JONES new paper:Microspheres and Temperatures

[DavidJames]

no problem. care to answer the question?

You want someone else to tell you how to think! Keep asking questions Sizzler, how on earth do you manage though life?

Please don't bother answering that's rhetorical.

 

[Sizzler]

I'm hoping that it will lead you to question his work. Why does he not look at natural or preexisting sources? If you are looking for evidence to support his work I suggest you ask him for a pay check. He simply is not doing the work. The most important work in the scientific process is to find the things that disprove your conclusions and deal with them. Why does he skip this step?

Please think for yourself and ask the experts in the relevant fields. This forum is all about this type of thinking. You don't ask the garbage man about the mole on your leg, right? Why doesn't the "truth" movement enlist experts in the relevant fields?

And if one can't find things to disprove one's conclusions?

The best I got so far was a picture from CC of a macro-donut sphere.

 

[Gravy]

I'm not refusing to contact experts Gravy.

I will take your advice, but that will entail me going to the university and asking an expert.

Why would you spend your time wandering from university to university (which I presume you do not attend) looking for people who are experts in these highly-specific fields, when you already have the names of such experts?

As with most truthers, it seems that you're avoiding doing anything about this pressing issue, Sizzler. Prove me wrong.

 

[Gravy]

And if one can't find things to disprove one's conclusions?

The best I got so far was a picture from CC of a macro-donut sphere.

The best you got? And which experts did you contact?

 

[DavidJames]

I'm hoping that it will lead you to question his work. Why does he not look at natural or preexisting sources? If you are looking for evidence to support his work I suggest you ask him for a pay check. He simply is not doing the work. The most important work in the scientific process is to find the things that disprove your conclusions and deal with them. Why does he skip this step?

Please think for yourself and ask the experts in the relevant fields. This forum is all about this type of thinking. You don't ask the garbage man about the mole on your leg, right? Why doesn't the "truth" movement enlist experts in the relevant fields?

This, of course, is a much better response then the flip one that I gave.

Unfortunately, Sizzler will respond to both with the same level of intellectual honesty. Sorry, color me cynical.

 

[Sizzler]

Why would you spend your time wandering from university to university (which I presume you do not attend) looking for people who are experts in these highly-specific fields, when you already have the names of such experts?

As with most truthers, it seems that you're avoiding doing anything about this pressing issue, Sizzler. Prove me wrong.

And how do I go about getting the e-mail address of these experts?

 

[DGM]

And if one can't find things to disprove one's conclusions?

The best I got so far was a picture from CC of a macro-donut sphere.

Then you change your conclusions.

There is iron micro-spheres in fly ash. Fly ash is in the concrete. If you were trying to discover the unknown source of these spheres wouldn't you want to eliminate all known sources first? The fact he does not do this doesn't raise a huge red flag in your head about his motives?

Your bias leans toward the "truth" movement. Try to use the same skepticism toward them sometime. The results will shock you I'm sure.

 

[metamars]

Dear 9/11 truther,

Here are some videos of the beginnings of the collapses. Please point out the minutes and seconds in the videos when you believe these enormous explosions happened. If you do so, you will be the first truther to accept this challenge, although many have been asked.

South tower: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2873871255585611926#1m10s

North tower:


If you cannot do this, please explain why. Thanks.

Your movie says

"Conspiracists claim that the plumes of debris flowing from some windows and vents in the Twin Towers after the collapses began were caused by high explosives."

and

"Note the absence of detonations that would have ejected smoke and debris at high velocity"

Thermobarics are not high explosives. From an Australian military website, you can see that an (unidentified) thermobaric will have 1/2 the maximum positive peak pressure of an (unidentified) high explosive, and the positive peak pressure will last about twice as long.

I can't think of any reason why one couldn't tailor a thermobaric to have much lower peak pressures, and last longer or have multiple, rapidly sequenced, fronts. In fact, at physorg, I posted recently regarding floor slabs have a response time of .03 - .1 s , which (I think) means that if you want a blast that maximally deforms them as it's, well, 'blasting' them, you want blast fronts slower than 52 mph. Which is right in the range of observed 'squib' velocities.

Since you're a critical thinker, please tell us in your own words whether a blast that maximally deforms a brittle or frangible substance is more or less likely to create copious amounts of dust than one which does not maximally deform.

I'm not making any definite claims that such thermobaric explosions would create the dust clouds observed - I'm suggesting it.

When are you going to address the thermobaric hypothesis in one of you movies?

You do agree, do you not, that thermobarics and high explosives are not the same thing?

BTW, there are other possibilities besides thermite/thermate for pre-weakening steel. Please tell us how you know that liquid metal embrittlement agents were not used, which according to http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/12/g_gordon_liddy.html are classified. Please tell us how you know that NIST even knew what to look for - did they have access to classified information? And even if they did, how would a non-NIST'ian-insider know what that is? (Cue Max Photon).

And don't forget to tell us how you know that these embrittlement agents are rendered more or less reactive with the application of heat.

 

[DGM]

This, of course, is a much better response then the flip one that I gave.

Unfortunately, Sizzler will respond to both with the same level of intellectual honesty. Sorry, color me cynical.

That's OK. I'm typing this while my architect and the local building inspector are arguing about something. They seem to think I'm paying attention to them and taking notes.

 

[Pookster]

And how do I go about getting the e-mail address of these experts?

Are you going to need someone to drive you to the University? Do you need someone to hold your hand while you're there too? Are you really this helpless?

 

[Gravy]

Metamars:

So you also decline such a simple challenge.

Okay, please explain how thermobaric explosions that are strong enough to destroy WTC floors are not strong enough to break windows or even perturb smoke coming from open windows.

I await with sadness your denial of reality.

 

[Gravy]

And how do I go about getting the e-mail address of these experts?

Geez, if only their workplaces and contact information were listed on their papers. I guess there's just no way to get a hold of these mysterious sciency people.

 

[BenBurch]

In fact, you can make iron with a wood fire. Not efficiently. The blooms often fail. But you can. I've watched it being done.

And of course there was no wood at all in those offices, right, twoofers?

 

[BenBurch]

Geez, if only their workplaces and contact information were listed on their papers. I guess there's just no way to get a hold of these mysterious sciency people.

Here is a clue for him;

 

[Sizzler]

Then you change your conclusions.

There is iron micro-spheres in fly ash. Fly ash is in the concrete. If you were trying to discover the unknown source of these spheres wouldn't you want to eliminate all known sources first? The fact he does not do this doesn't raise a huge red flag in your head about his motives?

Your bias leans toward the "truth" movement. Try to use the same skepticism toward them sometime. The results will shock you I'm sure.

Point taken.

however;

the same conclusions are made by non truth scientists

RJ. Lee Report.

Quote:
"Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC Event, producing spherical metallic particles."

 

[Viper Daimao]

Geez, if only their workplaces and contact information were listed on their papers. I guess there's just no way to get a hold of these mysterious sciency people.

Yeah I was going to suggest the people involved with the paper's jones referenced. Should be interesting to see their reaction. Also what journal did he submit his paper to? Could find some people from the journal, though they may not be willing to discuss it if they're considering his "paper" it can't hurt to ask. Isn't Dr. Frank Greening, aka Apollo20 is a chemist is he not? You've already gotten his opinion here, perhaps you can correspond with him personally through email for a deep discussion.

I understand that you think this is the only place you can get answers though, after your post to the loose change forum only got a long incorrect reply from the legendary stundie himself. You'll have to excuse people here, they can get tired of perpetual questions and handholding.

 

[Sizzler]

Yeah I was going to suggest the people involved with the paper's jones referenced. Should be interesting to see their reaction. Also what journal did he submit his paper to? Could find some people from the journal, though they may not be willing to discuss it if they're considering his "paper" it can't hurt to ask. Isn't Dr. Frank Greening, aka Apollo20 is a chemist is he not? You've already gotten his opinion here, perhaps you can correspond with him personally through email for a deep discussion.

I understand that you think this is the only place you can get answers though, after your post to the loose change forum only got a long incorrect reply from the legendary stundie himself. You'll have to excuse people here, they can get tired of perpetual questions and handholding.

Yes I understand. But for the most part a lot of people here spend a lot of time here, and are willing to answer my questions.

If I am wasting anyones time, simply stop replying.

And yeah, that LC forum is garbage!!!!!!

 

[DavidJames]

Point taken.

however;

the same conclusions are made by non truth scientists

RJ. Lee Report.

Is there someone here denying "spherical metallic particles" existed in and around the site?

 

[metamars]

BTW, there are other possibilities besides thermite/thermate for pre-weakening steel. Please tell us how you know that liquid metal embrittlement agents were not used, which according to http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/12/g_gordon_liddy.html are classified.

Hmm. According to a poster on that web page, LME agents are not classified. Well, at least some of them.

 

[DGM]

Point taken.

however;

the same conclusions are made by non truth scientists

RJ. Lee Report.

Exactly. But do they make any absurd assumptions in their paper about abnormally high temps? Please use the critical eye to look in both directions.

I'll ask my local fire chief if he knows any good references to fire info. He just showed up at the meeting from hell. I need a bigger office.