Government testing by a military lab (air force) shows that the silicon spike results from the use of siliconizing solution used in growing the bacteria, which then can be removed from the surface by repeated centrifugation. No measurable silicon was found in the controls. Use of the siliconizing solution leads to greater concentration by dampening the vanderwaals forces according to the DARPA-funded patent which was confidential as of 9/11. When granted, the correspondence came to Ali Al-Timimi’s maildrop. He shared the maildrop with the leading anthrax scientist and former deputy USAMRIID. Ivins did not have access to the biochemistry information and the government has no theory on what might have led to a “silicon signature” in aerosolized anthrax made by him. Their data, moreover, does not support a theory of “natural variability.” It is a waste of time to use the word “weaponized” (undefined) in the debate. Or to debate whether silicon dioxide or a siliconizing solution is a sophisticated additive. The relevant scientific inquiry is whether it leads to the silicon signature and whether the silicon signature appears without it. The answer to the first question is yes. The answer to the second question is no. Dr. Michael’s data merely supports this conclusion. He offers no data that undermines it. His lab has no knowledge of or experiencing with biological processes and did not make the relevant examination that would address this. In making this argument, I am relying on the peer reviewed articles recently published by the air force lab, SEMS provided me by the lab, and the argument made by the head of the lab to me over the past months in correspondence. I myself have no scientific training and defer to the relevant experts who have done the relevant tests and who have the relevant data.
“I myself have no scientific training”
You should at least be awarded an honorary degree.
Haven’t followed this for a while. Any news come out if the stuff in the jar also had a silicon signature, or wasn’t tested at all?