Merged So there was melted steel

[A W Smith]

Okay let's see what kind of lucid thoughtful responses I've gotten.

A W Smith has nothing to refute the published paper by Dr. Harrit et al

what paper? It was never published. It was the equivalent of posting it on a refrigerator with a magnet.

 

[beachnut]

... Ah beachnut fresh from googling WTC dust links. Sigh. I guess when I said that; "a detailed accounting of the WTC dust at Ground Zero has never been published..." I should have explained clearly that it was a reaction to GlennB giving an unsupported figure (95%) as representing the amount of concrete in the WTC dust. By accounting, I meant something like core samples from the dust piles enclosing the hotspot zones that gave a percentage breakdown of the debris contents. I could be wrong, but I doubt any of those USGS reports even mention red chips and their characteristics.
MM

911 truth fails to read and comprehend, and best product is 10 years of shallow, incomplete research. Many in 911 truth could have earned a PhD in 10 years to help them combat insanity and stupidity of 911 truth claims. Followers have picked returning to reality or remain blind obedient followers spreading lies and claims of 911 truth conspiracy nuts. What have you done for 10 years to avoid falling for the lies of 911 truth? Got some photos of tons of melted steel? You failed to research my post past your standard no evidence retort.

... A detailed accounting of the WTC dust at Ground Zero has never been published. ...MM

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/508OF05-1165.html#heading11
It would be rude to ask you to read any of the reports done on dust, some will cost you money, and doubt you can find most of them using your bias method of collecting data.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/results.html
What, no comment, you will turn it around and fail to learn, fail to understand no thermite was found at the WTC or in the dust? Why do you fail to research past your nonsensical claims? Your level of research has to be close to nil, or you might figure out your claims are delusional.
There are too many to list, too many studies, too many sources and references to understand the dust, and the fact no thermite was found.

Arbogast, B.F. (ed.), 1996, Analytical methods manual for the Branch of Geochemistry, U.S. Geological Survey: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 96525, 248 pp.

Badger, S.R., Rickabaugh, K.P., Potter, M.S., Scheetz, B.E., Bhattacharjee, H.R., and Lee, R.J., 2004, World Trade Center particulate contamination signature based on dust composition and morphology: Microscopy and Microanalysis, v. 10, suppl. 2, p. 948 - 949CD.

Bern, A.M. Brownfield, I.K., and Meeker, G.P., 2005, Preparation and analysis of soil samples for measurement of asbestos content by scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, in preparation.

Briggs, P.H., and Meier, A.L., 1999, The determination of forty two elements in geological materials by Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometry, U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 99-166, 15 p.
Clark, R.N., 1979, Planetary Reflectance Measurements in the Region of Planetary Thermal Emission, Icarus, 40, 94-103.

Chandra, S. and Berntsson, L., 2003. Lightweight Aggregate Concrete-Science, Technology, and Applications: Noyes Publications, Norwich, NY., 430 p.

Chatfield, E. J. and Kominsky, J. R., 2002. Characterization of Particulate Found in Apartments after Destruction of the World Trade Center: Chatfield Technical Consulting Limited, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada.

Clark, R.N., Green, R.O., Swayze, G.A., Meeker, G.P., Sutley, S., Hoefen, T.M., Livo, K. E., Plumlee, G., Pavri, B., Sarture, C., Wilson, S., Hageman, P., Lamothe, P., Vance, J. S., Boardman, J., Brownfield, I., Gent, C.,
Morath, L. C., Taggart, J., Theodorakos, P. M., and Adams, M. 2001. Environmental Studies of the World Trade Center area after the September 11, 2001 attack: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 01-0429.

Clark, R.N. and T.L. Roush, 1984, Reflectance Spectroscopy: Quantitative Analysis Techniques for Remote Sensing Applications, J. Geophys. Res., 89, 6329-6340.

Clark, R.N., A.J. Gallagher, and G.A. Swayze, 1990a, Material Absorption Band Depth Mapping of Imaging Spectrometer Data Using a Complete Band Shape Least-Squares Fit with Library Reference Spectra, Proceedings of
the Second Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) Workshop. JPL Publication 90-54, 176-186, 1990a.

