• 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.

Debunk Alert: Experiment to Test for Eutectic Reaction

RedIbis said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw&feature=player_embedded

So what's wrong with the experiment? What's it's weaknesses? Does it have any validity? If not, why not?

I don't think it's perfect, but I think this is a very helpful experiment. As Cole points out, whereas there may be sources for sulfur in the building materials, how did it enter the intergranular structure? And if these experiments are relatively easy to conduct, why didn't NIST do any for their final report?

If this video and experiment is not the type of sincere research that can be done by independent scientists, I'd like to know what is. Besides there are shoutouts to Jones, Greening and Mackey. Enjoy.
Click to expand...

I'm just curious how this person you cited intends to show how this corrosion took place all within the span of the seven hours the building burned and then collapsed as opposed to the several weeks/months the samples were actually located within the debris pile. I'd also be interested in how this individual intends to show that the condition of those samples represents the pre-collapse condition of the steel. Sadly, it seems he assumes everything hoping that his audience just 'nods' and agrees with everything he says because he's supposedly an "authority figure" on the subject. Is this really something that you find no faltering in?

In fact I recall he gave an excellent summary of how he thinks it takes an entire half of a building to cause the entire whole to collapse. I certainly see he has an excellent record for scientific study, after all he's an excellent pupil of our famed "Heiwa"
 
Last edited:
yes please, I would be MOST interested to see a valid source stating that the sulfidation was a PRE-COLLAPSE reaction.

TAM:)
 
RedIbis said:
That was quick. I misread your post and tried to edit.
Click to expand...

Does anyone else think it is hilarious that Red Ibis "misread" a one word post asking for a source?

And of course never actually provided the source?

Hee hee! Hey Red, got that proof that Silverstein "made out like a bandit"?

Just kidding, we know you never actually prove anything, ever.
 
Wait wait wait... I'm confused...

Is Christopher7 and Christophera the same person? If so, where's the rebar and concrete core crap?
 
16.5 said:
Does anyone else think it is hilarious that Red Ibis "misread" a one word post asking for a source?

And of course never actually provided the source?

Hee hee! Hey Red, got that proof that Silverstein "made out like a bandit"?

Just kidding, we know you never actually prove anything, ever.
Click to expand...

I think it's hilarious that you think Post #32 is one word, and I can prove you can't add above 1.
 
Quad4_72 said:
What steel are you referring to?
Click to expand...
Sample #1 is the the piece identified as being from WTC 7 in the FEMA C report.
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

"Heating of the steel into a hot corrosive environment approaching 1,000°C (1,800°F) results in the formation of a eutectic mixture of iron, oxygen, and sulfur that liquefied the steel.

[FONT=&quot]R.J. Lee Group Pg 17 [pdf pg 21][/FONT]
"[FONT=&quot]Figure 21 [FONT=&quot]and Figure 22 show a spherical iron particle resulting from the[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]melting of iron [/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=&quot](or [FONT=&quot]steel)[/FONT][FONT=&quot].[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=&quot]"
[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]http://www.nyenvirolaw.org/WTC/130%20Liberty%20Street/Mike%20Davis%20LMDC%20130%20Liberty%20Documents/Signature%20of%20WTC%20dust/WTC%20Dust%20Signature.Composition%20and%20Morphology.Final.pdf[/FONT]

The only known source for temperatures hot enough to melt iron or steel in the fires or debris pile is some form of thermite.
 
RedIbis said:
I think it's hilarious that you think Post #32 is one word, and I can prove you can't add above 1.
Click to expand...

I think it is hilarious that you posted that bull **** to remind everyone that you had no *********** source for your latest lie. Did you think people did not notice the fact that I quoted the post you were referring to.

Lapman: Has anybody positiviely confirmed that this reaction occured pre-collapse?
Redliar: Yes.
Lapman: Source?
Redliar: That was quick. I misread your post and tried to edit."

Moran.

"Originally Posted by lapman View Post
Source?
That was quick. I misread your post and tried to edit."

Uh, yeah, Red. Keep posting Red, you didn't earn the title of most worthless poster on this site for nothing.
 
Last edited:
DGM said:
You might want to search christopher7 post history before you spend much time responding to him.

Just saying. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Oh yes, I remember him now. I had an extensive discussion with him on WTC 7 collapse progression.

Im bored, so no worries!
 
Christopher7 said:
It was a limited change from a solid to a liquid. You can play with semantics all you like but office fires or debris pile fires do not burn anywhere near hot enough to melt steel.
Click to expand...

And you can lie all you want, but the steel never melted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom