[Closed]Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center

Status
Not open for further replies.
bill smith said:
I think it's fair to say that nano technology did not exist in 1971 . So the paint that was used was not a nano product. The substance that professor Jones nd his team of eight scientists have just brought to light IS a nano compound and is very likely to be thermite as he claims. Their conclusions are being confirmed by other scientists reproducing their resuts sucessfully.
Click to expand...
Nano - really - Bill you don't even know what nano means with regard to technology. Bill show me where there are materials of a diameter less than 100 nm in Jones' data - Jones hasn't found anything nano.

Mu, that's this symbol here µ when combined with metre m, µm mean micron. Not nano. Say it slowly, MyyyKrron, no not moron, Micron. Now click the link at see what it means - that means paying attention and reading for more than 30 seconds without thinking about nano-noonoo- nonsense, comprende?

Either talk about the data or ask good questions - are won't bother with the rest.

And yes I do have a SEM photo of sub-micron Kaolinite too :D
 
Sunstealer said:
Nano - really - Bill you don't even know what nano means with regard to technology. Bill show me where there are materials of a diameter less than 100 nm in Jones' data - Jones hasn't found anything nano.

Mu, that's this symbol here µ when combined with metre m, µm mean micron. Not nano. Say it slowly, MyyyKrron, no not moron, Micron. Now click the link at see what it means - that means paying attention and reading for more than 30 seconds without thinking about nano-noonoo- nonsense, comprende?

Either talk about the data or ask good questions - are won't bother with the rest.

And yes I do have a SEM photo of sub-micron Kaolinite too :D
Click to expand...

Does the Journal of Chemical Physics have a short article submission process where a quick takedown of this article could be published, Sunstealer?
 
The drank the kool-aid Jones followers need no evidence just his word alone. With no evidence of thermite on the WTC steel these faithful few sally out with renewed vigor of hearsay, lies and fantasy. Fight on with nothing new and winning in their own minds. What is their story, the SIOP for this new “Loaded Gun” stuff?

Who did it?
How did they do it?
Why is there no thermite evidence on the steel?
Why does the stuff Jones has look a lot like burnt dust from any old fire?
Why can I find chips just like Jones’ chips in my burn pile in my back yard?

Why is there no SIOP in Jones’ fantasy?

Who believes the thermite in the ceiling tiles endorsed by Jones found in the Hoffman delusion?



 
Last edited:
bofors said:
You do not care if your Kaolinite / Tnemec (or whatever) hypothesis is true? Is that what you are saying?
Click to expand...
Reading comprehension is not your forte is it? I have shown that there is a very good explanation for the material in the red and gray layers - I have backed that up with data that is as good as you'll get. You will either understand it, not understand it, ask good questions and have it explained or you''l write BS like this. Now what's it to be? It's easier to put you on ignore.

bofors said:
If not who is going to produce some Kaolinite / Tnemec (or whatever) "red chips" and perform the DSC experiments on them required? Popular Mechanics?
Click to expand...
Another one who doesn't understand that you don't need to do lots of experiments and such in order to analyse data that is currently published and show that the conclusion published in the paper is wrong. Any more of this kind of rubbish and it's onto the ignore list.

If Jones had bothered to do things properly and have several chips analysed using XRD (Pdf) or equivalent - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_crystallography, then we would know EXACTLY what the materials are.
 
For those of you getting hung up on the "nano-engineered" canard, let me offer a counter-example. Activated charcoal is a "nano-engineered" substance -- one that has been manufactured for thousands of years, and refined to near current levels of precision in the 1700's.

While the substances Dr. Jones discusses contain small particles, those same substances are not precision-engineered and therefore do not qualify as "nanotech." For instance, the energy output of his samples varies by roughly a full order of magnitude. This is not the hallmark of a special-purpose application incendiary or explosive. If the production varied that much, the mythical saboteurs would have no choice but to plan their demolition using the lower bound on energy, which means using about ten times as much of the stuff as would be needed were the quality control a bit better. Nobody would be stupid enough to do this, not even the Truth Movement.

Maybe in time, those of you following this paper blindly will begin to understand why we all find it so funny.
 
