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 james millette , kevin ryan , Niels Harrit , paint chips , richard gage , steven jones , wtc

Reply
Old 10th June 2012, 06:04 AM   #801
NoahFence
Psycho Kitty
 
NoahFence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 20,491
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Lol. But two bedunkers googling a Pink Floyd lyric to "verify" twoofer accuracy is not lame at all....

You won't google nanothermite, but boy howdy, watch out for those 1980s concept album rock lyrics!
Googling? Sorry kiddo, that one is memorized, and probably not even on any lyric sheet.

Its just another in a long line of mistakes...I mean lies... You make.
__________________
you to the ignorant, uneducated portion ofAmerica too short sighted to see what's right in front of your cheeto loving faces.
NoahFence is online now   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 June 2012, 07:08 AM   #802
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 14,920
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Lol. But two bedunkers googling a Pink Floyd lyric to "verify" twoofer accuracy is not lame at all....

You won't google nanothermite, but boy howdy, watch out for those 1980s concept album rock lyrics!
So, Google find you and "military-grade nanothermite" yet?
__________________
"Realize deeply that the present moment is all you ever have." (Eckhart Tolle, 2004)
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 10th June 2012, 09:21 AM   #803
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Figured out that the WTC primer doesn't ignite at 430 C yet?

Or is that the missing brick for you?
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 09:21 AM   #804
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Lol. But two bedunkers googling a Pink Floyd lyric to "verify" twoofer accuracy is not lame at all....

You won't google nanothermite, but boy howdy, watch out for those 1980s concept album rock lyrics!
Ergo, you reveal yourself to be fractally wrong again, at every level of detail! Hilarious! It's not a lyric for starters. Second, you wouldn't know this because you're apparently living on another planet, but Roger Waters is currently on tour in N.A. (need to google his name?). A couple of weeks ago my neighbor organized a big party and then went to the concert here. We enjoyed playing a bunch of Floyd tunes that day.

Besides we listened to The Wall endlessly in high school.

So as a matter of fact, you're wrong again. How does that feel?

You! Yes you, behind the false accusations! Stand still Truther!
If you don't have enough Aluminum you can't have any Nanothermite!
How can you have any Nanothermite if you don't have enough Aluminum?
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'

Last edited by alienentity; 10th June 2012 at 09:26 AM.
alienentity 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 June 2012, 09:27 AM   #805
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Lol. What is this, now? Seven posts about Pink Floyd by bedunkers in a thread about Jim Millette's dust study?

Why are bedunkers trashing their own thread? They don't want to admit that the WTC primer paint doesn't ignite at 430 C ?
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 10:19 AM   #806
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Well, anything I haven't quite grasped of Oystein's highly complex theory, feel free to enlighten me, DGM.

The best I can summarize from the logical carnage so far is: "There was no nanothermite.". . . "Because there was no nanothermite."
I liked this comment.

Originally Posted by ergo View Post


Because I thought that nanothermites are typically embedded in a binder or matrix of some kind, typically organic. Isn't it commonly accepted that the presence of these organic compounds will alter the energy output in the reaction?
Where exactly did you come up with this idea?


Originally Posted by ergo View Post
For example,what was the energy release measured in the Tillotson test? Anyone?
Somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 kJ/g.

Originally Posted by ergo View Post

So how can it be concluded that "there is no nanothermite" when the energy output will not confirm this either way?
Think about this. Why did Harrit et al do a test that wouldn't confirm either way?
__________________
"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

Last edited by DGM; 10th June 2012 at 10:20 AM.
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 10th June 2012, 10:30 AM   #807
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,502
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 kJ/g.
No. Tillotson and Gash measured 1.5 kJ/g - and propose explanations for why it is lower than that of regular thermite. What we have been saying all along: When the size of the AL-particles drops into the tens-of-nm scale, the relative mass of inert Al-oxide at their surface increases signifcantly, which immediately lowers the energy density (mass appears in the denominator of the equation to compute energy density).
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 June 2012, 10:35 AM   #808
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
No. Tillotson and Gash measured 1.5 kJ/g - and propose explanations for why it is lower than that of regular thermite. What we have been saying all along: When the size of the AL-particles drops into the tens-of-nm scale, the relative mass of inert Al-oxide at their surface increases signifcantly, which immediately lowers the energy density (mass appears in the denominator of the equation to compute energy density).
I sit corrected. (and freely admit I was going solely from memory, flawed as it is.) Thanks.

