Geisbert and Jahrling directly state that they SAW the silica. Although AFIP don’t actually say the precise words “we SAW the silica” it is impossible to measure EDX signals without also recording the SEM image - so clearly they also SAW the additive. But since they didn’t actually write “we saw the silica on the SEM picture” that allows you to claim they didn’t see it - an argument akin to saying - “how should I believe you when you write it was a hot day when you didn’t actually write that it was day and not night?”
Another expert said he saw a brown ring - demolishing your “nobody said they SAW any additive” immediately.
At least have the courage to tell the truth. Lying about the FACTS only exposes the weakness of your arguments.
Pretending the AFIP article says something different than it actually says is another example of your twisted beliefs. The AFIP Newsletter seems to truly terrify you - which speaks volumes about your agenda.
Try looking at the FACTS.
Then why don't you give us the actual quotes? Why do you quote Richard Preston's description of how they saw "goop" and "fried egg gunk" and claim it MEANS they saw a silica coating?
It does NOT mean that. It means they saw something and didn't know what it was. They had to go to AFIP to try to determine what it was.
It is scientifically absurd to believe that they saw silica oozing out of a spore when they heated the spore in an electron beam -- particularly when that spore was killed by dipping it in CHEMICALS prior to putting it into the TEM.
What kind of fantasy causes you to believe that silica can be absorbed INTO a spore and ooze out of the spore when heated?
Pretending the AFIP article says something different than it actually says is another example of your twisted beliefs.
Any claim that the AFIP article says they saw a coating on the Daschle spores is a lie. Pretending the AFIP article says something different than it actually says is another example of your twisted beliefs.
it is impossible to measure EDX signals without also recording the SEM image
Right. And they SAW no SILICA COATING because others looking at the spores SAW NO SILICA COATING, plus AFIP makes no CLAIM of seeing any silica coating. They don't even say they SAW any additives. In fact they say just the opposite:
“Ft Detrick sought our assistance to determine the specific components of the anthrax found in the Daschle letter,” said Florabel G. Mullick, MD, ScD, SES, AFIP Principal Deputy Director and department chair. AFIP experts utilized an energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer (an instrument used to detect the presence of otherwise-unseen chemicals through characteristic wavelengths of X-ray light) to confirm the previously unidentifiable substance as silica.
Your facts are not facts. They are your beliefs based upon your distorting of the facts.