Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

Christopher7 said:
False. The building was NOT leaning. No one at the scene said it was leaning and nowhere in the NIST reports does it say the building was leaning.
Click to expand...

No one? :rolleyes:

"You see where the white smoke is, you see the thing leaning like this? It's definitely comin' down. There's no way to stop it. 'Cause you have to go up in there to put it out, and it's already, the structural integrity is not there."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnYBX6QT0R4

The building was structurally sound.
Click to expand...

So you're saying the firefighters are all liars. Why do you keep saying the firefighters are liars?
 
Christopher7 said:
No one at the scene. He was several blocks away looking thru smoke.

Read LashL's warning. It's in SLT's last post.

This message will self destruct in 30 min.
Click to expand...

LOL wow.

He's a firefighter that looks at the building and says it is leaning and he even says this on canera and you say it doesnt count. "No one" saw the building leaning. haHAAHAHAHAHH. You are a riot.
 
LSSBB said:
So tell me, which smoke color is for which temperature of fire?
Click to expand...

There were many news reports that day of fires cooling because of the smoke getting "lighter and lighter". I am no fire expert, but I'm pretty sure that smoke indicates an oxygen starved fire and means it's going out, which would mean(I would think) it's getting cooler.

So the type of smoke does tell the approximate temperature of a fire according to this news report at 0:21 sec of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
 
Christopher7 said:
Keep reading this until you understand it:
RJ Lee Group report 2004
Pg 4 [pdf pg 5]
The pressure differential was caused by the onrush of the WTC Dust cloud that was created by the collapse of the WTC Towers with a low pressure inside Building components and high pressure outside. A huge pressure difference was created that caused large quantities of dust laden air to move through unplanned pathways. Individual components or devices with internal spaces effectively acted like a vacuum cleaner pulling the dust into them with great force.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with what you responded to.
The quoted passage from the RJ Lee report describes how dust was deposited before lunch on 9/11/2001.

I went on to describe how iron oxide fumes were released into the air, and had a chance to accumulate additional dust in 130 Liberty street in the 9 months after 9/11 and until RJ Lee collected their samples. So please read again the following till you understand it. If there are points you don't understand, please ask. Again, note that I am talking here about the time between 9/12/2001 and June 2002, and not about "the WTC event":

  1. Do you accept that the air near GZ contained aerosols?
  2. Do you accept that the air near GZ contained iron in its aerosols?
  3. Do you accept that the concentration of iron in the air near GZ was (typical, or mean, value) 5µg/m3?
  4. Do you accept that this concentration is significantly higher than in typical inner city air, and that the source for the extra iron is most likely the nearby GZ?
  5. Do you accept that iron workers cutting up steel debris produce iron-rich microspheres and release them into the air?
  6. Do you accept that this iron work may account for a significant proportion of the measured increase of iron-rich aerosols in the air above GZ, given the fact that measured iron concentration near iron workers was significantly higher than near other workers on GZ?
  7. Do you accept that aerosols, including iron, are prone to falling out and settling as dust?
  8. Do you accept that the air inside the offices of 130 Liberty street, which had 1500 windows broken, exposing the offices to the elements, was constantly replenished with air from outside?
  9. Do you accept that this fresh air was also laden with iron-rich aerosols?
  10. Do you accept that these iron-rich aerosols are prone to falling out and settling into the dust even in the offices of 130 Liberty St?
Please indicate precisely which of these points you do not accept, and give short reasons!

If you accept them all, I guess you know your mechanism and are now ready to admit that there was indeed a mechanism "to deposit them in and on top of the building". Please acknowledge!




Christopher7 said:
Pg 21 [pdf pg 25]
The amount of energy introduced during the generation of the WTC Dust and the ensuing conflagration caused various components to vaporize. Vapor phase components with high boiling point and high melting point would have, as they cooled, tended to form precipitated particles or thin film deposits on available surfaces through condensation mechanisms. The results of this process would be the presence of a thin layer of deposited material on the surfaces of the dust particulate matter. Many of the materials, such as lead, cadmium, mercury and various organic compounds, vaporized and then condensed during the WTC Event.

Lead Melting point 622oF [328oC]
Boiling point - Vaporization 3182oF [1,750oC]
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/melting-boiling-temperatures-d_392.html

The buildings were being reduced to dust at the very beginning of the destruction. There was not enough energy in the descending structure to do this. After that, dust cannot turn concrete into dust.
Click to expand...

Note that there are processes that "vaporize" substances other than bulk boiling of the pure substance. One such process is the burning of organic materials that contain these elements.

Note that some lead is contained in plastics that are used for plumbing or electrical insulation (e.g. of power cables). If these plastics burn, their main organic constituents largely turn into gasses (CO2, H2O, ...), and the rest becomes airborne, some if it "vaporized" and prone to condense.

As Myriad explained, organic fires are a great way to concentrate inorganic stuff, such as metal oxides.
 
sheeplesnshills said:
.....RJ Lee found it to be expected,
Click to expand...

Considering high temperatures.....and I have established beyond a reasonable doubt that the temperatures were present DURING the destruction and the spheres were created DURING the destruction from the RJ Lee report.

This eliminates the clean up theory, and all the other theory's which are not referenced by the RJ Lee Group.

I'll post the quote again, so you all can misunderstand it.....again.

Considering the high temperatures reached during the destruction of
the WTC, the following three types of combustion products would be expected to be present in WTC Dust.
Click to expand...
 
Christopher7 said:
The heat to vaporize lead was created during the collapse not by the collapse.
Click to expand...
I think we're back to the dreaded math again. You are aware there was a large surplus of energy in the collapse*? What do you believe happened to this surplus? Remember the laws of physics (you can't violate them).


* Gregory Uhich (sp?) showed this.
 
This whole thing is much ado about nothing. I create "iron-rich microspheres" every time I touch my car's brake pedal. That they are present in a freaking giant building collapse in New York City is not news.
 
DGM said:
I think we're back to the dreaded math again. You are aware there was a large surplus of energy in the collapse*? What do you believe happened to this surplus? Remember the laws of physics (you can't violate them).
* Gregory Uhich (sp?) showed this.
Click to expand...
Did he subtract the weight of the exterior walls? They were pushed outside and did not contribute any energy to the pulverization or the heat. Next subtract all the material being ejected in the huge mushroom cloud.

The problem is - there is no way to accurately calculate that so anyone saying that they can reasonably estimate the amount of energy available to pulverize everything and create huge amounts of heat is a couple beats shy of a bar.
 
Last edited:
DGM said:
Why don't you show us (in another thread) where? I don't like "call out" threads but, I'll start it for you. (you'll be the first to do so).

I bet you can't.
Click to expand...

This is off topic but....you could be right because they stayed far away from explaining the collapse itself. They should have left "Standards" out of their name.
 
Christopher7 said:
Did he subtract the weight of the exterior walls? They were pushed outside and did not contribute any energy to the pulverization or the heat. Next subtract all the material being ejected in the huge mushroom cloud.

The problem is - there is no way to accurately calculate that so anyone saying that they can reasonably estimate the amount of energy available to pulverize everything and create huge amounts of heat is a couple beats shy of a bar.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you're looking for ways to support your belief. Maybe you should redirect your work and show how much of whatever you're proposing would be needed to create the results that were found.

Maybe if you contact Richard Gage he could get all those engineers on the problem.
 
carlitos said:
This whole thing is much ado about nothing. I create "iron-rich microspheres" every time I touch my car's brake pedal. That they are present in a freaking giant building collapse in New York City is not news.
Click to expand...
I'm glad to hear that you are creative but you are ignoring this: "iron melted during the WTC event producing spherical iron particles".

The point here is the 2800oF it takes to melt iron.

Some people are so arrogant that they actually think that they know better than the RJ Lee Group - go figure. :rolleyes:
 
superlogicalthinker said:
This is off topic but....you could be right because they stayed far away from explaining the collapse itself. They should have left "Standards" out of their name.
Click to expand...
So I take it you won't take up the challenge?

Thought so. :rolleyes:

Are you backing down from this claim?

superlogicalthinker said:
The official reports contradict Newtons laws repeatedly through out the entire read.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
I'm glad to hear that you are creative but you are ignoring this: "iron melted during the WTC event producing spherical iron particles".

The point here is the 2800oF it takes to melt iron.

Some people are so arrogant that they actually think that they know better than the RJ Lee Group - go figure. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

OK, great. What is it that you want done about this again? An investigation by whom, where?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom