Invitation for Java Man to discuss his 9/11 theory

Java Man said:
Well evidence for sulfidation was found both on WTC 7 and WTC 1. So that begins to clear the way for a thermite theory.
Click to expand...

wrong...the wtcs were full of sulfur, and this reaction would be common where metal, sulfur, and oxygen are found in large quantities.

TAM:)
 
Justin39640 said:
Why do you morons talk about the towers like the only thing in them was steel? They were fully operational, fully functioning buildings. I bet you could find just about every kind of metal conceivable in them, including lead from the UPS (uninterruptible power supply) system that was installed in the area that the molten flow was spotted. Many people theorize the metal was the lead from the cells in the batteries of that UPS system.
Click to expand...

Not to mention two large jets made from aluminum were flown into them.

I guess all that aluminum just vanished into thin air. :rolleyes:
 
ElMondoHummus said:
Will we allow you? No one's stopping you. For pete's sake, man, that was question 1 from the beginning. You are the one who's derailing. For 3 pages now, too.
Click to expand...

He only wants to change now as he was backed into a tiny little corner over his "incomplete report" bull:rule10.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
The sulfidation was explained by the Worcester Polytechnic group (Barnettt, Biederman, Sisson, et. al.) in multiple papers and a couple of different presentations. The sulfidation negates the thermate theory because the temperatures thermate (not thermIte, BTW, not if you're invoking sulfur) achieves would destroy the very sulfidation evidence that the WPI group found. Do a forum search for "eutectic" and read those threads.

Furthermore, the sulfur's source is eminently explained by multiple sources already known to exist within the towers: CRT monitors (remember, this was 2001), various items with organic components, such as paper, rubber, etc. Thermate would actually be a nonsensical proposition, given that it would have to be brought into the towers, and also given that it's use is contradicted by the presence of those very eutectic structures that, I repeat, would've been destroyed by thermate use.

Again: You seriously need to do forum searches for your talking points. You're bringing up things we've refuted years ago.
Click to expand...

Do you have a link for those publications by the institute?

Furthermore I find it intriguing that when the use of thermite is proposed the debunkers jump all over the place demanding explanation for the large quantities required. When sulfur is questioned it is explained by trace amounts found in things like CRTs, paper, rubber, etc.
 
T.A.M. said:
wrong...the wtcs were full of sulfur, and this reaction would be common where metal, sulfur, and oxygen are found in large quantities.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

Please indicate source and concentrations. Please also explain the availability of oxygen under the pile.
 
9/11 Chewy Defense said:
Come to think of it, there was an aweful lot of plastics inside the buildings. Those would be molten in the fires! Truthers really aren't bright, are they!
Click to expand...

Yup, but burning melted plastic doesn't drip in bright yellow sparks, it drip in dark blobs that smoke a lot. Dark smoke.
 
Java Man said:
Do you have a link for those publications by the institute?

Furthermore I find it intriguing that when the use of thermite is proposed the debunkers jump all over the place demanding explanation for the large quantities required. When sulfur is questioned it is explained by trace amounts found in things like CRTs, paper, rubber, etc.
Click to expand...

THousands of CRT monitors were in the towers. Thousands of rubber foam chair were in the towers, thousands of pieces of drywall (which contain sulfur) were in the towers. I linked to some of the articles written on this acid attack.
 
Java Man said:
Actually it does.
Click to expand...

Really? That is great!! Here is a cool challenge for you!

Identify the materials in the photos.

Oystein said:
Derek, if you think that eye witnesses know molten steel when they see it, then surely you will be able to pass this test:

Exhibit #1:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/120/293967938_fefbfba958.jpg?v=0
What is it?

Exhibit #2:
http://cache.io9.com/assets/images/io9/2008/08/79060530.jpg
What is it?

Exhibit #3:
http://www.lawrenceport.com/images/chuquiLiquid.jpg
What is it?

Exhibit #4:
http://www.jameslockman.com/jamesblog/down_the_hole.jpg
What is it?

Exhibt #5:
http://gallery.usgs.gov/images/05_26_2009/nr2Tlx8KKf_05_26_2009/medium/Drip2.JPG
What is it?

Exhibit #6:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/141/368337809_e92e87064f.jpg?v=0
What is it?

Exhibit #7:
http://www.amemco.us/exported photos/foundry.gif
What is it?
Click to expand...



Care to take a stab?
 
triforcharity said:
THousands of CRT monitors were in the towers. Thousands of rubber foam chair were in the towers, thousands of pieces of drywall (which contain sulfur) were in the towers. I linked to some of the articles written on this acid attack.
Click to expand...

