• 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.

Fetzer vs Jones

I just wanted to paste this clarification that I sent to Dr. Fetzer, today.

I have not received a reply to this as to date.

I will keep it in layman's terms, for the benefit of the members here, please correct any inaccuracies I have made, that would be most helpful.

Dear Dr. Fetzer,

I wanted to clarify my last email to you, based on Dr. Steven Joneses, work
it is the rapid reaction of super thermites that provides the force to
pulverize the concrete, that reaction comes from the movement of the
particles, the conversion of thermal energy to the Molecular motion,
expansion to break the oxide layer. The reason that is important that is
what allows a stable device to be made, because we are referring to solid
forms of Aluminum the fuel in super thermites. However as the particle is
reduced the Oxide layer to fuel source increases, there is actually greater
fuel in Endothermic metal reactions in liquid form, and they can react
quicker, if the Oxide is compromised, than Super thermites it all depends on
the energy molecular motion to break the oxide coating and the speed it is
applied to the coating and materials. The smaller the particle the faster
the reaction of said particle with thermal energy, to create molecular
motion.

The size of the energy packet is irrelevant, it is the speed of the reaction
that matters and since the Oxide layer on molten aluminum is dependent on
the temperature of the material because of the physics of molecular bonding
that effects all elements and compounds in the universe. The hotter
something is the more Liquefied it is the weaker the bonds, damaging the
coating at the right temperature will cause extremely fast endothermic
reactions faster than those of even super thermites. I wish you could have
seen the aluminum fire ball burning in air at super sonic speeds that I
created. At that speed and temperature the Oxide coating is molten, and the
shock wave of the explosion, blew it away from the metal .

It would just be difficult to make a device that would recreate it stable,
which is why they use solid, not molten aluminum in super thermites. The
Molten aluminum is simply to reactive and dangerous for the application of
it in a stable device.

PS. I have also reverse engineered a device that will cut though the beam,
that Dr. Jones says was cut with thermite, I found it almost impossible to
cut a standing beam with thermite, but I was able to cut a standing beam
with a thermite powered device, using steam, from a similar reaction of
Carbon with Iron oxide, and thermite simply as a heat source directly
applied to the steel. Up on contact with the heated material, steel, the
Iron in the steel reacted with the steam and gave of hydrogen while
producing an Iron oxide slag from the steel burring. This is important
because Iron rusts when exposed to steam or water in air, and there is no
rust on the slag, on the beam, it is almost impossible to recreate that with
thermite it would require a device that could produce a solid aluminum oxide
coating on the metal, do to the violence of the thermite reaction, that is
about as probable as me winning the Powerball without buying a ticket.

It is very important you check the date of the photos creation, my thermite
starts rusting within minutes of exposure to an Ion Carrier, such as steam
or moisture.

We are talking 100 year old science, are we not?

http://kr.cs.ait.ac.th/~radok/physics/j5.htm

"The combustion of iron and certain other (highly heated) metals in a pure
oxygen flow is technically of great importance due to the accompanying huge
quantities of heat - huge when compared with the unit volume of the metal,
for iron, it is around 12900 cal/l compared with 2½ cal/l for hydrogen. A
strongly condensed sharp oxygen jet, meeting a plate made out of malleable
iron or steel at a location, which has been heated to about 1 350ºC,
combusts the iron there into iron oxide and blows the oxide away. The heat
tone of the combustion heats and combusts neighboring sections; locations in
the direction of the gas jet pass through the same process, and since this
continues, you can make deep groves in plates and eventually cut them
(autogenous). A metal can be cut autogeneously only when its temperature of
brisk combustion and oxide melting point lie below its melting temperature.
This is the reason, why cast iron, copper, aluminium, et al. cannot be cut,
but only melted through. The combustion of aluminium into aluminium oxide
(Al2O3) forms the foundation of alumino-thermics (H. Goldschmidt, 1899),
which serves generation of high temperatures, especially for welding (rail
links, large machine parts), but here the oxygen comes from the interaction
of aluminium with iron-oxide. During the conversion of 1 kg thermite
mixture, consisting of 3 parts Fe2O3 and one part of Al, there arise about
850 kcal. This enormous heat tone of the reaction is due to its rapid
development during a few seconds; the estimated maximum temperature is 3
000ºC."

Also I wish to add that Prof. Woods is right about aluminum glowing Yellow
at 1000c, since black body radiation is irrelevant. However Dr. Jones is
right that pure molten aluminum can not drop or flow for long distances in
air without turning silver because of conductivity it simply cools to
quickly. However a mixture of steel dust, and Aluminum from a high impact
maybe and probably mixed with an amount of carbon black and Iron Oxide can
glow as it falls though air from the complex reactions of the Oxidations of
the materials involved. Such a combination can only be formed from a high
impact situation, or possibly from a sand blasting situation, then a very
slow melting of the Aluminum in combination with violent wave action on the
material.

I intend to also address these Issues on my next World Wide TV. appearance,
which I hope will not be to long into the future. It will be a minor issue,
I was going to ignore it but the producers want me to address it.

Sincerely,

Carroll Sanders
 
It's turning into a weird soap opera

on the front of the scholars' website said:
AN OPEN LETTER ABOUT STEVEN JONES
19 Novermber 2006, by James H. Fetzer
A RESPONSE TO "AN OPEN LETTER"
20 November 2006, by Steve Jones
A MODEST PROPOSAL FOR ST911.ORG
20 November 2006, James H. Fetzer
A REPLY TO JIM'S MODEST PROPOSAL
22 November 2006, by Steve Jones
ON GRAND PIANOS AND TERMINAL VELOCITIES
22 November 2006, by James H. Fetzer with
Judy Wood and Anonymous Scholar
Click to expand...

http://www.st911.org/ "Founder's Corner", scroll down a bit on the front page.

Note that Founder's indicates there is but one founder - Fetzer?

At the latest episode of the soap opera, Judy Wood is bitching about Jones' math and his dishonesty in assuming a different kind of grand piano to her.
 
Maybe I'm just unsophisticated, but I have a hard time believing that any object of grand-piano mass, lid open or closed, would take much longer than free-fall time to hit the ground. The atmospheric drag just wouldn't affect it that much. If one of the math guys could help me out on this I'd be very grateful.
 
maccy said:
At the latest episode of the soap opera, Judy Wood is bitching about Jones' math and his dishonesty in assuming a different kind of grand piano to her.
Click to expand...

I've read Judy's math. She is no Steven Jones. That much is certain.
 
maccy said:
At the latest episode of the soap opera, Judy Wood is bitching about Jones' math and his dishonesty in assuming a different kind of grand piano to her.
Click to expand...

Wow, after she came up with the 30 sec figure and "bitched" (:D) about Jones' failure in picking the right piano, she finishes with:

"I never said I had checked those numbers. " :eek:
 
Gawd, Fetzer is truly a buffoon. He is so wrapped up in wanting to be right that he changes his argument while still using the same basic lie.

Jim "We never went to the moon" Fetzer said:
Judy had advised me that the 30 second calculation for a grand piano had been done by a friend and that she had yet to verify it. According to the new calculation, the piano would have hit the ground in 11 seconds. I dare say that confirms my basic point, since the 9/11 Commission and NIST have assigned times of destruction for the towers of 10 seconds and 9 seconds apiece. So even though the calculation was flawed, the key point remains. The Twin Towers were demolished in less time than free fall through air! That is simply astonishing..."
Click to expand...

Would someone please post the page numbers for the 10 and 9-second collapses of the WTC towers? Even when faced with a gross error on his part, he establishes a death grip on another lie.

Fetzer basically said:

"I didn't know what the hell I was talking about, but I'm still right."

