• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

atavisms said:
people make this issue so complicated and convoluted. In fact it is very simple because there is so much evidence showing these building were blown up...
Click to expand...


Let me guess, This is easier for people with simple minds? You know, everyone would be a "truther" if they hit themselves on the head with a hammer.

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
atavisms said:
people make this issue so complicated and convoluted. In fact it is very simple because there is so much evidence showing these building were blown up... that the hardest thing to get past is the idea that people would attempt such an audacious thing.
Click to expand...

Then why is it you're still a fringe group and totally ignored in the professional world?
 
atavisms said:
people make this issue so complicated and convoluted. In fact it is very simple because there is so much evidence showing these building were blown up... that the hardest thing to get past is the idea that people would attempt such an audacious thing.
There is no getting around the long list of facts demonstrably proving these building were blown up with pre-planted explosives but people will bog themselves down in minutia rather than face this terrible reality.. so so it seems looking at some of the post here and messages Ive gotten from Oystein.
Click to expand...

You have my permission to post our private communication in full.
 
atavisms said:
people make this issue so complicated and convoluted. ...
Click to expand...
E=mgh, easy physics, you have problems with science?
911 is so complex!
1. Kill pilots take planes.
2. Crash planes into very large buildings.
Too complex for 911 truth.

The iron spheres are not an indicator of themite. Which was so complicated you left your iron sphere proof of themite out of your post, spreading lies.

atavisms said:
In fact it is very simple because there is so much evidence showing these building were blown up......
Click to expand...
The collapsed, due to damage from fire. E=mgh, you don't do physics, your posts prove it.
It is simple you have no idea the thread is about iron spheres, so you troll, and repeat your lie. A plagiarized lie from 911 truth.

atavisms said:
that the hardest thing to get past is the idea that people would attempt such an audacious thing. ...
Click to expand...
19 terrorists killing people is only hard for you to understand. You don't do reality, you post lies, based on nothing. Wait, you base your lie on a the lie you have a "long list of facts". Two lies in one.

The hardest thing for you is getting this empty evidence post to explain how iron sphere play in your story of 911.

atavisms said:
There is no getting around the long list of facts ...
Click to expand...
It is easy when your list is nothing, a lie. ??? lol

The long list? Is your iron sphere post lost in the long list of facts which support the failed claim of CD, and inside job hogwash?

Your list is where? A secret list? Where do you hide it?

Fact: if you had a long list of facts proving your claim, you would have a Pulitzer. Come back when you earn the Pulitzer. Good luck

atavisms said:
demonstrably proving these building were blown up with pre-planted explosives ...
Click to expand...
Bring on the evidence. You don't have any. List away.
Is there some iron sphere stuff in your hidden long list of facts?

atavisms said:
... people will bog themselves down in minutia rather than face this terrible reality.. ...
Click to expand...
You don't bog yourself down with anything, only failed statements. No evidence, no math, no physics, nothing bogs you done to any thing close to reality, you wave you hands (make an evidence free post) and run away, a troll.
You can't handle 19 terrorist killing people, taking planes, and crashing them. Too complex? Reality is not your game, trolling is.

You don't bog yourself down with being on topic, you post the silly pre-planted explosives lie and run away, not know the topic, failing to roll out your iron sphere evidence and how it supports your fantasy.
 
Last edited:
Okay, Oystein:

Revised Questions to RJ Lee:

Background facts: RJ Lee is reported to have stated in their 2004 Expert Report that: "The presence of lead oxide on the surface of mineral wool indicates the existence of extremely high temperatures during the collapses which caused metallic lead to volatilize, oxidize, and finally condense on the surface of the mineral wool." This is also mentioned in Steven Badger's report.

Elsewhere in their report RJ Lee state that the presence of iron microspheres is "expected".

NIST reports that steel temperatures did not exceed 600o C, but even at that temperature, it was in scattered locations and for brief periods only.

In their letter to Ron Wieck RJ Lee propose how very high temperatures may have been reached at the WTC and that it was iron or rust particles (a little unclear which) flaking off the steel columns that melted in this high heat and then condensed to form the spheres.

1) Is it RJ Lee's position that normal office fires (1000oto 1100o C) can and do produce microspheres of iron and lead? Or was there something unique about the WTC fires that created these spheres? What temperatures was RJ Lee referring to when they used the phrase "extremely high" for the lead microspheres?

2) For further clarification, can lead and iron microspheres be created at temperatures below the melting point of iron and the boiling point of lead? If so, by what process in the context of an office fire, and would they chemically resemble those found in the WTC dust? If not, how would the iron/iron oxide flakes melt at these temperatures?

3) What air temperatures is RJ Lee positing for the iron/iron oxide flakes to melt and form microspheres?

4) Is RJ Lee aware that molybdenum-rich microspheres were identified in the USGS study? What is RJ Lee's opinion on how molybdenum melted at the temperatures of office fires?

5) RJ Lee also apparently reported that aluminosilicate particles had taken on a rounded, porous structure as a result of boiling and evaporation. Dr. Steven Jones notes that the boiling temperature of aluminosilicates is around 2,760 °C.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

How does RJ Lee propose that these particles boiled or melted in the temperatures provided by the WTC fires?

6) Just out of curiosity, what is RJ Lee's opinion on why their dust samples had the higher counts of iron microspheres (5.87%, as a mean) than any of the other reports on WTC dust? Was it from proximity to the debris pile?

Thank you for your participation and help in clarifying these matters.
 
Last edited:
Chemistry, how many 911 truth Followers failed to take chemistry? All? Now, n+1
ergo said:
Okay, Oystein:

Revised Questions to RJ Lee:

Background facts: RJ Lee is reported to have stated in their 2004 Expert Report that: "The presence of lead oxide on the surface of mineral wool indicates the existence of extremely high temperatures during the collapses which caused metallic lead to volatilize, oxidize, and finally condense on the surface of the mineral wool." This is also mentioned in Steven Badger's report.

...

4) Is RJ Lee aware that molybdenum-rich microspheres were identified in the USGS study? What is RJ Lee's opinion on how molybdenum melted at the temperatures of office fires?

...
Click to expand...
Page number for the moly spheres please. Moly does not have to melt to be found.
Is your google broken?
Lead is on the mineral wool made before 1970. Lead in paint vaporizes at 800-1000 F. If RJ Lee does not know the history of mineral wool he can google it for you.

No molybdenum in RJ Lee report.

Moly compounds are used as lubricants, and melt at temperature less than the melting point of steel. Is your google broken?

Source your moly spheres in USGS, please. Hard to follow your tolling when you can't source your statements. I assume you can, unless you are a troll. Are we a troll mr ergo?

It is worth noting that the United States Geological
Survey (USGS) found and studied one or more molybdenum
spheres in the WTC dust.
Click to expand...
Jones said this. Worth only to make up lies about temperature. What compound was the Moly in?

I can synthesize moly spheres at 150C. There goes that lie down the tubes. Why does Jones make up lies about chemistry? Oh, he is a physics professor who made up the lie of thermite.
 
Last edited:
atavisms said:
people make this issue so complicated and convoluted. In fact it is very simple because there is so much evidence showing these building were blown up... that the hardest thing to get past is the idea that people would attempt such an audacious thing.
There is no getting around the long list of facts demonstrably proving these building were blown up with pre-planted explosives but people will bog themselves down in minutia rather than face this terrible reality.. so so it seems looking at some of the post here and messages Ive gotten from Oystein.
Click to expand...

No, the concensus is very simple. Fire and planes damage caused bny the 19 terrorists caused the collapse of the TT. This was the concensus of scores of engineers worldwide before the NIST produced their report.

The complicated story comes from the truthers that add hundreds of unnecesary tons of thermite that can't melt steel, silent explosives that hurl multition column assemblies hundreds of feet, buldings that fall symmetrically (undefined-what is falling symmetrically?) = CD where many CD buildings are demoed to one side to avoid surrounding damage, drone remote contriolled planes, passenger planes that shoot a missile at the Pentagon and then fly over unnoticed, Red Cross and FDNY demoing WTC7, an imperial war to steal resources of Iraq and Afghanistan (what Afgh resources?) when it is much cheaper to buy these resources in the commodities markets, WTC7 ae911t videos that don't show the first 8 seconds of the collapse, thousands of silent conspirators to murder, etc.
The truther version of events is much more complicated and unlike the concensus story, not integrated, the pieces don't fit together.

Professionals use math, science ,logic, education and experience because it is the only reliable means to produce intended results, to understand how nature works. There's no other simpler way to do this, or people would be doing it. It may seem complicated to those not educated in the sciences, and to those not educated in the sciences or its epistemology, it is. Is it simple to design and build a 767? No, but there is no simpler way that works. The concensus of professionals agree there was no CD of the Towers.

The truther version may seem simpler but it's more complicated and also wrong.
Dump the losers,
Join the rationals.
 
Last edited:
BasqueArch said:
No, the concensus is very simple. Fire and planes damage caused bny the 19 terrorists caused the collapse of the TT. This was the concensus of scores of engineers worldwide before the NIST produced their report.

The complicated story comes from the truthers that add hundreds of unnecesary tons of thermite that can't melt steel, silent explosives that hurl multition column assemblies hundreds of feet, ...
Click to expand...

What atavism meant by "complicated" and "convoluted" is the science of it all. He thinks that common sense is all that is needed to understand the dynamics of engineered structures, the chemistry of paints or thermite, or the thermodynamics of huge masses of stuff. When you start digging down to the details of science and engineering to show why truthers are wrong, that's when atavism's eyes glaze over, he throws up his arms and screems "heeey that's too complicated and convoluted!" ;)

To show what I mean I invited him to post our full PM exchange.
 
BasqueArch said:
No, the concensus is very simple. Fire and planes damage caused bny the 19 terrorists caused the collapse of the TT. This was the concensus of scores of engineers worldwide before the NIST produced their report.
Click to expand...

I sincerely doubt that, however it was the consensus amongst Fox News watchers within an hour of first impact. Where I come from that's called jumping the gun.
 
KreeL said:
I sincerely doubt that, however it was the consensus amongst Fox News watchers within an hour of first impact. Where I come from that's called jumping the gun.
Click to expand...
Must not be a lot of experienced fire fighters where you come from. I expected at least the top several floors of the towers to collapse from the get-go.
 
atavisms said:
people make this issue so complicated and convoluted. In fact it is very simple because there is so much evidence showing these building were blown up... that the hardest thing to get past is the idea that people would attempt such an audacious thing.
Click to expand...
That, and the fact that there is no physical evidence pointing to explosives, and an abscence of evidence which would necessarily be present, such as thousands of broken windows and hundreds of cases of barotrauma, which was not exhibited even by survivors inside the falling buildings.


There is no getting around the long list of facts demonstrably proving these building were blown up with pre-planted explosives but people will bog themselves down in minutia rather than face this terrible reality.. so so it seems looking at some of the post here and messages Ive gotten from Oystein.
Click to expand...
You're not actually reading the posts. You've just convinced yourself your the One Free Man capable of independent thought. Or else you'd realize you were wrong instead of grandstanding, or at least respond directly to posts with more than boilerplate points debunked years ago.
 
000063 said:
Chris, I proved that there were multiple breaches up and down the elevator shafts. Not doors being blown off
Click to expand...
You linked to a newspaper article. Only eyewitnesses would know and none were cited.

You have never been able to prove that the bulk of the spheres would be carried away by smoke.
Click to expand...
Self evident. Smoke is particulate matter and iron microspheres are tiny particulate matter.
 
Christopher7 said:
Self evident. Smoke is particulate matter and iron microspheres are tiny particulate matter.
Click to expand...

Household dust is also "tiny particulate matter", but it isn't smoke or even a constituent of smoke. Ditto the ultra-fine dust that blows across the Med. and settles on my car.

Do you see the fallacy in your reasoning? Clue: it's a really fundamental error you've made.
 
Christopher7 said:
You linked to a newspaper article. Only eyewitnesses would know and none were cited.
Click to expand...
A newspaper article and 911myths with multiple eyewitness reports of breaches. The 911 myths page also references the NIST report.

http://www.911myths.com/html/accounts_of_explosions.html
http://www.911myths.com/html/jet_fuel.html Oh, look, multiple people throughout the building describing the smell of jet fuel. Unless there was some way the jet fuel could've gotten down to those points besides the elevator shafts? Because if those paths let fuel (even vaporized fuel) down, that means they were also paths to let oxygen up.

Self evident. Smoke is particulate matter and iron microspheres are tiny particulate matter.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes, the "obviously" dodge. I could make a similar argument for glitter being carried away in the smoke, therefore glitter was present. Or, as Glenn points out, dust.
 

Attachments

  • wtc-dust-911.jpg
    wtc-dust-911.jpg
    22.3 KB · Views: 2
Christopher7 said:
Debating here is a form of research too. When you strip away all the insults and the "nitpick and babble", there are occasional useful pieces of information.
...
Most of the iron spheres created would be carried away with the other particulate matter in the smoke.

This is not a good hypothesis and there is no data to back it up.

...
Click to expand...

For once, I agree with you, C7! ;)
 
KreeL said:
I sincerely doubt that, however it was the consensus amongst Fox News watchers within an hour of first impact. Where I come from that's called jumping the gun.
Click to expand...
What did FOX say about iron spheres? Where is your iron-rich stuff?
Iron-rich spheres, the jumping the gun by 911 truth; saying iron spheres are evidence for thermite since they were found in WTC dust. Jumping the gun, what 911 truth does, repeating failed lies. You are jumping the gun by spreading delusions not based on anything but opinions based on the goal to troll JREF.

Where do you come from? A place where it takes over 10 years to figure out 911, and come up with the wrong story. A place where you don't do research, you troll.

911, figured out in minutes. Not hard to figure out who did it, the only passengers on the planes who had no relatives ask where their kids were, supplied names to fly, left behind rental cars, etc. CNN and FOX can figure out 911. Passengers on Flight 93 did it in minutes, and took action. 911 truth is in the dark after 10 years taking in dollars from people who can't think for themselves. Jumping the gun? Is that what you call the kid who answers 4 first to 2+2 math problem? "teacher", "suzy jumped the gun"... Where you come from people must spread delusions and have the goal of troll.
Are you upset FOX beat 911 truth to understanding 911? Pretty bad when FOX news figures out anything, even CNN, before anyone. Our betters were on Flight 93. They did not make fun of people being murdered like 911 truth does by trolling and spreading lies. They took action against the murderers that 911 truth apologizes for. Why are you and 911 truth jumping the gun on iron-spheres?

911 truth pushes lies, disrespect those murdered on 911, they have no evidence. When will you have something on iron-spheres to help you stop spreading lies of explosives and termite?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom