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 iron microspheres

Reply
Old 7th February 2012, 07:37 AM   #1281
Christopher7
Philosopher
 
Christopher7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
Originally Posted by 000063 View Post
Isn't it strange how he's so precise some times and maddeningly vague others?

Do you? I think not.

You're not proposing a 'state of the art' technique, you're proposing a type of demolition that was completely unprecedented, has never been repeated, and no Truther in ten years has been able to come up with a plausible and comprehensive theory for.
I'm looking at the evidence which only controlled demolition using one or more types of thermite can explain.

Enjoy your insult fest, I'm going to leave for a while.

Last edited by Christopher7; 7th February 2012 at 07:40 AM.
Christopher7 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 7th February 2012, 07:41 AM   #1282
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,724
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
I'm looking at the evidence which only controlled demolition using one or more types of thermite can explain.

Enjoy your insult fest, I'm going to leave for a while.
Or, fires and gravity....................whichever floats your boat.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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 7th February 2012, 07:42 AM   #1283
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
I'm looking at the evidence which only controlled demolition using one or more types of thermite can explain.

Enjoy your insult fest, I'm going to leave for a while.
Sure you are.
*Pats chris on the head*

Sure you are.

You're bailing because you've been asked questions, and the answers you know ruin your lies.

Since this is a method of controlled demolition that has never taken place before, or since, how can you say "only" thermite can explain?

Nobody has ever taken down a building of any size using thermite - yet its as obvious as the nose on your face that theyTM used thermite?

Lies.
NoahFence 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 7th February 2012, 07:49 AM   #1284
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
They log you out after 5 or 10 minutes with no activity. Other than that the only problem i have is with the JREFers themselves.

My thermite theories?

I'm just calling 'em as I see 'em. There was molten steel/iron in the debris pile. The folks here deny that but that's just what they do. The NYPD Museum has a gun encased in concrete that melted and flowed around everything in it's path. Iron melted and lead vaporized.

What we have here is a preponderance of evidence for temperatures far in excess of what office fires can attain, local denial notwithstanding.
And since you are not an expert witness.....how you see em is irrelevant.
You are simply wrong about the molten steel (and even if you were right you couldn't prove it in a court of law) and the "molten concrete" is just laughable, its just a silly mistake made by someone as ignorant as you (well maybe not that ignorant but you know what I mean....)
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 7th February 2012, 07:50 AM   #1285
000063
Philosopher
 
000063's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
I'm looking at the evidence which only controlled demolition using one or more types of thermite can explain.
No, you're cherry-picking evidence to support your theory, ignoring contrary evidence (such as the time it would take for thermite to cut through steel, the plumes of smoke and flame and sparks, and the lack of knowledge of the properties of nano-thermite, which is basically Unobtanium for Truthers) showing it to people, and tipping over the chessboard when they don't agree with you. For what, five years now?

Quote:
Enjoy your insult fest, I'm going to leave for a while.
Feel free. Your post is not actually a response to even a single point I've made.
000063 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 7th February 2012, 08:02 AM   #1286
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,950
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
I'm looking at the evidence which only controlled demolition using one or more types of thermite can explain.

Enjoy your insult fest, I'm going to leave for a while.
Highlighted the part that you need to work on.
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 7th February 2012, 08:02 AM   #1287
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
He makes a good case for lead as the falling metal.

ETA: If he is correct then NIST was lying about it being aluminum.
Are you confusing being mistaken for lying? Do you know the difference? If you don't then you have been "lying" in almost every post
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 7th February 2012, 08:03 AM   #1288
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,950
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
You sound like a two year old. A never ending stream of questions.
Report or put on ignore? Hmm hmm....


Goodbye, C7!
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 7th February 2012, 08:05 AM   #1289
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
When the trade center towers burned and collapsed, tons of concrete, glass, furniture, carpets, insulation, computers and paper were reduced to enormous, oxygen-poor debris piles that slowly burned until Dec. 19, 2001.
http://delta.ucdavis.edu/WTC.htm


Actually, it was the molten metal that kept the "fires" burning.
Not possible, there was no large "ingot" of previously molten metal found.
Glad however to see you have concede it was "metal" not "steel". You are learning.
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 7th February 2012, 08:10 AM   #1290
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
Considering the extreme temperatures that vaporized lead during the collapse.
Therefore implying that said "extreme" (you never did say what "extreme" was) temps were also expected.
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 7th February 2012, 08:12 AM   #1291
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
What it the thermite were IN the columns?
There would be a lot of very strange looking columns in the debris. There were none.
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 7th February 2012, 08:19 AM   #1292
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
It doesn't get into places that require excess pressure to force it in, and the amount of lead in the air was miniscule.

So where did they get samples from that were STILL hermetically sealed AFTER the event...........and 90 days of "miniscule" adds up......
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 7th February 2012, 08:21 AM   #1293
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
Do you know everything there is to know about thermite, nano-thermite and state of the art demolition techniques?
Do you? This is just an appeal to magic.
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 7th February 2012, 08:25 AM   #1294
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
It has been the biggest coverup in history. And the evidence has been seen.
and yet you can produce none that would stand up for a minute in any court. Why is that?.....could it be that you are simply Mistaken (or lying).
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 7th February 2012, 08:33 AM   #1295
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,058
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
Enjoy your insult fest, I'm going to leave for a while.
Insults notwithstanding, which are uncalled for even if richly deserved, no blaze of glory with this departure, only a fizzle, and maybe a faint "pop".
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB 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 7th February 2012, 08:34 AM   #1296
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
You sound like a two year old. A never ending stream of questions.

That how they learn, you should try it!...... and if you stop making baseless assertions then we can stop asking questions...
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 7th February 2012, 08:36 AM   #1297
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
I'm looking at the evidence which only controlled demolition using one or more types of thermite can explain.

Enjoy your insult fest, I'm going to leave for a while.


Run away little boy.....
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 7th February 2012, 09:31 AM   #1298
chrismohr
Master Poster
 
chrismohr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,080
Re Chris7: Let's give credit where credit is due. Only C7 noticed the mistake in the Chinese paper; I certainly didn't, and neither did anyone else. He's got an eagle eye and kudos to him for that.
__________________
20 videos rebutting Blueprint for Truth YouTube keyword chrismohr911 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC3JgWkNNIQ
Playlists http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
and http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...eature=viewall
WTC Dust study http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64959841/911...12webHiRes.pdf Hundreds more links and info both sides: http:www.chrismohr911.com
chrismohr 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 7th February 2012, 09:34 AM   #1299
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Re Chris7: Let's give credit where credit is due. Only C7 noticed the mistake in the Chinese paper; I certainly didn't, and neither did anyone else. He's got an eagle eye and kudos to him for that.
eh?

He'll get no credit from me. He openly mocks the deaths of 3,000 people for his own personal hobby. Its sickening, vile and obscene. I'm not going to give a known liar any leeway because he found some irrelevant tidbit in a newspaper nobody has ever heard of.
NoahFence 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 7th February 2012, 09:46 AM   #1300
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,871
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Re Chris7: Let's give credit where credit is due. Only C7 noticed the mistake in the Chinese paper; I certainly didn't, and neither did anyone else. He's got an eagle eye and kudos to him for that.
Eagle Eye miss Harrit same mistake.
Eagle Mouth silent until German Bee speak.
__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum

Last edited by BasqueArch; 7th February 2012 at 10:01 AM.
BasqueArch 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 7th February 2012, 12:06 PM   #1301
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,950
Originally Posted by BasqueArch View Post
Eagle Eye miss Harrit same mistake.
Eagle Mouth silent until German Bee speak.
In all honesty, what I described about the graph in the Harrit paper was not as mistake, only a quirk, but one that illustrates how easily editing mistakes in such graphs could occur. The one slightly compressed graph had its scale slightly compressed as well, so all was fine.
The mistake in Jones's presentation was also a very minor slip - he labelled a peak "C" that should have been "Ca" - you see what happened. And I didn't catch that slip, Sunstealer or The Almond did, many moons ago.
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 7th February 2012, 03:23 PM   #1302
000063
Philosopher
 
000063's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Insults notwithstanding, which are uncalled for even if richly deserved, no blaze of glory with this departure, only a fizzle, and maybe a faint "pop".
I'm not insulting him, I'm accusing him of intellectual dishonesty and poking specific holes in his logic. Note how he flat out ignores most of my posts over the last few pages, whether "insulting" him or not. If I have referred to him in a degrading manner, I don't think its been directed at him personally, but to other people, about him. Certainly not an insult-fest.
000063 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 7th February 2012, 05:33 PM   #1303
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,058
Originally Posted by 000063 View Post
I'm not insulting him, I'm accusing him of intellectual dishonesty and poking specific holes in his logic. Note how he flat out ignores most of my posts over the last few pages, whether "insulting" him or not. If I have referred to him in a degrading manner, I don't think its been directed at him personally, but to other people, about him. Certainly not an insult-fest.
No offense meant, I had no particular care about whom he thought had insulted.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB 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 7th February 2012, 06:06 PM   #1304
tfk
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,454
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
Oh ye of one sided imagination. What it the thermite were IN the columns?
Then there would be somewhere around 10,000 - 25,000 1 story column segments with plainly obvious, melted ends.

Number of hours that I've spent looking for them: ~4.
Number of ground zero photos that I've examined looking for melted ends: 100 - 200
Number that I've found to date: 0
___

Next baseless, erroneous speculation, please.
tfk 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 7th February 2012, 06:42 PM   #1305
Fly Poster
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 162
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
It's been a long time commin'

Using the numbers from the British solid waste plant for the amount of bottom ash and the Korean numbers for the percentage of iron:

1 metric ton = 2205 pounds in

275 kg = 606 pounds bottom ash

4.85% = 29.4 pounds of iron per metric ton of solids.

What form is that in? Is it rough or spherical?
Dunno, I am a carpenter like you, also it's not my burden of proof.
__________________
"Everyone who comes from the UK is a perp.
"I've been searching for truth since 2006... and in all of that time I've traded notes with people from around the world...

... What's interesting is that EVERY person from the UK has turned out to be a perp. Amazing. And when you visit TheFlyposter's YouTube profile page, s/he's from the UK"
Fly Poster 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 7th February 2012, 07:02 PM   #1306
Fly Poster
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 162
"1 metric ton = 2205 pounds in

275 kg = 606 pounds bottom ash

4.85% = 29.4 pounds of iron per metric ton of solids.

What form is that in? Is it rough or spherical? "


So you Haven't ruled it out then?
__________________
"Everyone who comes from the UK is a perp.
"I've been searching for truth since 2006... and in all of that time I've traded notes with people from around the world...

... What's interesting is that EVERY person from the UK has turned out to be a perp. Amazing. And when you visit TheFlyposter's YouTube profile page, s/he's from the UK"
Fly Poster 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 7th February 2012, 11:14 PM   #1307
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by chrismohr View Post
Re Chris7: Let's give credit where credit is due. Only C7 noticed the mistake in the Chinese paper; I certainly didn't, and neither did anyone else. He's got an eagle eye and kudos to him for that.
You are right and Chris7 has my respect in this matter.

Btw, using "yahooing" instead of googling, I have just found this interesting and detailed (freely available) Russian paper on ferrospheres from fly ashes ("from 14 heat and electric power plants"). I am now lazy to read this all, but in introduction, the formation of ferrospheres is described roughly as a melting of FeO-CaO-MgO-SiO2-Al2O3 complex.
Composition of spheres varied in the very wide range, see the paper.

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 8th February 2012 at 12:10 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 8th February 2012, 12:55 AM   #1308
Christopher7
Philosopher
 
Christopher7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
Originally Posted by Fly Poster View Post
"1 metric ton = 2205 pounds in

275 kg = 606 pounds bottom ash

4.85% = 29.4 pounds of iron per metric ton of solids.

What form is that in? Is it rough or spherical? "


So you Haven't ruled it out then?
No. Although solid waste is not the same as office contents, it's a better match than coal. Iron only made up ~5% of the bottom ash and from what I have read the iron may be largely combined with other elements so we need a more detailed analysis to see how much is "iron rich" and spherical.

Thanks to those who supplied data rather than childish insults and endless questions requiring speculation.

Ivan,
That paper is about coal fly ash and not really relevant to the question at hand. - Could some, most or all of the iron microspheres be from office contents burning in the fires before the collapse? An analysis of the bottom ash would give us some idea.

I have stated the case for the iron microspheres leaving with the smoke and challenged my opponents to justify their claiming they would not while saying that iron microspheres from the debris pile fires would float on the breeze.
Christopher7 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 8th February 2012, 01:09 AM   #1309
Christopher7
Philosopher
 
Christopher7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
Originally Posted by BasqueArch View Post
Eagle Eye miss Harrit same mistake.
Eagle Mouth silent until German Bee speak.
Ug! Basque man speak with sharp tong.
Christopher7 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 8th February 2012, 01:43 AM   #1310
Ivan Kminek
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
No. Although solid waste is not the same as office contents, it's a better match than coal. Iron only made up ~5% of the bottom ash and from what I have read the iron may be largely combined with other elements so we need a more detailed analysis to see how much is "iron rich" and spherical.

Thanks to those who supplied data rather than childish insults and endless questions requiring speculation.

Ivan,
That paper is about coal fly ash and not really relevant to the question at hand. - Could some, most or all of the iron microspheres be from office contents burning in the fires before the collapse? An analysis of the bottom ash would give us some idea.

I have stated the case for the iron microspheres leaving with the smoke and challenged my opponents to justify their claiming they would not while saying that iron microspheres from the debris pile fires would float on the breeze.
Chris7, using googling or "yahooing", I haven't be able so far to find anything really (closely) relevant, as for microspheres from large building/office fires etc. This is why asked Almond to provide us with some particular data/references/figures. But since he doesn't care very much about this matter, no real progress. Perhaps Myriad can also show us something (?).
But, what is really "closely relevant"? WTC fires (their initial phase) were more wild explosions than just "fires" (among others).
I think it is better to wait now for the results of the Jim Millette's study. If he finds ferrospheres in the WTC concrete, this material (fly ash in it) could be the main source of them and no real need to look elsewhere. I think

Last edited by Ivan Kminek; 8th February 2012 at 01:47 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 8th February 2012, 02:48 AM   #1311
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,950
I just read through what may have been the earliest comprehensive web post on Steven Jones's red-gray chips:
Announcing a discovery: Red/gray bi-layered chips in the WTC dust

I especially read through the comments, by Steven Jones and others, and found a few interesting facts on the "iron-rich spheres" from the WTC dust samples that Jones had analysed:
  • "...WTC dust, generally with iron above the aluminum content and both above 10% (typically)? I'd like to see it. The iron content of these spheres (I have looked at hundreds of them now, in the WTC dust) is often above 20%..."
  • "All of the iron-aluminum spheres I have found in the WTC dust show abundant OXYGEN. Often O is the principal element in the spheres."

So it would seem that the most abundant and "suspicious" spheres are actually mixed bags of oxides, with iron being a minor ingredient (often 10-20%), and apparently also Al, Si, K playing a large role, but oxygen above all!

Iron oxide is at least (Fe2O3) 70% by weight iron, 30% oxygen. Other oxides are 78:22 (FeO) or 72:28 (Fe3O4)
Aluminium oxide (Al2O3) is 53% Al, 47%O.
SiO2 is 54:46.
I think if spheres iron-rich and oxygen-poor enough to make a case for there to be at least some elemental iron, there should be more than 40% iron by weight in them (assuming 10% as a typical value for Si and Al), better yet >70%. I think if Jones had found a significant number of spheres with that much iron, he would no doubt have told us happily. Also, he vaguely quantifies ("generally", "often") iron contents above 10% and 20%, but makes no mention of contents above 30%. The fact that he did neither strongly suggests that iron content in these sphere is generally below 30% and all the iron in them must be thought of as fully oxidised.

Totally useless to be talking about the melting point of iron in that context.
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 8th February 2012, 06:01 AM   #1312
sheeplesnshills
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post

Thanks to those who supplied data rather than childish insults and endless questions requiring speculation.
Chris, your entire theory is just speculation. I'm not surprised you are glad other people are doing your work for you.........
As for childish insults simply reflect your childish claims......and questions?....you should welcome them as without the answers to them you have no case. Consider us your peer review
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 8th February 2012, 08:36 AM   #1313
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
  • "...WTC dust, generally with iron above the aluminum content and both above 10% (typically)? I'd like to see it. The iron content of these spheres (I have looked at hundreds of them now, in the WTC dust) is often above 20%..."
  • "All of the iron-aluminum spheres I have found in the WTC dust show abundant OXYGEN. Often O is the principal element in the spheres."

So it would seem that the most abundant and "suspicious" spheres are actually mixed bags of oxides, with iron being a minor ingredient (often 10-20%), and apparently also Al, Si, K playing a large role, but oxygen above all!
Which tells me it aint thermte, because thermite would produce nearly pure iron.

Quote:
Iron oxide is at least (Fe2O3) 70% by weight iron, 30% oxygen. Other oxides are 78:22 (FeO) or 72:28 (Fe3O4)
Aluminium oxide (Al2O3) is 53% Al, 47%O.
SiO2 is 54:46.
Since the sphereules are not pure iron, I fail to see how any person in good health, with an IQ over 100 could conclude that they werre produced by thermite.

My math is inadequate, but aren't the percentages of AlO2and SiO2correct for kaolin?

Quote:
Totally useless to be talking about the melting point of iron in that context.
Can you melt FeO?
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.

Last edited by leftysergeant; 8th February 2012 at 08:38 AM.
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 8th February 2012, 08:42 AM   #1314
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,871
Ivan
Originally Posted by BasqueArch View Post
Incinerator fly ash analyzed. All sorts of microspheres, at temperatures of 1000C-1200C.
http://suwic.group.shef.ac.uk/posters/p-ash.pdf
Originally Posted by Ivan Kminek View Post
You are right and Chris7 has my respect in this matter.

Btw, using "yahooing" instead of googling, I have just found this interesting and detailed (freely available) Russian paper on ferrospheres from fly ashes ("from 14 heat and electric power plants"). I am now lazy to read this all, but in introduction, the formation of ferrospheres is described roughly as a melting of FeO-CaO-MgO-SiO2-Al2O3 complex.
Composition of spheres varied in the very wide range, see the paper.
The top link shows ferrospheres and volatile (vapor) lead created at <1200C temperatures among other things.

One cause may be the "melting point depression effect"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melting-point_depression
__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum
BasqueArch 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 8th February 2012, 09:22 AM   #1315
Tezro
Student
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by Sunstealer View Post
I'm looking at PVC which normally used to be stabilised by Pb. Combustion of PVC gives off HCl. And HCl reacts readily with Pb (which is all over the place in buildings, 2-8 lbs worth in old CRTs) to form PbCl which has a far lower boiling temperature and will readily volatize.

There's a huge amount of complex chemistry going on in the fires due to the different materials and fuels present and the temperatures created. Smoke temperatures of around 1000°C are normal in office and dwelling fires.

Truthers don't realise this and will just focus on a specific simple idea like "iron melts at 1540°C" and that's all they have. They don't realise the difference between using a lighted splint to set fire to 1Kg of Mg ribbon, which will readily burn/rapidly oxidise and a block of 1Kg of Mg not behaving in the same way.

It's the same for steel - why can you burn 1Kg of wire wool AND produce iron-microspheres by setting it on fire with a lighted splint, but can't burn a solid block of 1Kg of iron the same way?

They then can't get it into their heads that in a building there will be dozens of items that will utilise thin pieces of steel or iron as thin as steel wool and not just great big lumps of steel in columns and girders.

They then can't see that if you have thin bits of steel in a building that is on fire that those bits will produce microspheres just in the same way that burning steel wool does.

