Replies

"But they did NOT say the spores were coated."

They said silica was a key component. And the Science article provides a theory that the way the key component is applied is by having a coating of silcia nanoparticles. That theory was accepted by all of the reviwers (and I believe some of the reviwers were scientists who had FIRST HAND access to ALL of the analysis). How do you explain this? Do you have a different theory? Are you saying silcia could be a key component WITHOUT being a coating? If that is your theory, then you need to provide a detailed scientific explanation for what precisely the silica did. There is alreay a detailed explantion for what silcia would do AS A COATING. That theory has now been accepted.

What is your theory on how the silica was a key component? How come you know this and none of these scientists know it? Are you going to tell us what your silica theory is, or is it a secret?

If you you're not going to disclose your detailed silcia theory (and remember - it has to expalin why the silcia causes the spores to float and it is NOT allowed to be a coating) - then we will have to assume you are spouting utter nonsense.

Of course, it would help if you published your theory in a peer-reviwed journal - or even had a real scientist endorse your theory. Why don't you try writing to a scientist and ask him to endorse your "silica - key-component-but-not-a-coating" theory. Are you afraid he might laugh too hard at it?

And why do you keep dodging my question about Meselson? Do you or do you not have full confidence in his opinions concerning weaponized anthrax? Bear in mind that he thought, for fifteen years, that 100 inhalational anthrax cases were actually gastrointestinal fatalities caused by eating contaminated meat.

Are you going to tell us what your silica theory is, or is it a secret?

I don't have a "silica theory". I'm just weighing the evidence. Statements from top experts on weaponize anthrax - Meselson and Alibek - say that the spores were not coated. They cite other possible reasons for the detected presence of silica or silicon. Examples: Something natural occurring as suggested by the 1980 study of Bacillus cereus. The use of some silicon product in the drying process that left a residue. Some silicon material in some aspect of the growth medium or the refining process. I've also talked with an expert who says:

"Many pharmaceuticals and polishing compounds are Silicon Dioxide (SiO2). A bulk analysis of supposed Anthracis spores and/or rods would obviously show Silicon. Furthermore, against what background medium was the analysis performed? My specimens are typically on a small Silicon chip. So, trying to analyze a 0.3u-2um spore on a Silicon die is a rather waste of time."

There seem to be many possible explanations besides a coating.

Ed www.anthraxinvestigation.com