Originally Posted by ergo
I think RJ Lee or his staff shot something from the hip that isn't quite thought through. So in that sense, yes, I think to some extent they "made up" a "vivid story". It ain't totally wrong in describing some of the conditions and that these might add
somewhat to the level of microspheres commonly and expectedly found in the dust, but leaving the impression this is the
explanation sine qua non
wasn't wise - all in my opinion.
If you want to disagree and rather believe that RJ Lee did not
"make up" a "vivid story", in other words told a true, factual and significant story, well, that is your prerogative.
RJ Lee certainly understand that iron-rich microspheres are abundant. common an expected in most kind of ashes, including those from building fires
, and they certainly understand well that the WTC was an extreme case of such fires, resulting in very high amounts of ashes with significant amounts of these things so common in such ashes.
 The McCrone Particla Atlas, Volume III, Edition Two (Ann Arbor Science Publishers, 1973), which is probably the
standard reference for any scientist who wishes to identify the origin of dust particles, shows fractions of various types of ashes on pages 775 to 780. Of the 18 examples presented there, more than half have spheres specifically pointed out, 13 are dominated by Al, Si and Fe (this is mostly scanning a variety of particles shown in the SEM images; O and C were not measured with the 1973 equipment).