• 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?

leftysergeant said:
What's with that comment about getting the banhammer "again?" Is KreeL a sock for someone already banned once here?
Click to expand...
How do you tell if a troll who spreads lies is telling the truth? The sky is falling for KreeL and 911 truth, until they gain maturity and knowledge.

I found some papers on iron spheres from all types of sources; why can't 911 truth. Is their google broken, or their logic/critical thinking skill deficient?

These and other rhetorical questions, remain the only mysteries of 911.
 
We know that there is some lead in rock wool. I am trying to think of minerals which would be used in making rock wool and in what form lead ore might be present.

If there are inclusions of wulfenite in the rock used, that would account for the molybdenum/lead spheres.
 
leftysergeant said:
We know that there is some lead in rock wool. I am trying to think of minerals which would be used in making rock wool and in what form lead ore might be present.

If there are inclusions of wulfenite in the rock used, that would account for the molybdenum/lead spheres.
Click to expand...
Lead slag was used sometimes in rock wool manufactured before 1970.

The moly compound was trioxide, I believe. The moly sphere, or particle was mostly Al.

wiki...
Molybdenum disulfide is often a component of blends and composites where low friction is sought. A variety of oils and greases are used, because they retain their lubricity even in cases of almost complete oil loss, thus finding a use in critical applications such as aircraft engines. When added to plastics, MoS2 forms a composite with improved strength as well as reduced friction. Polymers that have been filled with MoS2 include nylon (with the trade name Nylatron), Teflon, and Vespel. Self-lubricating composite coatings for high-temperature applications have been developed consisting of molybdenum disulfide and titanium nitride by chemical vapor deposition.[7]
Click to expand...
Moly is used to lubricate stuff. Al and moly might be together on a sliding door. Al melts in office fires, and Moly-trioxide melts too. Moly is used as lubricant in high temperatures, but not in fires.

Heat the disulfide and you get trioxide. Use near Al, and you have what USGS found. Al with moly and oxygen. Lots of Al, a little Mo, and a medium amount of oxygen, O. All at temperatures less than melting steel.

Why is 911 truth so stupid (bad at chemistry, and fire)?
 
Last edited:
000063 said:
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.
Click to expand...
We are talking about the hypothesis in the letter sent to Ron.

"The fire is in a building with a central core of elevator shafts that act like a chimney efficiently providing the oxygen needed for combustion. The air and other gasses are flowing with hurricane force speeds.

The iron has a thin layer of rust flakes that can be easily removed by sticky tape.The iron is heated red hot or hotter and subjected to hurricane force blast furnace like wind. The iron flakes are liberated as small particles and some iron is vaporized. Like drops of water, the iron flakes form molten spheres that solidify and the fume also condenses into spheres, the most efficient geometrical form."

But could there be "hurricane force blast furnace like winds" up the elevator shafts?

In the links you posted I found one more reference to elevator doors being blown off. But the exterior windows were intact so there was no source of air to be sucked into the elevator shafts on that floor. The guy on the 82nd floor said they busted out windows to get air but other than that the windows below the impact zone were intact. The same is true for any other shafts that were breached, no external air supply.

"The explosion on the 86th floor seemed to come from the inside out, rather than the outside in,'' said Mr. Gartenberg, 35, of Manhattan. "That's why the core of the building is as damaged as it is. The fire door is blocked. It either closed from the force of the explosion or as a fire precaution. The elevators are completely blown out.''
Mr. Gartenberg said that the interior glass doors were blown out, but the external windows were intact.
http://www.mishalov.com/wtc_northtower.html


The two shafts from the lobby to the impact zone, the one on the 82nd floor and possibly the freight elevator shaft from the basement were the only ones [yet documented] with an external air source below the impact zone and could have acted as chimneys to any great extent.

There was nothing to burn in the elevator shafts so the " thin layer of rust flakes that can be easily removed by sticky tape" could only be effected in the shaft from floor 82 to the impact zone, the impact zone and above.

There is no data to support the hypothesis that iron spheres could be created from rust on steel framework. If they were "liberated" by the updraft and melted in the flames, then they would be carried away in the updraft from the flames with the rest of the particulate matter that make up the smoke.
 
beachnut said:
Lead slag was used sometimes in rock wool manufactured before 1970.
Click to expand...

