ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Laclede primer , nanothermite , Niels Harrit , paint chips , tnemec , wtc

Reply
Old 22nd July 2011, 05:38 AM   #41
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
The heat released by 2 of the paint chips was higher than that of perfect thermite, so if that is the benchmark, it wasn't "quite low". "Vigorous", as I understand it, does not only refer to the heat release (energy density) but also, or more so, to the speed of reaction, which is power per mass unit, and indeed the DSC trace charts show that the paint reacted with much higher power peaks (Fig. 19: range from about 10 to 24 W/g) than the nano-thermite referenced from the Tillotson paper (Fig. 29: about 5 W/g).
So if the authors describe the reaction of the chips as "vigorous", I am not inclined to deny that.

You are of course right with all the rest: The heat release in a range from 1.5 to 7.5 kJ/g, and the ignition point around 430°C aren't untypical for a number of materials where organics and inert stuff are mixed. I once calculated that humans, despite consisting to 65% of inert water, have a net energy density around 8-10 kJ/g, so average human tissue would release mire energy in a DSC than those paint chips did.


But all this detracts from the question if anyone has made any progress towards identifying the particular paint that the chips consisted of.
You are right concerning the "quite low released heat", sorry for this and apologies to SkepticOfLies. I was trying to say that the released heat was nothing extraordinary and even burning of organic binder present in mere ca 10-20 % concentration in the chips could produce the same heat as pure thermite. (Ergh... it seems to be almost impossible to completely avoid any mention of nanothermite even here, this strange sticky stuff is everywhere...)
Ivan Kminek 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
Old 22nd July 2011, 05:46 AM   #42
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I disagree. I see no reason not to assume good faith about what the paper tells us about the chain of custody, and given the fact that we have four samples from four locations, and in each they found very similar such chips, I am satisfied that that dust did in fact originate from the WTC collapses.
Why would you assume good faith in a known liar? Even if we grant that the samples came from NY they were still in his sole possession so tampering has to be considered as a possibility.


ETA: Is there any proof he even did the experiments?

His whole edifice seems to be standing on sand.

Last edited by tsig; 22nd July 2011 at 05:49 AM.
tsig 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
Old 22nd July 2011, 05:56 AM   #43
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,703
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Yes, but we have some good evidence, provided by Sunsteeler via Steven Jones, that the 4 chips a-d in the Harrit paper are not that primer. Here write-down of the argument:
http://oystein-debate.blogspot.com/2...paint-not.html
Summary:
- The chips a-d are different from the chip they soaked with MEK to allegedly show "elemantal" Al
- Steven Jones, in a video presentation, showed an XEDS spectrum for red WTC primer (Tnemec, I believe)
- That spectrum was very neat fit with the MEK-soaked chip from the Harrit paper
-> The MEK-soaked chip was WTC1+2 structural steel primer, but the 4 other chips a-d were not.
OK, fair enough. But if we are looking for a source of chips a-d, why restrict ourselves to the three WTC towers?

There were several other buildings damaged that day. We could be chasing ghosts. Who's to say the a-d chips didn't come from one of the older buildings that were damaged in the collapse?

We're kind of shooting in the dark at a target 5 miles away. It seems we only know, at this point, that the chips didn't come from the WTC beam primer...and that's pretty much it. There are potentially hundreds of possiblities from here.
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth 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
Old 22nd July 2011, 07:23 AM   #44
Animal
Master Poster
 
Animal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 2,094
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
Now I am begining to wonder whether the floor elements would have been painted with the same primer as the columns. Were they manufactered in the same facility?
Typically no, long span joist manufacturing is a different animal than "red iron" fabrication
Animal 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
Old 22nd July 2011, 07:33 AM   #45
bill smith
Philosopher
 
bill smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,408
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Exactly. Simply reading the OP would have sufficed to figure that out. I even bolded it:
Sort of Harrit without Harrit and Jones without Jones if I'm not wrong.. This would be more suited to an email exhange rather than a public forum I think.
__________________
*Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together
*A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough
* To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'
bill smith 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
Old 22nd July 2011, 07:41 AM   #46
bill smith
Philosopher
 
bill smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,408
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
You are right concerning the "quite low released heat", sorry for this and apologies to SkepticOfLies. I was trying to say that the released heat was nothing extraordinary and even burning of organic binder present in mere ca 10-20 % concentration in the chips could produce the same heat as pure thermite. (Ergh... it seems to be almost impossible to completely avoid any mention of nanothermite even here, this strange sticky stuff is everywhere...)
Even on this thread it is essential that the existence of nanothermite is accepted.
__________________
*Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together
*A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough
* To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'
bill smith 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
Old 22nd July 2011, 07:52 AM   #47
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,703
Originally Posted by bill smith View Post
Even on this thread it is essential that the existence of nanothermite is accepted.
Unless you can prove (in another thread) that nanothermite could be a viable form of building demolition, no it doesn't.
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth 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
Old 22nd July 2011, 07:59 AM   #48
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by bill smith View Post
Even on this thread it is essential that the existence of nanothermite is accepted.
In this thread is even more essential that the existence of paints consisting of iron oxide and aluminosilicates as key ingredients is also accepted. (I do not deny the existence of n......te)

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 22nd July 2011 at 08:02 AM.
Ivan Kminek 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
Old 22nd July 2011, 08:52 AM   #49
bill smith
Philosopher
 
bill smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,408
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
In this thread is even more essential that the existence of paints consisting of iron oxide and aluminosilicates as key ingredients is also accepted. (I do not deny the existence of n......te)
This is a solid foundation for the discussion. I also accept that several of the ingedients are common to both primer paint and ....the other substance.
__________________
*Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together
*A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough
* To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'
bill smith 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
Old 22nd July 2011, 09:00 AM   #50
WTC Dust
Illuminator
 
WTC Dust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,529
Originally Posted by bill smith View Post
I have a six minute clip of Dr.Steven Jones describing the red-grey chips. It might help to focus minds here. I will post it if you think it helps. If not I won't.
I thought I detected a thermite-sniffer in Bill. Gross.
__________________
The World Trade Center did not collapse. It was turned into dust while it was standing there, and then the dust fell to the ground.
WTC Dust 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
Old 22nd July 2011, 09:04 AM   #51
bill smith
Philosopher
 
bill smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,408
Originally Posted by WTC Dust View Post
I thought I detected a thermite-sniffer in Bill. Gross.
It's a working theory Dr. Blevins. Feel free to educate me otherwise on your thread as I ask.
__________________
*Think WTC7 - You cannot make the four corners of a table fall together unless you cut the four legs together
*A kitchen table judgement on a world scale is enough
* To Citizens: 'There comes a time when silence is betrayal'
bill smith 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
Old 22nd July 2011, 04:04 PM   #52
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Originally Posted by Animal View Post
Typically no, long span joist manufacturing is a different animal than "red iron" fabrication
Then we can probably also expectr a different paint.

The columns seem to have fallen with most of the paint intact. The perimmeter columns were shoved out of the way by the debris plume, and most of the heavy debris fell outside the cores and then the cores just kind of buckled or shook themselves to pieces. Not much going on to grind paint into such small pieces.

The floor slabs were another matter entirely. They were basicly run through a multi-bladed blender going down the confines of the space betweeen core and perimeter columns.

Was there zinc in any of the red-over-grey chips? (Just sitting here thinking how I would design a floor unit.) Were the floor pans galvanized?

If it can be confirmed that the floor uniits had a different primer, I think we have an explanation for why most of the chips were absolutely identical to paint, but were not Tnemec.
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.
leftysergeant 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
Old 23rd July 2011, 01:24 AM   #53
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,158
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
Why would you assume good faith in a known liar? Even if we grant that the samples came from NY they were still in his sole possession so tampering has to be considered as a possibility.


ETA: Is there any proof he even did the experiments?

His whole edifice seems to be standing on sand.
I think the proof lies in the fact that they published data that unequivocally DISproves thermite and supports a strong case for paint.
Had they tampered with the dust, or lied about the data, they would have introduced real thermite into the sample or forged the data such that it would actually support their conclusion.

The fact that the data does not at all support their conclusions is a strong hint that the data is real and honest.
Oystein 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
Old 23rd July 2011, 02:55 AM   #54
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,158
Originally Posted by Sabretooth View Post
OK, fair enough. But if we are looking for a source of chips a-d, why restrict ourselves to the three WTC towers?

There were several other buildings damaged that day. We could be chasing ghosts. Who's to say the a-d chips didn't come from one of the older buildings that were damaged in the collapse?

