MEK question

leftysergeant · 6th June 2009, 07:06 PM

Inm looking at the Jones paper on his paint chips, it is mentioned that some of them seem impervious or only partially soluble in MEK, and this is used as proof that they are thermite.

It seems to me that nothing will dissollve every know kind of paint. Am I wrong on this? What sorts of paint vehicles or binders would resist MEK?

ElMondoHummus · 6th June 2009, 07:21 PM

I noted back in April that I saw somewhere online (forget where) that Polyurethane-based paints do not dissolve in butanone.

apathoid · 6th June 2009, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Inm looking at the Jones paper on his paint chips, it is mentioned that some of them seem impervious or only partially soluble in MEK, and this is used as proof that they are thermite.

It seems to me that nothing will dissollve every know kind of paint. Am I wrong on this? What sorts of paint vehicles or binders would resist MEK?

Well, I know from first hand experience that zinc-chromate primer is resistant to MEK.

beachnut · 6th June 2009, 07:24 PM

I have used MEK before and it did not dissolve dried paint quickly. I would get some chips of paint and play again if it mattered. Jones made up the thermite story due to some mental problem he has. I think Jones drank the MEK and that is why he supports the Hoffman thermite chips in the ceiling tiles with radio control remote detonators. The MEK dissolved Jones' brain faster than the chips of his delusion he calls the "loaded gun".

UNLoVedRebel · 6th June 2009, 07:55 PM

god damn is there anything funnier than a beachnut post?

ElMondoHummus · 6th June 2009, 08:05 PM

Originally Posted by UNLoVedRebel

god damn is there anything funnier than a beachnut post?

Ultima1's posts... but that's unintentional comedy.

dropzone · 6th June 2009, 08:59 PM

Originally Posted by UNLoVedRebel

god damn is there anything funnier than a beachnut post?

Here, at least, you are being unfair. He has this right: MEK actually is NOT good for you. Fairly bad, in fact. Not as bad as methyl ethyl ketone peroxide, which will do you serious harm, but bad. How the use of MEK, a common, but far from universal, solvent might prove the use of a thermite paint is nonsensical. Beachnut done good here.

To answer leftysergeant's question, I offer this:

Originally Posted by "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butanone"[/quote

MEK dissolves many substances and is used as a solvent in processes involving gums, resins, cellulose acetate and nitrocellulose coatings and in vinyl films. For this reason it finds use in the manufacture of plastics, textiles, in the production of paraffin wax, and in household products such as lacquer, varnishes, paint remover, a denaturing agent for denatured alcohol, glues, and as a cleaning agent. MEK is also used in dry erase markers as the solvent of the erasable dye.

. I don't see latex paint, for instance, on that list, but that is a total red herring. The paint is largely irrelevant, as is a suggestion that, being insoluble, the paint was unusual. Thermite is a mixture of various inorganic substances. It's vehicle, the paint, is is only important in how it supports the flame. A nonflammable paint, UNLIKE one soluble in MEK, would not work well.

leftysergeant · 6th June 2009, 09:39 PM

I think that the one with zinc in it was the most resistant of Jones' chips to MEK. That would be from the columns. The other chips could come from any number of other painted steel surfaces, including some office furnishings.

How does MEK work on epoxy?

UNLoVedRebel · 6th June 2009, 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by dropzone

Here, at least, you are being unfair. He has this right: MEK actually is NOT good for you. Fairly bad, in fact. Not as bad as methyl ethyl ketone peroxide, which will do you serious harm, but bad. How the use of MEK, a common, but far from universal, solvent might prove the use of a thermite paint is nonsensical. Beachnut done good here.

I never said he was wrong I said he was funny.

alienentity · 6th June 2009, 11:07 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Inm looking at the Jones paper on his paint chips, it is mentioned that some of them seem impervious or only partially soluble in MEK, and this is used as proof that they are thermite.

It seems to me that nothing will dissollve every know kind of paint. Am I wrong on this? What sorts of paint vehicles or binders would resist MEK?

Jones mentioned that he bought the MEK himself at a hardware store. You'd have to contact the manufacturer's to get more info on the chemical properties of their various paints I think.

Nobody from the 9/11 'truth' movement, nor other skeptics seems to have done much work in that area. I for one would be very interested to know what their chemists would have to say about the red chips.