Last edited:
boloboffin said:
Does the Journal of Chemical Physics have a short article submission process where a quick takedown of this article could be published, Sunstealer?
Click to expand...

Great idea. Make sure to include the following:

(1) Evidence that Kaolinite / Tnemec "red chips" under go a thermite-like reaction at about 430oC.

(2) Photomicrographs of iron-rich microsphere produced by Kaolinite / Tnemec "red chips".
 
boloboffin said:
Does the Journal of Chemical Physics have a short article submission process where a quick takedown of this article could be published, Sunstealer?
Click to expand...
I don't know. The thing is reputable Journals have space constraints and linking to a paper that isn't peer reviewed and considering the subject material the likely hood it will get filed in the round cabinet.
 
Sunstealer said:
Nano - really - Bill you don't even know what nano means with regard to technology. Bill show me where there are materials of a diameter less than 100 nm in Jones' data - Jones hasn't found anything nano.

Mu, that's this symbol here µ when combined with metre m, µm mean micron. Not nano. Say it slowly, MyyyKrron, no not moron, Micron. Now click the link at see what it means - that means paying attention and reading for more than 30 seconds without thinking about nano-noonoo- nonsense, comprende?

Either talk about the data or ask good questions - are won't bother with the rest.

And yes I do have a SEM photo of sub-micron Kaolinite too :D
Click to expand...

I will when you show me particles in paint that come within the same range. (100 nm IS nano..um is micro or 1000 x nano)
 
bill smith said:
I will when you show me particles in paint that come within the same range. (100 nm IS nano..um is micro or 1000 x nano)
Click to expand...
Sorry I don't understand your post. Yes nanotechnology is <100nm. I told you that. I've asked you several times before what the size was in order to consider something nano-sized. All you've done is pick up that titbit and then I can't understand what you are on about.

Just click on my sig, open Jones' paper and do the comparisons, it's only pattern spotting, you don't need to trawl google images for SEM photos of paint. You've asked good questions in the past - don't go the way of Bofors.

Also note R.Mackey's post #1766 - that's just as valid.
 
Last edited:
JamesB said:
Heh, Harritt in that Dutch TV interview estimates they used as much as 100 tons of nanothermite in the buildings. 100 tons, yeah, nobody is going to notice that. This is what a mere 10 tons of conventional explosives looks like.

ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7tG7keSe-0
Click to expand...

Nah....you're getting mixed up....that was Danish TV.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o&eurl=http://www.911blogger.com/&feature=player_embedded

This week the Dutch TV ran the show that found OBL not guilty of 9/11.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr...sion/news/e3ie9cf6d4fe9496d052885db4114f0c656
 
Playing with Platelets

There may be other options. E.g., you can buy silicon in nano-scale platelet form.


You can deposit Al onto silicon via sputtering.
( and perhaps other methods of physical vapor deposition? not sure if this means elemental Al )


As for the motivation to do so, I have absolutely no idea about cost (and absolutely no intention to research it), but aside from that, referring to "MODELING THE MELT DISPERSION MECHANISM FOR NANOPARTICLE COMBUSTION"

we see that:

nanometer scale spherical particles in nanothermite are 20-120 nm

oxide shell thickness is 1-8 nm

consider middling values of 50 nm and 4 nm, about 26% of your particle is taken up in the oxide shell. You are also wasting the space in between spheres.

Perhaps platelets made on nano-silicon platelet substrates help you pack more elemental Al, per unit volume. Especially if Al-oxide shells are "sticky" as they form Al nanothermite in the normal, spherical form, thus leaving huge pockets of empty space to fill. (BTW, IIRC, the Ph.D. thesis I linked to gets into compressing nanopowders. If not that one, then definitely the master's thesis mentioned above.)

If it does this, and saves you money, that would be a double motivation for doing so.

Once again, I remind everybody that I am not a domain expert. Thus, my sputtering speculations may sputter!
 
Sunstealer said:
Onto the ignore you go. You were warned, but you had to be stupid didn't you? Now I understand the earlier comments about you in this thread.
Click to expand...