We're kind of shooting in the dark at a target 5 miles away. It seems we only know, at this point, that the chips didn't come from the WTC beam primer...and that's pretty much it. There are potentially hundreds of possiblities from here.
Oh I agree that there's no easy and obvious target.
However, as the towers added 267 complete stories worth of dust to the environment all over Lower Manhatten, all the other buildings taken together at most 5% of that, as they didn't collapse quite as dynamically. So yes, we have to consider the possibility that these paint chips didn't come from the towers, however they most likely did.
Oystein 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
Old 23rd July 2011, 03:04 AM   #55
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,158
Originally Posted by bill smith View Post
Sort of Harrit without Harrit and Jones without Jones if I'm not wrong..
You are right. We don't need these blokes. They had 2 years time to clean up their act and revoke their erroneous conclusions. The fact they didn't shows they are either incompetent or dishonest. In either case, we're better off without them.

Originally Posted by bill smith View Post
This would be more suited to an email exhange rather than a public forum I think.
With whom??

Originally Posted by bill smith View Post
Even on this thread it is essential that the existence of nanothermite is accepted.
Huh? No one doubts that nanothermite exists. We have seen Tillotson's work and characterisation of it. Harrit's red-gray chips had different characteristics, some of which are totally impossible or nonsensical for n-t, so they are almost certainly not n-t. It is essential on this thread that you accept that.
Oystein 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
Old 23rd July 2011, 03:10 AM   #56
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,158
Originally Posted by Sabretooth View Post
Unless you can prove (in another thread) that nanothermite could be a viable form of building demolition, no it doesn't.
It could. It has been done with regular thermite before about 75 years ago (if your definition of "building" allows for steel lattice towers with no walls and floors), so there is no reason to assume that nanothermite could not, in theory, do the same.
That is however irrelevant to the case at hand. I wish you would care to address the OP instead replying to some derail with less than convincing arguments.
What is relevant here is whether or not the red layer of the chips is paint, and if so, which paint it is.

Even if one were to accept the possibility that the chips are nano-thermite, it wouldn't matter for this thread and be off-topic, as I have specifically excluded that possibility from the debate.
Oystein 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
Old 23rd July 2011, 03:32 AM   #57
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,158
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
...
The columns seem to have fallen with most of the paint intact. The perimmeter columns were shoved out of the way by the debris plume, and most of the heavy debris fell outside the cores and then the cores just kind of buckled or shook themselves to pieces. Not much going on to grind paint into such small pieces.

The floor slabs were another matter entirely. They were basicly run through a multi-bladed blender going down the confines of the space betweeen core and perimeter columns.
Good thinking!
I think it wasn't as black and white as you make it to be - quite a number of core column pieces got involved in the big grind, and certainly some of the perimeter, but I can see how there would be differences in the relative amounts of scraped-off paint. Then again, the different physical properties of the paints themselves would make a difference.

Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
Was there zinc in any of the red-over-grey chips?
No zinc. The XEDS spectra of both the gray (fig. 6) and red (fig 7) layer are flat around 8.64keV (K-alpha level of zinc) and just above 1 keV (the several L-levels).

Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
(Just sitting here thinking how I would design a floor unit.) Were the floor pans galvanized?
Don't know.
What would you conclude or predict wrt to our paint chips if they were?

Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
If it can be confirmed that the floor uniits had a different primer, I think we have an explanation for why most of the chips were absolutely identical to paint, but were not Tnemec.
Well, that would still be conjecture and inconclusive. Better fto find out which specific paint formulations were used, and what their properties are.
Oystein 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
Old 23rd July 2011, 06:47 AM   #58
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Good thinking!
I think it wasn't as black and white as you make it to be - quite a number of core column pieces got involved in the big grind, and certainly some of the perimeter, but I can see how there would be differences in the relative amounts of scraped-off paint. Then again, the different physical properties of the paints themselves would make a difference.
You might also consider the surface areas of paint exposed to impact, abrasion and erosion in the floor trusses as opposed to the columns. I am kind of thinking that the surface area of the floors far exceded the surface areas of the outer bank of core columns or the perimeter columns, maybe even both.

Core and perimeter columns were also somewhat shielded by drywall. the floor assemblies went right into the blender. A couple good whacks and the foam and concrete would be parting ways with the trusses and floor pans. Now every moving object that they meet starts chipping paint.



Quote:
No zinc. The XEDS spectra of both the gray (fig. 6) and red (fig 7) layer are flat around 8.64keV (K-alpha level of zinc) and just above 1 keV (the several L-levels).
I have no bloody clue what that means, but i will take your word that it excludes zinc.

Quote:
Don't know.
What would you conclude or predict wrt to our paint chips if they were?
I was of the opinion that, were the floor pans galvinized before painting, some of the zinc would peel off with the paint. Apparently a moot point.

Quote:
Well, that would still be conjecture and inconclusive. Better fto find out which specific paint formulations were used, and what their properties are.
By all means, we would need to positively match the paint on the trusses with the non-Tnemec chips. If they are a match, the case, as regards CD by thermite, thermate or super-dooper-nano-banano therm*te is dismissed.
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.
leftysergeant 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
Old 23rd July 2011, 07:17 AM   #59
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,703
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
It could. It has been done with regular thermite before about 75 years ago (if your definition of "building" allows for steel lattice towers with no walls and floors), so there is no reason to assume that nanothermite could not, in theory, do the same.
That is however irrelevant to the case at hand. I wish you would care to address the OP instead replying to some derail with less than convincing arguments.
What is relevant here is whether or not the red layer of the chips is paint, and if so, which paint it is.

Even if one were to accept the possibility that the chips are nano-thermite, it wouldn't matter for this thread and be off-topic, as I have specifically excluded that possibility from the debate.
I wasn't attempting a derail...my intentions were actually keep the thread on track.

Thermite, in any form, has to be shown to have a plausible or valid reason for being there. The idea that a few stray chips of red/gray paint, showing up in the immense aftermath of such a colossal event, are thermite in a demolition form? That line of reasoning is ridiculous at best...IMO anyway.

We are speculating the origin of the paint in the thread, are we not? With so many other completely viable options, we are far removed from even a remote possibility that thermite, in any form, is the source of that material.

Again, no harm to the thread intended. Maybe I should have made my point more clear from the start.
__________________
--------------------------------------
Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit!

Sabretooth 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
Old 23rd July 2011, 07:55 AM   #60
Seymour Butz
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 869
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post

The columns seem to have fallen with most of the paint intact.

This is an interesting point.

If we determine that only 10% of the paint was scraped off during the collapse, and Jones says that there was a hundred tons of his "thermite" in the dust, then it would follow that there must have been a thousand tons of his gook applied.

At that point, the ridiculousness of his assertions become apparent to all but the idiotic.
Seymour Butz 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
Old 23rd July 2011, 11:27 AM   #61
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,158
Originally Posted by Seymour Butz View Post
This is an interesting point.

If we determine that only 10% of the paint was scraped off during the collapse, and Jones says that there was a hundred tons of his "thermite" in the dust, then it would follow that there must have been a thousand tons of his gook applied.

At that point, the ridiculousness of his assertions become apparent to all but the idiotic.
Not sure if you paraphrase Jones correctly there, but suppose you do, it was a non-starter to begin with. I seem to recall Harrit making statements along the same line, speculating about really serious amounts of unreacted nano-thermite. One would have to ask how they managed at the same time to use such high-tech material and rig the building with perferct stealth both before and during the collapse, and bring them down wonderfully, but fail to ignite tens or hundreds of tons!? How much more reacted thermite would they have to assume, or what level incompetence in burning the stuff?

However, the same kind of problem of course arises with paint - there wasn't hundreds of tons of paint in the buildung (can someone crunch some numbers and confirm this?), and much less than that in the dust.

I prefer to think that they greatly overestimate the occurance of that material. There is no mention of relative or absolute amounts of chippy material in the Harrit paper itself.
Oystein 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
Old 23rd July 2011, 11:56 AM   #62
Jrrarglblarg
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 12,673
Quote:
Core and perimeter columns were also somewhat shielded by drywall. the floor assemblies went right into the blender. A couple good whacks and the foam and concrete would be parting ways with the trusses and floor pans. Now every moving object that they meet starts chipping paint.

. . . to say nothing of the paint that flakes off metal when you start twisting it.
Jrrarglblarg 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
Old 23rd July 2011, 08:25 PM   #63
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon View Post
. . . to say nothing of the paint that flakes off metal when you start twisting it.
And, of all the components of the building, the floor elements would have been the most prone to twisting during the collapses.

We need to know what sort of paint was on them.

The preponderance of the paint chips in the dust samples may be partly the result of the rates at which they settled out of the clouds of dust.

The drywall and concrete dust would have been lighter, thus more widely-dispersed. The microspherules of iron-rich material and the paint chips would have been significantly more dense, thus settling out much closer to the site.

We have, thus, no real clue as to how much of this stuff was in the debris over-all, unless someone sorted that out from other sites. Jones apparently had access to samples only from two locations, down-stream of the turbidity flow from the collapse and at a fairly short distance.

There is no way on earth to reach a useful conclusion about how much of this stuff there was.
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.
leftysergeant 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
Old 24th July 2011, 04:02 AM   #64
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,158
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
And, of all the components of the building, the floor elements would have been the most prone to twisting during the collapses.

We need to know what sort of paint was on them.
Yep ^^ And now we need a volunteer who bugs the companies that built the floors. ANd those who did renovations. Oh my.

Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
The preponderance of the paint chips in the dust samples may be partly the result of the rates at which they settled out of the clouds of dust.

The drywall and concrete dust would have been lighter, thus more widely-dispersed. The microspherules of iron-rich material and the paint chips would have been significantly more dense, thus settling out much closer to the site.

We have, thus, no real clue as to how much of this stuff was in the debris over-all, unless someone sorted that out from other sites.
You are somewhat speculating here on what materials would drift farther, and I don't believe you just because it sounds plausible. However it is established fact that dust tends to sort itself as long as it flows.

Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
Jones apparently had access to samples only from two locations, down-stream of the turbidity flow from the collapse and at a fairly short distance.
No, the Harrit-paper analysed four samples from four locations. Two were pretty close to each other, a couple of thousand feet north (upwind) from GZ, one was just across the street from GZ to the south, and one was at a larger distance out east: Brooklyn Bridge.

But I know of no detailed tallying of the chip count at each individual location. Since we just said that dust tends to sort itself, we'd expect different relative amounts.

Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
There is no way on earth to reach a useful conclusion about how much of this stuff there was.
It is not highly important anyway for the task at hand; we just want to know what it is, not how much of it there was.
Oystein 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
Old 24th July 2011, 05:15 AM   #65
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
It is not highly important anyway for the task at hand; we just want to know what it is, not how much of it there was.
How much is probably more important to someone critiquing Harrit on the amount that was in the towers.
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.
leftysergeant 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
Old 24th July 2011, 11:53 PM   #66
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
To leftysergeant and Oystein

Thanks, leftysergeant, for interesting ideas.
Concerning alleged second red primer used for protection of the huge amount of floor steel elements, could the NIST report omit such an important "detail" (since they consider and discuss only this red Tnemec)?
Concerning amount of paint: let suppose that hundred ton of this paint was used (similar amount as this of alleged unburned n....t). Let say this paint had a density around 2 g/cm3 and it was applied in 0.05 mm thick layer (there is a mention in NIST report that tested Tnemec layers were 0.025 mm (1 mil) thick, so I am roughly keeping this figure for the second primer). Than, 1 m2 of such paint layer weighs 0.1 kg, one ton of paint is good for 10 000 m2 and one hundred ton can cover an area about 1 million m2. This looks as a quite large area, but one single floor of WTC1 or 2 (outside of the building core) had area (roughly) 7500 m2. Still, it seems to be possible the one hundred ton of such paint is enough for floors of both (all three) towers. (Sorry for the uncertain inputs, such a layer thickness, of these "calculations".)
Concerning composition: I tend to consider the second dust analysis perfomed by French truther here www(dot)darksideofgravity(dot)com/marseille_gb.pdf as a good and honest. This truther found mostly red chips which were red on both sides (no gray layer) and, according to XEDS, they contained not only C, Al, Si, Fe and O, but also Ca, S, K. So we could consider also these elements as contributing to the composition of these rather mysterious red little things.
Concerning variable composition of dust at various places, this is a quite natural presumption and I found, e.g., interesting maps of various iron compounds occurrence here pubs(dot)usgs(dot)gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/feats-1um.html.
Concerning origin of chips (a) to (d) (and “French chips”as well), could not they be simply red particles of some iron-rich mineral (present in the concrete or gypsum)? Even iron ores contain aluminosilicates (i.e. Al and Si) and carbonates (i.e. C). I know it is not very probable but it could perhaps explain the high concentration of red chips (if it was really so high).

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 25th July 2011 at 01:15 AM.
Ivan Kminek 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
Old 25th July 2011, 06:43 AM   #67
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,158
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
Thanks, leftysergeant, for interesting ideas.
Concerning alleged second red primer used for protection of the huge amount of floor steel elements, could the NIST report omit such an important "detail" (since they consider and discuss only this red Tnemec)?
I must admit I have never looked at the NIST report in search of what they havre to say about primer and Tnemec, so I don't know. Guess I'll have to do that sometime soon...

Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
Concerning amount of paint: let suppose that hundred ton of this paint was used (similar amount as this of alleged unburned n....t). Let say this paint had a density around 2 g/cm3 and it was applied in 0.05 mm thick layer (there is a mention in NIST report that tested Tnemec layers were 0.025 mm (1 mil) thick, so I am roughly keeping this figure for the second primer). Than, 1 m2 of such paint layer weighs 0.1 kg, one ton of paint is good for 10 000 m2 and one hundred ton can cover an area about 1 million m2. This looks as a quite large area, but one single floor of WTC1 or 2 (outside of the building core) had area (roughly) 7500 m2. Still, it seems to be possible the one hundred ton of such paint is enough for floors of both (all three) towers. (Sorry for the uncertain inputs, such a layer thickness, of these "calculations".)
Yes, this is exactly the kind of calculation that ought to be done - if it was relevant
Each steel element has at least four (e.g. box columns) long sides. An I-shaped beam would have even more surface per mass; each floor truss consists of two horizontal beams/girders and a number of diagonal braces. Then there are the corrugated metal decks, having more surface area than the office floors themselves. Were these painted with primer?
Etc.

I think it's not unreasonable that each floor had steel surfaces covered with primer that were 2 to several times the floor area. Office space per floor was less than you say (twin towers were 63x63m, that is 3969m2), but let's say 10,000m2 of painted steel per floor isn't outlandish, and that would work out to more than 1 million m2 per tower. One hundred tons of primer per twin tower seems to be about the right order of magnitude!
Of this, however, only a small percentage would wind up in the dust.

Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
Concerning composition: I tend to consider the second dust analysis perfomed by French truther here www(dot)darksideofgravity(dot)com/marseille_gb.pdf as a good and honest.
Another paper I was so far too lazy to study.
http://www.darksideofgravity.com/marseille_gb.pdf
The author, Frédéric Henry-Couannier, has posted here at JREF as member HenryCo.

Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
This truther found mostly red chips which were red on both sides (no gray layer) and, according to XEDS, they contained not only C, Al, Si, Fe and O, but also Ca, S, K. So we could consider also these elements as contributing to the composition of these rather mysterious red little things.
Concerning variable composition of dust at various places, this is a quite natural presumption and I found, e.g., interesting maps of various iron compounds occurrence here pubs(dot)usgs(dot)gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/feats-1um.html.
(no comment)

Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
Concerning origin of chips (a) to (d) (and “French chips”as well), could not they be simply red particles of some iron-rich mineral (present in the concrete or gypsum)? Even iron ores contain aluminosilicates (i.e. Al and Si) and carbonates (i.e. C). I know it is not very probable but it could perhaps explain the high concentration of red chips (if it was really so high).
Don't think they come from any concrete, due to their shape (they are indeed flat layers, and I agree with Harrit's assessment that "“nice adherent film” fit very well with our observations of the red-chips", and most certainly not from gypsum, as hematite would not be expected there.
Oystein 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
Old 25th July 2011, 08:46 AM   #68
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I must admit I have never looked at the NIST report in search of what they havre to say about primer and Tnemec, so I don't know. Guess I'll have to do that sometime soon...
We should simply make some inquiry to NIST. Or... you should do this since you are a respected debunker

Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Yes, this is exactly the kind of calculation that ought to be done - if it was relevant
Each steel element has at least four (e.g. box columns) long sides. An I-shaped beam would have even more surface per mass; each floor truss consists of two horizontal beams/girders and a number of diagonal braces. Then there are the corrugated metal decks, having more surface area than the office floors themselves. Were these painted with primer?
Etc.

I think it's not unreasonable that each floor had steel surfaces covered with primer that were 2 to several times the floor area. Office space per floor was less than you say (twin towers were 63x63m, that is 3969m2), but let's say 10,000m2 of painted steel per floor isn't outlandish, and that would work out to more than 1 million m2 per tower. One hundred tons of primer per twin tower seems to be about the right order of magnitude!
Of this, however, only a small percentage would wind up in the dust.
Exactly: no exact calculation can give us really good clue if we have no idea of how much of red paint (material) was stripped out from the steel during collapses.

Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Another paper I was so far too lazy to study.
wwwdot)darksideofgravity(dot)com/marseille_gb.pdf[/url]
The author, Frédéric Henry-Couannier, has posted here at JREF as member HenryCo.

