Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

[000063]

Why don't you write the RJ Lee Group and tell them that they are wrong and you know better than they do about the stuff?

It's amazing how statements to the effect of "you are wrong" just slide off you like water off a duck.

The question of whether your source is wrong is germane to the question of whether your conclusions, based on such, are wrong. Your interpretation of the source is also subject to questioning. I know little about molecular chemistry, but I can still see holes in your argument big enough to drive a truck through.

 

[beachnut]

What part of microscopic don't you understand? I said the largest iron spheres would be left behind.

You made up the gone with the smoke stuff. This is nonsense. How large, size in nm?

I talking about extreme temperatures that office fires cannot attain.

What temperature? If you are saying the WTC towers were at 3100 F, then that is a lie. There was no melted steel, proves the extreme temperature fantasy false.

I don't know how thermite was used but I can look at the data and see that it there is no other explanation for the extreme temperatures.

Office fires are extreme temperatures, the temperature melts glass, lead, burns wood, burns people; that is extreme. But your extreme has no defined temperature. What is the number for your average extreme temperature and why was no steel melted?

The office fire in one WTC tower was equal in heat to over 2,800 Tons of Thermite. That leaves out the heat energy from the jet fuel, equal to 315 Tons of Themite.

You are using weak thermite, with 10 times less heat energy than jet fuel to make your fantasy come true. You are using silly nano-thermite when the office fires have the heat of 2,800 Tons of nano-Thermite. Your fantasy is weak, based on gullibility and ignorance, two things 911 truth count on.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Nearly 6% of the WTC dust was iron microspheres compared to 0.04% in normal dust.

What was normal about 911????? why would it be relevant to compare it with "normal" dust unless you were looking for health hazards?

You need to find data from dust form large fires, commercial CDs etc.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

No, Thee RJ Lee Group did. And you know so much better than they do.

and they said the iron and lead was to be expected
And you know so much better than they do.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

What part of microscopic don't you understand? I said the largest iron spheres would be left behind.

Prove it

I am talking about extreme temperatures that office fires cannot attain.

Prove it

I don't know how thermite was used but I can look at the data and see that it there is no other explanation for the extreme temperatures.

And you are what kind of expert in fires, thermite use etc? Your opinion is worthless and you have no standing in any of the relevant subjects. Now if you did the work to actually prove each point of your theory in turn and get your paper published then you might get somewhere........

But that would require work......and that appears to be something you cannot or will not do.

 

[Edx]

and they said the iron and lead was to be expected
And you know so much better than they do.

You dont get it, Chris thinks that RJ Lee believe that it was expected because of the impossibly high temperatures Chris says is only possible with thermite.

So why doesnt RJ Lee talk about this in the report?

According to Chris, its because they read a newspaper article where someone said jet fuel fires melted steel and so now believe that its possible for these fires on 911 to reach these temperatures without thermite, throwing all their experience and credentials out the window.

 

[DGM]

and they said the iron and lead was to be expected
And you know so much better than they do.

"Expected" is a secret word to clue in the "truth" seekers to make the case because, they can't. They are afraid of losing their Government contracts (it also fends of every other scientist that don't have the decoder ring).

Don't you pay attention?

 

[chrismohr]

Nearly 6% of the WTC dust was iron microspheres compared to 0.04% in normal dust.

Chris,
I mentioned the fact that when stuff burns down, what is left exists in higher concentrations just because the non-iron stuff burned away. Do you think that could at least partially explain part of the higher concentration of iron-rich microspheres than exists in the dust? Also, didn't other WTC dust test out at 1%-2%, and the 6% figure was on the very high end?
The other Chris

 

[tsig]

But that's only a part of the office contents. Even in the case of file cabinets, the lead vapors and the microscopic iron spheres would be carried away with the smoke, leaving only the largest iron spheres.

The possibilities of what nano-thermite can do are not know by the public. This thread is about establishing temperatures far in excess of what office fires can attain. So far, you have not provided a viable alternative to the extreme temperatures of 2800^oF and 3100^oF it takes to melt iron and vaporize lead.[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

Then how do you know them?

 

[beachnut]

By extreme I mean 2800-3100^oF, but you knew that.

This means the mineral wool would melt.

You don't understand, the lead contamination was in the mineral wool before 911. Then the WTC fell down spreading mineral wool, with lead on it from before 1970, all over NYC.

 

[tsig]

What part of microscopic don't you understand? I said the largest iron spheres would be left behind.

I am talking about extreme temperatures that office fires cannot attain.

I don't know how thermite was used but I can look at the data and see that it there is no other explanation for the extreme temperatures.

The rest were raptured?

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Why don't you write the RJ Lee Group and tell them that they are wrong and you know better than they do about the stuff?

you missed the part where they said the iron and lead were "expected"??? Why are you insisting they are right about one thing but wrong about another?

 

[sheeplesnshills]

You dont get it, Chris thinks that RJ Lee believe that it was expected because of the impossibly high temperatures Chris says is only possible with thermite.

So why doesnt RJ Lee talk about this in the report?

According to Chris, its because they read a newspaper article where someone said jet fuel fires melted steel and so now believe that its possible for these fires on 911 to reach these temperatures without thermite, throwing all their experience and credentials out the window.

Yeah, he wants them to be simultaneously expert and incompetent

 

[Fly Poster]

Diesel looks like a good candidate for elevated iron content in the dust.

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2002/2002-09-25-06.html

http://www.enme.umd.edu/~mrz/pdf_papers/2006_JAS_SPMS.pdf

 

[leftysergeant]

You don't understand, the lead contamination was in the mineral wool before 911. Then the WTC fell down spreading mineral wool, with lead on it from before 1970, all over NYC.

Source? Seems that that would make rock wool even less acceptable than asbestos.

 

[Sunstealer]

Diesel looks like a good candidate for elevated iron content in the dust.

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2002/2002-09-25-06.html

http://www.enme.umd.edu/~mrz/pdf_papers/2006_JAS_SPMS.pdf

I'm looking at PVC which normally used to be stabilised by Pb. Combustion of PVC gives off HCl. And HCl reacts readily with Pb (which is all over the place in buildings, 2-8 lbs worth in old CRTs) to form PbCl which has a far lower boiling temperature and will readily volatize.

There's a huge amount of complex chemistry going on in the fires due to the different materials and fuels present and the temperatures created. Smoke temperatures of around 1000°C are normal in office and dwelling fires.

Truthers don't realise this and will just focus on a specific simple idea like "iron melts at 1540°C" and that's all they have. They don't realise the difference between using a lighted splint to set fire to 1Kg of Mg ribbon, which will readily burn/rapidly oxidise and a block of 1Kg of Mg not behaving in the same way.

It's the same for steel - why can you burn 1Kg of wire wool AND produce iron-microspheres by setting it on fire with a lighted splint, but can't burn a solid block of 1Kg of iron the same way?

They then can't get it into their heads that in a building there will be dozens of items that will utilise thin pieces of steel or iron as thin as steel wool and not just great big lumps of steel in columns and girders.

They then can't see that if you have thin bits of steel in a building that is on fire that those bits will produce microspheres just in the same way that burning steel wool does.

It's sad but also funny at the same time. I'm loving the idea of lugging tons of themite into a building and spreading it all over the monitors and PCs so as to volatize lead. I read somewhere that Jones or Harrit was touting between 29,000 and 143,000 metric tons of thermite was used (as calculated from the amount of iron in the dust). Maximum Take Off Weight of a 747 is around 400 metric tons so you'd need 72 747's worth of thermite minimum to do the job by truther calculation. lol.

 

[Christopher7]

Nearly 6% of the WTC dust was iron microspheres compared to 0.04% in normal dust.

Chris,
I mentioned the fact that when stuff burns down, what is left exists in higher concentrations just because the non-iron stuff burned away. Do you think that could at least partially explain part of the higher concentration of iron-rich microspheres than exists in the dust?

It might account for some of the larger spheres but the microspheres and lead vapors would have been carried away in the smoke. The blackness of the smoke is particulate matter of many kinds.

Also, didn't other WTC dust test out at 1%-2%, and the 6% figure was on the very high end?

That's what the RJ Lee Group found and the iron spheres are one of the official "signature markers" because the quantity found was so unusual.

 

[Christopher7]

The pressure of the dust cloud from the destruction of the TT pushed dust into places where passive dust does not go. The contaminates were the same throughout the building. Therefore, the lead covered fibers and the iron microspheres were carried by the TT dust cloud and were NOT deposited later.

If an appreciable amount of lead vapors and iron microspheres contaminated the dust passively during the clean up, the areas where the dust was forced in by the pressure of the TT dust cloud would be noticeably different. It would have less contaminates.

Thats a good theory, now show it to be actually true.

I just did. Keep reading it until you understand it.

and no your putative "commonsense" does not count as proof

Only to someone devoid of common sense.

 

[plague311]

It might account for some of the larger spheres but the microspheres and lead vapors would have been carried away in the smoke. Ther blackness of the smoke is particulate matter of many kinds.

That's what the RJ Lee Group found and the iron spheres are one of the official "signature markers" because the quantity found was so unusual.

So who is right here, RJ Lee, or Harrit? That needs to be decided before we move on. One of them is wrong and twoofers use both constantly, so which is correct?

 

[sheeplesnshills]

=Christopher7;7998015]It might account for some of the larger spheres but the microspheres and lead vapors would have been carried away in the smoke.

evidence?

That's what the RJ Lee Group found and the iron spheres are one of the official "signature markers" because the quantity found was so unusual.

so unusual they called it Expected


C'mon try Cris7, you are making this way to easy.