JONES new paper:Microspheres and Temperatures

[lapman]

Apollo, I don't know if you have said any more on this since you anwered my last question. Have you gotten any more of the spectra analysis from Dr. Jones?

 

[Apollo20]

Lapman:

SJ did send me (and Chainsaw) some EDX spectra that he had not presented at Boston. That would have been in early January. I tried to engage SJ and several of his supporters in a debate on these spectra. We had a few e-mail exchanges but then I sent a long technical commentry on the topic of certain elements such as copper and zinc being present in some microspheres and SJ went all silent on me. That was about 3 weeks ago..... That's all I want to say on this for now.

 

[Furcifer]

1. I think this is a pretty strong indication of where the dust came from

If you add the results of the USGC reports to the findings as well and the WTC 7 steel corrosion, I think you have a pretty solid case about the temperature issue.

The other valid criticism would be to test the 'dust' from steel cutting operations to show a similarity or difference in the spheres chemical signature. It appears that they did do this test to rule out contamination from a different source as per your suggestion, Apollo.

1. Where it came from and where it originated are two seperate things SD. Finding moon dust on the moon is different than say, finding it behind your ears.

2. Don't you find it odd they specifically mention the fact that the dust was collected well before clean up began, but hey, this can't be dust from the clean up as it isn't like the "clean up" dust we tested? It's a ruse my friend. If the dust they collected and tested from the process of oxy cutting was so identifiable and unique, they could have simply stated this in the paper. Thereby eliminating the need to distinguish the two sample types earlier on in the paper. It's a very clever way of allowing the reader to come to their own wrong conclusions while gauranteeing them (the authors) a backdoor.

 

[Max Photon]

Oops. Forgot to water Dr. Jones.

Max Photon:

If you look closely I am sure you will find that in the context of microspheres in the WTC dust, most of the ambiguity you refer to is generated by Jones himself!

I wonder why..........

In the context of the microspheres - I agree.

As to the why? Well, we can only speculate...

He is sincere and genuine, and is concerned that independent analyses will get infiltrated, etc.?

He is a plant?

He is an animal?


I don't kinow...

You?

 

[Pardalis]

So who placed those thermate thingies? Where, how and when?

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Yes the pentagon thread was a train wreck I must admit. I think a plane hit the building anyway so it doesn't matter in the end. I've calmed myself down now and feel a little more rational.

Forgive me for my past actions in that thread.

So how about these temperatures?



Are you suggesting that these temperatures were reached in the WTC fires?

And if you are, what is your source for temperatures from ~1400C to 2,700C?

ps. 40 replies later and no one has addressed these temperatures......is that squirming I hear?????

I'm not blaming you for the Pentagon thread or even suggesting anything you did was wrong. Even if it was true, it would not be a valid argument since it has nothing to do with this thread. Just pointing out that the issues you claimed weren't addressed actually were.

First of all, I clearly stated that in Jone's own research some of the possible sources had nothing to do with the fires in the WTC period. So that alone rules out having to prove the temperatures of the fires. 2nd, much of the testing showed indications of above certain temperatures, not exact temperatures that could not have gone above. That conclusion is made by general behaviors of fires and the contents typically found in offices. It does not mean it is in any way impossible for higher temperatures. It's very plausible that those fires could even have melted steel. It's just not very probable. You CANNOT say certain temperatures were impossible, because you nor Jones nor anyone else can inventory every piece of material that was inside that building. You cannot say that there was not anything more than common office materials. You don't know if a resident may have had certain chemicals of unusual materials there.

but again, back to the fact that many possible causes don't involve the fires. And because the samples were taken so far away, you can't even conclude the samples even involve the WTC.

 

[lapman]

Lapman:

SJ did send me (and Chainsaw) some EDX spectra that he had not presented at Boston. That would have been in early January. I tried to engage SJ and several of his supporters in a debate on these spectra. We had a few e-mail exchanges but then I sent a long technical commentry on the topic of certain elements such as copper and zinc being present in some microspheres and SJ went all silent on me. That was about 3 weeks ago..... That's all I want to say on this for now.

Thank you, Apollo. Your efforts are appreciated.

 

[CHF]

Well, first of all, he didn't draw any such conclusion in this most recent paper. He concludes that the evidence suggests very high temperatures, and recommends a new investigation to understand why.

In other words, Jones is JAQing off.

And here I thought he was gonna offer something new.

 

[CHF]

This dancing around about thermite residues in the WTC dust samples is really pathetic!

Sure, Jones et al. do NOT mention thermite in their new paper, but Jones has spent the last two years talking about thermite/thermate at the WTC, so it is interesting that it is NOT mentioned in his latest paper.

Does this mean Jones no longer considers thermite/thermate was used to bring down the towers, or is he just "playing it safe" in his new paper? I suspect the latter, and I also suspect that the thermite, (or thermate!), theory will soon resurface......

But consider this: Jones' last public presentation, in Boston just before Christmas, included spectra of microspheres in the WTC dust and spectra of thermite residues prepared by Jones himself. And in Boston Jones claimed that the WTC microspheres and his thermite residues had essentially the same composition and both contained Si. But Jones was careful to say therMITE in his Boston talk, not his old favorite therMATE. Why? Could it be because at that time he was not seeing S in his spectra.

Now, in his new paper, Jones presents three spectra of WTC dust microspheres: one with no S, one with 0.2 at. % S and one with 3.6 at. % S. I call that "covering the bases."

But, as I said before, Jones' thermite/thermate theory is effectively debunked by the great variety of spectra of iron-rich microspheres in the WTC dust. This PROVES the spheres came from MANY different sources. If some of these sources were present BEFORE 9/11, e.g. in construction debris from welding and cutting operations, Jones needs to show us how he can distinguish between such particles and particles produced in the WTC fires. If he cannot do this, his high temperatures mean NOTHING!

Thanks for the summary, Apollo. Sure is nice to have a scientist able to explain things for all us non-scientists.

 

[Myriad]

The 911 WTC perpetrators must have used latests technology to cut all these columns quickly and coordinated.

Not to mention, from considerable distance away, unless they were all suicide operatives.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Swing Dangler:

May I suggest you look into the microspheres found in WELDING FUME and so-called MICROSPATTER.

A good place to start is the work of N.T. Jenkins who has many excellent articles on this topic in the WELDING JOURNAL.

Then there are these papers to consider:

D. Scott et al, "Spherical debris- Its Occurrence, Formation and Significance in Rolling Contact Fatigue" Wear, 24, 235 (1973)

J. Yuansheng et al. "Spherical Particles Generated During the Running-in Period of a Diesel Engine" Wear, 131 315 (1989)

Swing Dangler, why does Jones not address this kind of research?

Max Photon:

If you look closely I am sure you will find that in the context of microspheres in the WTC dust, most of the ambiguity you refer to is generated by Jones himself!

I wonder why..........

Apollo20, if Dr. Jones did the research he should he would debunk his own Science paper, then were would all the paid shills be?

 

[pomeroo]

In other words, Jones is JAQing off.

And here I thought he was gonna offer something new.

I'm betting that Jones is trying figure out how to dismount the tiger he's been riding. Given that admitting a mistake is impossible for a twoofer, he is faced with a knotty problem.

 

[pomeroo]

As far as the eye can see

Ambiguity

Do everyone a big favor and buy a dictionary.

 

[T.A.M.]

Could SJ be doing a "Dylan Avery" and moving his stance more towards LIHOP ambiguity? He might be doing it in steps, with this being the first.

TAM

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I'm betting that Jones is trying figure out how to dismount the tiger he's been riding. Given that admitting a mistake is impossible for a twoofer, he is faced with a knotty problem.

I am betting he does not know that thin steels can oxidize burn in a fire creating high temperatures in specific areas, without generating an overall higher fire temperature.
This is nothing new nothing I have not already done, in experiments, Dr. Jones has just how can I say it, his research is now boring me to death.

 

[pomeroo]

I am betting he does not know that thin steels can oxidize burn in a fire creating high temperatures in specific areas, without generating an overall higher fire temperature.
This is nothing new nothing I have not already done, in experiments, Dr. Jones has just how can I say it, his research is now boring me to death.

As you no doubt recall from that crazy e-mail exchange we found ourselves involved in, even some twoofers are growing impatient with his protracted tap dance. How long can he expect even the dumbest, most gullible suckers on the planet to wait for something that ain't coming?

 

[Sizzler]

I think a lot of you have missed this point:

Moreover, the RJ report provides provocative data regarding the abundance of observed iron-rich spheres. A WTC dust sample acquired at 130 liberty shows a "mean composition" of "Fe spheres" of 5.87% which is very high compared with "Fe spheres" found in ordinary building dust of only 0.04% (RJ Lee Group, WTC Dust Signature Report, December, 2003). As the report notes, the WTC dust has unusual identifying characteristics-in particular, the WTC dust in this sample has nearly 150 times (5.87/0.04) the amount of iron-rich spheres as ordinary dust.

5.87% of the dust is iron-rich spheres, compared to regular building dust of 0.04%.

 

[DGM]

I think a lot of you have missed this point:



5.87% of the dust is iron-rich spheres, compared to regular building dust of 0.04%.

Apples to oranges. Regular dust does not come from a burning office building.

 

[Sizzler]

Apples to oranges. Regular dust does not come from a burning office building.

Right.

So next question-->why is there such a high percent of microspheres.

And-->by what process?

 

[Alferd_Packer]

Got any pictures of that evaporated steel mrwrong?

Duh, how can you take a picture of something that's evaoprated!