(no comment)
Look at these pictures of red chips on HenriCo's web www(dot)darksideofgravity(dot)com/redreds.pdf . Many of them (although unburned) seem to contain "shiny microspheres" typical (according to Harrit et al.) of burned t...t. What does it mean? Could it be a sign that some chemical reaction took place in these particles during fires and collapse and can be "semi-burned" (whether they are paint or whatever)? Btw, just today I found this video of Kevin Ryan about an experiment with nano...thing www(dot)youtube(dot)com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=O66UyGNrmSI. Here, the burned nano...t looks roughly similar to HenriCo's chips. (Sorry to mention this here, but it is a quite new thing). I do not think that this resemblance means something crucial (keeping in mind that even chips (a) to (e) had the same appearence, but different origin). Looking at this video I thought: 1) This stuff burned nicely but was not able even to melt that tiny glass beaker. How it could melt WTC columns? 2) After burning, the thermal glow of nano...t was diminishing in several seconds; how it could remain very hot for days or weeks even in the debris? (I know very well, we should move this matter to the relevant forum...)

Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Don't think they come from any concrete, due to their shape (they are indeed flat layers, and I agree with Harrit's assessment that "“nice adherent film” fit very well with our observations of the red-chips", and most certainly not from gypsum, as hematite would not be expected there.
OK, chips are mostly flat. But even some particles of mineral can be flat in this tiny scale, consider just mica or vermiculite as typical examples. I am not sure about concrete and gypsum either, but there was a lot of these stuffs in WTC, and you can not exclude the minor presence of iron minerals in them. But this was simply my "nice try", nothing else

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 25th July 2011 at 09:54 AM.
Ivan Kminek 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
Old 25th July 2011, 12:12 PM   #69
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
I don't think there's any chain of custody, so what's to prevent him from testing anything he wanted and claiming it came from NY.
They all passed through Jones hands before being tested. He could have adulterated them with anything and we would never know.

Now if he had acted professionally and had an independent person pick up and distribute the samples along with similar dust as a control and then had them tested by several independent labs in a double blind test..............

Instead they carried out a series of incompetent tests on material of now worthless provenance, deliberately misinterpreted the results and had them published in a vanity journal...........typical twoofer fail.
sheeplesnshills 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
Old 25th July 2011, 12:27 PM   #70
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I think the proof lies in the fact that they published data that unequivocally DISproves thermite and supports a strong case for paint.
Had they tampered with the dust, or lied about the data, they would have introduced real thermite into the sample or forged the data such that it would actually support their conclusion.

The fact that the data does not at all support their conclusions is a strong hint that the data is real and honest.
Real, possibly, honest no. They knew their findings were bogus and hence the vanity press journal. They made conclusions for which they had no data to support.
sheeplesnshills 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
Old 25th July 2011, 10:45 PM   #71
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
(I am not allowed to edit my own posts now, what is wrong?) Concerning my last contribution, sorry for OT with n...t experiment. I am also not sure if HenryCo's findings on chips can be taken as kind of proof, since they were not published in any journal; but it seems to be probable, that such chips were really found in HenryCo's dust sample.
Ivan Kminek 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
Old 26th July 2011, 02:40 AM   #72
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,158
Originally Posted by sheeplesnshills View Post
Real, possibly, honest no. They knew their findings were bogus and hence the vanity press journal. They made conclusions for which they had no data to support.
No disagreement: I agree fully that the conclusions are dishonest and bogus. But the data is not. At worst, the data has been derived at partially by incompetent handling. For example, not seeing that chips a-d are different from the MEK-soaked chip, and thus treating them incorrectly as the same, can well be explained by incompetence, so there is no need to ascribe it to ill intent.

Remember, we were discussing chain of custody. There is no need at this time to have ill faith in what they report about the origin, also no need to have ill faith in their treatment of the samples. The paper and conclusions fail easily and fully without such unwarranted assumptions.
Oystein 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
Old 26th July 2011, 02:46 AM   #73
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,158
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
(I am not allowed to edit my own posts now, what is wrong?)
Nothing wrong. It's a feature that applies to long-time members as well as to newbies like yourself: You can edit your post only for a short while after posting. I never paid attention to how long after that would be. Something like 15 or 30 minutes. This allows you to correct obvious mistakes of formatting, spelling, or to add a thought you forgot. Or delete things you regret immediately after you wrote them.
However it is good that post are in general stored for posteriority as they were when written.

Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
Concerning my last contribution, sorry for OT with n...t experiment. I am also not sure if HenryCo's findings on chips can be taken as kind of proof, since they were not published in any journal; but it seems to be probable, that such chips were really found in HenryCo's dust sample.
Harrit's findings as well weren't published in any real journal
I think we learn from the Harrit paper that you can find chips in the dust that look similar, but are different. Harrit found at least 2 different varieties. HenryCo may have found the same, or still different ones.
Nevertheless, HenryCo's contribution can be used for what it's worth, even if not published. Just take it with the usual grain of salt.
Oystein 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
Old 26th July 2011, 09:16 AM   #74
SkepticOfLies
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 62
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
incompetent or dishonest.
All truthers fit that description.
SkepticOfLies 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
Old 27th July 2011, 12:18 AM   #75
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
linseed oil and other crosslinkable/polymerizable binders

Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
We have several properties of that paint:
  1. XEDS spectrum
  2. Micrographs
  3. DSC traces
  4. Specific resistivity = roughly 10 ohm*m
  5. No significant dissolution, only swelling, in MEK

I can't assess how reliable the last two items are. #4 suffered from small sample size, and the result may be dominated, to the point of being worthless, by the admitted contamination with gray material. #5 is somewhat dubious as we cannot know which of the at least two different kinds of red material they tested with MEK.

However, in principle, with what we already know about the paint (some ingredients, pigment size, ...), it might be possible to find candidate paints from catalogues, and then test their resistivity and dissolubility in MEK.
I would like to note that if, e.g., linseed oil was used as a binder in any "red material", we can not expect that would stay soluble, it polymerizes when in contact with air (whether for purpose or not). I remember btw that in old times we used linseed oil together with a hemp rope for steel plumbing connections in our house. After several years, we were not able to release these connections in any way since linseed oil was already extremely rigid and insoluble. This is also observed with other such seed oils and of course it is a normal/desired property of many synthetic crosslinkable/polymerizable resins/lacquers as, e.g., epoxide and polyester ones. So we can not expect that the binder stays soluble for years. At best, only some swelling can be observed. Also I should note that MEK is not a very good solvent of such resins with many polar groups. Dimethylformamide (and other strongly polar aprotic solvents) is apparently a better choice.

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 27th July 2011 at 12:30 AM.
Ivan Kminek 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
Old 27th July 2011, 04:25 AM   #76
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
I use linseed oil to form a refractory shell on my cast thermite charges. That way, you can duck tape them to a vertical column.
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.
leftysergeant 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
Old 27th July 2011, 06:56 PM   #77
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,158
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
I would like to note that if, e.g., linseed oil was used as a binder in any "red material", we can not expect that would stay soluble, it polymerizes when in contact with air (whether for purpose or not). I remember btw that in old times we used linseed oil together with a hemp rope for steel plumbing connections in our house. After several years, we were not able to release these connections in any way since linseed oil was already extremely rigid and insoluble. This is also observed with other such seed oils and of course it is a normal/desired property of many synthetic crosslinkable/polymerizable resins/lacquers as, e.g., epoxide and polyester ones. So we can not expect that the binder stays soluble for years. At best, only some swelling can be observed. Also I should note that MEK is not a very good solvent of such resins with many polar groups. Dimethylformamide (and other strongly polar aprotic solvents) is apparently a better choice.
# oysteinbookmark
(This means that your post contains information that I find valuable for my personal interests, and that I have not seen before. I write that word under quotes so I can search for the posts I consider the most valuable to me.)
Oystein 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
Old 27th July 2011, 11:21 PM   #78
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
I use linseed oil to form a refractory shell on my cast thermite charges. That way, you can duck tape them to a vertical column.
? (Sorry, I have no idea what are you talking about here, I am a newcomer)
Ivan Kminek 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
Old 28th July 2011, 12:19 AM   #79
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
# oysteinbookmark
(This means that your post contains information that I find valuable for my personal interests, and that I have not seen before. I write that word under quotes so I can search for the posts I consider the most valuable to me.)
Thanks, Oystein To be more specific: Binders as seed oils (without special additives) are usually hardening quite slowly, during days (as all of us can observe when some used plant oil is left on a frying pan). Synthetics like epoxides, polyesters or alkyds can be hardened (crosslinked) quite rapidly, let say during minutes. But even in the cases of binders which were not intended for hardening by means of chemical crosslinking we can not exclude a very slow "post-crosslinking" and, consequently, a gradual loss of a solubility. E.g. (my experience), paints based on nitrocellulose stay soluble for many years, whereas others become insoluble.

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 28th July 2011 at 12:21 AM.
Ivan Kminek 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
Old 28th July 2011, 02:52 AM   #80
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
? (Sorry, I have no idea what are you talking about here, I am a newcomer)
I learned to make several kindsof thermite while I was in the Air Force. One form of cast thermite uses linseed oil as an inhibitor so that it can be placed against a vertical surface. It leaves an unburned shell after the reaction is complete.

THermite that contains linseed oil or any of its polymers has, in effect, become a fire-proof paint.
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.
leftysergeant 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
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:05 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.