here, when it is not true.
These sorts of false explanations fool large members of the general public but they do not fool honest experts or people that take the time to research every point raised (or have done this research already).
The mistakes these Debunker people make are hard to believe, which flags them as deliberate liars who do what they do because they have links to the intelligence community or they are compromised individuals.
-----------------------------
Note I expanded on the above comment on Facebook:
Imho the following can be a very difficult lesson for people to figure out, although it's important for anyone living in today's propagandised society (to get a window into how things work online and in the media and captured academia). The following linked article goes through a prominent skeptics 'debunking' of evidence concerning the attacks of 911. The 'debunking' trick used is to present a misleading explanation where the examples/analogies do not fit what actually happened. They will say that what happened is exactly like what we see here, with this scientific experiment, when it is not true.
They misapply things.
These sorts of false explanations fool large members of the general public but they do not fool honest (usually courageous apolitical) experts or people that take the time to research every point raised (or have done this research already).
The obvious (after research) mistakes these Debunker people make are hard to believe. It flags them as deliberate liars who do what they do because they have links to the intelligence community and/or they are compromised individuals. If you look into the background of the leading skeptics you'd be surprised to find that many of them have been involved in sexual misconduct. No joke. This is from where you recruit these sorts of people. FBI whistleblowers have said as much about the promotion of politicians and judges.
This pattern is very familiar to me. I used to work at unraveling this sort of falsity and still like to point it out.
[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 15, 2020.]
In late 2018, West published the 36-minute video titled "Debunking 9/11 Microsphere Myths." According to West, he chose to take on the subject of iron microspheres in the World Trade Center (WTC) dust because it is a key point of evidence for so-called "9/11 conspiracy theorists."
As with all of his materials, West’s video has the air of being convincing but is actually replete with obfuscations and outright falsehoods. Here, we dispel these obfuscations and falsehoods one by one for the purpose of demonstrating that the iron microspheres constitute irrefutable evidence that incendiaries were used in the destruction of the three WTC towers on 9/11.
Mick West @ 3:15:
"RJ Lee . . . found some iron microspheres."Chris Sarns:
During their toxicological study of the WTC dust, the RJ Lee Group found that up to 6% of the weight of the dust was composed of previously molten iron microspheres. The spheres were so ubiquitous that they designated them as a "Signature Component" of the WTC dust (that is, it's not even WTC dust unless it has these large quantities of previously molten iron microspheres). RJ Lee had reason to declare that the microspheres were "melted during the WTC event, producing spherical metallic particles."
* * *
Mick West @ 4:29:
"Therefore, the argument goes, the iron spheres come from the thermite."Mick West @ 4:39:
"And, the argument goes on, there's lots of them, therefore there must have been some kind of controlled demolition with a whole bunch of thermite proved 100%."Chris Sarns:
This is a sarcastic, oversimplified, straw man argument, which is countered with the following points:1. There is no other explanation besides thermite for the abundance of iron microspheres in the WTC dust.
2. The iron spheres are not the only evidence of thermite in the WTC dust. They are simply supporting evidence. Much additional evidence of extreme temperatures, unaccounted for in the WTC official story, is documented in the paper "Extremely High Temperatures During the World Trade Center Destruction."
3. And in "Ground Zero Part 1, Part 2, Part 3" of 9/11: Explosive Evidence — Experts Speak Out.
* * *
Mick West @ 4:55:
"This is a current page on Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. And they’re talking about this paper by Steven Jones . . . ."[NOTE: See "Extremely High Temperatures During the World Trade Center Destruction" and "High-Temperature Thermitic Reactions."]
Chris Sarns:
In addition to the above-referenced paper by physicist Steven Jones, there is a 25-page peer-reviewed paper, "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe," authored by Jones, Harrit, et al., which documents the finding of red-gray chips of nano-thermite in all four independently collected samples of the WTC 7 dust. These chips, when ignited, produce molten iron microspheres with the same chemical signature as those found in the WTC dust. There is no reason for nano-thermite to have been in the WTC dust unless it was used to melt steel as part of a controlled demolition that most likely used a combination of nano-thermite and high explosives.
* * *
Mick West @ 6:16:
"What this group [Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry] are doing now is filing a petition with the U.S. attorney in New York for a grand jury investigation into the events on 9/11. Here is the petition. And in the petition they make a very simple argument at one point. They say, 'The presence in the World Trade Center dust of iron microspheres formed from previously molten iron is physically impossible without the use of incendiary materials such as thermite.'"Chris Sarns:
While there does exist the possibility of leftover iron microspheres from welding procedures during the erection of the Twin Towers, the amount would be negligible. The Lawyers' Committee's declaration was based on the unwritten assumption that "the quantities" of previously molten iron microspheres found is what they are saying would be "physically impossible" had there been no nano-thermite in the dust.
* * *
Mick West @ 6:52:
"There's many, many ways of making of making iron microspheres. I make microspheres myself about ten different ways."Chris Sarns:
None of West's methods of making iron microspheres are applicable to the large quantities of them found in the WTC dust.https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/technical-articles/articles-by-ae911truth/690-refuting-a-demolition-denier-s-false-claims-about-iron-microspheres?fbclid=IwAR0hNBWBzzB3yhKZvt_36h8iLDWM2_DumbuQk2ZG-RGSIJwwPRjmFIBqvT0
This sort of misleading explanation is typical of the leading Debunkers (check out the link for the rest of the article). They bring up examples that do not fit what actually happened. They will say, what happened is exactly like what we see here, when it is not true.
These sorts of false explanations fool large members of the general public but they do not fool honest experts or people that take the time to research every point raised (or have done this research already).
The mistakes these Debunker people make are hard to believe, which flags them as deliberate liars who do what they do because they have links to the intelligence community or they are compromised individuals.
-----------------------------
Note I expanded on the above comment on Facebook:
Imho the following can be a very difficult lesson for people to figure out, although it's important for anyone living in today's propagandised society (to get a window into how things work online and in the media and captured academia). The following linked article goes through a prominent skeptics 'debunking' of evidence concerning the attacks of 911. The 'debunking' trick used is to present a misleading explanation where the examples/analogies do not fit what actually happened. They will say that what happened is exactly like what we see here, with this scientific experiment, when it is not true.
They misapply things.
These sorts of false explanations fool large members of the general public but they do not fool honest (usually courageous apolitical) experts or people that take the time to research every point raised (or have done this research already).
The obvious (after research) mistakes these Debunker people make are hard to believe. It flags them as deliberate liars who do what they do because they have links to the intelligence community and/or they are compromised individuals. If you look into the background of the leading skeptics you'd be surprised to find that many of them have been involved in sexual misconduct. No joke. This is from where you recruit these sorts of people. FBI whistleblowers have said as much about the promotion of politicians and judges.
This pattern is very familiar to me. I used to work at unraveling this sort of falsity and still like to point it out.
[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, May 15, 2020.]
