New Scientific Evidence Emerges In Anthrax Case

sciencehabit writes "A Science Magazine investigation uses clues from a key document unveiled last week to reconstruct the trail that led the FBI to Bruce Ivins. Among the revelations: Anthrax fingerprinting was not critical to the investigation, as many reports have suggested. Rather, brute-force genetic sequencing, with the help of the J. Craig Venter Institute, helped crack the case. New potential motivations by Ivins are also revealed."

Comments

I like their music.

[Anonymous Coward]

Anthrax rocks are bigger than Alan Cox.

How about.....

[crhylove]

Government stages false flag terror operations, including sending Anthrax to government officials, 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7, Pentagon. Senate and Congress are scared, vote for patriot act, vote for war in Iraq, Afghanistan, vote for telecom immunity and wire tapping.

End of the Constitution

End of Democracy

Once again, fascism starts giant world war and millions die.

I'm pretty sure this recipe is vaguely familiar.

Re:Critical Analysis of Ivins investigation

[Anonymous Coward]

The FBI are such clowns. They can barely beat up a deadman, much less a live one!

Ivans

[Free the Cowards]

New potential motivations by Ivans are also revealed.

What do you mean new potential motivations? They're Ivans, they're trying to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids, they don't need additional motivations!

(P.S. the guy's name is spelled Ivins.)

Was Ivins just another anti-abortion kook?

[Anonymous Coward]

It just sounds like he had a motive.

Do you want to discuss SCIENCE?

[crhylove]

The "government" was well aware of 9/11 before it happened, because they were in charge of the entire operation. There is VAST evidence suggesting that there were tons of bombs in both of the twin towers.

If you really want to talk about science, you will not be refuting me. You will be actively refuting the 9/11 commission report, the NIST conclusions, the "official story", and all the other lies that have been propagated on a populace that does not know enough about physics, construction, media manipulation, and logic to even begin to question the "official" story.

It is a simple fact that there was THERMATE in the buildings, which is an incendiary of incredible strength, burning in an exothermic reaction hotter than the core of the sun.

It is a simple fact that all 3 WTC buildings fell at free fall speed, completely impossible WITHOUT the use of explosives and incendiaries.

Refute Steven Jones, a Mormon, and a highly respected academic. Refute the engineers that built the world trade center buildings. Refute the eye witnesses that carried wounded people out of the towers that were clearly injured by explosives.

9/11 was an inside job. Do your scientific research and refute that.

Re:Do you want to discuss SCIENCE?

[crhylove]

Actually, it's not a stretch at all. The Bush family and the Bin Laden family have been close friends and business partners for decades. That is half the point of this whole line of inquiry. Or have you not seen the footage of Bush Sr. kissing the arab dude? I'd love to be a loon and making the whole thing up, or frightened for no good reason, and the bill of rights is still safe, JFK was shot from behind, and that Diebold counts our votes. I'd like very much for all of that to be true, but unfortunately the facts surrounding the case DO NOT provide evidence for that hypothesis. Quite the contrary.

Thermate was not a mis-spell. Thermate is different than Thermite, though very similar, it has additional sulfer to speed up and increase the reaction.

It is the way buildings are currently demolished by professionals, and lends itself strongly to Occam's Razor.

Those buildings WERE NOT AIR, and they WERE NOT EMPTY. They had GIANT solid steel beams throughout their entire core. Just do the minimal of research on destruction of sky scrapers. Do even a small comparison of a few demolitions, watch those tapes, review the evidence at hand and tell me how planes melted those central steel columns when jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel that quickly or thoroughly.

Please stop parroting your idiotic philosophical ideas and re-hashed Popular Mechanics references. Read all the various reports, including the scientific peer-reviewed ones, and then draw your own fresh conclusions.

It was painfully evident and obvious that very few of the haters who are also apparently modding me down have done any research, AT ALL.

Re:Do you want to discuss SCIENCE?

[crhylove]

How about you read some. And try to give us scientific references, as that pop culture you threw at me I've read already, and was not at all impressed, though sometimes Maddox is funnier than others, and sometimes his Conservative-Colbertism is on the money. That article however is not one of them, in my opinion. I like his reviews of children's art, however. Top rate.

Now go and read, and debate this on scientific points, or STFU.

http://wtc.nist.gov/media/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf

Re:Weak Talking Points?

[ScentCone]

You think this bunch would worry about a few post office employees or mail room people dying?

No, of course not. They, personally, like it when the little guy dies horribly. They want children to starve, endangered species to become extinct, and senior citizens to have to eat dog food. They actually want those tings, as you know. It's good of you to point that out, though, just in case someone who hadn't made up their mind yet can safely settle on them as cartoon villains. Certainly they're worse, of course, than the previous "bunch," who were perfectly happy to see someone like Vince Foster "commit suicide" while their history of crooked dealings was on parade. What? That's crazy talk? Oh.