Oh no... I am being ignored the JREF circus ringmaster of moment. Whatever...

Anyone with serious materials analysis experience can see that your Kaolinite/Tnemec theory in nothing more than a weak hypothesis produced by rank amateur.

All you have done here that actually has any scientific merit is shown that Kaolinite has a similar EDS spectra to the red side of the chips. But the EDS spectra you showed is missing the peaks for iron observed on the red side, and of course, pure Kaolinite is white.

Kaolinite is just a cheap "filler" material. In no way would the presence of Kaolinite in the red chips mean that they are not thermite-like composites. You can add dirt or talc or sawdust or any other "filler" to thermite and guess what? It can still be a thermite pyrotechnic. So, the red side of the chips may very well be some Kaolinite/Fe2O3 composite. You assertion of the presence of Kaolinite in no way disproves the co-existence thermite.

Otherwise, the SEM data you have posted for Kaolinite is obviously not a good match for the red side of the chips and you do not even seem to have a theory for the grey side of the chips.

Finally, you have failed to post any DSC data for Kaolinite, any images of iron-rich microspheres produced by heating any kind of Kaolinite composite, nor have you even posited any such chemical reaction for Kaolinite:

Al2Si2O5(OH)4 + ???? => Fe (how?)
(Kaolinite)
 
Last edited:
bofors said:
Oh no... I am being ignored the JREF circus ringmaster of moment.

Whatever...

Anyone with serious materials analysis experience can see that your Kaolinite/Tnemec theory in nothing more than a weak hypothesis produced by rank amateur.

All you have done here is shown that Kaolinite has similar EDS spectra to the red side of the chips. But the EDS spectra you showed is missing the peaks for iron observed on the red side, and of course, pure Kaolinite is white.

Kaolinite is just a cheap "filler" material. In no way would the presence of Kaolinite in the red chips mean that they are not thermite-like composites. You can add dirt or talc or sawdust or any other "filler" to thermite and guess what? It is still a thermite pyrotechnic. So, the red side of the chips may very well be some Kaolinite/Fe2O3 composite.

Otherwise, the SEM data you have posted for Kaolinite obviously is not a good match for the red side of the chips and you do not even seem to a theory for the grey side of the chips.

Finally, you have fail to post any DSC data for Kaolinite, any images of iron-rich microspheres produced by heating any kind of Kaolinite composite nor have even posited such chemical reaction:

Al2Si2O5(OH)4 => Fe (how?)
(Kaolinite)
Click to expand...

Sunstealer, as you can see, another tactic of the 9/11 conspiracy advocate is to be offensive until you put them on ignore, and then they can start pretending you've run from actual issues. I've reproduced this post so you can see what bofors thinks his aces are, now that you're not looking.
 
bofors said:
Oh no... I am being ignored by the JREF circus ringmaster of moment. Whatever...

Anyone with serious materials analysis experience can see that your Kaolinite/Tnemec theory in nothing more than a weak hypothesis produced by a rank amateur.
Click to expand...

And truthers bash us for the ad hom attacks. Hypocrites all.
 
bill smith said:
I think it's fair to say that nano technology did not exist in 1971 . So the paint that was used was not a nano product. The substance that professor Jones nd his team of eight scientists have just brought to light IS a nano compound and is very likely to be thermite as he claims. Their conclusions are being confirmed by other scientists reproducing their results sucessfully.
Click to expand...

Nano-technology may be a recent development but nanoparticles have been used for thousands of years. They were used by 9th century Mesopotamian artisans to achieve a glittering effect on the surface of pots.

Fail.
 
Wow. As usual, we have somebody who has no idea what he is talking about calling one who does a 'rank amateur'.

The "truth" movement ROCKS!
 
All he has to do is go back and and read the thread or click on it in my sig - he can then read about the "gray layer" and how it's iron oxide 9from steel) and most likely of the magnetite variety. A late comer criticizing a post on a 40th page without checking to see if there already is a idea about what the gray layer is. We've been over that a few times - maghemite, hemetite (haematite), magnetite are all words he can use to search the thread and find posts on it.

He could also look at the EDS data from both papers too.