Jones himself is not a chemist, nor is he a qualified forensic criminal investigator, nor did he or his team bother to hire any such people that I know of. I think Kevin Ryan has a chemistry degree, but for some reason he doesn't seem bothered that two of the chips produced >4.0 kJ/G, which makes the chips unlikely to be thermite, doesn't it?

Even though I don't have all the info I'd like regarding the chips, I don't think Jones et al. are very competent forensic investigators. They seem more like a gaggle of science geeks with an axe to grind than real investigators.

But that's just me.

leftysergeant · 7th June 2009, 03:07 AM

Originally Posted by alienentity

Even though I don't have all the info I'd like regarding the chips, I don't think Jones et al. are very competent forensic investigators. They seem more like a gaggle of science geeks with an axe to grind than real investigators.

But that's just me.

I have some forensic training related to thermite and fire scenes and I don't think it is just you who feel that way about how Jonesie handles evidence.I laughed my butt off at the way he handled his little blob of slag that someone sent him from someplace when he gave his big YouTubed talk in Boston.

He put on a rubber glove, reached into the sandwich bag that contained the slag drop, held it up, then put it in his unprotected hand.

Somebody a couple sandwiches short of a picnic?

BenBurch · 7th June 2009, 07:39 PM

Lots and lots of things won't dissolve in MEK.

Saying that something does not dissolve in MEK is only one point of data in figuring out what that substance is.

But as he keeps his samples entirely to himself, he can fabricate any data he wishes about them.

So the minute he releases samples with a verifiable chain of custody to a reputable lab, that is when we can either verify or refute anything he claims.

Until then, he is just jerking people around and enjoying his dime-store power trip.

leftysergeant · 8th June 2009, 05:15 AM

It occurs to me that he cannot be the only person in the world keeping dust samples from that day.

Has anybody seen any articles on the dust that included piuctures of the sorts of particles they found?

There had to have been tons of that stuff all over manhattan. There is no way you bang that much steel and concrete together and not create a blizzard of paint chips.

ElMondoHummus · 8th June 2009, 05:23 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

It occurs to me that he cannot be the only person in the world keeping dust samples from that day.

Has anybody seen any articles on the dust that included piuctures of the sorts of particles they found?

There had to have been tons of that stuff all over manhattan. There is no way you bang that much steel and concrete together and not create a blizzard of paint chips.

Yeah. Dr. Greening cited four references back in 2007.

Originally Posted by Apollo20

1. H. A. Lowers et al. “Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust.” USGS Open-File Report 2005-1165, (2005)

2. Various authors: “U.S. EPA Response to the Peer Review of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Final Report on the World Trade Center Dust Screening Study.” Page 28, (December 2006)

3. R. J. Lee et al. “Damage Assessment 130 Liberty Street Property: WTC Dust Signature Report on Composition and Morphology.” Issued December 2003.

4. S. R. Badger et al. “World Trade Center Particulate Contamination Signature Based on Dust Composition and Morphology.” Microscopy and Microanalysis 10 (Supplement 2), 948, (2004).

Now, I haven't done anything more than leaf through pages of the first and third references, but those studies are available.

BenBurch · 8th June 2009, 05:30 AM

I'll say right here that I will be absolutely amazed if the dust he has actually came from the source he claims. I am absolutely certain he cannot prove chain of custody. I am absolutely certain he cannot prove no contamination. And I am absolutely certain that a competent lab would find that what he has is something different from what he says he has.

6th June 2009, 07:06 PM	#1
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	MEK question Inm looking at the Jones paper on his paint chips, it is mentioned that some of them seem impervious or only partially soluble in MEK, and this is used as proof that they are thermite. It seems to me that nothing will dissollve every know kind of paint. Am I wrong on this? What sorts of paint vehicles or binders would resist MEK?

6th June 2009, 07:21 PM	#2
ElMondoHummus 0.25 short of being half-witted Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole Posts: 11,938	I noted back in April that I saw somewhere online (forget where) that Polyurethane-based paints do not dissolve in butanone.
	__________________ must take this very carefully....booze is wise men's drink..... -pillory "... I'm quite willing to have everyone use my rejection of the 9/11 conspiracy theory as a basis for assessing my intelligence, judgment, and trustworthiness" -Prof. Ann Althouse

6th June 2009, 07:21 PM	#3
apathoid Government Loyalist Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Virgo Supercluster Posts: 2,699	Originally Posted by leftysergeant Inm looking at the Jones paper on his paint chips, it is mentioned that some of them seem impervious or only partially soluble in MEK, and this is used as proof that they are thermite. It seems to me that nothing will dissollve every know kind of paint. Am I wrong on this? What sorts of paint vehicles or binders would resist MEK? Well, I know from first hand experience that zinc-chromate primer is resistant to MEK.
	__________________ Nature abhors a moron. -H.L. Mencken

6th June 2009, 07:24 PM	#4
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,891	I have used MEK before and it did not dissolve dried paint quickly. I would get some chips of paint and play again if it mattered. Jones made up the thermite story due to some mental problem he has. I think Jones drank the MEK and that is why he supports the Hoffman thermite chips in the ceiling tiles with radio control remote detonators. The MEK dissolved Jones' brain faster than the chips of his delusion he calls the "loaded gun".
	Last edited by beachnut; 6th June 2009 at 08:12 PM.

6th June 2009, 07:55 PM	#5
UNLoVedRebel Hard Knocks Doctorate Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: School of Hard Knocks Posts: 5,507	god damn is there anything funnier than a beachnut post?
	__________________ "All the Officialiers here typically have rancid alien avatars or else some kind of violent military-type avatar. Once again affirming my contention that 9/11 Officialiers are the most violent, murderous, group of people in the United States. Both statistically confirmed, but also anecdotally affirmed in almost every case of active pro-Officialers." - FloydGoethe

6th June 2009, 08:05 PM	#6
ElMondoHummus 0.25 short of being half-witted Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole Posts: 11,938	Originally Posted by UNLoVedRebel god damn is there anything funnier than a beachnut post? Ultima1's posts... but that's unintentional comedy.
	__________________ must take this very carefully....booze is wise men's drink..... -pillory "... I'm quite willing to have everyone use my rejection of the 9/11 conspiracy theory as a basis for assessing my intelligence, judgment, and trustworthiness" -Prof. Ann Althouse

6th June 2009, 08:59 PM	#7
dropzone Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 1,666	Originally Posted by UNLoVedRebel god damn is there anything funnier than a beachnut post? Here, at least, you are being unfair. He has this right: MEK actually is NOT good for you. Fairly bad, in fact. Not as bad as methyl ethyl ketone peroxide, which will do you serious harm, but bad. How the use of MEK, a common, but far from universal, solvent might prove the use of a thermite paint is nonsensical. Beachnut done good here. To answer leftysergeant's question, I offer this: Originally Posted by "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butanone"[/quote MEK dissolves many substances and is used as a solvent in processes involving gums, resins, cellulose acetate and nitrocellulose coatings and in vinyl films. For this reason it finds use in the manufacture of plastics, textiles, in the production of paraffin wax, and in household products such as lacquer, varnishes, paint remover, a denaturing agent for denatured alcohol, glues, and as a cleaning agent. MEK is also used in dry erase markers as the solvent of the erasable dye. . I don't see latex paint, for instance, on that list, but that is a total red herring. The paint is largely irrelevant, as is a suggestion that, being insoluble, the paint was unusual. Thermite is a mixture of various inorganic substances. It's vehicle, the paint, is is only important in how it supports the flame. A nonflammable paint, UNLIKE one soluble in MEK, would not work well.

6th June 2009, 09:39 PM	#8
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	I think that the one with zinc in it was the most resistant of Jones' chips to MEK. That would be from the columns. The other chips could come from any number of other painted steel surfaces, including some office furnishings. How does MEK work on epoxy?

6th June 2009, 10:00 PM	#9
UNLoVedRebel Hard Knocks Doctorate Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: School of Hard Knocks Posts: 5,507	Originally Posted by dropzone Here, at least, you are being unfair. He has this right: MEK actually is NOT good for you. Fairly bad, in fact. Not as bad as methyl ethyl ketone peroxide, which will do you serious harm, but bad. How the use of MEK, a common, but far from universal, solvent might prove the use of a thermite paint is nonsensical. Beachnut done good here. I never said he was wrong I said he was funny.
	__________________ "All the Officialiers here typically have rancid alien avatars or else some kind of violent military-type avatar. Once again affirming my contention that 9/11 Officialiers are the most violent, murderous, group of people in the United States. Both statistically confirmed, but also anecdotally affirmed in almost every case of active pro-Officialers." - FloydGoethe

6th June 2009, 11:07 PM	#10
alienentity Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Somewhere between Here and There Posts: 4,240	Originally Posted by leftysergeant Inm looking at the Jones paper on his paint chips, it is mentioned that some of them seem impervious or only partially soluble in MEK, and this is used as proof that they are thermite. It seems to me that nothing will dissollve every know kind of paint. Am I wrong on this? What sorts of paint vehicles or binders would resist MEK? Jones mentioned that he bought the MEK himself at a hardware store. You'd have to contact the manufacturer's to get more info on the chemical properties of their various paints I think. Nobody from the 9/11 'truth' movement, nor other skeptics seems to have done much work in that area. I for one would be very interested to know what their chemists would have to say about the red chips. Jones himself is not a chemist, nor is he a qualified forensic criminal investigator, nor did he or his team bother to hire any such people that I know of. I think Kevin Ryan has a chemistry degree, but for some reason he doesn't seem bothered that two of the chips produced >4.0 kJ/G, which makes the chips unlikely to be thermite, doesn't it? Even though I don't have all the info I'd like regarding the chips, I don't think Jones et al. are very competent forensic investigators. They seem more like a gaggle of science geeks with an axe to grind than real investigators. But that's just me.

7th June 2009, 03:07 AM	#11
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	Originally Posted by alienentity Even though I don't have all the info I'd like regarding the chips, I don't think Jones et al. are very competent forensic investigators. They seem more like a gaggle of science geeks with an axe to grind than real investigators. But that's just me. I have some forensic training related to thermite and fire scenes and I don't think it is just you who feel that way about how Jonesie handles evidence.I laughed my butt off at the way he handled his little blob of slag that someone sent him from someplace when he gave his big YouTubed talk in Boston. He put on a rubber glove, reached into the sandwich bag that contained the slag drop, held it up, then put it in his unprotected hand. Somebody a couple sandwiches short of a picnic?
	Last edited by leftysergeant; 7th June 2009 at 03:08 AM. Reason: typos

7th June 2009, 07:39 PM	#12
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,090	Lots and lots of things won't dissolve in MEK. Saying that something does not dissolve in MEK is only one point of data in figuring out what that substance is. But as he keeps his samples entirely to himself, he can fabricate any data he wishes about them. So the minute he releases samples with a verifiable chain of custody to a reputable lab, that is when we can either verify or refute anything he claims. Until then, he is just jerking people around and enjoying his dime-store power trip.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

8th June 2009, 05:15 AM	#13
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Spanaway WA Posts: 18,613	It occurs to me that he cannot be the only person in the world keeping dust samples from that day. Has anybody seen any articles on the dust that included piuctures of the sorts of particles they found? There had to have been tons of that stuff all over manhattan. There is no way you bang that much steel and concrete together and not create a blizzard of paint chips.

8th June 2009, 05:23 AM	#14
ElMondoHummus 0.25 short of being half-witted Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole Posts: 11,938	Originally Posted by leftysergeant It occurs to me that he cannot be the only person in the world keeping dust samples from that day. Has anybody seen any articles on the dust that included piuctures of the sorts of particles they found? There had to have been tons of that stuff all over manhattan. There is no way you bang that much steel and concrete together and not create a blizzard of paint chips. Yeah. Dr. Greening cited four references back in 2007. Originally Posted by Apollo20 1. H. A. Lowers et al. “Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust.” USGS Open-File Report 2005-1165, (2005) 2. Various authors: “U.S. EPA Response to the Peer Review of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Final Report on the World Trade Center Dust Screening Study.” Page 28, (December 2006) 3. R. J. Lee et al. “Damage Assessment 130 Liberty Street Property: WTC Dust Signature Report on Composition and Morphology.” Issued December 2003. 4. S. R. Badger et al. “World Trade Center Particulate Contamination Signature Based on Dust Composition and Morphology.” Microscopy and Microanalysis 10 (Supplement 2), 948, (2004). Now, I haven't done anything more than leaf through pages of the first and third references, but those studies are available.
	__________________ must take this very carefully....booze is wise men's drink..... -pillory "... I'm quite willing to have everyone use my rejection of the 9/11 conspiracy theory as a basis for assessing my intelligence, judgment, and trustworthiness" -Prof. Ann Althouse

8th June 2009, 05:30 AM	#15
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,090	I'll say right here that I will be absolutely amazed if the dust he has actually came from the source he claims. I am absolutely certain he cannot prove chain of custody. I am absolutely certain he cannot prove no contamination. And I am absolutely certain that a competent lab would find that what he has is something different from what he says he has.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!