It's sad but also funny at the same time. I'm loving the idea of lugging tons of themite into a building and spreading it all over the monitors and PCs so as to volatize lead. I read somewhere that Jones or Harrit was touting between 29,000 and 143,000 metric tons of thermite was used (as calculated from the amount of iron in the dust). Maximum Take Off Weight of a 747 is around 400 metric tons so you'd need 72 747's worth of thermite minimum to do the job by truther calculation. lol.
I was reading through this thread and thought this was a great post, which of course went unaddressed by Christopher7.

It also made me think of another category of metal in the fires which I don't think I've ever heard mentioned (though I'm pretty new to this)...metal duct for HVAC systems.

I haven't the faintest idea what kind of material would have been in the duct work in the WTC, or how it might have responded in the WTC fires, but there surely was a lot of it exposed to the hottest temperatures on the fire floors. What happens to HVAC ducts in fire? Sunstealer's comments about thinner pieces of steel got me thinking about that. Does anyone have any insight into this?

edit- I realize this has probably been dealt with ad nauseum, but bear with me, I'm new here.

Last edited by Tezro; 8th February 2012 at 09:27 AM.
Tezro 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 8th February 2012, 09:47 AM   #1316
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,871
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
Ug! Basque man speak with sharp tong.
Thanks.
__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum
BasqueArch 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 8th February 2012, 10:41 AM   #1317
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,950
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
Which tells me it aint thermte, because thermite would produce nearly pure iron.

Since the sphereules are not pure iron, I fail to see how any person in good health, with an IQ over 100 could conclude that they werre produced by thermite.
Yes, but it would be quite possible that after the thermite reaction has produced tiny spheres(1) with pure iron, but as these are initially hot and liquid, they would be rather likely to immediately react with ambient oxygen (burn), or corrode later on. So yes, there should be some elemental iron, but not necesserily so much.

Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
My math is inadequate, but aren't the percentages of AlO2and SiO2correct for kaolin?
Don't go there. While kaolinite is probably not particularly rare in a building (in paper, paints...), it also is far from the only Al-Silicate. In my calculation, I was just thinking what compounds Al and Si would form in the simplest case, and that would be their respective oxides, Alumina and Silica. You are right of course that some of the Al and Si in Jones's or anybody's spheres are Aluminium Silicates. Kaolinite has a sum formula of Al2Si2O5(OH)4, or, if you ignore the H, Al2Si2O9. You could split that off to Al2O3 + 2 SiO2, and would be left with 2 more O-atoms. Makes a difference of something like 7 percent among these 3 elements, and less if you throw in all the rest. Since I was looking at iron proportions in increments of 10% of total sphere mass, that difference of a couple O-atoms between oxides and silicates doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
Can you melt FeO?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FeO
Melting point 1377 °C


Footnote:
(1) Of course the bulk amounts of thermite charges would produce bulk amounts of reaction products, not spheres, but since we are talking about spheres here, I'll let that pass
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 10th February 2012, 01:30 AM   #1318
Christopher7
Philosopher
 
Christopher7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Yes, but it would be quite possible that after the thermite reaction has produced tiny spheres(1) with pure iron, but as these are initially hot and liquid, they would be rather likely to immediately react with ambient oxygen (burn), or corrode later on. So yes, there should be some elemental iron, but not necesserily so much.

Footnote:
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
(1) Of course the bulk amounts of thermite charges would produce bulk amounts of reaction products, not spheres, but since we are talking about spheres here, I'll let that pass
Thank you for your analysis.

I would like to remind you all that the RJ Lee Group did a thorough study of the WTC dust using state of the art technology, and you all did not.


All the possible sources that y'all have come up with ignore this statement by the professionals who studied the dust:

"Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC event, producing spherical metallic particles."

Note they clearly said that Iron melted producing spherical metallic particles, not office furnishings burned producing spherical metallic particles.

The common tactic here is to sidestep or jump over this fact and ask about thermite.
One step at a time please. First come to grips with the scientifically verified fact that iron melted.

Last edited by Christopher7; 10th February 2012 at 01:38 AM.
Christopher7 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 10th February 2012, 02:33 AM   #1319
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,871
Originally Posted by Christopher7 View Post
Thank you for your analysis.

I would like to remind you all that the RJ Lee Group did a thorough study of the WTC dust using state of the art technology, and you all did not.

All the possible sources that y'all have come up with ignore this statement by the professionals who studied the dust:
"Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC event, producing spherical metallic particles."

Note they clearly said that Iron melted producing spherical metallic particles, not office furnishings burned producing spherical metallic particles.

The common tactic here is to sidestep or jump over this fact and ask about thermite.
One step at a time please. First come to grips with the scientifically verified fact that iron melted.
Yes, nanoiron at office fire temperatures.

Peak fire temperature normally associated with room fires is around 1200C.
Quote:
Of interest, however, is the peak fire temperature normally associated with room fires. The peak value is governed by ventilation and fuel supply characteristics [12] and so such values will form a wide frequency distribution. Of interest is the maximum value which is fairly regularly found. This value turns out to be around 1200°C.
Quote:
Maximum atmosphere temperature 1213C.
Quote:
Cardington Fire Tests
Quote:
3.7 Test 6: The office demonstration test …..
The aim of this test was to demonstrate structural behaviour in a realistic fire scenario.
….. The maximum atmosphere temperature was 1213°C and the maximum average temperature was approximately 900°C (see Figure B.3.15). The maximum temperature of the unprotected steel was 1150°C.
The maximum atmosphere temperature 1254C
Quote:
BHP test building
Quote:
The fire was started in the open plan area and allowed to develop with the sprinklers switched off. The maximum atmosphere temperature reached 1254°C
Atmosphere temperature exceeds 1000C
Quote:
Stuttgart-VaihingenUniversity in Germany fire test
During the test, the atmosphere temperature exceeded 1000°C,
Link for all the above
http://guardian.150m.com/fire/small/SCI.htm


It’s been shown that office fires can reach 1254C.
And that ferrospheres and volatile (vapor) lead are created at <1200C temperatures, less than the melting point of bulk iron (1535C) and bulk lead boiling point (1740C)- Melting point of bulk lead (327C) So Jones and C7 are wrong that iron temperatures need to be 1535C to produce ferrospheres and that lead has to boil to vaporize.
http://suwic.group.shef.ac.uk/posters/p-ash.pdf


Due to the “melting point depression” phenomena.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melting-point_depression

First come to grips with the scientifically verified fact that ferrospheres and volatile (vapor) lead are created at less than the melting point of bulk iron (1535C) and bulk lead boiling point (1740C)
__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum

Last edited by BasqueArch; 10th February 2012 at 02:37 AM.
BasqueArch 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 10th February 2012, 03:09 AM   #1320
Christopher7
Philosopher
 
Christopher7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
Originally Posted by BasqueArch View Post
Yes, nanoiron at office fire temperatures.

Peak fire temperature normally associated with room fires is around 1200C.
Maximum atmosphere temperature 1213C.
The maximum atmosphere temperature 1254C
Atmosphere temperature exceeds 1000C
Link for all the above
http://guardian.150m.com/fire/small/SCI.htm

It’s been shown that office fires can reach 1254C.
And that ferrospheres and volatile (vapor) lead are created at <1200C temperatures, less than the melting point of bulk iron (1535C) and bulk lead boiling point (1740C)- Melting point of bulk lead (327C) So Jones and C7 are wrong that iron temperatures need to be 1535C to produce ferrospheres and that lead has to boil to vaporize.
http://suwic.group.shef.ac.uk/posters/p-ash.pdf

Due to the “melting point depression” phenomena.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melting-point_depression

First come to grips with the scientifically verified fact that ferrospheres and volatile (vapor) lead are created at less than the melting point of bulk iron (1535C) and bulk lead boiling point (1740C)
We are talking about the melting of iron and there is NO evidence that temperatures in the TT exceeded 1100oC. NIST said that temperatures of 1000-1100oC only lasted for about 15 min in any location.

ETA: What nano-iron? Read my post again:
Note they clearly said that Iron melted producing spherical metallic particles, not office furnishings burned producing spherical metallic particles.

Last edited by Christopher7; 10th February 2012 at 03:39 AM.
Christopher7 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 02:32 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.