Clark, R.N., T.V.V. King, M. Klejwa, G. Swayze, and N. Vergo, High Spectral Resolution Reflectance Spectroscopy of Minerals: J. Geophys Res. 95, 12653-12680.

Clark, R.N., G.A. Swayze, A. Gallagher, N. Gorelick, and F. Kruse, 1991, Mapping with Imaging Spectrometer Data Using the Complete Band Shape Least-Squares Algorithm Simultaneously Fit to Multiple Spectral Features from Multiple Materials, Proceedings of the Third Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) Workshop, JPL Publication 91-28, 2-3.

Clark, R.N., G.A. Swayze, A. Gallagher, T.V.V. King, and W.M. Calvin, 1993, The U. S. Geological Survey, Digital Spectral Library: Version 1: 0.2 to 3.0 m, U.S. Geological Survey, Open File Report 93-592, 1340 pages. Online
at: http://speclab.cr.usgs.gov.

Clark, R.N. and Swayze, G.A., 1995, Mapping Minerals, Amorphous Materials, EnvironmentalMaterials, Vegetation, Water, Ice and Snow, and Other Materials: The USGS Tricorder Algorithm. Summaries of the Fifth Annual JPL Airborne Earth Science Workshop, January23- 26, R.O. Green, Ed., JPL Publication 95-1, p. 39-40.

Clark, R.N. 1999, Chapter 1: Spectroscopy of Rocks and Minerals and Principles of Spectroscopy, Manual of Remote Sensing (Invited), (A.N. Rencz, ed.) John Wiley and Sons, New York, p 3- 58.

Clark, R.N., G. A. Swayze, K. E. Livo, J. B. Dalton, R. F. Kokaly, R.R. McDougal, S. J.Sutley, and C. A. Gent., 2001, Imaging Spectroscopy: Earth and Planetary Remote Sensing with the USGS Tetracorder and Expert Systems, J. Geophys Res, in review.

Crock, J.G., Arbogast, B.F., and Lamothe, P.J., 1999, Laboratory methods for the analysis of environmental samples, in Plumlee, G.S., and Logsdon, M.J., eds., The Environmental Geochemistry of Mineral Deposits, Part A:
Processes, techniques, and health issues: Reviews in Economic Geology, Volume 6A, Society of Economic Geologists, Littleton, Colorado, p. 265-288.

Gavett, S.H., Haykal-Coates, N., Highfill, J.W., Ledbetter, A.D., Chen, L.C., Cohen, M.D., Harkema, J.R., Wagner, J.G., and Costa, D.L., 2003, World Trade Center fine particulate matter causes respiratory tract hyperresponsiveness in mice: Environmental Health Perspectives, v. 111, no. 7, p. 981 - 991.

Hageman, Philip L, and Briggs, Paul H., 2000, A simple field leach test for rapid screening and qualitative characterization of mine-waste dump material on abandoned mine lands, in ICARD 2000: Proceedings from the Fifth International Conference on Acid Rock Drainage, Denver, Colorado, May 21-24, 2000: Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration Inc., p. 1463-1475.

King, T.V.V. and R.N. Clark, 1989, Spectral Characteristics of Serpentines and Chlorites Using High Resolution Reflectance Spectroscopy: J. Geophys. Res. 94, 13997-14008.

King, T.V.V., R.N. Clark, and Gregg A. Swayze, 2000, Applications of ImagingSpectroscopy Data: A Case Study at Summitville Colorado, in Remote Sensing for Site Characterization (F. Kuehn, T. King, B. Hoerig, D. Pieters, eds.), Springer, Berlin, p 164- 185.

Lamothe, P.J., Meier, A.L., Wilson, S.. 1999. The determination of forty four elements in aqueous samples by Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometry. U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 99-151, Denver, CO, 14 p.

Lioy, P.J., Weisel, C.P., Millette, J.R., Eisenreich, S., Vallero, D., Offenberg, J., Buckely, B., Turpin, B., Zhong, M., Cohen, M.D., Prophete, C., Yang, I., Stile, R., Chee, G., Johnson, W., Porcja, R., Alimokhtari, S., Hale, R.C., Weschler, C., and Chen, L.C., 2002, Characterization of the dust/smoke aerosol that settled east of the World Trade Center (WTC) in lower Manhattan after the collapse of the WTC 11 Septemeber 2001: Environmental Health Perspectives, v. 110, no. 7, p. 703 - 714.

Lowers, H.A., Meeker, G.P., and Brownfield, I.K., 2005. Analysis of Background Residential Dust for World Trade Center Signature Components Using Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-Ray Microanalysis: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005–1073. Available on the worldwide web at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1073/.

McGee, J.K. and others, 2003, Chemical analysis of World Trade Center fine particulate matter for use in toxicologic assessment: Environmental Health Perspectives, v. 111, no. 7, p. 972 - 980.

Meeker, G.P., Taggert, J.E, and Wilson, S.A., 1998, A basalt glass standard for multiple microanalytical techniques: Microscopy and Microanalysis, v. 4, suppl. 2, p. 240 - 241.

Meeker, G.P., Bern, A.B., Brownfield, I.K., Lowers, H.A., Sutley, S.J., Hoefen, T.M., and Vance, J.S., 2003, The composition and morphology of amphiboles from the Rainy Creek complex, near Libby, Montana: American
Mineralogist, 88, p. 1955 1969.

Meeker and others, 2005, Materials characterization of dusts generated by the collapse of the World Trade Center, in Urban Aerosols and Their Impacts: Lessons Learned from the World Trade Center Tragedy, American
Chemical Society, in press.

Meeker, G.P., Bern, A.M., Lowers, H.A., and Brownfield I.K., 2005a. Determination of a Diagnostic Signature for World Trade Center Dust using Scanning Electron Microscopy Point Counting Techniques: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 2005-1031. Available on the worldwide web at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1031/.

Meeker, G.P., Sutley, S.J., Brownfield, I.K., Lowers, H.A., Bern, A.M., Swayze, G.A., Hoefen, T.M., Plumlee, G.S., Clark, R.N., and Gent, C.A., 2005b. Materials characterization of dusts generated by the collapse of the
World Trade Center, in Urban Aerosols and Their Impacts: Lessons Learned from the World Trade Center Tragedy, American Chemical Society, in press.

Millette, J.R., Boltin, R., Few, P., and Turner, W. Jr., 2002, Microscopical studies of World Trade Center disaster dust particles: Microscope, v. 50, no. 1, p. 29 - 35.

Nolan, R.P., A.M. Langer, M. Ross, F.J. Wicks, and R.F. Martin, 2001, The Health Effects of Chrysotile Asbestos, Contribution of Science to Risk-Management Decisions, The Canadian Mineralogist Special Publication 5,
Mineralogical Association of Canada, Ottawa, 304 pp.

Nomenclature Committee of TIMA Inc., 1991, Nomenclature of Man-Made Vitreous Fibers., TIMA Inc. McDonald, C., 2001, Carcinogenicity of fibrous tremolite in workplace and general environments: 2001 Asbestos
Health Effects Conference, EPA-NIOSH, Oakland, California, May 24-25, 2001, 4 p.

Offenberg, J.H., Eisenreich, S.J., Chen, L.C., Cohen, M.D., Chee, G., Prophete, C., Weisel, C., and Lioy, P.J., 2003, Persistent organic pollutants in the dusts that settled across lower Manhattan after September 11, 2001: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 37, p. 502 - 508.

Plumlee and others, 2005, Inorganic chemical composition and chemical reactivity of settled dust generated by the World Trade Center building collapse, in Urban Aerosols and Their Impacts: Lessons Learned from the World Trade Center Tragedy, American Chemical Society, in press.

Prezant, D.J., Weiden, M., Banauch, G.I., McGuinness, G., Rom, W.N., Aldrich, T.K., and Kelly, K.J., 2002, Cough and bronchial responsiveness in firefighters at the World Trade Center site: The New England Journal of
Medicine, v. 347, no. 11, p. 806 - 842.

Ross, M., 1999, The health effects of mineral dusts, in The Environmental Geochemistry of Mineral Deposits, Part A: Processes, Techniques, and Health Issues: Society of Economic Geologists Reviews in Economic Geology, 6A, p. 339-356.

Skinner, H.C.W., Ross, M., and Frondel, C., 1988, Asbestos and other fibrous minerals: Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 204 p.

Swayze, G.A., K.S. Smith, R.N. Clark, S.J. Sutley, R.N. Pearson, G.S. Rust, J.S. Vance,P.L. Hageman, P.H. Briggs, A.L. Meier, M.J. Singleton, and S. Roth, 2000, Using imaging spectroscopy to map acidic mine waste,
Environmental Science and Technology, 34, 47-54.

Swayze and others, 2005, Spectroscopic and x-ray diffraction analyses of asbestos in the World Trade Center dust, in Urban Aerosols and Their Impacts: Lessons Learned from the World Trade Center Tragedy, American
Chemical Society, in press.

TIMA (Thermal Insulation Manufacturers Association), 1991. Nomenclature of Man-Made Vitreous Fibers: TIMA Inc. 72p.

Van Oss, C.J., J.O. Naim, P.M. Costanzo, R.F. Giese, Jr., W. Wu, and A.F. Sorling, 1999, Impact of different asbestos species and other mineral particles on pulmonary pathogenesis: Clays and Clay Minerals, v. 47, no. 6,
p. 697-707.

Yiin, L., Millette, J.R., Vette, A., Ilacqua, V., Quan, C., Gorczynski, J., Kendall, M., Chen, L.C., Weisel, C.P., Buckley, B., Yang, I., Lioy, P.J., 2004, Comparisons of the dust/smoke particulate that settled inside the
surrounding buildings and outside on the streets of southern New York City after the collapse of the World Trade Center, September 11, 2001: Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association, v. 54, p. 515 – 528.

many more ,,,

... A detailed accounting of the WTC dust at Ground Zero has never been published. ...MM

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/..._WTCDustSignatureCompositionAndMorphology.pdf
A building essentially destroyed by WTC dust, accounted for in one study which found no thermite. good one

...Must remember to listen to some Three Dog Night. ...

Yep, Jones is the personification of Naturally, side two, track three, on 911 issues.

 

[Miragememories]

Nice collection of irrelevant links Beachnut.

They talk about all kinds of interesting "stuff" but not about the red chips.

But you would be wrong if you believe that the R.J. Lee Report you provided a link for was not consulted by Dr. Jones.

"Previous studies discussing observations of the WTC dust include reports by the RJ Lee Company [14], the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) [15], McGee et al. [13] and Lioy et al. [16] Some of these studies confirmed the finding of iron-rich microspheres, which are also peculiar [5, 8, 11, 13-15] but the red/gray chips analyzed in this study have apparently not been discussed in previously published reports.

[14] Lee RJ Group. WTC dust signature report, composition and morphology. December 2003. [Accessed February 7, 2009]. Available from:
http://www.nyenvirolaw.org/WTC/130 ...is LMDC 130 Liberty Documents/Signature of WT
C%20dust/WTC%20Dust%20Signature.Composition%20and%20Morphology.Final.pdf "

MM

 

[jaydeehess]

Okay let's see what kind of lucid thoughtful responses I've gotten.
Moving on.

Ah jaydeehess educating me about the number of floors and what buildings are composed of. Well first of all, in the interest of accuracy, it should be 267 storeys since I included WTC7. The inventory list he provided was covered I believe when I said this in my earlier reply;
"A natural expectation from this, would be that pre-existing hotspot cavities deep in the debris pile would receive a steady influx of falling pulverized concrete, pulverized glass and other building materials, pulverized office furnishings and other building combustibles, and pulverized thermitic material in the form of red chip laden dust.".

I suppose so, other than the steady influx of dust (don't know how the amount filtering down could be significant though I know you pin your hopes and desires to it), and the existence of thermitic material which has most certainly not been shown to be what the r/g chips are.

As for the amount of material yes, a lot more concrete, drywall, glass, etc., and I suppose paint chips too.

That just about covers it.

Carry on.

Oops not quite. I see GlennB has arrived with a tidbit response which supposedly will totally annihilate by lengthy response to him earlier.



They did not fail to perform the ignition test in an inert atmosphere Glenn.

Dr. Harrit clearly explained this recently and I reported his reasoning here.

Dr. Harrit contacted Tillotson before testing in order to determine what test conditions he used when igniting nano-thermite under DSC. To get as accurate a comparison as possible, Dr. Harrit, who believed his samples to be a form of nano-thermite, tested under the same conditions.
Carry on.

MM

Tillotson was or was not claiming the chips were thermitic?
Harrit was or was not claiming the chips were thermitic?

If Harrit was merely duplicating Tillotson then fine, no problem. But Harrit was attempting to conclude that the chips were thermitic and Tillotson was not doing this as he already knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was testing thermite. Harrit did not, thus additional tests are required other than Harrit's 'belief' that they were thermitic.

So Harrit did not fail to test his hypothesis that the chips are thermitic, he simply did not attempt to prove that they are self oxidizing and he did not do so because he already believed them to be so.

Isn't that a logical fallacy of some sort Circular reasoning perhaps?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Greening did a paper a while back quantifying the amount of pulverization using calculations based on energy: http://www.911myths.com/WTCONC1.pdf

Using comminution theory and experimental data it is shown that hard impacts on
concrete-like materials produce fragment size distributions that depend to a good
approximation only on the original size of the impacted specimen and the mass-specific
input kinetic energy. In this way it is concluded that the WTC concrete consumed less
than 15 % of the kinetic energy available from the collapse and produce fragments in the
size range:
10 cm – 1 cm 1 cm – 1 mm 1 mm – 100 €m 100 €m – 10 €m Less than 10 €m
30 % 20 % 15 % 10 % 25 %
The predicted particle size distribution of WTC concrete may be compared to data on
WTC dust samples collected in the vicinity of ground zero after the 9-11 attacks. Such
comparisons are not straightforward, however, because WTC dust samples contain other
pulverized material, such as gypsum (from wallboard) and vitreous fibers (from
insulation), in addition to concrete. Furthermore, samples collected within a few city
blocks of ground zero contained a higher percentage of concrete than samples collected at
locations more than 0.5 km from the WTC site. This type of fractionation of the different
components of WTC dust is to be expected for the atmospheric dispersion of pulverized
material exhibiting the wide range of particle sizes noted above. However, regardless of
the details of the concrete particle size and contribution to the WTC dust, it is concluded
that 2/3rds of the concrete debris fell within the approximate footprint of the two towers.

Basically, using the energy calculated for the collapse he concludes is produces around 30% of fragments ranging between 1 and 10cm, and 20% of which range between 1cm and 1mm. In other words, the energy available by the gravitational collapse produces about 50% alone that doesn't constitute "a fine powder"... of course continued discussion on this would be best served in another thread.

 

[A W Smith]

911 troll still trolling

At the surface? No. ANYWHERE.

And you can't be pulling numbers from nowhere Glenn. A detailed accounting of the WTC dust at Ground Zero has never been published.MM

Nice collection of irrelevant links Beachnut.

They talk about all kinds of interesting "stuff" but not about the red chips.
MM

Move goalposts much?

 

[Miragememories]

"On the basis of a study that failed to perform such utterly fundamental tests as igniting the chips in an inert atmosphere and analysing for compounds (to name but two) you are nailing your colours to a very rickety mast indeed. Yet you claim these things are "known" ?

I haven't the stomach to address the rest of your semi-coherent rant so I'll just bid you adieu."

"Tillotson was or was not claiming the chips were thermitic?"

Tillotson was testing his nano-thermite sample in a DSC and his results were the only ones available for Dr. Harrit to make a comparison.

"Harrit was or was not claiming the chips were thermitic?"

Dr. Harrit did believe the red chips were likely nano-thermitic and wanted to match the DSC test conditions used by Tillotson as closely as possible.

"If Harrit was merely duplicating Tillotson then fine, no problem. But Harrit was attempting to conclude that the chips were thermitic and Tillotson was not doing this as he already knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was testing thermite. Harrit did not, thus additional tests are required other than Harrit's 'belief' that they were thermitic.

So Harrit did not fail to test his hypothesis that the chips are thermitic, he simply did not attempt to prove that they are self oxidizing and he did not do so because he already believed them to be so.

Isn't that a logical fallacy of some sort Circular reasoning perhaps?

Like I said, in effect, Dr. Harrit was duplicating Tillotson's DSC methodology. He was testing a material that he believed to be nano-thermite.

And yes, as I have posted previously, Dr. Harrit did perform additional analysis to build up evidence for his ultimate conclusion that he was indeed observing nano-thermite.

Of course based on your reasoning, it is possible that because Tillotson did all his testing in air, maybe he was wrong in his belief that the material he had created was nano-thermite.

Maybe he created a super volatile paint that others here are convinced Dr. Harrit et al were observing.

Paint that would likely ignite dramatically if exposed to an office fire.

Dr. Harrit suggested that such an extremely volatile substance would not likely be found in steel primer paint, but many of your colleagues here are convinced otherwise.

Go figure.

MM

 

[Travis]

MM, why do you continue to advance the less parsimonious idea here?

 

[Miragememories]

"MM, why do you continue to advance the less parsimonious idea here?"

I assume you do know what "less parsimonious" means?

Maybe you would like to make your question less parsimonious so that I can answer it in a manner befitting your expectations Travis?

MM

 

[NoahFence]

Paint that would likely ignite dramatically if exposed to an office fire.

And then what? Wait several minutes to an hour to actually do the damage?

Why don't you people ever THINK before you type?

 

[Tomtomkent]

I assume you do know what "less parsimonious" means?

Maybe you would like to make your question less parsimonious so that I can answer it in a manner befitting your expectations Travis?

MM

Or you could try answering it?

The "thermite" nano or otherwise was misidentified or misunderstood evidence of surface preperation paint.

What is the point of pretending it had anything to do with the collapse of the building at all?

 

[beachnut]

Nice collection of irrelevant links Beachnut.

They talk about all kinds of interesting "stuff" but not about the red chips.

But you would be wrong if you believe that the R.J. Lee Report you provided a link for was not consulted by Dr. Jones.

MM

Thank you for pointing out Jones links to work that debunks his moronic claims of thermite. Jones fools you by using legitimate work to reference his failed paper. You call work which debunks Jones' delusional work as irrelevant because you fail to understand. Okay, good for 911 truth, 10 years of failure down, infinite failure to go.

Iron-rich spheres from iron-bearing building components or contents

R.J. Lee Report says no thermite. You are funny, you ignore the reference Jones used, and go for the delusional claims. The ironic part of finding iron (Fe) in the dust at 5 to 6 percent, that is the same as finding Fe all around us. You are a 911 truth follower, you fall for the dumbest ideas and support them with talk.

 

[Miragememories]

And then what? Wait several minutes to an hour to actually do the damage?

Why don't you people ever THINK before you type?

I can only assume you are talking to your mirror.

MM

 

[Miragememories]

"MM, why do you continue to advance the less parsimonious idea here?"

"I assume you do know what "less parsimonious" means?

Maybe you would like to make your question less parsimonious so that I can answer it in a manner befitting your expectations Travis?"

"Or you could try answering it?"

If I understood the point of what what he was actually asking, I might attempt answering.

"The "thermite" nano or otherwise was misidentified or misunderstood evidence of surface preperation paint.

What is the point of pretending it had anything to do with the collapse of the building at all?"

Yet another nonsense question.

MM

 

[Miragememories]

"Nice collection of irrelevant links Beachnut.

They talk about all kinds of interesting "stuff" but not about the red chips.

