Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

Sunstealer said:
Nice dodge!

And why would you expect a spherical particle like those shown to adhere to the surface of a concrete particle?
Click to expand...
the first pic i was showing you the scale. the second pic, im sure ya know how fly ash works in concrete.

Sunstealer said:
Care to address the issue of iron microspheres produced from combustion? Do you not think that a large fire containing all sorts of material could produce these spheres?
Click to expand...
do you agree with how these microspheres were produced:
"Exposure of phases to high heat results in the formation of spherical particles due to surface tension.
Figure 21 and Figure 22 show a spherical iron particle resulting from the
melting of iron (or steel)."
has anyone ever extrapolated out how much melted steel that would mean if the background sample only contained 0.04% fe spheres and the wtc dust contained 5.87% fe spheres?
 
Senenmut said:
.. has anyone ever extrapolated out how much melted steel that would mean if the background sample only contained 0.04% fe spheres and the wtc dust contained 5.87% fe spheres?
Click to expand...
Oh please tell us. Please. You don't answer your own questions?

No melted steel on 911. Oops.
911 you has two plus steel buildings falling, with over 220 acres of junk crushed up by itself, releasing over 260 TONS of TNT in kinetic energy to do the crushing. The dust on 911 is not anywhere close to being a background sample since the rock wool insulation is out of the walls, the toner cartridges are all over NYC, etc, etc, etc....

Have you tried to use reality based studies to form your silly questions?

How much fly ash is in the WTC concrete floors, all 220 acres of them? Does fly ash have spheres of iron it it? Yes, no, maybe?
 
Incredible. The truther movement is reduced to talking about "iron microspheres" in dust covering an adjacent building....

Simply incredible.
 
USAFMXOfficer said:
Incredible. The truther movement is reduced to talking about "iron microspheres" in dust covering an adjacent building....

Simply incredible.
Click to expand...

Not only that, they are comparing one sample (background dust) to another (WTC dust) and they see the difference in content and taking that as proof of their "inside job".

Only problem, the background dust wasn't involved in a large fire or collapse (pulverization). It's just your everyday normal dust that you find in all buildings (if you look, it's there, especially in Manhattan).
 
Known, recorded molten steel at the Twin Towers

You know, for people (read: Truthers) who want to keep beating the drum about molten steel, there was indeed thousands of pounds of molten steel recorded at the Twin Towers...

... during construction:
NCSTAR 1-3 chapter 4.2.5 page 24 said:
Higher strength SMA electrodes (ASTM A 316 until 1969, then AWS A 5.5-69) were also permitted by the contract. More than 48,000 lb (22,000 kg) of electrodes were used in each of the towers (welding design 1970b).
Click to expand...

If someone with welding experience can speak up, let us know what percentage a SMAW electrode erodes to before it's replaced. Just for an arbitrary, off-the-cuff figure, let's say it's 75%. If that's correct, then that means that we can source 12,000 lbs of molten steel right there in the erosion of SMA electrodes during construction.

And as Wikipedia reminds us of Shielded Metal Arc welding:
The composition of the electrode core is generally similar and sometimes identical to that of the base material.
Click to expand...

... so yes, the electrodes would indeed be steel. It was not the exact alloy composition as A36 structural steel - the NIST report quote above says they were A316, then that weird A 5.5-69 standard (whatever that is) - but it would still be steel.

What's my point? My point is that all of you conspiracy peddlers work overtime to ignore the fact that 1. Microspheres are ubiquitous in the environment, and 2. That there are plenty of sources out there for molten steel in air (therefore forming microspheres) that has absolutely zero to do with thermite and everything to do with what's known and established about the Twin Towers, including the fact that steel components were welded. So we're well aware of events that could have truly involved molten steel in the Twin Towers, and we don't have to create silly theories as to how they occurred; instead, we can see that they extrapolate naturally and simply from basic known facts. So instead of bending over backwards to try to shoehorn a well-beaten and well-disproven thermite theory into the known facts, how about noting which facts exist from now on and letting that determine what explanations suffice? That, after all, is the way critical thinking is supposed to be done!
 
11.) As I thought, the EPA report he coauthored re health hazards he found in the dust focused on the dangerous chemicals. He remembers seeing small spheres of iron (and reported on large quantities of iron) but the shape of the iron dust pieces was not the focus of the study. He understands that this is being treated as evidence of thermitics in the Bentham paper so he will deal with it in his report.
[/QUOTE]

So if he remembers seeing them now why wouldn't he have reported them? Iron rich formerly molten microspheres should have been the first thing reported. Millette did a lot of the analytical work on the WTC dust for government teams, and was the leader in the laboratory for the official reports. Go ahead and ask him. There has been talk that the same scientists collaborated on the official WTC dust signature study and made the deliberate decision to not report iron spheres.

Now all of a sudden he remembers them being there and will now do an experiment with them?????

I don't understand how the shape of these sphere's could have possibly been overlooked. To get the shape, the sphere would have had to experience extreme pressure/surface tension to pull them aggressively into that shape.
 
Last edited:
superlogicalthinker said:
bro....the iron rich microspheres are the most important element in this whole topic. How can you say that the spheres are unimportant. That is just silly.
Click to expand...

Face palm.

Now is the time that you explain how iron rich microspheres consititute a health hazard of interest to the EPA.

Jesus, it is like the blinkers these guys are wearing have blinkers on.
 
superlogicalthinker said:
bro....the iron rich microspheres are the most important element in this whole topic. How can you say that the spheres are unimportant. That is just silly.
Click to expand...

Of course they are, the man on the internet told you so. Sadly for you "iron rich" spheres are found all over the place where metal fabrication or oxidation due to heating occurs.
 
superlogicalthinker said:
bro....the iron rich microspheres are the most important element in this whole topic. How can you say that the spheres are unimportant. That is just silly.
Click to expand...

This thread wasn't around when they were first tested.

Try to keep up. But do it in another thread. Preferrably the one where I asked you to prove me wrong, and if you did I'll leave this forum forever. Oh, and you still owe me and the rest of JREF an apology. Not coming, is it?
 
grandmastershek said:
Of course they are, the man on the internet told you so. Sadly for you "iron rich" spheres are found all over the place where metal fabrication or oxidation due to heating occurs.
Click to expand...

Yep. They do. But they are not in a tear drop shape and formerly molten which means 2800F which means demolition.
 
NoahFence said:
This thread wasn't around when they were first tested.

Try to keep up. But do it in another thread. Preferrably the one where I asked you to prove me wrong, and if you did I'll leave this forum forever. Oh, and you still owe me and the rest of JREF an apology. Not coming, is it?
Click to expand...

Okay mr. fence.....i will prove you wrong. Send me what you said and where.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom