Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

[GlennB]

By the way, I still maintain the following, perhaps unconventional, opinion:

• The RJ Lee figure of 5.87% "iron spheres" must be misleading at best, and is perhaps flat-out wrong. It is at any rate NOT the percentage of iron in dust from the "WTC event"
• That figure represents an extreme outlier among the extensive data sets we have on the prevalence of iron in WTC dust. Other studies have found means much closer to 1%

I too think the Lee figure anomalous. The in-depth Lioy et al study has no mention of iron-rich spheres whatsoever.

 

[Christopher7]

c) these spheres are found in fly ash and temperatures in furnaces do not reach the melting point of iron.

Was there a coal fired power plant in the towers?

The kerosene burned up in the first few minutes. Most of the microspheres from the kerosene would have left the building with the smoke.

ETA: If there were hurricane force winds going up the elevator shafts they would have carried away any spheres created by flakes.

 

[BasqueArch]

Was there a coal fired power plant in the towers?

The kerosene burned up in the first few minutes. Most of the microspheres from the kerosene would have left the building with the smoke.

You’ve been cornered and pinned. The match is over. That chafing you feel is called lying to yourself.

 

[Oystein]

I too think the Lee figure anomalous. The in-depth Lioy et al study has no mention of iron-rich spheres whatsoever.

The Lioy team wasn't interested in the shape of their particles, as long as it wasn't a hazard. Particles dominated by the mundane elements of Fe, O, Si, Al and Ca are abundantly ubiquous and not a hazard. They come in many shapes. Spherical is one of these common shapes and totally not interesting. Lioy e.al. simply did not report on the shapes.

I believe a study is currently underway to re-evaluate some of the Lioy dust samples. I expect to find a mention of such spheres when that study will be published.

 

[Oystein]

Was there a coal fired power plant in the towers?

The kerosene burned up in the first few minutes. Most of the microspheres from the kerosene would have left the building with the smoke.

ETA: If there were hurricane force winds going up the elevator shafts they would have carried away any spheres created by flakes.

You need to read this post again, and do so fully and carefully - quite obviously you have not read it yet, or you have noot understood it, or you already forgot it again, or you are in conscious denial about it:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8013472&postcount=1329

It contains a detailed opinion of your expert witness, RJ Lee, about the likely and mundande sources of iron spheres in the dust of the WTC event.

 

[Christopher7]

You’ve been cornered and pinned. The match is over. That chafing you feel is called lying to yourself.

So you think hurricane force winds won't carry iron microspheres?

 

[000063]

Chris, Ergo, why are you arguing with us?

Argue with each other for a change.

I always love it when sophists are so eager to gainsay negative evidence that they actually contradict each other. Then they have to carefully talk around each other for a while.

Which reminds me of the time Oystein made several points, and Ergo or KreeL asked around to see how many debunkers agreed with him, never actually responding to the content of the post. It was hilarious how transparent he was. And kinda sad to see how many people fell for the derail.

Was there a coal fired power plant in the towers?

Focusing on only the one point you think you can defeat? Very Ergo of you.

The kerosene burned up in the first few minutes.

At which point everything stopped burning entirely?

Most of the microspheres from the kerosene would have left the building with the smoke.

Unproven. And what about the micropheres from the office contents?

ETA: If there were hurricane force winds going up the elevator shafts they would have carried away any spheres created by flakes.

Prove such winds were present and would've carried away such spheres.

 

[Christopher7]

You need to read this post again, and do so fully and carefully - quite obviously you have not read it yet, or you have noot understood it, or you already forgot it again, or you are in conscious denial about it:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8013472&postcount=1329

It contains a detailed opinion of your expert witness, RJ Lee, about the likely and mundande sources of iron spheres in the dust of the WTC event.

I read it. He said that hurricane force winds provided the oxygen needed to melt iron flakes.

 

[Sunstealer]

Was there a coal fired power plant in the towers?

The kerosene burned up in the first few minutes. Most of the microspheres from the kerosene would have left the building with the smoke.

ETA: If there were hurricane force winds going up the elevator shafts they would have carried away any spheres created by flakes.

Take it up with RJ Lee - their Fax number and address is on the bottom of the letter.

Let us know how you get on.

 

[000063]

I read it. He said that hurricane force winds provided the oxygen needed to melt iron flakes.

Okay. Now prove they would've carried away the spheres.

 

[Christopher7]

Focusing on only the one point you think you can defeat?

I "defeated" all the points one at a time.

Most of the microspheres from the kerosene would have left the building with the smoke.

Unproven.

Do you think microspheres would not be carried in the smoke by the up draft of the fire?

And what about the micropheres from the office contents?

Same as above.
Mr. Lee did not mention office contents as being a factor.

If there were hurricane force winds going up the elevator shafts they would have carried away any spheres created by flakes.

Prove it.

You need proof?

 

[Oystein]

I read it. He said that hurricane force winds provided the oxygen needed to melt iron flakes.

I specifically told you to read that post fully. Please do so now, and when you return, don't try to fool us by pulling a single line from the context.

RJ Lee said a lot more.

 

[Oystein]

...
Mr. Lee did not mention office contents as being a factor.
...

I seem to remember that you, Christopher7, quoted RJ Lee's reports as saying that office contents were a factor. For example computers containing lead.

Maybe you should try for consistency.

 

[Christopher7]

Problem:
I can't think up a plausible source for the 5.87% iron spheres.

Solution:
Just say that the RJ Lee Group got it wrong!

Denial is so easy.

 

[ergo]

Truthers you are well beaten. He is saying that

a) it's not unique
b) the temperature needed is not 1535°C due to the fact that c)
c) these spheres are found in fly ash and temperatures in furnaces do not reach the melting point of iron.

Well, then, we hardly need blast-furnace-like temperatures and hurricane-force winds tearing at the steel (over how long a time? Did they mention that?) to create iron flakes that would melt and vaporize, do we? I mean, why mention the elevator shafts at all?

In fact, perhaps it was the hurricane-force winds inside the building that brought the steel down. Why did no one think of this before? And why are these terrible winds never mentioned in the NIST report?

I mean, come on, guys.

 

[Christopher7]

I seem to remember that you, Christopher7, quoted RJ Lee's reports as saying that office contents were a factor. For example computers containing lead.

I quoted RJ Lee saying that computers contain ~4 pounds of lead.

But there is no mention of iron spheres from office contents of any kind in the report or Rich's letter.

 

[Sunstealer]

Well, then, we hardly need blast-furnace-like temperatures and hurricane-force winds tearing at the steel (over how long a time? Did they mention that?) to create iron flakes that would melt and vaporize, do we? I mean, why mention the elevator shafts at all?

In fact, perhaps it was the hurricane-force winds inside the building that brought the steel down. Why did no one think of this before? And why are these terrible winds never mentioned in the NIST report?

I mean, come on, guys.

Take it up with RJ Lee - their Fax number and address is on the bottom of the letter.

Let us know how you get on.

 

[000063]

I "defeated" all the points one at a time.

No, you quoted one point and focused on that. Plain as day.

Do you think microspheres would not be carried in the smoke by the up draft of the fire?

What I think is currently irrelevant. What you can prove, however, is not. Nice attempt to shift the burden of proof.

Same as above.
Mr. Lee did not mention office contents as being a factor.

He said several other things which you're trying to spin, though.

You need proof?

Yes, on account of this being a forum for skeptics.

I've seen hurricanes, actually walked around in a few. Sometimes they don't even move small branches on the ground, sometimes they break trees. "Hurricane speed" is an extremely wide definition, even assuming Lee was speaking literally.

 

[Christopher7]

Well, then, we hardly need blast-furnace-like temperatures and hurricane-force winds tearing at the steel (over how long a time? Did they mention that?) to create iron flakes that would melt and vaporize, do we? I mean, why mention the elevator shafts at all?

In fact, perhaps it was the hurricane-force winds inside the building that brought the steel down. Why did no one think of this before? And why are these terrible winds never mentioned in the NIST report?

Because the elevator shafts were sealed so there could not have been a draft, much less hurricane force winds.

ETA: And the columns were wrapped with gypsum except where the planes hit.

 

[000063]

Well, then, we hardly need blast-furnace-like temperatures and hurricane-force winds tearing at the steel (over how long a time? Did they mention that?) to create iron flakes that would melt and vaporize, do we? I mean, why mention the elevator shafts at all?

In fact, perhaps it was the hurricane-force winds inside the building that brought the steel down. Why did no one think of this before? And why are these terrible winds never mentioned in the NIST report?

I mean, come on, guys.

No assertions or evidence, empty sarcasm meant to address points no one actually made.