__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 11:15 AM   #809
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
No. Tillotson and Gash measured 1.5 kJ/g - and propose explanations for why it is lower than that of regular thermite. What we have been saying all along: When the size of the AL-particles drops into the tens-of-nm scale, the relative mass of inert Al-oxide at their surface increases signifcantly, which immediately lowers the energy density (mass appears in the denominator of the equation to compute energy density).
As has also already been pointed out, thermites display a range of energy yields. It's also reaction time and not energy density that determines explosive potential, so what you say here has no relevance to the discussion.

For DGM: the DSC test on the chips showed that the chips were not primer paint.
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 11:33 AM   #810
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,502
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
As has also already been pointed out, thermites display a range of energy yields.
What is that range? I expect numbers for a and z: "From a kJ/g to z kJ/g

(Hint: I know a lower limit for a and an upper limit for z. Just checking if you know them, too)

Originally Posted by ergo View Post
It's also reaction time and not energy density that determines explosive potential, so what you say here has no relevance to the discussion.
The opposite is true: In this discussion, ONLY energy density is relevant, and reaction time / explosive potential / power is not.

Originally Posted by ergo View Post
For DGM: the DSC test on the chips showed that the chips were not primer paint.
We'll come back to this after you have shown you know and understand the correct answer to my question above.
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 June 2012, 11:37 AM   #811
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
What is that range? I expect numbers for a and z: "From a kJ/g to z kJ/g
It doesn't matter since it's reaction time that is the pertinent factor in explosive potential.

Quote:
The opposite is true: In this discussion, ONLY energy density is relevant, and reaction time / explosive potential / power is not.
In what discussion? What are you discussing here that no one else is?


Quote:
We'll come back to this after you have shown you know and understand the correct answer to my question above.
No need. You don't have an answer to this.
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 11:44 AM   #812
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by ergo View Post

In what discussion? What are you discussing here that no one else is?

.
DSC only measures energy density. You are the one that's confused.
__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 11:46 AM   #813
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,502
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
It doesn't matter since it's reaction time that is the pertinent factor in explosive potential.
We are not discussiong "explosive potential". Neither Harrit e.al. nor Millette measured, quantiefied or discussed "explosive potential".

What Harrit e.al. measured is energy density.

YOU said "thermites display a range of energy yields"

And empty, hollow, meaningless statement, because:
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
It doesn't matter
Why did you say this about "energy density" if "It doesn't matter"?

Originally Posted by ergo View Post
In what discussion? What are you discussing here that no one else is?
We are discussing DSC tests. Right?

I could quote you easily to show where you discussed energy density / energy yield. Shall I?

Originally Posted by ergo View Post
No need. You don't have an answer to this.
LOL

You are dodging. You made a claim - back it up: What is the range of energy yield for thernites? I know, you don't.
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 June 2012, 11:50 AM   #814
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Oystein, what is the relevance of energy density to the chips that were DSC-tested?

The DSC tests showed that the ignition point of the chips was ~ 430 C. This rules out primer paint.
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 12:24 PM   #815
NoahFence
Psycho Kitty
 
NoahFence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 20,491
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Lol. What is this, now? Seven posts about Pink Floyd by bedunkers in a thread about Jim Millette's dust study?

Why are bedunkers trashing their own thread? They don't want to admit that the WTC primer paint doesn't ignite at 430 C ?
The point is, even when you're trying to use an analogy you can't even get that right.

You REALLY, really really really - REALLY need to drop any and all interest in 9/11. You're simply not good at it. This is why I'm begging you to find a new hobby. Perhaps at minimum peruse and enjoy any one of the many sub-forums that exist on JREF.

I came here due to seeing AE911twoof's facebook page and found my way here. I've since come to find out JREF is an amazing place where litterally every question can be answered, conspiracy or not. You need to start doing the same.

Totally off-topic material enclosed:

Behind home plate at Fenway Park is a sign that says "Roger Waters The Wall" for the upcoming show. Someone called into sports talk radio on my way home from work asking who Roger was and why we cared if he watered the Wall. I kid you not.
(In the event someone doesn't know what the wall is, it's a major feature of Fenway Park)
__________________
you to the ignorant, uneducated portion ofAmerica too short sighted to see what's right in front of your cheeto loving faces.
NoahFence is online now   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 June 2012, 12:29 PM   #816
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,373
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
DSC only measures energy density. You are the one that's confused.
He's not confused. He's trolling. And to a large extent the sillier the claim the more effective it is likely to be in trolling. People cannot resist the temptation to show the error on the trolling claim. So the more obvious the error the more likely it will succeed in getting "bites".

And ergo is attempting to mimic C7's favourite technique of "throw in enough pseudo science to make it look as if it is a genuine discussion".

The test is simple - follow the discussion and see if it progresses OR merely goes round in circles.

Then, if it is circling, confirm the analysis by looking at who caused the circling.

That should get it "beyond reasonable doubt" BUT it's not a criminal offence so....
ozeco41 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 June 2012, 12:46 PM   #817
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Not only were paint chips ruled out by the DSC, but they were ruled out by the flame tests as well, lol. Had forgotten this.
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 12:51 PM   #818
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Not only were paint chips ruled out by the DSC, but they were ruled out by the flame tests as well, lol. Had forgotten this.
How so (on both cases)?
__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 12:53 PM   #819
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
The point is, even when you're trying to use an analogy you can't even get that right.
At the risk of perpetuating an already silly "discussion", I NEVER ASCRIBED THAT QUOTE TO PINK FLOYD. You did.
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 12:54 PM   #820
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
How so (on both cases)?
I've already explained the first one. You can read the ATM paper to find out the other.
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 12:55 PM   #821
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
I've already explained the first one. You can read the ATM paper to find out the other.
Would you mind providing a link?
__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 12:56 PM   #822
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
I don't have one. I have my own copy on my hard drive.
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 12:58 PM   #823
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
I don't have one. I have my own copy on my hard drive.
I see. Can you send it to me (via-email)?
__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 01:04 PM   #824
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Lol. No.
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 01:09 PM   #825
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Lol. No.
Why not? Are you afraid I'll spam you to death or publish your email? You can ask Tony S if your information is safe with me, he'll vouch for me.

__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 01:17 PM   #826
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
I've already explained the first one. You can read the ATM paper to find out the other.
Forgive me if I'm slow but, by ATM, do you mean the Harrit et al paper? If so, it does not support your assertion.
__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 01:20 PM   #827
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Forgive me if I'm slow but, by ATM, do you mean the Harrit et al paper? If so, it does not support your assertion.
Yes, I do mean Harrit et al. How does it not support my assertion?
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 01:23 PM   #828
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Yes, I do mean Harrit et al. How does it not support my assertion?
It does not show the chips were not paint. In fact, it does the opposite.

As a reminder, this was your claim.

Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Not only were paint chips ruled out by the DSC, but they were ruled out by the flame tests as well, lol. Had forgotten this.
__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 01:25 PM   #829
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
It does not show the chips were not paint. In fact, it does the opposite.
Let me know when you're able to explain this.
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 01:28 PM   #830
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Let me know when you're able to explain this.
I don't have to, The paper does it for me.

BTW: Here's a link to the paper:

http://www.benthamscience.com/open/t...002/7TOCPJ.htm

__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 01:32 PM   #831
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
I don't have to, The paper does it for me.

Okay then. I'll just simply say you're wrong, and that the paper shows that you're wrong.

Wow, "debunking" is easy!
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 01:38 PM   #832
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Okay then. I'll just simply say you're wrong, and that the paper shows that you're wrong.

Wow, "debunking" is easy!
Cool! Let me know when anyone else in the academic world notices. Strange that paper has had no impact, huh?
__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 01:40 PM   #833
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Yeah, if you call Jim Millette's attempt to replicate it "no impact"!
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 June 2012, 01:41 PM   #834
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,502
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Oystein, what is the relevance of energy density to the chips that were DSC-tested?

The DSC tests showed that the ignition point of the chips was ~ 430 C. This rules out primer paint.
This:
Originally Posted by Harrit e.al.
3. Thermal Analysis using Differential Scanning
Calorimetry


Red/gray chips were subjected to heating using a differential scanning calorimeter (DSC). The data shown in Fig. (19) demonstrate that the red/gray chips from different WTC samples all ignited in the range 415-435 °C. The energy release for each exotherm can be estimated by integrating with respect to time under the narrow peak. Proceeding from the smallest to largest peaks, the yields are estimated to be approximately 1.5, 3, 6 and 7.5 kJ/g respectively.
(Page 19 of the Bentham paper)
You do understand that "energy release", "yields" and "kJ/g" all refer to energy density, right?

It goes on, page 27:
Originally Posted by Harrit e.al.
It is striking that some of the red/gray chips release more energy in kJ/g than does ordinary thermite, as shown in the blue bar graphs above. The theoretical maximum for thermite is 3.9 kJ/g [27].
You do understand that "energy in kg/J" refers to energy density, right?


ergo, what is the relevance of reaction rate to the chips that were DSC-tested? Do you have any experimental results from the DSC test of red-gray chips that gives us an estimate of the reaction rate or explosive potential of the same they way they give and discuss specific values for energy denssity, and if yes, what are they?
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 June 2012, 01:43 PM   #835
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,502
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
I've already explained asserted without argument the first one. You can read the ATM paper to but won't find out the other.
Fixed
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 June 2012, 01:44 PM   #836
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Yeah, if you call Jim Millette's attempt to replicate it "no impact"!
How is that an impact?

__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 01:44 PM   #837
Miragememories
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
"...You are dodging. You made a claim - back it up: What is the range of energy yield for thernites? I know, you don't."
If you look at the Bentham Paper, they acknowledge several times that the DSC results exceeded the theoretical limit for thermite.

The authors of the Bentham Paper provided this hypothesis;

Originally Posted by Bentham Paper
"It is striking that some of the red/gray chips release more energy in kJ/g than does ordinary thermite, as shown in the blue bar graphs above. The theoretical maximum for thermite is 3.9 kJ/g [27]. We suggest that the organic material in evidence in the red/gray chips is also highly energetic, most likely producing gas to provide explosive pressure. Again, conventional thermite is regarded as an incendiary whereas super-thermite, which may include organic ingredients for rapid gas generation, is considered a pyrotechnic or explosive [6, 24]. As this test was done in air it is possible that some of the enhancement of energy output may have come from air oxidation of the organic component."
MM
Miragememories 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 June 2012, 01:47 PM   #838
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,502
Ergo,

you said
Originally Posted by ergo
thermites display a range of energy yields.
What is that range? I expect numbers for a and z: "From a kJ/g to z kJ/g".
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 June 2012, 01:48 PM   #839
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,183
Originally Posted by Miragememories View Post

The authors of the Bentham Paper provided this hypothesis;



MM
So the main thrust of the paper (active thermetic material) needs a hypothesis explaining why there results are actually inconclusive? Yeah, that was peer reviewed.

__________________
"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 10th June 2012, 01:48 PM   #840
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
This:

(Page 19 of the Bentham paper)
You do understand that "energy release", "yields" and "kJ/g" all refer to energy density, right?
Yes, and Harrit et al. show it is irrelevant to determining the substance is thermitic.
__________________
“Much of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo 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 04:49 AM.
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.