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 frank greening , iron microspheres , wtc dust

Reply
Old 8th August 2017, 06:22 AM   #1
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Frank Greening's Latest dust study.

Just posting this here so that people interested can Download Franks Latest study.

http://www.scientificmethod911.org/new_listings.html

Comments welcome, from those who know what this means.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 August 2017, 06:33 AM   #2
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,666
So the samples he tested from the first responder contained no iron spheres... and those were recovered during the clean up period... is that correct?

IIRC... the Harrit samples were collected from something like 7 locations and some as far as Chambers and West Broadway and his claim is that they contained evidence of molten metal... is that correct?
__________________
So many idiots and so little time.
JSanderO 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 August 2017, 06:45 AM   #3
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Originally Posted by JSanderO View Post
So the samples he tested from the first responder contained no iron spheres... and those were recovered during the clean up period... is that correct?

IIRC... the Harrit samples were collected from something like 7 locations and some as far as Chambers and West Broadway and his claim is that they contained evidence of molten metal... is that correct?
No the samples of dirrect dust from 9/11/2001 contained a limited amount of microspheres from welding and grinding the steel, and that is all that were found.

The Samples Harrit and Jones found were most likely contamination, from cutting and some from Trucks and Equipment, brakes using cast iron drums and Rotors.

He didn't have the funds to test the red grey chips, he hasn't appealed for
Donations he did this out of his own pocket.

Last edited by Crazy Chainsaw; 8th August 2017 at 07:08 AM. Reason: Elaborate on the Microspheres.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 August 2017, 07:28 AM   #4
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,101
A simple summary, as far as I can tell, is that a sample of dust collected by a first responder - in effect - immediately after the collapse of WTC2 contained particles mostly indicative of debris from drywall and concrete floor slabs, but also a small amount of iron-rich particles whose composition was consistent with having been produced in the construction of the towers by metal grinding equipment. This is from the iron/manganese ratio, which looks more like that of WTC structural steel than that of ambient atmospheric dust in general. Overall it's saying that what was in the dust from the WTC collapses was pretty much what you'd expect to be there.

Thermite proponents will no doubt immediately reject the paper on the grounds that thermite could have produced sufficiently high temperatures to generate the spherical particles observed, but they'll then have to assume that the thermite was specifically formulated to produce the correct iron/manganese ratio (on top of the usual attempt to reverse the burden of proof).

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers 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 8th August 2017, 08:05 AM   #5
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
A simple summary, as far as I can tell, is that a sample of dust collected by a first responder - in effect - immediately after the collapse of WTC2 contained particles mostly indicative of debris from drywall and concrete floor slabs, but also a small amount of iron-rich particles whose composition was consistent with having been produced in the construction of the towers by metal grinding equipment. This is from the iron/manganese ratio, which looks more like that of WTC structural steel than that of ambient atmospheric dust in general. Overall it's saying that what was in the dust from the WTC collapses was pretty much what you'd expect to be there.

Thermite proponents will no doubt immediately reject the paper on the grounds that thermite could have produced sufficiently high temperatures to generate the spherical particles observed, but they'll then have to assume that the thermite was specifically formulated to produce the correct iron/manganese ratio (on top of the usual attempt to reverse the burden of proof).



Dave
They would have to explain why there is no Al203, or Al in the microspheres.
In any significant amout and also how the microspheres got into the dust samples so far away from the collapse zone.

The burden of proof is on the Truthers now.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 August 2017, 08:16 AM   #6
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,101
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
The burden of proof is on the Truthers now.
But in fact it always was, and they have never seriously tried to meet it beyond the usual affirmation of the consequent.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers 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 8th August 2017, 11:20 AM   #7
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
But in fact it always was, and they have never seriously tried to meet it beyond the usual affirmation of the consequent.

Dave
The absolute truth David, because trying to meet the burden of proof, would prove them wrong.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 9th August 2017, 01:08 PM   #8
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
You would think that one of the Truth Movement people here would like to comment on this, but Either they have me on ignore, or they are holding their breath waiting on Basile to finnish his study of contaminated dust.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 August 2017, 04:55 AM   #9
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,542
I took my time reading the 44 pages. I did not look up references, did not check out whether the equations are proper, and did not do the calculations, so there is that.

I find the paper fairly well done. I was confused a bit in the early part about the percentages of elements - the business of eliminating C and O and normalizing all the rest to 100% and then comparing the results with other studies. On page 8: "Oxygen, typically ~ 50%, was also excluded from the data and the remaining elements adjusted to 100 %. The resulting percent concentrations are given in Table 1 and are compared to data from Reference [3]."
My problem is that the 10 major elements listed in column 1 of Table 1 add up to to only 37%. It seems that at least O is not excluded; if it were 50%, the total would be 87% - still too short of 100%. He might even have left C in the mix (Fig. 5 has C between 14% and 27%). The reference samples add up to 27.2% and 75.5%, respecticely - quite a span! Obviously, Greening did NOT normalize the elements other than C and O to 100%, and thus the comparison he draws is flawed.

This is, however, properly done in Tables 2 to 5. I am not sure about Table 6.


I like the part about estimating how different particle size fractions would fall out of the dust cloud as a function of distance to GZ;I particularly like the fact that Greening is aware that hos theoretical work does not allow for making predictions about particle size distributions as a function of distance, for that would require knowing the distribution at distance = 0 - i.e. the particle size distribution created by the collapse!
What I would suggest for a follow-up paper (and I have little doubt Frank is thinking about this already) is: Analyze the as-found size distribution of samples from known distances, and calculate back to the original size distribution. The latter is an important input to estimating the size of the energy sink that crushing concrete was. I saw a paper the other by Robert Korol at al (Truthers) that assumed, out of the blue, a particle size distribution and calculated that it would have required 4 times the available Potential Energy to generate such fine dust. (Of course no doubt emanates in that paper that perhaps the assumption was bollocks)


Greening concludes that various particles he finds, and finds to be typical for the dust, are consistent with, and thus plausibly explained as originating with concrete aggregate, fly ash, welding and cutting/grinding, all present since construction time, and some modified by HCl during the time the PVC on several floors burned.

I agree that this is plausible - but of course nothing more.
In terms of methodology, this is only somewhat more solid than what certain Truther "scientists" did (I am looking at you, Steven "Jesus visited America" Jones), when they claim that certain microspheres are consistent with thermite reaction residue.

Greening's paper can thus serve as a useful antidote to such Twoofiness, by showing that very trivial explanations exist, such that the outrageous speculations by Jones are wholely unnecessary and discouraged by Occam. It's a tough sell, though - seeing that it's 44 pages with math, rather than a YouTube video.


Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
You would think that one of the Truth Movement people here would like to comment on this, but Either they have me on ignore, or they are holding their breath waiting on Basile to finnish his study of contaminated dust.
This is miles beyond their level of comprehension or even interest.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
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 August 2017, 06:30 AM   #10
Criteria
Critical Thinker
 
Criteria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 447
Even if you accept his unproven hypothesis that the proliferation of intact iron-rich microspheres were the result of welding and grinding that occurred 30 years ago, Greening's selective analysis fails to explain, or address, Dr. Harrit et als' observations that thermitic red chips pervade the 9/11 WTC dust.
Criteria 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 August 2017, 07:05 AM   #11
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,101
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Even if you accept his unproven hypothesis that the proliferation of intact iron-rich microspheres were the result of welding and grinding that occurred 30 years ago, Greening's selective analysis fails to explain, or address, Dr. Harrit et als' observations claims that thermitic red chips pervade the 9/11 WTC dust.
Which of course it doesn't need to, those claims having already been dismissed as specious.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers 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 August 2017, 07:40 AM   #12
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Even if you accept his unproven hypothesis that the proliferation of intact iron-rich microspheres were the result of welding and grinding that occurred 30 years ago, Greening's selective analysis fails to explain, or address, Dr. Harrit et als' observations that thermitic red chips pervade the 9/11 WTC dust.
Edited by zooterkin:  <SNIP>
Edited for rule 7.
Do not post on behalf of banned members.

Last edited by zooterkin; 10th August 2017 at 10:48 AM.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 August 2017, 12:45 PM   #13
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,744
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Even if you accept his unproven hypothesis that the proliferation of intact iron-rich microspheres were the result of welding and grinding that occurred 30 years ago, Greening's selective analysis fails to explain, or address, Dr. Harrit et als' observations that thermitic red chips pervade the 9/11 WTC dust.
Harrit fool you and a fringe few.

Harrit found no thermite in the chips. Harrit's idiotic claim includes 10 tons to 100 tons of thermite used in the WTC complex. Yet, not one ounce of iron from a thermite reaction was found at the WTC. Where is the iron, a product of thermite, which would be in the tons found after the gravity collapse due to fire. oops, it was fire, not thermite.

Maybe 9/11 truth followers are unable to grasp the math associated with the office fires prior to collapse being equal in heat energy of over 2,700 tons of thermite. There is no need for thermite, the office fires caused the collapse.

It appear you have no idea what the products of thermite are past the fantasy claim iron particles found in dust are from thermite planted by people you can Harrit can't name.

How can Greening explain or address a fantasy of thermite only found in the minds of a few 9/11 truth nuts, Jones, Harrit, et al.

9/11 truth and you have nothing but speculation for the fantasy of thermite. You have No evidence steel was damaged by thermite on 9/11. 9/11 truth liars like Harrit, have fooled a fringe few who can't see Harrit's paper does not prove thermite was found in WTC dust. The big problem with Harrit's lie about thermite, the big clue, no steel was damaged by thermite or explosives.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut 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 August 2017, 02:09 PM   #14
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,542
I said
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
This is miles beyond their [the Truthers'] level of comprehension or even interest.
and they said
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Even if you accept his unproven hypothesis that the proliferation of intact iron-rich microspheres were the result of welding and grinding that occurred 30 years ago, Greening's selective analysis fails to explain, or address, Dr. Harrit et als' observations that thermitic red chips pervade the 9/11 WTC dust.
And I was right. That proof came quickly.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
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 August 2017, 02:54 PM   #15
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Or the dust is most likely contaminated by multiple sources, like industrial paints on machinery or other sources some aluminum coatings and rust flakes can have high energy levels, such as nano Oxygen hydrogen composites.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 August 2017, 09:19 PM   #16
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,792
Delete

Last edited by jaydeehess; 10th August 2017 at 09:24 PM.
jaydeehess 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 August 2017, 09:26 PM   #17
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,792
Smash a million tons of steel together for 15 seconds at 60 MPH and a few sparks might fly.
jaydeehess 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 11th August 2017, 07:58 AM   #18
Criteria
Critical Thinker
 
Criteria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 447
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Even if you accept his unproven hypothesis that the proliferation of intact iron-rich microspheres were the result of welding and grinding that occurred 30 years ago, Greening's selective analysis fails to explain, or address, Dr. Harrit et als' observations that thermitic red chips pervade the 9/11 WTC dust.
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
Or the dust is most likely contaminated by multiple sources, like industrial paints on machinery or other sources some aluminum coatings and rust flakes can have high energy levels, such as nano Oxygen hydrogen composites.
Contaminated dust?

The dust represents the amalgamation of the 9/11 WTC debris.

Of course it must have some contamination from local stirred up dust.

Given the proven thermitic nature of the red chips found in the 9/11 WTC dust, had Dr. Harrit et al only found those chips in a solitary sample of 9/11 WTC dust and not in their other three samples, it would have created quite a conundrum.

The fact is, they found thermitic red chips chips in all four samples (taken from four different locations), thus establishing their pervasive nature.

To date, no one has provided an alternative explanation for the ‘reduced’ iron microspheres produced by igniting those red chips that invalidates the finding of nano-thermite made by Dr. Harrit et al.
Criteria 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 11th August 2017, 08:19 AM   #19
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,101
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Given the proven thermitic nature of the red chips found in the 9/11 WTC dust, had Dr. Harrit et al only found those chips in a solitary sample of 9/11 WTC dust and not in their other three samples, it would have created quite a conundrum.
Given that the "thermitic nature" of these chips is not, in fact, proven, but disproven by the actual results published by Harrit et al (unless conservation of energy is disproven, possibly a slightly less parsimonious conclusion), all the above is moot; however;

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
The fact is, they found thermitic red chips chips in all four samples (taken from four different locations), thus establishing their pervasive nature.
Which is precisely what would have been expected from environmental contamination, which would not be expected to show particularly great variations between different locations in lower Manhattan. Sorry, but you're creating imaginary obstacles here.

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
To date, no one has provided an alternative explanation for the ‘reduced’ iron microspheres produced by igniting those red chips that invalidates the finding of nano-thermite made by Dr. Harrit et al.
Again, as the "finding" of nano-thermite invalidates itself, this is hardly necessary; two perfectly viable explanations are that the spheres were not produced by a reaction but were present in the as-collected dust (as indeed they were in the sample of dust analysed by Dr. Greening here) but that Harrit and his associates were insufficiently competent to detect them; or that they were already present, Harrit et al detected them, but chose not to report having done so, motivated by the intellectual dishonesty that may be clearly seen elsewhere in their paper (for example, in their conclusion that the reaction observed is a thermite reaction when it neither matches the DSC signal nor produces a total energy in the range physically possible from such a reaction).

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers 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 11th August 2017, 08:22 AM   #20
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,211
I don't fully buy the welding/cutting/grinding hypothesis, or the screeching steel one, for these quantities. The fly ash explanation sounds more compelling, and I'm not sure it explains the amounts found, but the origin matters not: the lack of a proportionally equivalent amount of aluminium oxide plainly refutes the thermite hypothesis.

By proportionally equivalent I mean that the amount of iron spheres believed to come from a thermite reaction, should be accompanied by a proportional amount of aluminium oxide, the proportion defined by said reaction. That didn't happen.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno 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 11th August 2017, 08:57 AM   #21
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,744
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Contaminated dust?

The dust represents the amalgamation of the 9/11 WTC debris.

Of course it must have some contamination from local stirred up dust.

Given the proven thermitic nature of the red chips found in the 9/11 WTC dust, had Dr. Harrit et al only found those chips in a solitary sample of 9/11 WTC dust and not in their other three samples, it would have created quite a conundrum.

The fact is, they found thermitic red chips chips in all four samples (taken from four different locations), thus establishing their pervasive nature.

To date, no one has provided an alternative explanation for the ‘reduced’ iron microspheres produced by igniting those red chips that invalidates the finding of nano-thermite made by Dr. Harrit et al.
The thermite in the dust is a lie, or a fantasy of Harrit's delusional conspiracy theory of 10 tons to 100 tons of thermite planted in the WTC. Where is the iron from the 10 to 100 tons of thermite?

You were fooled by foolish old men who have delusional conspiracy theories.

The Harrit/Jones thermite fantasy paper proved if you make up a fake conclusion, a fringe few will believe. With the energy of the dust not matching thermite and the fact the office fires had more heat energy than 2,700 tons of thermite, Harrit is short on heat with his BS claim of 10 to 100 tons of thermite - the office fires beat the thermite liars, Harrit and Jones.

16 years of lies in a paper with a lie for a conclusion. Explain why the energy and DSC don't match thermite?

The reality based dust study... https://www2.usgs.gov/blogs/features...nter-collapse/

OOPs, 9/11 truth don't do reality (what is the goal, to be the last truther? )
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut 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 11th August 2017, 12:58 PM   #22
Criteria
Critical Thinker
 
Criteria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 447
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
”By proportionally equivalent I mean that the amount of iron spheres believed to come from a thermite reaction, should be accompanied by a proportional amount of aluminium oxide, the proportion defined by said reaction.

That didn't happen.”
Your proof for that assertion?

Originally Posted by Dr. Harrit et al
”… The next XEDS spectrum (Fig. 17) was acquired from a region that showed a high concentration of aluminum. Using a conventional quantification routine, it was found that the aluminum significantly exceeded the oxygen present (approximately a 3:1 ratio). Thus, while some of the aluminum may be oxidized, there is insufficient oxygen present to account for all of the aluminum; some of the aluminum must therefore exist in elemental form in the red material. This is an important result. Aluminum particles are covered with a layer of aluminum oxide irrespective of size, thus it is reasonable to find a significant oxygen content with the aluminum, given the very high surface area to volume ratio of these very fine particles...."
Criteria 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 11th August 2017, 01:15 PM   #23
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,542
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
I don't fully buy the welding/cutting/grinding hypothesis, or the screeching steel one, for these quantities. The fly ash explanation sounds more compelling, and I'm not sure it explains the amounts found, ...
What amounts?
Has Greening quantified the amounts?
Or anyone else?

I think people, and truthers in particular, tend to overestimate the total amount of dust blown outside the debris field. People, especially truthers, also tend to overestimate the amount of fine particulate created by the collapses. Gypsum, yes, plenty. Concrete: Was certainly mostly left in larger size fractions. As Greening points out, mere distance enriches the smaller particles (and those with much higher surface:mass ratio, such as fibers). If the mechanisms that produce fly ash and the iron-rich residues of welding and grinding prefer a size fraction under 300 microns, and little of the dust that the collapse created is in that range, then indeed you would find welding and grinding residues significantly enriched, and you can't conclude from their prominence in those samples that they were as plentiful in the buildings pre-collapse.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
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 11th August 2017, 01:36 PM   #24
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,542
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
[snipped irrelevant blather]
Criteria, you certainly remember that you have been asked many many questions about many many aspects of the Harrit & Jones hoax, and you certainly remember that, when specifically asked to answer straight and honestly, you ran away pretty much every single time, such that dozends of questions we asked you remained unanswered. For years now.

Right?
Right!

You know of course that, had you ever answered these questions straight and honestly, you could not return here and make the same nonsense claims again, for you would have been forced to refute yourself.
None of us forgot that.
Neither have you.


I'll try again:
a) Did Harrit & Jones ascertain that this chip in Fig 17 (Fig 12-18, indeed, the "MEK" chip) was the same material as the four chips that they showed in Figures 5-11?
Hint: The honest and straight answer to this is one short word: "No".

b) Did Harrit et al burn this MEK chip? Did it produce iron-rich spheres, or any of the other effects they talk about?
Hint: The honest and straight answer to this is two short words: "No" and "No".

c) Judging from the data Harrit & Jones present about the MEK chip before mistreating it with MEK, did the chip contain a significant amount of Al, such that calling it "thermitic" is at least feasible? Remember that pure thermite is about 25% by weight Al.
Hint: The honest and straight answer to this is one short word: "No".

d) Would the maximum possible amount of Al that the XEDS spectra in Figure 14 and Figure 7 allow explain at least 5% of the energy output recorded in Figure 19 for the DSC experiment?
Hint: The honest and straight answer to this is one short word: "No".

e) Consequently, can any of the chips be called "thermitic", if the term is to be understood that a significant proportion of the heat generated by burning the chips comes from a thermite reaction?
Hint: The honest and straight answer to this is one short word: "No".

f) They show a chip that contains significant lead (Pb) in Figure 31. Is this the same material as chips a-d (Fig 5-12), or the MEK chip?
Hint: The honest and straight answer to this is one short word: "No".

g) They mention in passing that some chips have significant Cu (copper), some have significant Ba (barium). Are these chips the same material as chips a-d, or as the MEK-chip, or as the lead-rich chip in Fig. 31?
Hint: The honest and straight answer to this is one short word: "No".

h) The specimen shown in Figure 23 and 26 is a chip they treated with an oxyacetylene torch, the flame of which easily exceeds the melting point of iron and iron oxides. Canj we be sure the spherical shape of the tip of that specimen is the result of a chemical reaction within the chip itself, as opposed to the result of heating the gray layer to far beyond its melting point with an external flame?
Hint: The honest and straight answer to this is one short word: "No".


We all know already that you will not answer a single question, let alone answer straight, let alone honest.
You know it.
We know it.
You know that we know it.
We know that you know that we know it.

Bye bye, Criteria! T'was nice not playing with you!
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)

Last edited by Oystein; 11th August 2017 at 01:40 PM. Reason: Added questions d) and e)
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 11th August 2017, 02:13 PM   #25
Redwood
Graduate Poster
 
Redwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,467
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgimeno
”By proportionally equivalent I mean that the amount of iron spheres believed to come from a thermite reaction, should be accompanied by a proportional amount of aluminium oxide, the proportion defined by said reaction.

That didn't happen.”
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Your proof for that assertion?
Are the laws of chemistry good enough for you? 2 Al + Fe2O3 = 2 Fe + Al2O3

Did you take high school chemistry? By volume, there should be almost twice the amount of aluminum oxide as iron.
Redwood 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 11th August 2017, 03:07 PM   #26
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Contaminated dust?

The dust represents the amalgamation of the 9/11 WTC debris.

Of course it must have some contamination from local stirred up dust.

Given the proven thermitic nature of the red chips found in the 9/11 WTC dust, had Dr. Harrit et al only found those chips in a solitary sample of 9/11 WTC dust and not in their other three samples, it would have created quite a conundrum.

The fact is, they found thermitic red chips chips in all four samples (taken from four different locations), thus establishing their pervasive nature.

To date, no one has provided an alternative explanation for the ‘reduced’ iron microspheres produced by igniting those red chips that invalidates the finding of nano-thermite made by Dr. Harrit et al.
Wrong I can produce Iron microspheres, under an expoxy in an oxygen shielded environments, by reducing Fe 2O3 with carbon or other reducing agents.

There are tons of anti Rust coating on Equopment that contain yellow Iron and Aluminum in abundance.
Aluminum is used in red paint on magnesium rims.
Red grey chips should be found today in some of the spots the oridginal samples came from as trace contamination.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 11th August 2017, 03:44 PM   #27
Ziggi
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 374
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Even if you accept his unproven hypothesis that the proliferation of intact iron-rich microspheres were the result of welding and grinding that occurred 30 years ago, Greening's selective analysis fails to explain, or address, Dr. Harrit et als' observations that thermitic red chips pervade the 9/11 WTC dust.
Well, yes technically he should first explain why he thinks construction workers would not clean up the place and leave behind tons of iron spheres and other crap from construction, and also explain why these iron spheres would remain intact as iron versus rusting into iron-oxide and eventually turning into dust given 30 odd years in a salty wet next to the ocean rust factory climate. And then he would still have nothing because he neglected to mention we already know that the red material in those redgray chips formed at least some of those spheres so there is no challenge to Harrit et al.

Mr. Greening also assumes that the concrete had fly ash spheres even though he knows that it did not according to NIST and that he also knows that Dr Jones checked samples and found none. As he neglects to mention the redgray chips that debunk his welding spheres theory he simply neglects to mention these little details that debunk his work. This would be called out as scientific misconduct if any scientist bothered to respond to this crap. It is funny though seeing people here swallowing this BS without demanding he first publish it in some big name reviewed journal, as they do whenever anyone challenges their mantra. Behold, Greening says there be fly ash spheres in the concrete. Amen.

This paper is full of holes so big you could drive a truck through them, laughing all the way. It is ironic that the people he once called fanatical defenders of the official story are the only ones blind enough to not see them holes! So funny.

Mr Greening does though finally admit on paper that the iron rich spheres were created in 1500C plus temps, as truthers have been saying for years. Also very nice confirmation of Harrit et al conclusion of formation of iron spheres when redgray chips ignite means they reach temps over 1500C. But he neglects to mention all this, as he neglects to mention all the other things. Funny to think that some clowns on various forums and YouTube have been claiming otherwise for years. Red faces.
Ziggi 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 11th August 2017, 03:59 PM   #28
Ziggi
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 374
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Contaminated dust?

.....
Oh yes, lets talk about the response Mr. Greening gave when asked why he neglected to mention the redgray chips, in an answer posted here and then deleted
Quote:
Edited by zooterkin: <SNIP>
Edited for rule 7.
Do not post on behalf of banned members.
Was it deleted because quoting Greening is not allowed in a thread about his paper, or is it because his answer leaves certain people here with red faces and poo in their pants? The gist of his answer is that those chips could not be part of the dust because these tiny chips in the miliigrams are too big to have been blown away 200 to 600 meters, while them multi-ton steal beams were hurled up to nearly 200 meters or so. No big holes there.

And then also strange that Dr. Millete also claimed these same chips were actually part of the WTC dust. So Dr. Greening is debunking Millette and the ISF forum pet theory/mantra that these chips were WTC paint chips! So Oystein and Sunstealer et al would have to give up their mantra "the chips are WTC paint"..."LaClede paint!"....so they were all full of BS after all, if Greening is going to be accepted...

That is not why this comment got deleted, is it?

Red faces.

Ziggi 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 11th August 2017, 04:31 PM   #29
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,666
not steel was hurled 200 meters... that's rubbish
__________________
So many idiots and so little time.
JSanderO 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 11th August 2017, 04:42 PM   #30
MileHighMadness
Muse
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Just Southeast of Hell
Posts: 623
Again the fatal flaw...Thermite cannot not cut thru 1" to 4" steel plate.
__________________
“I don’t look forward to heaven, it sounds as boring as hell.” Lord Postsettle
MileHighMadness 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 11th August 2017, 05:36 PM   #31
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,744
Originally Posted by Ziggi View Post
Oh yes, ...

while them multi-ton steal beams were hurled up to nearly 200 meters or so. ...
lol, more alt-facts from 9/11 truth followers who offer no evidence, but multi-tons of BS.

16 years of lies from 9/11 truth, what is next for the movement based on the overwhelming ignorance of the followers.

How did your fantasy bad guys plant the 10 to 100 tons of thermite Harrit has in his dumbed down fantasy of thermite? Who are the bad guys in your plot of woo, can't you name a few.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232

Last edited by beachnut; 11th August 2017 at 05:38 PM.
beachnut 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 11th August 2017, 07:01 PM   #32
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,542
Originally Posted by Ziggi View Post
...quoting Greening ...
The gist of his answer is that those chips could not be part of the dust because these tiny chips in the miliigrams are too big to have been blown away 200 to 600 meters, ... And then also strange that Dr. Millete also claimed these same chips were actually part of the WTC dust. So Dr. Greening is debunking Millette and the ISF forum pet theory/mantra that these chips were WTC paint chips! ...
I have not seen what the admin deleted (which, by he way, is perfectly in line with long-standing moderating practice, your usual vile innuendo notwithstanding: A banned member is bannend, and must not post - thus sockpuppets are banned as is members posting on behalf of banned members), but I agree with you that it would be foolish to argue that the red-gray chips are not part of the original WTC event dust mix.

In this dropbox gallery, I have reproduced several Figures from Millette's latest progress report:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/dgkqksii3...4MzjxcY1a?dl=0

Note Figure 01 - Millette's sample locations:
22 Cortland St is very close to WTC2, half a block only
The other three are farther away than Greening's location (Fulton St and Broadway)
And yet, if you study the Appx A (PLM of as-is dust) and Appx B images (paint chips pulled out with magnet), you couldn't really tell that the closer location would have larger particles. In fact, the Ann St sample, taken more than 500 m from the nearest corner of either tower, seems to have some of the largest red-gray chips.

Of course these paint chips, being mostly paint chips, have a lower density (under 2 g/cm3) and higher drag coefficient (on account of being flat plates) than the spheres and amorphous particles of the concrete aggregate - and thus settle out of a dust close more slowly.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
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 11th August 2017, 07:05 PM   #33
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,542
Originally Posted by JSanderO View Post
not steel was hurled 200 meters... that's rubbish
Originally Posted by MileHighMadness View Post
Again the fatal flaw...Thermite cannot not cut thru 1" to 4" steel plate.
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
How did your fantasy bad guys plant the 10 to 100 tons of thermite Harrit has in his dumbed down fantasy of thermite? Who are the bad guys in your plot of woo, can't you name a few.
Oh come on guys, this is a thread about a new study on dust. It has nothing to do with the movement of steel, the hypothetical capabilities of thermite, or who did 9/11. It's just a study on dust, and how certain particles got to where there were collected.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
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 11th August 2017, 07:21 PM   #34
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,542
Originally Posted by Ziggi View Post
Well, yes technically he should first explain why he thinks construction workers would not clean up the place and leave behind tons of iron spheres and other crap from construction,
I hilighted a strawman. it's not the only one.
You cannot disagree, can you, that welding, cutting and grinding was done on site at construction time, can you? <- Please give this a straight and honest answer!
And so you cannot deny that some fumes and sparks and dust were produced and released to the construction at that time, can you? <- Please give this a straight and honest answer!

You now want to claim that construction workers would have cleaned that dust after their work? Well, the burden is on you, as you bring it up: Is that what steel workers and welders do? Can you document that? <- This is a yes/no question, to which I expect an answer of either "yes" or "no".

Originally Posted by Ziggi View Post
and also explain why these iron spheres would remain intact as iron versus rusting into iron-oxide
Well, he found them in the dust, so why would he need to explain that they exist?

Originally Posted by Ziggi View Post
and eventually turning into dust given 30 odd years in a salty wet next to the ocean rust factory climate.
Inside the towers' walls there was a "salty wet next to the ocean rust factory climate"? Would you pay rent if your appartment or office had this sort of climate?

Are you, Ziggi, not a bit ... excuse me ... silly to say such nonsense?

Originally Posted by Ziggi View Post
And then he would still have nothing because he neglected to mention we already know that the red material in those redgray chips formed at least some of those spheres so there is no challenge to Harrit et al.
Harrit et al show only 2 kinda roundish things in their hoax paper that come from incompetently heat-treated paint chips:
One is a conglomeration of red iron oxide pigments after needlessly wasting a chip in the pointless DSC "experiment" - much of the organic material burned away to gasses, and some small residue of soot and tar was much enriched with the unaffected pigments. Jones sold one such ball of pigments as a "sphere".
The other is the tip of a bit of gray layer rust which, inexplicably, they tortured with an oxyacetylene flame, which easily exceeds the melting points of both iron and rust by a comfortable margin - and ever since they have danced a happy dance because that bit of rust did - gasp! - experience a bit of melting! What morons - or what fools!? <- Your choice - though this time, I expect no answer.

Originally Posted by Ziggi View Post
Mr. Greening also assumes that the concrete had fly ash spheres even though he knows that it did not according to NIST
Citation?

Originally Posted by Ziggi View Post
As he neglects to mention the redgray chips that debunk his welding spheres theory
How? What on earth have the paint chip got to do with welding fumes?

Originally Posted by Ziggi View Post
This paper is full of holes so big you could drive a truck through them...
Please point them out!
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
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 12th August 2017, 02:55 AM   #35
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,211
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
”By proportionally equivalent I mean that the amount of iron spheres believed to come from a thermite reaction, should be accompanied by a proportional amount of aluminium oxide, the proportion defined by said reaction.

That didn't happen.”
Your proof for that assertion?
One proof: The RJ Lee report. It mentions significant amounts of iron spheres, but given that there should be approx. double the volume of aluminium oxide vs iron spheres supposedly coming from a possible thermite reaction, as Redwood notes, if their origin was a thermite reaction then there should be another remarkable amount of aluminium oxide. That wasn't reported; the closest the report includes is aluminosilicates (clay).

Another proof: the lack of reports of molten aluminium oxide pools post-collapse, despite the reports of molten iron, despite the fact that they should be there in twice the quantity.

Another proof: the fact that "truth-seekers" have not identified any significant amount of aluminium oxide in the dust in any report or analysis.


Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Originally Posted by Dr. Harrit et al
”… The next XEDS spectrum (Fig. 17) was acquired from a region that showed a high concentration of aluminum. Using a conventional quantification routine, it was found that the aluminum significantly exceeded the oxygen present (approximately a 3:1 ratio). Thus, while some of the aluminum may be oxidized, there is insufficient oxygen present to account for all of the aluminum; some of the aluminum must therefore exist in elemental form in the red material. This is an important result. Aluminum particles are covered with a layer of aluminum oxide irrespective of size, thus it is reasonable to find a significant oxygen content with the aluminum, given the very high surface area to volume ratio of these very fine particles...."
That applies to the unprofessionally handled MEK-soaked chip. We don't know much about the actual composition of the chip pre-soaking, since they claim it was contaminated, but a likely hypothesis is that it was Tnemec paint containing aluminates.

But I'm talking about the post-thermite-usage dust. Or are you claiming that no significant amount of burnt thermite ended up being in the dust? Was none ignited? What's nefarious about something that wasn't used?
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.

Last edited by pgimeno; 12th August 2017 at 03:03 AM.
pgimeno 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 12th August 2017, 02:59 AM   #36
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,211
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
What amounts?
Has Greening quantified the amounts?
Or anyone else?
AE911T say that "RJ Lee found the microspheres in amounts up to 6% inside the skyscraper across the street from WTC 2."

Assuming that as much as 3% came from a thermite reaction, there should be a report of a significant amount of aluminium oxide, easier to find due to its volume. There is none.

Particle distribution isn't that important for these considerations.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno 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 12th August 2017, 04:08 AM   #37
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Originally Posted by Ziggi View Post

Mr. Greening also assumes that the concrete had fly ash spheres even though he knows that it did not according to NIST and that he also knows that Dr Jones checked samples and found none. .
No need to assume, the concrete used glassy particles from the fly ash at Lansing New York to replace lime stone.
That is why it was termed Light weight concrete, Da.
It is the glassy particles Frank refers to as added fly ash, after the magnetic separation process used to separate the valuable magnetite from the Glassy component of the fly ash.


Also most of the microspheres would be captured and contained, in the floor pans under the concrete in a protected environment with the sparks microspheres from welding the rebar reinforcements, common in concrete flooring.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 12th August 2017, 04:09 AM   #38
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,666
Greening's other theory I recall was hair brained... I wouldn't bother to pay too much credence to anything he does. Sorry.
__________________
So many idiots and so little time.
JSanderO 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 12th August 2017, 04:14 AM   #39
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
AE911T say that "RJ Lee found the microspheres in amounts up to 6% inside the skyscraper across the street from WTC 2."

Assuming that as much as 3% came from a thermite reaction, there should be a report of a significant amount of aluminium oxide, easier to find due to its volume. There is none.

Particle distribution isn't that important for these considerations.
RJ Lee's samples appear to be simple contamination from cutting and hauling,
Nothing more not produced in the fires at all but from oxygen Lances, and vehicle traffic, that collected inside the building do to the broken windows.
The event RJ Lee was referring to was the damage to his Clients building.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 12th August 2017, 04:22 AM   #40
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Originally Posted by JSanderO View Post
Greening's other theory I recall was hair brained... I wouldn't bother to pay too much credence to anything he does. Sorry.
His hydrogen theory was wrong but that was because he was mislead by the scientist conducting experiments with Aluminum salts not pure Aluminum.

He is a PHD. Chemist, JSO, and this is quality work in Chemistry with tools he has used in his profession for decades.

He is an honest scientist who sometimes does make mistakes, but he admits them when he does, and never tries to intentionally deceive, unlike members of the truth movement.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 09:13 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.