That explains why I saw one descriptionof a sphere containing lead and molybdenum. Wulfenite occurs as an inclusion in a lot of galena. MoPbO3 is not a mysterious substance in that context.
 
Christopher7 said:
Thank you Dave. :)

Do you then agree that:

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

???
Click to expand...

Humorless much? Did you not see the tell-tale Wink?

Let me spell it out for you, then.

Here is the bad hypothesis that has no data to back it up:
Most of the iron spheres created would be carried away with the other particulate matter in the smoke.
Click to expand...

Do you agree?
 
I don't know whether the "loosened rust flake" process Rich Lee described in his letter is what actually happened, but Christopher7 is definitely misrepresenting what was said in the letter in an egregious manner with his stripping of context, bolding and underlining, and inserted paragraph breaks.

As far as I can tell (the language in the letter is admittedly imprecise), Lee nowhere states that the stripping of rust flakes he describes is occurring inside the shafts. He is saying that the fires in the core of the building were supplied by oxygen from the shafts. The violent airspeeds, and accompanying loosening of the rust he describes were occurring in the fires around the building's core. That all of this was occurring solely inside the elevator shafts is an interpretive leap on Christopher7's part. It is certainly not explicitly stated in the letter.
 
Christopher7 said:
..."The fire is in a building with a central core of elevator shafts that act like a chimney efficiently providing the oxygen needed for combustion. The air and other gasses are flowing with hurricane force speeds.

[...]

But could there be "hurricane force blast furnace like winds" up the elevator shafts?...
Click to expand...
See, that's how I' know you haven't been listening to me, or paying attention to the letter. As I've pointed out several times, and Terzo just noted, the letter says oxygen came up the elevator shafts. In the next sentence, it says air and other gases were moving at hurricane speeds. It never says the gases moving at hurricane speeds were actually coming up the elevator shafts, or even that they were the only source of gases. That's your straw man. We both know there were big holes in the side of the buildings where the planes hit, which would provide an additional source of O2.

In the links you posted I found one more reference to elevator doors being blown off. But the exterior windows were intact so there was no source of air to be sucked into the elevator shafts on that floor.
Click to expand...
You mean like the air on the floors themselves?

The guy on the 82nd floor said they busted out windows to get air but other than that the windows below the impact zone were intact. The same is true for any other shafts that were breached, no external air supply.
Click to expand...
No external air needed. Do you have any idea how much air was on any given floor?

The two shafts from the lobby to the impact zone, the one on the 82nd floor and possibly the freight elevator shaft from the basement were the only ones [yet documented] with an external air source below the impact zone and could have acted as chimneys to any great extent.
Click to expand...
Wrong.

There was nothing to burn in the elevator shafts so the " thin layer of rust flakes that can be easily removed by sticky tape" could only be effected in the shaft from floor 82 to the impact zone, the impact zone and above.
Click to expand...
And yet, multiple witnesses reported fireballs throughout the building.

There is no data to support the hypothesis that iron spheres could be created from rust on steel framework. If they were "liberated" by the updraft and melted in the flames, then they would be carried away in the updraft from the flames with the rest of the particulate matter that make up the smoke.
Click to expand...
Unproven assertion. And no, you don't get to say "it's obvious" and then repeat it.
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
Humorless much? Did you not see the tell-tale Wink?

Let me spell it out for you, then.
C7 said:
Most of the iron spheres created would be carried away with the other particulate matter in the smoke.
Click to expand...
Here is the bad hypothesis that has no data to back it up:
Click to expand...
So you don't think that rust dislodged by hurricane force winds and melted/vaporized in an intense fire, creating iron microspheres, would then be carried away with the other particulate matter in the updraft/smoke.

Do you think they would fall to the floor despite the hurricane force winds that were strong enough to dislodge them?

Do believe that iron microspheres from cutting torches can drift on a breeze and add to the dust in the bank building?
 
Tezro said:
I don't know whether the "loosened rust flake" process Rich Lee described in his letter is what actually happened, but Christopher7 is definitely misrepresenting what was said in the letter in an egregious manner with his stripping of context, bolding and underlining, and inserted paragraph breaks.