Jim, you are an embarrassment to the US Marine Corps. How do you look yourself in the mirror? Brave Marines are fighting the same terrorist scum that attacked us on September 11, 2001. How many more times will you declare bin Laden's confessions to be fake? How many more times will you absolve Atta and the hijackers of their crimes? How many more times will you call the passengers on the ill-fated flights cowards? What about your fellow servicemen and women that perished at the Pentagon? Is their blood cheaper than the ego-stroke you receive from peddling abysmal conspiracy theories?
 
maccy said:
Note that Founder's indicates there is but one founder - Fetzer?
Click to expand...
Fetzer has dismissed Jones as co-chair.
... while insisting that "a dictatorship may be no less undesirable than a democracy".:)

So he now has to re-write its history to say that he is the one and only founder.
 
brumsen said:
Fetzer has dismissed Jones as co-chair.
... while insisting that "a dictatorship may be no less undesirable than a democracy".:)

So he now has to re-write its history to say that he is the one and only founder.
Click to expand...

Gosh Fetzer is long-winded! I did like this bit:

Jim Fetzer said:
We need to remember that the 9/11 truth movement itself has had to cope with mountains of ridicule. We should not abandon our commitment to the principles of science and to the primacy of logic and evidence in the appraisal of possible explanations. I have therefore been dismayed at the dawning realization that even I may have been an accomplice to the constraint of research in several cases by removing at least two articles that were critical of Steve’s work, which I now believe deserve more objective scientific consideration, namely:

Aluminum Glows
1 Mar 2006, janedoe0911, Judy Wood and Michael Zebuhr
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/Aluminum_Glows.html


Why Indeed did the WTC Buildings Disintegrate?
18 Sep 2006, janedoe0911, Morgan Reynolds and Judy Wood, v. 1.02
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/why_indeed.html
Click to expand...

Both these papers contain some pretty good debunkings of Jones' thermite/ate theories. The seond one includes this:

What about nanoaluminum for cutting steel? Jones calls it "superthermite" and jumps to the conclusion that it caused the molten metal pools burning 99 days without eliminating competing hypotheses. There is no proof that thermite could cause such long-lived, intense fires. Jones and others might conduct experiments to prove otherwise, but we doubt such a result can happen. "Such molten-metal pools never before seen…with controlled demolitions which did not use thermite, nor with building fires, nor with thermal lances," writes Jones, "Huge quantities of the stuff." Jones asserts "that much thermite was used to bring the buildings down" [pdf (7/19/06) p. 62]." but if proven wrong, there is little or no fallback position. Placing all eggs in a thermite carton may lead to slim breakfasts down the road.

Another issue is how the perpetrators could deploy and control the necessary thermite. With 236 perimeter columns and 47 core columns and 110 floors to cut loose in each tower, it might take 31,000 large thermite deposits/canisters igniting in a computerized sequence to bring each tower down. Even if thermite was placed on alternate floors, that would be 15,500 charges in each tower. Then there is the problem of sufficient radio frequencies with 220 floors, each with its own set of frequencies. Professor Jones might give these scenarios some thought.

Professor Jones reports that he has analyzed a piece of solidified metal slag from WTC. He provides no documentation of the source or evidence regarding the chain of custody. He concludes that the presence of manganese, sulfur and fluorine suggest a "thermite fingerprint" [pdf (7/19/06) p. 77].". Perhaps he is right but there is no independent corroboration. Can outsiders test the slag? Jones has proved nothing. Demolition is corroborated, proven and undoubtedly involved steel cutters to insure swift collapse of the lower structure, but the cutters were not necessarily thermite. Without proof, thermite advocates put themselves out on a limb.
Click to expand...
Of course, Reynolds/Wood no-plane beam weapon theory is even crazier and easily debunked by Jones.

So, in effect, both sides are debunking each other.
 
Last edited:
maccy said:
Of course, Reynolds/Wood no-plane beam weapon theory is even crazier and easily debunked by Jones.

So, in effect, both sides are debunking each other.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

This is why the Trooth Movement is dead. We don't even have to take them on anymore -- we can sit back and let their own paranoia do the work for us.

Our role now is to provide the rational explanation for those who want to understand. But we don't have to debunk anyone at this point. Though it can be fun.

Oh, and regarding the piano in free-fall, it's pretty simple -- a free-falling object in vacuum that falls 410 meters will have an impact velocity of about 90 meters per second, or 200 miles per hour. If the terminal velocity of the object is comparable to or greater than this speed, then drag will only lengthen the time of fall by a small fraction. The piano, being quite massive, will experience no more than a single second of additional "hang time" depending on exactly how it falls.

And for the eleventy-billionth time, the towers did not fall in a freestream, and were therefore not subject to drag effects. Totally different mechanics.
 
R.Mackey said:
Exactly.

This is why the Trooth Movement is dead. We don't even have to take them on anymore -- we can sit back and let their own paranoia do the work for us.

Our role now is to provide the rational explanation for those who want to understand. But we don't have to debunk anyone at this point. Though it can be fun.

Oh, and regarding the piano in free-fall, it's pretty simple -- a free-falling object in vacuum that falls 410 meters will have an impact velocity of about 90 meters per second, or 200 miles per hour. If the terminal velocity of the object is comparable to or greater than this speed, then drag will only lengthen the time of fall by a small fraction. The piano, being quite massive, will experience no more than a single second of additional "hang time" depending on exactly how it falls.
Click to expand...

But what if it's an electric piano still attached to the power outlet?

And being played......
 
And how many times have we seen Fetzer raving on in his sputtering fashion about how thermite, er, um, superthermite, er, um, thermate was absolutely proven, proven I tells ya, to be what brought down the towers?

And now, one of his lengthy diatribes to Jones from the links above, he says to Jones,

Frankly, I do not see how thermite, thermate, or super-thermate could
possibly bring about the massive destruction that occurred on 9/11 at
the WTC, especially in the brief time-spans we are confronting here.
Click to expand...

<cue Wicked Witch of the West voiceover here>
They're melllllltttttting....
 
Is anyone working on before/after quotes? It would make great fodder for a Youtube video. Having the same person or people that worked together destroying a theory previously advocated would be something to sway the fence sitters.
 
In the grand Piano debate , Wood states :

Lets say you drop a billiard ball in a vacuum, no air resistance, so that it can rush up to speed as fast as possible. Then, when it reaches the speed of terminal velocity, it remains that speed from thereafter.
Click to expand...

Does she know anything at all about physics? Is she really an engineering PhD ??
 
GlennB said:
Does she know anything at all about physics? Is she really an engineering PhD ??
Click to expand...
I believe the first question has answered itself.;)

As to the second... might the fact that she apparently spent six years in a coma have anything to do with the tension between her knowledge of physics and her having obtained an engineering PhD?
 
Fetzer is now moving to incorporate ST911 as a non-profit, which will take control of the websites (and leave Jones out):

Steve and I may or may not reconcile our differences. If we do not, then Steve may want to form his own organization. If Steve were to pursue that option, then it could be a good thing in fostering competition in the search for truth. But there really is--or can be--unity in our diversity. A good, healthy, scholarly competition for 9/11 truth MIGHT serve us better than for us to try to manage our differences within one organization. Competition for the truth is the American way! I think we are stronger working together, but that is an option.

In the interim, I would ask that Alex Floum, a founding member, assign and transfer all rights in st911.org and our journal’s website as intellectual properties to Scholars for 9/11 Truth, with the understanding that Scholars for 9/11 Truth is going to incorporate as a non-profit organization Alex has been exceedingly generous in securing domain names for Scholars at my and Steve’s direction and hosting our web sites. I am overwhelmingly in his debt for doing so. At this juncture, a more formal structure suggests that different arrangements would be more appropriate.

My intention is that, once Scholars has been established as a non-profit organization, I will take steps to secure it 501(c)(3) status, which will enable supporters to have tax-exempt status for contributions in support of the society. We have been doing what we have been doing with no budget, no funding, and no source of income. In the past, I considered that a strength of Scholars, but I readily concede that we need to be able to finance research, sponsor lectures, arrange conferences, and publicize our discoveries.
Click to expand...
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ScholarsAnniversary.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom