I will alert Greening via a post at physorg. However, note that he has had major surgery within the last week or so, and is still in pain. Thus, he may not reply as quickly as otherwise.

Are you waiting until more analysis is done before publishing what you've already found out? There are many who are interested in this.

Regarding money for public-interest research, which both the government and the media were negligently not performing, this was one of my frustrations that led to my writing up my "Putting the NY Times Out of Business" proposal. I will do some research into the current state of so-called crowd funding, and request that other readers of this thread do likewise. Note that the successful internet fund-raising of the Ron Paul campaign give me hope that this is a vast resource which is just beginning to be tapped.

Thanks.

I did not know of his surgery before, but wish him well and a speedy recovery.
Perhaps you know where he has posted the EDS spectra from fly-ash spheres (or even non-spherical particles)? I would like to see if these really show high iron (and simultaneously aluminum) contents, above 10%...

Publishing a paper typically takes several months, from submission through peer-review and responses, and then waiting for final publication. I'm co-author on two papers currently in this process, with mainstream technical journals.

Given the reality of slow-publishing in mainstream scientific and engineering journals (granted this is important to do, to reach the scientific community better, for example), I/we are exploring other avenues -- open for suggestions.

"Perhaps you know where he has posted the EDS spectra from fly-ash spheres (or even non-spherical particles)? "

I don't know if he has actually posted this. If he has, it's probably somewhere in the rather long physorg 911 threads.

He has also posted some papers on websites such as 911myths.com, but I don't know of any regarding his fly ash claim there, either.

PS -- I sent the above set of questions and comments (starting with "Metamars, you said") to Frank Greening by direct email. Will let you know of any response...

I have quickly come across

http://crowdfunding.pbwiki.com/

and

http://crowdfunding.com/community/

Of links in the former reference, these seem the most promising:

http://www.pledgebank.com/
http://www.chipin.com/overview
http://www.laraghfinance.com/crowdfunding.html

Interestingly, the wikipedia article on crowdfunding has been DELETED. I find that fascinating. In light of the Ron Paul fundraising phenomenon, can we expect to see that article resurrected? After all, not only Presidential candidates need funding, but so does 911 research. It doesn't take an Einstein to see the potential of, say, 25 million 911 truth aware citizens chipping in $1 per month to fund 911 research. In 1 month, we COULD, collectively, out-fund NIST.

And if we did that, I'm quite sure that our simulations wouldn't stop at the presumed point of collapse initiation.

Please follow up on this, as the movement needs money.

Be sure that someone respected by most/all is able to oversee the fund and keep everything open, transparent to avoid the obivous.

Jones or Griffin would be ideal heads, but there are others. As far as I know, Griffin is willing to do something like that. I made inquiries some time ago, but simply do not have the time to follow through myself.

A well-run fund should be able to grow fast and large and if the money is well-spent, many of us will be happy to support it. Good luck.
________________

JFK on secrecy and the press

I wouldn't want to bother Professor Jones on this topic, aside from asking him to post a budget and timeline, as poster 7man suggests.

While I wouldn't presume to speak for Professor Griffin's availability, I would be amenable to asking him. Does anybody have his contact info?

As I was unable to give Griffin's email address to you in private, I went on to ask him myself. Let's wait and see.

David said thanks but no, as that would not be the best use of his time.

This is the scanned EDS spectrum image cited by Prof. Jones, provided by F. Greening.

(See Prof. Jones' above post)

"Coal Flyash Chain Grate"

Which book is this graph from - ? hopefully it can be referenced directly as photography must not be a skill/talent in the Greening household.
EDIT: The Particle Atlas - seems like this can be easily crosschecked by someone with access to academic material...

the burned coal ash blew into the dust fields at the WTC and that is what you are looking at. Considering that some of your samples were taken very quickly after the towers fell, I think that this is highly unlikely. Or, perhaps, that this coal ash was already present in NYC and simply mixed with the WTC dust as it dispersed.

That said, if the chemical signatures are close enough to create a reasonable doubt, then I would suggest locating these coal burning plants and correlating them with the prevailing wind patterns on 9/11/01 and in the weeks before and after to more accurately assess the probability of this explanation.

It might also be worthwhile (once again, if the chemical signatures are close enough), to actually go out and capture some of this coal ash and compare it directly. I'm going to hazard a guess that modern anti-pollution technology installed on these coal burning plants would have all but eliminated this kind of particulate matter from escaping and being able to blow into NYC.

I'm also inclined to think that the chemical signatures will be distinct enough to not warrant further investigation along this line of hypothesis. As always, due diligence is required.

I hope that you and yours are well and enjoying the holiday season.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Was thinking the same thing - if it was coal ash, one would expect to find unburned coal particles as well. (anathracite)
--
Truth Revolution: The Eleventh of Every Month

I wish you all a Merry Christmas season as well.

Interesting that much of the discussion above regards the presence of iron-aluminum spheres in the WTC dust. Particularly for the Delessio-Breidenbach sample collected less than 20 minutes after the collapse of the North Tower, contamination is highly unlikely. Contamination by clean-up operations (cutting of steel by torches, etc.) is strictly ruled out, since clean-up/steel cutting had not begun at that time, within an hour of the North Tower collapse.

Now comes the argument that perhaps effluent from a coal-burning plant somehow contaminated the sample with iron-aluminum-rich spheres. This is not a strong argument IMO, but I will refrain from detailed response until the claim is raised with more rationale than so far presented.

Beyond that, I'd like to point out that the presence of unreacted thermite in the WTC dust would be prima facie evidence that thermite was present during the WTC destruction. That's where this discussion started, and hence my invitation for scientists around the world to participate in this investigation of the composite red/gray chips which do indeed appear to be unreacted thermite.

I have a short video showing the response of a tiny chip being "ignited", [edit -- I have decided to hold that additional evidence for the present, except for several colleagues who are looking at it... ]

Again, the evidence I have presented needs further, independent quantitative corroboration... The needed research will be accelerated as other scientists join in the study. (The red/gray chips are quite abundant, and WTC dust samples are available.)

Again, thank you for comments... let's stay focused...

And wishing to all a very happy Christmas season. I agree with LeftWright that, as was said by him whose birth we celebrate, "the truth shall set us free."