It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
Really, are you that clueless? They were continuting to develope new ways to identify the remains.
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
They were continuting to develope new ways to identify the remains. Not all the remains had been identified. THAT is why they were attempting to develop new ways to identify the DNA that hadn't already been identified.
Originally posted by gavron Yep, you are correct. They were able to identify almost all of the Pentagon victims, and many of the over location victims using standard testing/DNA testing. !
Due to the nature of the World Trade Center disaster, it quickly became evident that traditional methods for performing DNA typing were not likely to be fully successful in identifying all of the recovered remains. Traditional DNA ID methods depend on the presence of long, intact segments of DNA in order to accurately type the sample. The DNA in many of the samples recovered in this situation were so fragmented that these standard methods were ineffective.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Then why did the head of DNA testing ask NIST to do new tests if they could identify most of the victims using standard testing?
Originally posted by exponent
It appears your quote is referring to DNA at the WTC site, which underwent a significant amount more trauma than the DNA at The Pentagon.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
If the fire was hot enouh to destroy the plane it would have aslo destroyed the DNA.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Then why did the head of DNA testing ask NIST to do new tests if they could identify most of the victims using standard testing?
Due to the nature of the World Trade Center disaster, it quickly became evident that traditional methods for performing DNA typing were not likely to be fully successful in identifying all of the recovered remains. Traditional DNA ID methods depend on the presence of long, intact segments of DNA in order to accurately type the sample. The DNA in many of the samples recovered in this situation were so fragmented that these standard methods were ineffective.
Originally posted by exponent
Can you cite for this? House fires regularly exceed the melting point of aluminium but DNA remains. Flesh tends to char rather than to melt.
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
THATS why they wanted to create better testing.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
But we are not talking about a house fire are we?
We are talking about a fire hot enough to destroy what was left of the plane (according to the official story).
Originally posted by gavron
So, it wasnt a typical office fire then? You seem to state it was just a typical office fire in countless threads.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Now AT THE PENTAGON if the fire was hot enough to destroy the plane then it would have also made the DNA not testable for DNA testing in 2001. Which was why NIST was asked to come up with new testing.
Originally posted by exponent
Why? Flesh contains a lot of water, and Aluminium will melt at a little over 600C. This is very typical fire temperatures. I suspect the WTC quote was referring more to physical trauma than to fire damage.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Well even with basic research you will find 1 main point. HEAT DESTROYS DNA.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Well even with basic research you will find 1 main point. HEAT DESTROYS DNA.
Originally posted by exponent You have presented no evidence to support this, and considering DNA was recovered from all 3 sites on 911, seems utterly unsupported anyway.
.
Originally posted by gavron
They ignore evidence like the photos of some of the victims, or portions of victims