As far as I can tell (the language in the letter is admittedly imprecise), Lee nowhere states that the stripping of rust flakes he describes is occurring inside the shafts. He is saying that the fires in the core of the building were supplied by oxygen from the shafts. The violent airspeeds, and accompanying loosening of the rust he describes were occurring in the fires around the building's core. That all of this was occurring solely inside the elevator shafts is an interpretive leap on Christopher7's part. It is certainly not explicitly stated in the letter.
Click to expand...
My bad. The letter says that the elevator shafts supplied "hurricane force blast furnace like wind" but indicates that the "The iron is heated red hot or hotter" took place in the fire zone and that is where "iron flakes are liberated as small particles and some iron is vaporized".
 
000063 said:
See, that's how I' know you haven't been listening to me, or paying attention to the letter. As I've pointed out several times, and Terzo just noted, the letter says oxygen came up the elevator shafts. In the next sentence, it says air and other gases were moving at hurricane speeds. It never says the gases moving at hurricane speeds were actually coming up the elevator shafts
Click to expand...
That is what he is implicitly saying.

You mean like the air on the floors themselves?
No external air needed. Do you have any idea how much air was on any given floor?
Click to expand...
We are talking about hurricane force winds. An updraft would pull some of the air out but that would not continue for very long and definitely could not reach hurricane force wind speed. The updraft could not suck all the air out and create a vacuum.

C7 said:
There was nothing to burn in the elevator shafts so the "thin layer of rust flakes that can be easily removed by sticky tape" could only be effected in the shaft from floor 82 to the impact zone, the impact zone and above.
Click to expand...
And yet, multiple witnesses reported fireballs throughout the building.
Click to expand...
Throughout? No.
Not to mention irrelevant to the hurricane winds feeding oxygen to the fire in the impact area.

C7 said:
There is no data to support the hypothesis that iron spheres could be created from rust on steel framework. If they were "liberated" by the updraft and melted in the flames, then they would be carried away in the updraft from the flames with the rest of the particulate matter that make up the smoke.
Click to expand...
Unproven assertion. And no, you don't get to say "it's obvious" and then repeat it.
Click to expand...
It is self evident but if you need proof, the proof is in the chimneys and filters of power plants and solid waste plants. The iron microspheres are carried away in the updraft along with the other particulate matter.
 
Christopher7 said:
So you don't think that rust dislodged by hurricane force winds and melted/vaporized in an intense fire, creating iron microspheres, would then be carried away with the other particulate matter in the updraft/smoke.

Do you think they would fall to the floor despite the hurricane force winds that were strong enough to dislodge them?

Do believe that iron microspheres from cutting torches can drift on a breeze and add to the dust in the bank building?
Click to expand...

I'm the one saying that some of the airborne iron microspheres will be carried away by the wind, but that a significant portion of these airborne iron microspheres will also settle out, clinging to walls and surfaces. Even in a high-wind situation. Have you ever seen eddy currents along the edges of a fast-moving river?



You're the one saying (without evidence; only assertions are offered) that the iron microspheres will be carried off by the wind.

If you have a shred of evidence to support your fantasy hypothesis, now would be the time to present it. By "evidence" I mean published, scientific analyses of things like iron microsphere deposition, and not simply your assertions that it must be so.

Cuz it doesn't have to be so, and it ain't so.

Maybe you should just waltz on down to the corner, and hold up a sign that says "Iron Microspheres NEVER Settle on Surfaces!" You can stand right next to the creationist with a sign reading "Mutations and Selection can NEVER produce Genetic Information!"
 
Christopher7 said:
... It is self evident but if you need proof, the proof is in the chimneys and filters of power plants and solid waste plants. The iron microspheres are carried away in the updraft along with the other particulate matter.
Click to expand...
How did they get in the dust on the ground, in the building? They floated away forever? I think you may of missed something. No wonder there was no evidence of burnt stuff near ground zero... ????????????

Did you see the study of iron rich spheres making leaves magnetic?
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
I'm the one saying that some of the airborne iron microspheres will be carried away by the wind, but that a significant portion of these airborne iron microspheres will also settle out, clinging to walls and surfaces.
Click to expand...
Some of the iron microspheres would cling to walls and surfaces but the majority would be carried away with the other particulate matter. Larger iron spheres would settle out but microspheres are so small [and therefore very light weight] that it takes an electron microscope to see them.

You're the one saying (without evidence; only assertions are offered) that the iron microspheres will be carried off by the wind.
Click to expand...
You just agreed that some would be carried away in the wind. [Actually, it's the updraft from the fires.]

If you have a shred of evidence to support your fantasy hypothesis, now would be the time to present it. By "evidence" I mean published, scientific analyses of things like iron microsphere deposition, and not simply your assertions that it must be so.
Click to expand...
You missed the evidence.

"It is self evident but if you need proof, the proof is in the chimneys and filters of power plants and solid waste plants. The iron microspheres are carried away in the updraft along with the other particulate matter."
 
Christopher7 said:
Some of the iron microspheres would cling to walls and surfaces but the majority would be carried away with the other particulate matter. Larger iron spheres would settle out but microspheres are so small [and therefore very light weight] that it takes an electron microscope to see them.

You just agreed that some would be carried away in the wind. [Actually, it's the updraft from the fires.]

You missed the evidence.

"It is self evident but if you need proof, the proof is in the chimneys and filters of power plants and solid waste plants. The iron microspheres are carried away in the updraft along with the other particulate matter."
Click to expand...


Excuse me, but you are still just making assertions, and not presenting proof.

You have not provided evidence for what you are attempting to imply, namely
ALL OF the iron microspheres are carried away in the updraft along with the other particulate matter.
Click to expand...

This IS what you're really claiming, right?

When will you provide evidence? Show us that chimneys and filters of power plants NEVER HAVE IRON MICROSPHERES ON THEIR SURFACES.

Saying that they don't isn't convincing anyone. Let's see some real evidence for your fantasy claim that iron microspheres are always carried away.

DID YOU NOT LOOK AT THE YOUTUBE ON EDDY CURRENTS???


You are saying things that have no basis in science.

No one is impressed. Sorry. This is as pathetic a performance as I've ever seen.
 
C7 said:
It is self evident but if you need proof, the proof is in the chimneys and filters of power plants and solid waste plants. The iron microspheres are carried away in the updraft along with the other particulate matter.
Click to expand...
DaveThomasNMSR said:
Excuse me, but you are still just making assertions, and not presenting proof.
You have not provided evidence for what you are attempting to imply
Click to expand...
I provided examples that we all know about and agree on. Fly ash is what goes up the smoke stack - by definition.

namely

ALL OF the iron microspheres are carried away in the updraft along with the other particulate matter.
Click to expand...
This IS what you're really claiming, right?
Click to expand...
I just agreed with you [as I had agreed with Lefty earlier] that some of the microspheres would adheare to walls and other surfaces.

When will you provide evidence? Show us that chimneys and filters of power plants NEVER HAVE IRON MICROSPHERES ON THEIR SURFACES.
Click to expand...
I just stated that they did have microspheres when I said "the proof is in the chimneys and filters of power plants"
 
Last edited:
If, as I have strongly suggested, based on my knowledge of what substances I would expect to find in the ashes of an office fire, the sphereules were formed by the burning of self-copying paper forms, most of the iron would not be carried away, but would remain attached or in some way associated with solid residues left behind. Smoke is in large part just the volitile elements a Class A fuel driven off by heat and partly combusted. If you look closely at burning paper, you may notice that it can become white-hot, thus hot enough to melt iron and vitrify kaolin. I would not expect most of it to be carried away in the smoke.
 
Oystein said:
Last call for Christopher7:

(In case C7 has me on ignore, could someone here who he still quotes quote my call for questions as well? Thanks)
Click to expand...

C7 has been given a chance to have his questions taken directly to Rich Lee. I asked several times over the course of 6 days. Apparently, C7 made a conscious decision to not get answers to questions. Consequently, he'll be treated as a troll and go back to Ignore.

Ergo's questions (here) will be forwarded. I'll keep you posted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom