• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Burning Painted Steel Beams, Making Iron-Rich Microspheres!

Spanx said:
I thought I would put this up for Georgio to see as he is showing an interest in the red gray chips.
Click to expand...

Thank you, this is indeed interesting.

Have any of the authors of the Bentham Open paper commented on these pictures?
 
Georgio said:
Thank you, this is indeed interesting.

Have any of the authors of the Bentham Open paper commented on these pictures?
Click to expand...
The vanity paper with the delusional conclusion of thermite? Are you joking? Jones and Harrit are mentally ill, they spread lies and have no evidence. The paper is a fraud. Proof, could not get it published with a real journal, had to pay.

Dust was studied after 911 by the USGS, and others who paid for studies. Jones and Harrit are a fraud, if people can't see it they can't do chemistry, logic, or reality.

The paper debunks itself. The big lies spread by nuts in 911 truth include the "only thermite can make irons spheres", and here are iron spheres in my fire place. If people can't figure out Jones is spreading lies about thermite, they can't do reality.

What happens with Flight 93, and 77? Where is the thermite in that part of 911? How does the thermite get into the WTC? So much BS, too little time to put out the Gish Gallop of lies 911 truth keeps making up.

Jone and Harrit have to deny the work of others to keep their insane fantasy based on woo safe in their heads filled with lies and fantasy.

Iron spheres are the big red flag Jones lied, and Harrit lied. Can't believe any rational person is fooled by 911 truth, and Jones's fantasy.

A vanity paper fooled you? Or the old on the fence nonsense, after 12 years?
 
Last edited:
You have ridiculed Niels Harrit on this forum:

chrismohr said:
Dave I'm really grateful for your work on this. When I asked you to do something like this experiment, I really didn't know if we would find microspheres at all, or if there would be iron-rich spheres. Their presence after a regular fire with steel and paint primer knocks down a major contention of the 9/11 Truth thermite assertions. Wow! Neils Harrit wrote to, I think Oystein, and said something like, if we find iron-rich spheres after a regular fire with prosaic paint, then halleluliah, more data!
Click to expand...
Josarhus said:
Since Harrit claims that ONLY thermite can produce these spheres, does it then really matter, if they are formed from the steel barrel or the piece being burned?
Click to expand...
Josarhus said:
Apparently Harrit will only accept spheres being formed from the paint side of any chips and not the rust/steel it is attached to.

If I am not mistaken, Harrit has never showed that his spheres ONLY come from the red layer of his chips?!

And Harrit is clearly missing the point, that the forming of iron rich spheres from any source, disproves his idea that only thermite, can produce them.
Click to expand...

beachnut said:
LOL, take an old building (likely heavily contaminated with welding-created iron-rich microspheres), this can't get better.

Of course iron spheres are common in fires... experts, unlike Harrit who seems to be crazy comparing himself to Galileo, when Harrit spreads lies about 911, the fantasy of thermite.
Click to expand...

LSSBB said:
Well, that pretty much nails Harriet to the wall.
Click to expand...

I could give still many more similar and even more hateful quotes taken from here. But how have you come to this scorn? By cherry-picking one sentence written by Harrit. From http://stj911.org/blog/research-faqs/:

(Question) ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS: Much is made of the fact that Fe-rich spheroids are present after reaction but there is no discussion of the grey-layer or of the origin of the Si-rich spheroids. Heating causes many things and there is an exothermic reaction so the conclusions about the presence of Fe-rich spheroids (which are reported to contain oxygen) as evidence for the thermite reaction is tenuous.

ANSWER: A scientific paper is a set of data and the best hypothesis rationalizing the observations. Fe-rich spheroids are observed after a thermite reaction. Fe-rich spheroids have never been observed unless there was a thermite reaction.
Click to expand...

Harrit did not mean his sentence to be a generalization but it concerns only the red-gray chips and chemical reactions in them. If you watch and listen carefully the following video so that ought to be quite clear:

Mark Basile: Dust Analysis Raises Questions - 9/11
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1VmaCl4HwU

Unfortunately Harrit did not elaborate his answer a little more clearly.
 
Lusikka said:
Harrit did not mean his sentence to be a generalization but it concerns only the red-gray chips and chemical reactions in them.
Click to expand...

Harrit's sentence, it seems to me, can only be read two ways. Firstly, it can be read as a purely general statement that Fe-rich microspheres have never been observed ever unless as a product of a thermite reaction; this statement is well known to be false, so it's the sense you're denying was meant (although one might think Harrit knows his own mind rather better than a third party). Secondly, it can be read as a statement that Fe-rich microspheres have never been observed in his sample set other than in samples where a thermite reaction took place; this is a circular argument, as the Fe-rich microspheres are the primary evidence claimed that a thermite reaction took place. In either case, the observation that Fe-rich microspheres are found from many other sources, including burning of primer paint, clearly invalidates their use as proof of a thermite reaction, whatever anyone thinks Harrit may or may not have meant.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
Harrit's sentence, it seems to me, can only be read two ways. Firstly, it can be read as a purely general statement that Fe-rich microspheres have never been observed ever unless as a product of a thermite reaction; this statement is well known to be false, so it's the sense you're denying was meant (although one might think Harrit knows his own mind rather better than a third party). Secondly, it can be read as a statement that Fe-rich microspheres have never been observed in his sample set other than in samples where a thermite reaction took place; this is a circular argument, as the Fe-rich microspheres are the primary evidence claimed that a thermite reaction took place. In either case, the observation that Fe-rich microspheres are found from many other sources, including burning of primer paint, clearly invalidates their use as proof of a thermite reaction, whatever anyone thinks Harrit may or may not have meant.

Dave
Click to expand...

Thank you for your immediate and to the point answer. But I suspect you did not listen to the video carefully enough. As I see it, so Harrit did not mean his sample set but the spherules observed inside or at the place of the remains of the reacted red-gray chips after the chips were ignited.

BTW, it is evident from the pictures in the OP that the Dave spherules had been formed in different surroundings compared with The Basile.org article spherules, which contain rather much aluminum. In my opinion it is logical because his spherules were formed in the thermite reaction. The picture is also in the Harrit et al. paper. There is also a spectrum of a spherule from 9/11 dust and it contains aluminum. I don't know if the Geological Survey spherules were analyzed. If there was aluminum also in them so perhaps they had formed in the thermite reaction.
 
Lusikka said:
Thank you for your immediate and to the point answer. But I suspect you did not listen to the video carefully enough. As I see it, so Harrit did not mean his sample set but the spherules observed inside or at the place of the remains of the reacted red-gray chips after the chips were ignited.

BTW, it is evident from the pictures in the OP that the Dave spherules had been formed in different surroundings compared with The Basile.org article spherules, which contain rather much aluminum. In my opinion it is logical because his spherules were formed in the thermite reaction. The picture is also in the Harrit et al. paper. There is also a spectrum of a spherule from 9/11 dust and it contains aluminum. I don't know if the Geological Survey spherules were analyzed. If there was aluminum also in them so perhaps they had formed in the thermite reaction.
Click to expand...

What form was the Aluminum in, an oxide of aluminum or pure aluminum,
Pure aluminum Iron microspheres would not be found from a thermite reaction,
In air.

Aluminum silicate is routinely found in steel as is aluminum oxide.

Finding aluminum in a microsphere means absolutely nothing.
 
Lusikka said:
You have ridiculed Niels Harrit on this forum:
...
Click to expand...
Who planted the thermite in Niels Harrit's fantasy version of 911? Who is Harrit blaming for the murder of thousands?
“We know explosives were used,” says Dr. Harrit, to bring down the towers.
Click to expand...
Harrit is a liar on 911 issues. And he can't explain how it was done with silent explosives and thermite which did not damage WTC steel on 911. There is zero damage to WTC steel from explosives or thermite.

It means Harrit is a liar; why does he lie about 911? Political bias, some mental issue? Hate? Why does he lie? The thermite paper is BS.

No need to ridicule Harrit, he does it to himself by spreading the thermite fantasy.

Iron spheres occur in fire from iron bearing substances.

911 truth lies about 911. Why does Harrit lie about 911? Harrit and Jones lie about thermite, and found aluminum and rust in WTC dust, and called it thermite; faked a conclusion, misleading people who can't think for themselves. Google "thermite WTC", and find idiotic claims due to massive ignorance.
 
Last edited:
Robrob said:
5) Even in a controlled environment, there is no way "thermite" could be used to sever a single vertical steel girder - much less sever the thousands of them required to collapse the WTC.
Click to expand...

What about the video below? You don't believe that military laboratories are able to do much more than an engineer in his backyard?

9/11 Experiments: The Great Thermate Debate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g
 
Lusikka said:
What about the video below? You don't believe that military laboratories are able to do much more than an engineer in his backyard?

9/11 Experiments: The Great Thermate Debate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g
Click to expand...

Stop dodging. Of course military labs can do better than back yard amateurs. So what?


The ThermXte discussion arose because S Jones was loosing his pre-eminence in the truther camp to Gage and others;

So Jones introduced "thermXte" as an ego boosting marketing ploy.

It worked briefly for Jones but failed long term - Gage still holds the leading place in the "market".

The technical issues are simple:

1) In the context of WTC 9/11 collapses the only legitimate reason for discussing thermXte is as a material used in CD;
2) There was no CD therefore thermXte was not used for CD;
3) Even if there were 100 tonne stockpiles of thermXte on ground zero - no CD THEREFORE thermXte was not used for CD.

(And the only reason we even have these decisions is that debunkers are willing to go along with truther "arse about logic". Even if truthers prove thermXte they still have to prove CD. )

4) Harrit was a late comer to the scene trying to ride to fame on the Jones nonsense.

MEANWHILE - WTC Towers were not brought down by EITHER military labs OR backyard amateurs using thermXte or any other material

So whether or not there was thermXte on site OR what mechanism produced microspheres is irrelevant ....

...other that as a means to support the "...goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution."
 
ozeco41 said:
Stop dodging. Of course military labs can do better than back yard amateurs. So what?


The ThermXte discussion arose because S Jones was loosing his pre-eminence in the truther camp to Gage and others;

So Jones introduced "thermXte" as an ego boosting marketing ploy.

It worked briefly for Jones but failed long term - Gage still holds the leading place in the "market".

The technical issues are simple:

1) In the context of WTC 9/11 collapses the only legitimate reason for discussing thermXte is as a material used in CD;
2) There was no CD therefore thermXte was not used for CD;
3) Even if there were 100 tonne stockpiles of thermXte on ground zero - no CD THEREFORE thermXte was not used for CD.

(And the only reason we even have these decisions is that debunkers are willing to go along with truther "arse about logic". Even if truthers prove thermXte they still have to prove CD. )

4) Harrit was a late comer to the scene trying to ride to fame on the Jones nonsense.

MEANWHILE - WTC Towers were not brought down by EITHER military labs OR backyard amateurs using thermXte or any other material

So whether or not there was thermXte on site OR what mechanism produced microspheres is irrelevant ....

...other that as a means to support the "...goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution."
Click to expand...

Jones and thermite came before gage.
 
Lusikka said:
What about the video below? You don't believe that military laboratories are able to do much more than an engineer in his backyard?

9/11 Experiments: The Great Thermate Debate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g
Click to expand...

So what I figured out and tested a device and type of thermite that could cut
Though 4 inch thick box column steel, but that does not mean some one actually
Used it.
 
ozeco41 said:
"...and others"???

Who won the bid for market prominence?
Click to expand...

Jones didn't fight, he wanted to leave because he realized the failure of the movement
was coming, best to get out and go into free unity energy scam, than stick with a dying truth
Movement.

All Gage has left is the twoofers that support him.
 
Lusikka said:
Thank you for your immediate and to the point answer. But I suspect you did not listen to the video carefully enough. As I see it, so Harrit did not mean his sample set but the spherules observed inside or at the place of the remains of the reacted red-gray chips after the chips were ignited.
Click to expand...
Do you mean the video "Mark Basile: Dust Analysis Raises Questions - 9/11"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1VmaCl4HwU
Can you point us to the minute:second timestamp(s) that you are refering to here?

Basile himself actually shows data and images that contradict the thermite hypothesis.
At 39:00 minutes, he shows "Chip #13". Its red layer is about 2.1x1.6 mm wide and long, and we may assume it is 50 µm = 0.05 mm thin - that's the usual thickness of those red layers. So it has a total volume of ~0.168 mm3At 39:30, he shows the elemental composition of the red layer of that same chip: >70% carbon means >80% hydrocarbon matrix (density: around 1 g/cm3), but only 1.7 to 2.6% iron, and 1.3 to 1.7% aluminium. If those were combined as ideal, stoichiometric thermite, there'd be a bit under 5% thermite in the red layer, by mass.
The red layer's volume is far and away dominated by the hydrocarbon matrix, such that the density of the red material hardly exceeds 1.3 g/cm3. This would give the red layer a total mass of ~0.22 mg.
Assuming that all the iron in that chip is iron oxide, and all of it is converted to elemental iron as you burn the chip, you'd get a maximum of 2.6% of 0.22 mg of elemental iron - that's ~0.0057 mg. Iron has a density of 7.8 g/cm3 - the elemental iron would occupy a volume of merely 0.00073 mm3, which would fit into a cube with 0.09 mm = 90 µm edges - this is the total iron content of the red layer Basile's Chip #13
Then he shows, at 43:10, several "iron droplets" he claims were formed from a "thermite reaction" when he burned Chip #13 - mind the scale marker: At least four of these droplets exceed a thickness and length of 100 µm easily - each of these droplets has more volume than the ENTIRE iron in the red layer could possibly fill out!

But: At 47:00 minutes, he analyses one of the smaller "iron based droplets" - it's only 53% iron, with plenty (21.4%) of oxygen and also lots of other stuff. This clearly is NOT elemental iron! Consider one particular and common iron oxide: Fe3O3 has a molecular weight of 231.5; 27.6% of that is O, 72.4% is Fe - the Fe:O ratio is about 2.6:1 by weight. Basile'ls droplet has a ratio of 2.5:1. This could well be magnetite. Iron-rich spheres, with O, C, Al, Si, Ca and others are commonly observed as the result of burning mixed organic/inorganic materials (burning household garbage would do), and Fe3O4 is often the dominating iron oxide in there.

Where did that iron oxide come from?

Easy: The gray layer. It is iron oxide, and the fact that the chips are magnetic suggests they contain a lot of Fe3O4 - the common name for that mineral is magnetite.


Similarly, you can estimate the energy that the >80% hydrocarbon release when burning, and the energy that the hypothetical and alleged (read: imaginary) <5% thermite could. Result: >99% of the energy released by Chip #13 was hydrocarbon combustion.

Basile burned plastic, and the heat of that burning, plus, I assume, the heat of his heating strip, affected the gray layer. (No, it didn't melt)

Lusikka said:
BTW, it is evident from the pictures in the OP that the Dave spherules had been formed in different surroundings compared with The Basile.org article spherules, which contain rather much aluminum. In my opinion it is logical because his spherules were formed in the thermite reaction. The picture is also in the Harrit et al. paper. There is also a spectrum of a spherule from 9/11 dust and it contains aluminum. I don't know if the Geological Survey spherules were analyzed. If there was aluminum also in them so perhaps they had formed in the thermite reaction.
Click to expand...
Again, could you please be more specific which Figures you are refering to? Time stamps in videos, and Figure numbers in the paper, please!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom