Fire/Arson Investigations :  Fire/Arson Investigations The fastest message board... ever.
A place to ask questions and add to probative and informative discussions associated with the various aspects of the field of fire investigation. -- FORUM RULES---BE CIVIL AND NO NAME CALLING, NO BELITTLING, NO BERATING, NO DENIGRATING others. Postings in violation of these rules can be removed or editted to remove the offending remarks at the discretion of the moderators and/or site administrator. 
Re: ILA
Posted by: MIKE (IP Logged)
Date: May 27, 2007 01:31PM

I know several of us have used ILA with good results and at least one prominent educational organization still touts it in some of their courses. In the interest of fairness and because I don't have the background to engage in a dialog about ILA, I wrote to John and asked him about the papers that were written. I am posting his response without comment as he asked me to do:

Mike,

What is amazing is that all of these tests and articles used the outdated and obsolete formula for ILA, not the new formula. The authors don't mention that fact. One of these authors was told of the modifications and new formula before his first article was written. He was again informed, before his second article was written, but he failed to mention that fact. He also failed to mention, not just to me, but also to one of my collaborators, that he was writing a negative article about ILA. Essentially, he failed to write that he was told of the changes we had made to ILA.

The Manual of ILA clearly states that absorption is the primary function of ILA and the "indication" aspects of ILA are secondary and only good for high concentrations of ignitable liquids and not for low ppm. That is also never mentioned in any of these articles. Obviously, the "scientific" testers don't read the manual. The manual clearly states that nothing is better than a well-trained canine, but not everyone can have a dog on every fire scene, which is why ILA was developed.

I wonder how these people can present themselves as scientists when they ignore the facts and manipulate the truth. Incidentally, kitty litter acts in a hydrophilic manner, and in consideration of the fact that most fire scenes are wet, once water is absorbed, ignitable liquid residues are repelled. Duh!

For the record, I gave up on the ILA project for several reasons:

1) It has become too difficult to get the appropriate raw materials.

2) I ran out of time, money, and tolerance of mean spirited people.

3) I need to move on to other things, where creating some good may be accepted by cooperative people.

4) I can't find anyone crazy or suicidal enough to take over the project for me.

In fire investigation, we have too many people that I would describe as what comes out of the south end of a northbound chicken!

Later,

John

Mike Carlson, CFI, CFEI, CVFI, CATI, CPP,
Chicago, Il



Subject Views Written By Posted
  ILA 1721 jgmcfps 05/23/2007 06:28AM
  Re: ILA 1037 Jonathan Squires 05/23/2007 07:51AM
  Re: ILA 955 dcarpenter 05/24/2007 05:37AM
  Re: ILA 927 Gerald Hurst 05/24/2007 12:57PM
  Re: ILA 913 John J. Lentini, CFEI 05/26/2007 09:24AM
  Re: ILA 878 MIKE 05/24/2007 05:00PM
  Re: ILA 886 MIKE 05/27/2007 01:31PM
  Re: ILA 856 Gerald Hurst 05/27/2007 02:12PM
  Re: ILA 864 MIKE 05/27/2007 03:50PM


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.