Funny thing is if you not on Jones' paper he has a sample on page 28 - Fig 31. That has a "gray layer" in it. Guess what's in the "gray layer"? Only Carbon and Oxygen. Now go back and look at the gray layers of the other chips - Fig 6. What's missing?

When there is an answer I'll then draw the conclusion - it's probably obvious to most, but lets see. Lets do some proper analysis.
 
Playing with Platelets, part 2

metamars said:
There may be other options. E.g., you can buy silicon in nano-scale platelet form.


You can deposit Al onto silicon via sputtering.
( and perhaps other methods of physical vapor deposition? not sure if this means elemental Al )


As for the motivation to do so, I have absolutely no idea about cost (and absolutely no intention to research it), but aside from that, referring to "MODELING THE MELT DISPERSION MECHANISM FOR NANOPARTICLE COMBUSTION"
Click to expand...

Another speculation as to platelets vs. spherical:

The MODELING thesis says:

A combination of increased oxide shell formation temperature and increased oxide shell strength could be used to maximize the flame velocity in particles with increased relative particle size.
Click to expand...

Besides packing more Al per unit volume, a platelet morphology, by minimizing the ratio of Al to Al oxide, might result in not just more energy, but relatively less power (i.e., a slower reaction). For one thing, I expect the oxide layer to break near the platelet edges (this is an uneducated guess, I hasten to add), and to do so under less pressure than would be required to break an oxide layer of equal thickness in the spherical case. * This would tend to negate the dispersion melt mechanism as a contributor to flame propagation. Hence, your nanothermite will have it's power profile shifted back towards that of the micron-thermite type, while simultaneously generating more total energy.


If you look at Fig. 1 of MODELING, you can see that Aluminothermics already have dramatically superior energy density (per unit mass) than high explosives, but the energy density, per unit volume, of Al/Fe2O3 is only about 40% greater than high explosives. You can't change the inherent mass of reactants, but you can fiddle with the density. If you simultaneously increase the energy per unit volume, while slowing down the reaction, you can end up with a hotter, but quieter "explosion".


* from MODELING:
The pressure inside the Al particle causes tensile hoop stress (σh) in the oxide shell. Due to the small thickness of the oxide shell (1 – 8 nm), it is almost defect free and therefore its ultimate strength (σu) approaches the theoretical maximum strength of alumina (σth) estimated at 11.33 GPa [11].
Click to expand...
 
Sparky said:
Nano-technology may be a recent development but nanoparticles have been used for thousands of years. They were used by 9th century Mesopotamian artisans to achieve a glittering effect on the surface of pots.

Fail.
Click to expand...

Sure....stained glass was made the same way..not that they knew the technicalities of what they were doing- just that it worked.

But this line from the Jones paper indicates something else altogether.

''After igniting several red/gray chips in a DSC run to
700 °C, we found numerous iron-rich spheres and
spheroids in the residue''

Man this stuff is Thermite....get used to it, 9/11 was an inside job.
 
bill smith said:
Nah....you're getting mixed up....that was Danish TV.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o&eurl=http://www.911blogger.com/&feature=player_embedded

This week the Dutch TV ran the show that found OBL not guilty of 9/11.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr...sion/news/e3ie9cf6d4fe9496d052885db4114f0c656
Click to expand...

It was Danish TV indeed, in a sort of British Newsnight equivalent. The ´troofers´ are understandably jubilant:

http://www.911blogger.com/node/19805#comment

This is a real first MSM breakthrough, not counting the prime time live japanese coverage of a parlamentarian stating his doubts about the OCT in parlament.

Beginning of the end of the OCT indeed.
 
bill smith said:
Man this stuff is Thermite....get used to it, 9/11 was an inside job.
Click to expand...

why..because YOU say so? its that simple huh?

Look out everyone!! Bill Smith says 9-11 was an Inside Job!! We better all cancel our JREF accounts, the mystery has been solved.

=)
 
Last edited:
Hey. Bill Smith says it's an inside job. Run for the hills folks, our days are numbered!
 
bill smith said:
Sure....stained glass was made the same way..not that they knew the technicalities of what they were doing- just that it worked.

