Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

[Edx]

Quoted for C7.

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.

 

[000063]

That is what he is implicitly saying.

No. You do not get to rely on what you think someone is saying, only what they are explicitly saying, especially in a letter that most of the people here agree was written in imprecise language.

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.

Who is positing a "vacuum"? Oxygen being fed to the fires via the shafts, is what the letter claimed.

Throughout? No.

Do I have to link the 911myths page again?

Not to mention irrelevant to the hurricane winds feeding oxygen to the fire in the impact area.

I went back and checked. While the "hurricane force" gas movement is mentioned, nowhere is it stated that it's feeding oxygen to the fire.

It is self evident

Nonsense.

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.

Except that this wasn't a power plant or a solid waste plant, this was an office fire with a large number of unique factors and elements.

Strange how you expect the fire to not act like a furnace or oven or incinerator when it comes to supplying oxygen up the elevator shafts, but to act like a furnace or oven or incinerator when it comes to carrying the iron microspheres away.

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

I provided examples that we all know about and agree on. Fly ash is what goes up the smoke stack - by definition.

I just agreed with you [as I had agreed with Lefty earlier] that some of the microspheres would adheare to walls and other surfaces.

I just stated that they did have microspheres when I said "the proof is in the chimneys and filters of power plants"

Let's review, shall we? Waaaaay back on page 34 of this thread, I posted a letter from R.J.Lee to Ron Wieck, which included this:

Iron Microspheres in the Context of the World Trade Center Dust

Well, let’s start with the basics. The World Trade Center was a building with many iron‐based components. There were structural components such as beams and electrical conduit. There were building contents such as desks and file cabinets.

Now, the building is hit by two jet airplanes resulting in a fire fed by jet fuel. The electrical system is compromised resulting in high voltage, high amperage electrical arcing between the wires and the conduit. 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 fire is sufficiently hot to exceed the plastic strength of the structural steel and the building collapses.

What about the iron microspheres? 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. Incidentally, iron is not the only material that formed spheres during the event. Some building material is made of minerals containing aluminum and silicon and alumino‐silicate spheres were also observed in the dust.

The formation of iron and other type spheres at temperatures obtainable by the combustion of petroleum or coal based fuels is not a new or unique process. These spheres are the same as iron and alumino‐silicate spheres in the well‐studied fly ash formed from contaminants in coal as it is burned in furnaces.
Rich Lee

Then, C7 began saying words like these, again and again and again:

...The hypothesis is that the iron spheres were created in the elevator shafts so the only place where iron spheres could be created in this hypothesis, if they could be created this way, would be in the elevator shafts above the fire zone and between the 80th floor and the 98th floor in the shaft with blown out doors. Most of the iron spheres created would be carried away with the other particulate matter in the smoke. ...

Apparently, C7 is attempting to say that the mechanism R.J. Lee proposed to explain the presence of iron-rich microspheres in WTC dust is invalid, since C7 insists that MOST of the microspheres would be carried away.

But, in true Troll Fashion, C7 is now hedging, and saying that

... some of the microspheres would adheare [sic] to walls and other surfaces.

C7: since you now admit that not all microspheres would be carried away, and that some would be deposited on surfaces, would you care to also admit that R.J. Lee's hypothesis could indeed explain the presence of iron microspheres in WTC dust?

The trolling, it burns us, preciousssss.

 

[ozeco41]

...But, in true Troll Fashion, C7 is now hedging, ....
....The trolling, it burns us, preciousssss.

Let's give due credit to C7 who must be the most effective troll we have currently posting. This thread has been going round in circles for a long time - and it is now 1700 plus posts long. The lack of progress mainly the consequence of C7's activity.

And all of it because we are prepared to follow truther style arse about logic. The issue flows from consideration of thermXte which is itself a side track red herring.

The real question is "was there demolition?" and, until the truthers can show demolition it is a waste of time arguing thermXte. And if they prove demolition then whether it was TDX or thermXte or super inventium will drop into place as part of that proof. And microspheres is one grade more remote.

So the topic of microspheres is a red herring off a sidetrack away from the real issue. Sound trolling tactics. And worthy of commendation for C7 who must arguably be our most effective troll.

Watch for the next stage - what will it be? Discussion of the colour of the left side of a microsphere?

 

[Christopher7]

Let's review, shall we? Waaaaay back on page 34 of this thread, I posted a letter from R.J.Lee to Ron Wieck, which included this:
Iron Microspheres in the Context of the World Trade Center Dust ...

Then, C7 began saying words like these, again and again and again:

Most of the iron spheres created would be carried away with the other particulate matter in the smoke.

Apparently, C7 is attempting to say that the mechanism R.J. Lee proposed to explain the presence of iron-rich microspheres in WTC dust is invalid, since C7 insists that MOST of the microspheres would be carried away.

The theory is invalid and that is why I don't think RJ Lee wrote it.

I used the word "any" sometimes which was incorrect but other times I acknowledged that some would adhere to walls and other surfaces.

Some of the iron microspheres would cling to walls and surfaces but the majority would be carried away with the other particulate matter.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8047255&postcount=1755

Most of the iron spheres created would be carried away with the other particulate matter in the smoke.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8037560&postcount=1713

Only the spheres [if there were any] in the smoke still in the building would be caught up in the dust. And of course, the ones that adhered to surfaces.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8018921&postcount=1443


The point is still the same. Even if iron microspheres could be created from rust dislodged from beams and columns at temperatures 1000^oF lower than the melting point of rust [iron oxide], and there is no data to confirm that could happen, most would be carried away in the smoke and therefore they could not account for the significant amount of the iron microspheres that the RJ Lee Group used as part of the dust signature.

 

[triforcharity]

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."

So, can you explain soot? Shouldn't all that carbon and such be carried away? Explain why chimneys need to be cleaned.....

 

[Edx]

The theory is invalid and that is why I don't think RJ Lee wrote it.

So then Chris, why dont you call them and tell them someone is either pretending to be them or someone RJ Lee hires doesn't know enough about anything and should be sacked?

So how about it Chris? Or do you only exist on the internet?

 

[000063]

He's actually a very sophisticated bot meant to imitate someone who keeps making assertions they can't back up.

Doing a very good job.

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

The theory is invalid and that is why I don't think RJ Lee wrote it.

I used the word "any" sometimes which was incorrect but other times I acknowledged that some would adhere to walls and other surfaces.

Some of the iron microspheres would cling to walls and surfaces but the majority would be carried away with the other particulate matter.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8047255&postcount=1755

Most of the iron spheres created would be carried away with the other particulate matter in the smoke.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8037560&postcount=1713

Only the spheres [if there were any] in the smoke still in the building would be caught up in the dust. And of course, the ones that adhered to surfaces.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8018921&postcount=1443


The point is still the same. Even if iron microspheres could be created from rust dislodged from beams and columns at temperatures 1000^oF lower than the melting point of rust [iron oxide], and there is no data to confirm that could happen, most would be carried away in the smoke and therefore they could not account for the significant amount of the iron microspheres that the RJ Lee Group used as part of the dust signature.

No, the point is that your position - R.J. Lee's hypothesis is a non-starter, because iron microspheres will always be carried off by the air blasts hot enough to make them - is clearly, plainly, and obviously wrong.

I keep pointing out that you are simply making assertions, and not providing evidence, yet you continue to make these unfounded claims.

I'm done trying, C7. As Albert Einstein said,

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Oh yeah - one more thing. Iron microspheres can be created from rust dislodged from beams and columns at temperatures 1000^oF lower than the melting point of rust [iron oxide].

 

[ergo]

Oh yeah - one more thing. Iron microspheres can be created from rust dislodged from beams and columns at temperatures 1000^oF lower than the melting point of rust [iron oxide].

... And he has a video by DaveThomasNMSR to prove it!

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

... And he has a video by DaveThomasNMSR to prove it!

Um, did you notice how the video PROVED production of iron-rich microspheres with a simple lighter? Did you notice the spheres were verified in the scanning electron microscope lab?

You're probably not familiar with this aspect of Science, seeing as it involves more than simply espousing one's assertions and opinions on the internet.

It's called "Doing the Experiment."

You should try it some time.

 

[alienentity]

Yeah Dave, Ergo and C7 are doing an experiment: it's a sociology experiment to see whether they can recycle the same bare assertions for years and keep debate threads going without ever offering any evidence.

 

[Christopher7]

No, the point is that your position - R.J. Lee's hypothesis is a non-starter, because iron microspheres will always be carried off by the air blasts hot enough to make them - is clearly, plainly, and obviously wrong.

You have agreed that microspheres would be carried off in the smoke but "a substantial amount" would adhere to walls and other surfaces. "Substantial" is vague. You know that there is a lot more soot leaving a fire in the smoke that soot deposited on surfaces in a fire zone. I clearly clarified my position as "Some of the iron microspheres would cling to walls and surfaces but the majority would be carried away with the other particulate matter". You used the qualifier "always" in place of "majority" which makes your statement knowingly misleading.

Oh yeah - one more thing. Iron microspheres can be created from rust dislodged from beams and columns at temperatures 1000^oF lower than the melting point of rust [iron oxide].

Steel wool is not rust [iron oxide]. Try that with a pile of rust.

Also: How much rust was there? A layer of just a few one hundredths of an inch thick doesn't amount to much and with most of the microspheres [if they were formed] leaving with the smoke there would not be enough to create a substantial percentage of the millions of pounds of WTC dust.

 

[alienentity]

That mechanism is only ONE possible source for spheres. Remembering that almost none of them are very pure, but are mixtures of various compounds, such as large amounts of Si.

Large office fires burning complex plastics, computers and so forth are going to produce all kinds of weird byproducts.

So what caused the Si to get into the microspheres? Where did it come from?

 

[Christopher7]

Yeah Dave, Ergo and C7 are doing an experiment: it's a sociology experiment to see whether they can recycle the same bare assertions for years and keep debate threads going without ever offering any evidence.

I presented evidence but you are blind to it. Iron oxide microspheres are part of fly ash which is what goes up the chimney is power plants and solid waste incinerators. This proves that iron microspheres will be carried away with the soot. It also proves that some will adhere to surfaces. This verifies the obvious that Lefty and Dave pointed out. Some of the soot, containing iron spheres, will adhere to walls and other surfaces.

 

[Christopher7]

That mechanism is only ONE possible source for spheres. Remembering that almost none of them are very pure, but are mixtures of various compounds, such as large amounts of Si.

Large office fires burning complex plastics, computers and so forth are going to produce all kinds of weird byproducts.

So what caused the Si to get into the microspheres? Where did it come from?

We are discussing the hypothesis in the letter which says dislodged rust melted and vaporized to form the iron microspheres.

 

[alienentity]

We are discussing the hypothesis in the letter which says dislodged rust melted and vaporized to form the iron microspheres.

It's one hypothesis. There are several possible sources for these microspheres. And I wouldn't really call them 'iron', because they're certainly not pure iron.

This suggests a number of mechanisms, as I said. The chimney effect is just one such mechanism, and may have contributed to the overall number.

And again, where did these large amounts of Si come from? Why were they intimately mixed in so many of the spheres?

 

[Christopher7]

So then Chris, why dont you call them and tell them someone is either pretending to be them or someone RJ Lee hires doesn't know enough about anything and should be sacked?

I wrote to RJ Lee a week ago and I am awaiting his reply.

 

[Christopher7]

It's one hypothesis. There are several possible sources for these microspheres. And I wouldn't really call them 'iron', because they're certainly not pure iron.

This suggests a number of mechanisms, as I said. The chimney effect is just one such mechanism, and may have contributed to the overall number.

And again, where did these large amounts of Si come from? Why were they intimately mixed in so many of the spheres?

Acording to the RJ Lee Group report, the silicates came from computer screens.

The EDS of the iron rich sphere in the RJ Lee Group report is primarily Fe with smaller spikes of O and C. The aluminosilicates are shown in a separate EDS. Al₂O₃ melts at 1726^oC and SiO₃ melts at 2054^oC. which is further proof of temperatures far in excess of what office fires can attain.

ETA: Yes, the letter is about one very speculative hypothesis. Even if it had occurred, and there is no data to back it up, it would be woefully insufficient to explain the abundance of iron microspheres.

 

[alienentity]

The aluminosilicates are shown in a separate EDS. Al₂O₃ melts at 1726^oC and SiO₃ melts at 2054^oC. which is further proof of temperatures far in excess of what office fires can attain.

Except that there are already several proven examples where such spheres can be produced at the temperatures that office fires can attain, including but not limited to - campfires that use wood.

So apart from the fact that your post is highly speculative and disregards most relevant information, you're spot on.