Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

[Christopher7]

********. If you do not know how it operates, you cannot tell us what sorts of residues and signiture damage it would leave.

Correct, I cannot, but Niels Harrit and Steven Jones have done that but you reject their findings.

Nor have you offfered any evidence that is of any forensic value.

Incorrect. The RJ Lee report is forensic evidence of melted iron and vaporized lead.

You have not described how thermite which was so positioned that it could act on the perimeter columns could suck vaporized lead out of a computer.

So what? You are asking me to speculate so you can make snotty remarks and avoid the point. No sale.

You have not provided any viable alternative explanation for the temperatures needed to melted iron or vaporized lead.

 

[Ivan Kminek]

Deleted... how to paste a picture from my "photoblog" (as jpg) here? I'm confused

 

[Christopher7]

Hehe, I'm at least forced to learn some very basics in using personal computers here
Following your simple advice (thanks), I was able to make a copy of the corresponding page including Fig. 4. It's here.

Much better but still not readable. Would you open it with Microsoft Picture Manager and crop it please? The result is - what is left is bigger and clearer.

 

[Ivan Kminek]

Much better but still not readable. Would you open it with Microsoft Picture Manager and crop it please? The result is - what is left is bigger and clearer.

Ergh... my last attempt for this morning, using MPM you recommended. In my computer, it is clearly readable. And sorry for this mess

 

[Christopher7]

Ergh... my last attempt for this morning, using MPM you recommended. In my computer, it is clearly readable. And sorry for this mess

No worries mate, thank you for your effort.
However, that is the same as the last.
Here is what I meant by crop:

But this is second generation so it's still not clear.
I'm done for the day too but if you would try it again and collapse the page view on the left [that will make everything larger], don't highlite and crop as I have done, I would really appreciate it.

Thanks

Chris

 

[fourtoe]

So what is the temperature of a "normal" office fire?

I have no qualms in stating my ignorance on this subject. I merely clicked on your link and was directed to a newer version of the WTC7 report than the one you wanted to originally link to.

ETA:
You should stop using that thread bear canard. NIST made a statement in a publication and I can quote them. The fires did not change even if they decided to change their characterization of them.

But you're quoting from a working hypothesis, wouldn't it be better to quote from the final report? No offense but that just seems cheap to me. You said yourself that the Final Report paraphrases you so are you going to at least stick to using what that report states instead?

Sorry for the late reply, I forgot how fast-paced this forum is.

 

[tsig]

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?

They are both correct when the truther wants them to be and both wrong when that suits better.

 

[leftysergeant]

Correct, I cannot, but Niels Harrit and Steven Jones have done that but you reject their findings.

No, they have fed gullible saps like yourself mushroom food. They have not given us any evidence that what they think happened happened. They have obvious paint chips and not one signle piece of steel damaged by thermite, nor any thermte residues. NOT A GRAM of alumina do those giggling morons show us.

Incorrect. The RJ Lee report is forensic evidence of melted iron and vaporized lead.

How many times need you be told that that is not evidence of thermite? In order to vaporize lead, the thermite would have to be in contact with it. You want to tell me how a thermite charge on my desk is going to burn down a skyscraper?

There was lead all over the towers and there were localized spots of intense flames in places where we know there were massive battery arrays. We may even have seen video of some lead flowing out of one corner of the south tower.

Nowhere did we see the intense light or white smoke that MUST accompany a thermite reaction. All the heat which damaged the structural elements came from Class A fuels.

You have not provided any viable alternative explanation for the temperatures needed to melted iron or vaporized lead.

 

[tsig]

Since copy paper, plastics etc only contain trace amounts of iron, it would be released in the form of microspheres and be carried away with other particulates in the smoke. You have absolutely no evidence or reason to believe otherwise.

The point here is: Burning office contents would not account for the iron microspheres found in abundance in the WTC dust. What you thought was proof that they were was actually proof that they were not.

The iron microspheres in the WTC dust were created during the destruction of the three buildings, not in the fires. Steven Jones did some tests and found some of the spheres had the fingerprint of thermite. You will of course reject this scientific evidence but you have no evidence that they were created any other way.

So all the microspheres created before the collapse were blown away on the wind?

What's the fingerprint of thermite?

 

[leftysergeant]

So all the microspheres created before the collapse were blown away on the wind?

Somehow, in C7 world, the hot iron sphereules of a thermite reaction would be heavier than the iron sphereules formed by burning paper.

What's the fingerprint of thermite?

Molten elemtal iron and alumina.

 

[The Almond]

If I present that evidence, will you abandon the thermite-based 9/11 conspiracy theory?

No. The iron spheres are only one part of the evidence of thermite.

Thanks for saving me the time. Let me know when the revolution starts, ok?

 

[The Almond]

The EDS of fly ash that I have does not have aluminum and silicone spikes like the thermite EDS.

[qimg]http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/548/flyashvironspectrum.jpg[/qimg]

Sweetie, the trace-level peaks of aluminum and silicon present in the x-ray spectrum come from the particles next to the iron oxide particle. The overscan of the particle used to produce the x-ray data for the chart also excited x-rays from those particles.

I know because I took the data.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Self evident to all but the brain dead and those in denial.

Do you really think that argument would convince a Judge or Jury?
That's the same sort of nonsense we get from the religious about "intelligent Design"

Considering the extreme temperatures.

Define "extreme", compared to the surface of the sun they were extremely low.

 

[BasqueArch]

Originally Posted by Christopher7
The EDS of fly ash that I have does not have aluminum and silicone spikes like the thermite EDS.

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/5...onspectrum.jpg

Sweetie, the trace-level peaks of aluminum and silicon present in the x-ray spectrum come from the particles next to the iron oxide particle. The overscan of the particle used to produce the x-ray data for the chart also excited x-rays from those particles.

I know because I took the data.

If anything the adjacent Ca and Si proves that this sphere or others containing these elements were not created by thermxte which contain none of these but associated with concrete instead which also contains Al.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

But the iron microspheres went up the chimney. In the TT they would have left the building with in the smoke.

How do you know all, or even if most, went up the chimney? How do you know that the design of an incinerator does not facilitate this better than an unstructured fire as in the WTC?

You have a very bad tendency to jump to conclusions....

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Since copy paper, plastics etc only contain trace amounts of iron, it would be released in the form of microspheres and be carried away with other particulates in the smoke. You have absolutely no evidence or reason to believe otherwise.

The point here is: Burning office contents would not account for the iron microspheres found in abundance in the WTC dust. What you thought was proof that they were was actually proof that they were not.

The iron microspheres in the WTC dust were created during the destruction of the three buildings, not in the fires. Steven Jones did some tests and found some of the spheres had the fingerprint of thermite. You will of course reject this scientific evidence but you have no evidence that they were created any other way.

what was that about argument ad nauseum?

Do you really think you have made a convincing case? Sorry not even close.

 

[NoahFence]

So according to C7, incinerators can create the iron microspheres but the fires in the WTC can't, even though the temps were both about the same?
Yikes. can't say I'm surprised.

 

[000063]

...
So what? You are asking me to speculate so you can make snotty remarks and avoid the point. No sale....

You are not backing up your claim. Now asking you to prove your own point would be "speculation"? Interesting.

I will concede that I was wrong, however. You did answer Almond, in the negative. Eventually, after they asked again.

 

[LSSBB]

So according to C7, incinerators can create the iron microspheres but the fires in the WTC can't, even though the temps were both about the same?
Yikes. can't say I'm surprised.

No, he says they "go away with the smoke", yet somehow the ones from nanothermite don't. C7 has yet to present any comprehensiive model that would predict the observed distribution given the various spheroid generating mechanisms at play and the disparate possible locations they could have been generated, plus the chaotic transport mechanisms. In addition, time delays between spheroid generation and sampling also need to be accounted for. Some generation mechanisms for spheroids occurred after the collapses and during cleanup.

Basically, a conclusion has been reached that nefarious means could be the only cause before any real scientific and forensic exploration had been done.

In other words, C7 is jumping to conclusions and trying to justify it.

 

[000063]

Actually, he's not even doing that. He's been dodging lefty's computer lead questions for a while now, and now claims that presenting a scenario would be "speculating".