Erebus

September 11 · source record · report

Revised Report of Results: MVA9119 — Progress Report on the Analysis of Red/Gray Chips in WTC Dust

James R. Millette; MVA Scientific Consultants · 2012

AI-verified citationSRC-MILLETTE-2012
identifier / locator
Dated March 1, 2012 (supersedes February 29, 2012); 21 pp.; prepared for Classical Guide, Denver, CO
url
https://www.metabunk.org/sk/9119ProgressReport022912_rev1_030112webHiRes.pdf
verification note
Full report text obtained and read 2026-08-26 from a third-party mirror (the original hosting is gone; identical text served by two further mirrors); conclusions quoted verbatim from p. 6 of 21.
reliability notes
  • A consulting progress report prepared for a private client, never published in a peer-reviewed journal — the same venue objection that applies to the paper it rebuts, and this case applies it symmetrically.
  • No authoritative host: the document survives only on third-party mirrors, one of them a site adversarial to the hypothesis under test.
  • Analyzed the analyst's own archived dust samples from four Manhattan locations, not the samples used in the paper it rebuts — so it is an independent test of the claim, not a re-examination of the same material.

Evidence drawn from this source

Undermines· strongSEP-E017

The dust chips: no elemental aluminum — and not the building's primer either

what the source states
"The red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments." And: "There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano thermite." On the primer question: "The composition of the red/gray chips found in this study (epoxy resin with iron oxide and kaolin pigments) does not match the formula for the primer paint used on iron column members in the World Trade Center towers" and "none of the 177 different coatings are a match for the red layer coating found in this study."
what we infer
Elemental aluminum is not optional for the thermite claim, so its absence in an independent analysis of custody-archived dust is a direct contradiction. But the same report refutes the popular counter-claim: it explicitly did NOT identify the chips as the towers' column primer. What the chips actually are remains unidentified in the published literature — a real loose end that both camps paper over.
limitations
  • Never published in a peer-reviewed journal — the same venue objection made against the paper it rebuts.
  • Prepared for a private client and surviving only on third-party mirrors, one of them adversarial to the hypothesis tested.
  • Analyzed the analyst's own archived samples, not the samples used in the paper it rebuts, so it is an independent test rather than a re-examination.