But this line from the Jones paper indicates something else altogether.

''After igniting several red/gray chips in a DSC run to 700 °C, we found numerous iron-rich spheres and spheroids in the residue''

Man this stuff is Thermite....get used to it, 9/11 was an inside job.
Click to expand...
Nope - 700°C is higher than the melting point of Aluminium - why aren't any of their samples showing globules of aluminium?

We know that independent analysis confirmed iron-rich spheres. Jones' paper proves that a source of iron-rich spheres is burnt paint.
 
bill smith said:
''After igniting several red/gray chips in a DSC run to
700 °C, we found numerous iron-rich spheres and
spheroids in the residue''

Man this stuff is Thermite....get used to it, 9/11 was an inside job.
Click to expand...


Care to explain this huge logic leap?
 
Sunstealer said:
Nope - 700°C is higher than the melting point of Aluminium - why aren't any of their samples showing globules of aluminium?

We know that independent analysis confirmed iron-rich spheres. Jones' paper proves that a source of iron-rich spheres is burnt paint.
Click to expand...

Dude, let it go. Bill Smith just said it was an inside job. We should take his word for it.

:D
 
bill smith said:
I can hardly believe that most guys of your persuasion still say there is no need for a new and independent 9/11 investigation.
Click to expand...

what.....lol...cough

what does that exactly mean?

Are you actually claiming that Jews should think that 9-11 was an inside job..because we are Jews? lolololol

oy vey.

your hole is now 9 feet deeper. I suggest you stick to the topic and not derail the thread into ethnic insults.
 
Last edited:
Sunstealer said:
Nope - 700°C is higher than the melting point of Aluminium - why aren't any of their samples showing globules of aluminium?

We know that independent analysis confirmed iron-rich spheres. Jones' paper proves that a source of iron-rich spheres is burnt paint.
Click to expand...

If I was you I'd be nore concerned about the presence of melted steel than the absence of aluminium.

As a scientist I don't think you can be serious about the burnt paint thing.
 
Last edited:
parky76 said:
what.....lol...cough

what does that exactly mean?

Are you actually claiming that Jews should think that 9-11 was an inside job..because we are Jews? lolololol

oy vey.

your hole is now 9 feet deeper. I suggest you stick to the topic and not derail the thread into ethnic insults.
Click to expand...

Lol. I am surprised. With a certain little moustache under your nose you might look a litle like somebody German who didn't like Jews. No offence intended btw.
 
bill smith said:
Lol. I am surprised. With a certain little moustache under your nose you might look a litle like somebody German who didn't like Jews. No offence intended btw.
Click to expand...

No, I have green/blue eyes. Hitler had brown eyes.

Nice ad hom by the way. Learn to attack the message, not the messenger.
 
But what did you mean by "people of your persuasion"?

Were you talking about skeptics here in general, or Parky specifically?
 
bofors said:
Oh no... I am being ignored the JREF circus ringmaster of moment. Whatever...

Anyone with serious materials analysis experience can see that your Kaolinite/Tnemec theory in nothing more than a weak hypothesis produced by rank amateur.
Click to expand...


Hmm.. for any lurker it is quite clear the weak hypotheses and rank amateurism is on the side of the table where you and your fellow clueless, delusional dolts (*) are sitting, Czar of the dolts Jones included.

WTC was brought down by demolition. It's true, True, TRUE. Nothing could be more TRUE. And we have da Prooof. Layered stuff, Fe2O3, Al(something).. See ABSOLUTE proof.. termite! Proof.. and no it's not paint from NYU Stadium. ABSOLUTE SCIENTIFIC Proof, we'll tell yu!... Give me a break.

(*) And no, this is not an Ad Hominem, it explains a large volume of empirical data. It is therefore a scientifically correct conclusion
 
Pardalis said:
But what did you mean by "people of your persuasion"?

Were you talking about skeptics here in general, or Parky specifically?
Click to expand...

he was talking about me. he is saying that a good Jew would be a Truther-Jew.

then he said I almost look like Hitler. nice huh?

:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom