View Single Post
Old 30th January 2008, 10:51 AM   #96
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,425
This dancing around about thermite residues in the WTC dust samples is really pathetic!

Sure, Jones et al. do NOT mention thermite in their new paper, but Jones has spent the last two years talking about thermite/thermate at the WTC, so it is interesting that it is NOT mentioned in his latest paper.

Does this mean Jones no longer considers thermite/thermate was used to bring down the towers, or is he just "playing it safe" in his new paper? I suspect the latter, and I also suspect that the thermite, (or thermate!), theory will soon resurface......

But consider this: Jones' last public presentation, in Boston just before Christmas, included spectra of microspheres in the WTC dust and spectra of thermite residues prepared by Jones himself. And in Boston Jones claimed that the WTC microspheres and his thermite residues had essentially the same composition and both contained Si. But Jones was careful to say therMITE in his Boston talk, not his old favorite therMATE. Why? Could it be because at that time he was not seeing S in his spectra.

Now, in his new paper, Jones presents three spectra of WTC dust microspheres: one with no S, one with 0.2 at. % S and one with 3.6 at. % S. I call that "covering the bases."

But, as I said before, Jones' thermite/thermate theory is effectively debunked by the great variety of spectra of iron-rich microspheres in the WTC dust. This PROVES the spheres came from MANY different sources. If some of these sources were present BEFORE 9/11, e.g. in construction debris from welding and cutting operations, Jones needs to show us how he can distinguish between such particles and particles produced in the WTC fires. If he cannot do this, his high temperatures mean NOTHING!

Last edited by Apollo20; 30th January 2008 at 10:55 AM.
Apollo20 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top