But you would be wrong if you believe that the R.J. Lee Report you provided a link for was not consulted by Dr. Jones."

"Previous studies discussing observations of the WTC dust include reports by the RJ Lee Company [14], the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) [15], McGee et al. [13] and Lioy et al. [16] Some of these studies confirmed the finding of iron-rich microspheres, which are also peculiar [5, 8, 11, 13-15] but the red/gray chips analyzed in this study have apparently not been discussed in previously published reports."

"Thank you for pointing out Jones links to work that debunks his moronic claims of thermite. Jones fools you by using legitimate work to reference his failed paper. You call work which debunks Jones' delusional work as irrelevant because you fail to understand. Okay, good for 911 truth, 10 years of failure down, infinite failure to go."

The fool is the one I'm replying to in this post.

Work that does not examine the same material evidence used as the basis for a scientific paper is not proof of debunking.

"Iron-rich spheres from iron-bearing building components or contents"

"R.J. Lee Report says no thermite.

That is a lie.

The R.J. Lee Report says nothing at all about thermite.

MM

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Okay let's see what kind of lucid thoughtful responses I've gotten.

A W Smith has nothing to refute the published paper by Dr. Harrit et al so he chooses to attack the paper's publisher.

There is no "published paper. Bentham will publish anything if you pay. Getting a paper "published" there has no more meaning than getting a video of your pet cat on Youtube.

As for the contents of the "paper" its been completely bebunked from end to end. Its a joke.

 

[Dog Town]

I can only assume you are talking to your mirror.

MM

So YOU responded, are you his mirror?

 

[sheeplesnshills]

My original reference was to the know hotspots deep in the debris pile. Pockets or cavities in the debris that remained incredibly hot over the ensuing months following 9/11.

Well insulated hotspots that cooled very slowly and subjected to a steady shower of dust disturbed by the vibrations from the surface excavations.

If its well insulated it can't be showered with anything let alone enough dust to keep steel molten. These characteristics of your chamber are mutually exclusive.

Dust composed of all the materials originally composing the original WTC 1,2 & 7 structures but also containing a high red chip count.

so what % of your "dust" was thermite? You don't seem to accept figures based of Jones et al so what is your figure?

Red chips which would ignite at 430 C ambient temperatures.

Ignitions that generated heat and if in sufficient quantity over time, would either slow down the cooling in these hotspots or actually make them hotter.

right lets see the math. firstly how much molten steel do you think there was?
what was the insulation material and how effective was it?

What rate of dust addition would be required to keep said initial qty of steel still molten after 90 days?

An unproven theory? Yes. But based on the knowledge that the thermitic red chips have been found in every WTC dust sample to date.

Not a single test has shown it to be thermitic. Not one.

Yes I know that Glenn. My argument is based on a scientific publication.

Wrong again, as you know Benthan has zero credability, they will publish nonsense if paid to do so .......ironically as Jones proved

If you have a peer-reviewed scientific publication that clearly disputes the published findings by Dr. Harrit et al, I would be more than happy to see it?

why dispute toilet paper????

To back it up, you must prove that the experiments documented in that published paper were improperly conducted, falsely observed, and had erroneously derived conclusions.

Thats been done numerous times. You simply didn't understand what you were reading. Understandable given that you couldn't see the problems for yourself......

Again Glenn. I look forward to seeing the proof that supposedly supports your strong assertions!

And we are still waiting for Jones et al to do the same But we are not holding our breath!

 

[Dog Town]

The R.J. Lee Report says nothing at all about thermite.

MM

That should tell you something!
NO ONE can be this dense!

 

[Tomtomkent]

Yet another nonsense question.

MM

Twaddle. It's a perfectly reasonable question: The "nanothermite"/"thermite"/presumed thermite source was misidentified surface preperation paint. So what is the point of pretending it had anything to do with the collapse of the building?

But here is another you can refuse to answer:
As it HAD nothing to do with the collapse of the buildings why are you even bothering to discuss the point at which it ignites? What can any discussion of it hope to prove?