I'm sure all that was also in other buildings that have caught on fire. Yet FEMA says it is very rare to find such a phenomenon.
 
Java Man said:
...
Furthermore I find it intriguing that when the use of thermite is proposed the debunkers jump all over the place demanding explanation for the large quantities required. When sulfur is questioned it is explained by trace amounts found in things like CRTs, paper, rubber, etc.
Click to expand...

Well, actually, I only demand any theory that involves themite at this point in time. What is that theory? It sounded like you have a complete theory, which involves thermite, which you consider the most solid. What is that theory?

(Only two pieces of steel are known where that eutectic melting was observed. They are outliers in a large sea of ummelted, uncorroded steel. It is in fact true that only trace amounts of sulfur would suffice for these. However, many hundreds of tons of chemical compounds containing sulfur were present, from many sources. That's hardly "trace amounts".)
 
Java Man said:
I'm sure all that was also in other buildings that have caught on fire. Yet FEMA says it is very rare to find such a phenomenon.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is rare to have a pile on fire, that takes 99 days to extinguish. Yes, that is rare.

It is rare to allow an office fire to burn for such extended periods of time. Correct. Which is why FEMA stated that this type of acid attack is rare.
 
Oystein said:
Well, actually, I only demand any theory that involves themite at this point in time. What is that theory? It sounded like you have a complete theory, which involves thermite, which you consider the most solid. What is that theory?

(Only two pieces of steel are known where that eutectic melting was observed. They are outliers in a large sea of ummelted, uncorroded steel. It is in fact true that only trace amounts of sulfur would suffice for these. However, many hundreds of tons of chemical compounds containing sulfur were present, from many sources. That's hardly "trace amounts".)
Click to expand...

This! Everyone keeps letting Java derail the thread by talking specific points and he has yet to flesh out his opening "theory."
 
Java Man said:
Please indicate source and concentrations. Please also explain the availability of oxygen under the pile.
Click to expand...

Wait wait wait.
While sulfur is truly ubiquous in any building (dry wall; fuels; ect. etc.) and oxygene present in any pile on the suface of this planet, all that is off-topic to this thread.

Don't let that distract you.

Just post your theory, please. The complete theory. Your most solid theory.
 
Java Man said:
Do you have a link for those publications by the institute?
Click to expand...

Do we have to do everything for you? I gave you the organization plus the name of the researchers; you don't know how to use Google Scholar? Names of researchers involved:
  • Ronald R. Biederman
  • Rick D. Sisson
  • Jonathan Barnett
Assistants/collaborators:
  • Erin M. Sullivan
  • George F. Vander Voort
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Here are a pair of their articles:
Now, as I've said umpteen times already: Do a search in this forum for previous threads on the matter. The notion of sulfur indicating thermate has already been refuted. Years ago.

Java Man said:
Furthermore I find it intriguing that when the use of thermite is proposed the debunkers jump all over the place demanding explanation for the large quantities required. When sulfur is questioned it is explained by trace amounts found in things like CRTs, paper, rubber, etc.
Click to expand...

Explain why you think those are "trace" sources. Show your work. Then explain how Greening could be wrong with his figures, or why you're dismissing building contents entirely (Greening points to gypsum in wallboarding as a source, and makes a very compelling argument for it).

Furthermore, answer whether you think the sulfidation attack occurred in the standing towers prior to collapse or in the rubble piles post collapse. If you can't answer that, then you have not done the research.

I would say the reason you find it "intriguing" that we're so ready to provide the answers is because you're predisposed to looking for suspicious reasons to doubt what you're being told, rather than to accept that we've looked into this already and have the answers at hand. Which again is a reason you should read previous threads on the issue. You are behind in your knowledge, and you are starting at a level the rest of us here left behind back in 2007.

Seriously. Look things up before you post them. You're doing nothing more than running down the Truther Canon 101 list, and that's old hat.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
Here are a pair of their articles:
Now, as I've said umpteen times already: Do a search in this forum for previous threads on the matter. The notion of sulfur indicating thermate has already been refuted. Years ago.
Click to expand...

Do you have something that doesn't cost 40 bucks a pop? Something you know open to the general public? Like the FEMA reports.
 
Oystein said:
Wait wait wait.
While sulfur is truly ubiquous in any building (dry wall; fuels; ect. etc.) and oxygene present in any pile on the suface of this planet, all that is off-topic to this thread.
Click to expand...

Yes, but that doesn't thermite make.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom