• 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

Cutting torches melt steel. Grinding melts steel. when it cools it forms micro spheres. This is very basic stuff. Why don't you know this?

How basic do you want people to go to provide sources for their statements?

Steel is made from iron? Iron is extracted from an ore by a smelting process?
Ore is mined from the ground?
 
Cutting torches melt steel. Grinding melts steel. when it cools it forms micro spheres. This is very basic stuff. Why don't you know this?

How basic do you want people to go to provide sources for their statements?

Steel is made from iron? Iron is extracted from an ore by a smelting process?
Ore is mined from the ground?

See Dick.

See Jane.

See Jane run.

Run, Jane. Run!
 
No, it isn't. Drops of molten iron would give rise to localised heating rather than the general heating to between 850 and 1000ºC that was actually seen, and more importantly would have solidified on the beam leaving very obvious structures that were not, in fact, observed.
Once again you are speculating and talking as if you knew all there was to know.

What we do know is that the beam was exposed to temperatures between 850 and 1000ºC for very long (several days) periods of time.
How do we know that? That's someone's speculation.

We know that a smouldering, diffusion-limited fire in well-insulated conditions is capable of achieving this temperature and maintaining it for this period of time.
BS!
Well ventilated fires burn at those temperatures [850 - 1000ºC/1560 - 1800oF]. Smoldering debris pile fires are oxygen starved and burn at much lower temperatures.

We know, also, that thermite is incapable of maintaining a steady temperature in this range, or for maintaining any elevated temperature at all over this time period.
Thermite starts at 4500oF. In a well insulated situation it would cool slowly. You are NOT qualified to say how long thermite would stay hot.

Therefore, we can be absolutely certain that these elevated temperatures were not caused by thermite
No, you don't know the facts nor do you know the conditions in the rubble pile.

You keep avoiding the obvious; thermite is the only known explanation for the melted beam, the iron spheres and the vaporized lead. Your list of "It can't be because" reasons notwithstanding.
 
What part of "liquify" don't you understand?

What makes you so sure that "liquify" means "melt"?

"Melting, or fusion, is a physical process that results in the phase change of a substance from a solid to a liquid. The internal energy of a substance is increased, typically by the application of heat or pressure, resulting in a rise of its temperature to the melting point, at which the rigid ordering of molecular entities in the solid breaks down to a less-ordered state and the solid liquefies. An object that has melted completely is molten." (Wikipedia)

The process that FEMA is describing intimately involves chemical reactions, namely corrosion: Heated steel corrodes in the presence of high temperatures and certain chemicals (sulfur, water vapor); the resulting chemicals or compounds may be liquid at that temperature, without having melted at any time - they come out of the chemical process in liquid form. It was not "melting" because it wasn't the same chemical or compound that was solid before the reaction, it was a different chemical or compound.
 
You keep avoiding the obvious; thermite is the only known explanation for the melted beam, the iron spheres and the vaporized lead. Your list of "It can't be because" reasons notwithstanding.

The list of "It can't be because" is all that matters; thermite cannot explain the corroded beam. Since it's an impossible explanation, it needs no further consideration.

If you want to dispute that, show me one piece of evidence that thermite can erode a steel beam to a fraction of its original thickness, leaving sharp edges. There is nothing to suggest that this is even possible, and until you've shown it to be so you're just making up stories.

Dave
 
The evidence that grinding steel produces iron-rich microspheres is pretty obvious. You can see the microspheres coming from the grinding surfaces, usually in great numbers. You can see them from a distance. They are clearly visible in almost any photograph of grinding metal.

The reason they are so easy to see is that they react with air and self-heat to high temperatures (yes, temperatures high enough to melt them), causing them to incandesce for a short period. Of course, during that interval most people don't call them "iron-rich microspheres," they call them "sparks."

When they cool down, they don't disappear, they just get much harder to see. They usually end up on the shop floor near the grinder, where they pile up over time. In a building under construction they would pile up on whatever surfaces were underneath at the time, and in any available crevice.

Iron-rich microspheres are also produced from wood flames. The source is ferritin protein complexes within the wood, containing ferrihydrate molecules that condense exothermically into droplets within the hot reducing environment of the flame. At no point is the melting of bulk iron required. (Iron microspheres in coal ash probably come from the same process.)

Burn some wood, stir a strong magnet through the ashes, look at the magnet through a microscope and tell me what you find.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
This is assuming the thermite is applied directly to the beam. Thermate residue [molten iron at much less than its starting temperature of 4,500 degrees F] could have dripped on the beam while it was in the debris pile and slowly eroded it. This is a possibility.

No.

We know of nothing else that could have melted the beam.

Bull flopsd. Those of us who have etched metals with acids know that sulphuric acid would do that. We know that there was sulphuric acid in the towers prior to collapse, and that more would have been formed in the hot-wet environment to which the steel was exposed.

Do stop and figure out what other items would be in the pile before you post any more baseless garbage.
 
BS!
Well ventilated fires burn at those temperatures [850 - 1000ºC/1560 - 1800oF]. Smoldering debris pile fires are oxygen starved and burn at much lower temperatures.

Really? How do you know this? Can you provide a cite and source? Also, show me that the fires in the piles were oxygen starved.

I'll wait.
 
I still find it hilarious that not one truther even understands what eutectic means. Or epic fail threads like this would not be started. Then again I would not be able to chuckle at RedIbis again.

It seemes to have brought back a particularly obstinate troll however. See my sig.
 
Before this thread becomes too "Realistice,"

I'll just ask whether Red ever supported his claim, or whether he is going to leave that huge steaming load of "I misread your one word post" as his swan song.
 
Before this thread becomes too "Realistice,"

I'll just ask whether Red ever supported his claim, or whether he is going to leave that huge steaming load of "I misread your one word post" as his swan song.
RedIbis doesn't make claims... he insinuates, thus leaving a back door to escape through when he is backed into a corner.
 
...

Thermate is the only known explanation for the melted beam.
Due to ignorance you have lied, and added your own moronic delusion of thermate. There were no thermate products found with the steel. Magic thermate. lol, Jones is insane and made up the thermite delusion; what is your excuse for making up lies?

Reason # 1,000,057 to go to college; to learn what this means!!!
"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.
LOL, the failed thermite/themate tripe is classic paranoid conspiracy theorists, making statements based on ignorance and bias.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom