All the links open new windows. (Or at least should)

http://chronicle.com/free/v 52/i42/42a01001.htm

http://newsnet.byu.edu/stor y.cfm/57724

http://www.deseretnews.com/ article/1,5143,645199800,00 .html

http://www.deseretnews.com/ article/1,5143,645201360,00 .html

http://www.deseretnews.com/ article/1,5143,650200587,00 .html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/ news/article-403757/Fury-ac ademics-claim-9-11-inside-j ob.html

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148 &sid=476951

A correction of sorts; NIST investigators never tested for the kinds of explosives used since there was no evidence of explosives being used at all. Typically, explosive use is obvious upon visual inspection and the tests are to figure out exactly what kind had been used.

Now onto a short review of the new paper put forward. I will type things as i read them.

The dust samples seem to be taken from citizens living in the area, and then given to this group six years later. The dust is magnetic in nature. The dust is very small, chip shaped, between .2 and 3 mm in width and 10 to 100 micros thick. Scanned by an electron microscope. Scanned by a calorimeter to test for heat flow. Two layers to the chips, one red, one grey. Grey layer is of high iron and oxygen (rust) content and a little carbon. Red layers are the same with the addition of aluminum and silicon and higher amount of carbon.

Chips all ignited in the range of 779F - 815F. Of the four samples analyzed, yields are estimated at 1.5, 3, 6, 7.5 kJ/g. Afterwords microspheres of iron and silcon were observed. The paper continues to test these chips against paint chips for reasons i can not determine. The paper mentions a video clip of the test of ignition but the link appears to be broken. 

The paper begins to go into speculation about how such a product could have been applied to a structure. 

I have a few issues with the paper. Firstly, the samples were taken from citizens of New York six years after the fact. To say that the validity of the samples is questionable is an understatement. Secondly, they test the "9/11 chips" against paint chips. I would be testing them against things I think they may actually be. Thirdly, they claim such a product could be spread safely onto a surface with the application of a gel. Whether or not this gel has to be spread onto the actual beams of a building or if the drywall or cement will do is not mentioned. This is one of the sources stated in the paper.

http://awards.lanl.gov/PDFf iles/Super-Thermite_Electri c_Matches_2003.pdf

To me that is a joke. Its more of an ad then an actual source. In fact a lot of the sources for the paper come from the people involved with this paper. Sometimes even worse, just linking to 9/11 conspiracy sites that have little or no scientific merit. In one of the video sources, Jones mentions that he can make a thermate that matches what they found in the chips very easily.

http://video.google.com/vid eoplay?docid=19574908670303 16250

Timestamp 40:24

I think this is enough for now.