• 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?

Oh, and if you look at fig 3 (p. 2) XEDS from the Jones/Farrer Paper 'Extremely high temperatures', you'll see the WTC dust sphere is mostly:
O - 63%
Si - 14%
Fe - 11%
Al - 9%

There is no empirical proof to show this would have to be formed by extremely high temperatures. This is pure speculation on the part of 9/11 truthers, as usual.
 
A far bigger obstacle for the 9/11 Truth movement is dealing with the false pronouncements of leaders like Richard Gage, who continue to spread the false claim that iron-rich spheres could 'only' be formed by thermite.

Yet as Dave Thomas and many others have easily demonstrated, these can be formed by ordinary processes of combustion. Gage's main claim is falsified empirically.

Try tackling that one, truthers!!
 
Oh, and if you look at fig 3 (p. 2) XEDS from the Jones/Farrer Paper 'Extremely high temperatures', you'll see the WTC dust sphere is mostly:
O - 63%
Si - 14%
Fe - 11%
Al - 9%

There is no empirical proof to show this would have to be formed by extremely high temperatures. This is pure speculation on the part of 9/11 truthers, as usual.

Hehe
Fig. 4 has a different composition:
Fe (65)
O (18)
Al (11)
S (4)
Cu(0.6)
Mn (0.6)
Ni (0.4)
And the caption says "The Fe-S-Al-O signature is striking, nothing like the signature of structural steel.". Oh it isn't? Just browse several tables of specified and reported compositions of contemporaneous steels. Quite a few contain noticable amounts of Mn, Ni and Cu. "Steel" is the first thing I think when I see lots of Fe and traces of Mn and Ni. So where do the Al and S come from? I don't know, but neither does Jones.
 
I wrote to RJ Lee a week ago and I am awaiting his reply.

What did you write them?
I wrote them myself, but as I am not a customer nor a scientist nor a journalist, I didn't get a reply. I had offered you to channel yopur questions through a journalist who already is in contact with RJ Lee. Why did you ignore it?
 
Last edited:
Dave Thomas and many others have easily demonstrated, these can be formed by ordinary processes of combustion.
Steel wool burns because of the very thin fibers that create a much greater surface to volume ratio.

Remember, we are discussing the hypothesis in the letter. Iron spheres from RUST.

ETA: the size is comparable but iron oxide is fully oxidized. I'm not a chemist but I think that means it cant burn. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Do you have an example of rust being melted and vaporized as in the hypothesis?
 
Last edited:
What did you write them?
I asked him if the melted iron and vaporized lead confirmed temperatures of 2800oF and 3182oF respectively.

I wrote them myself, but as I am not a customer nor a scientist nor a journalist, I didn't get a reply. I had offered you to channel yopur questions through a journalist who already is in contact with RJ Lee. Why did you ignore it?
I would rather hear it from RJ Lee directly.

Did it go thru Chris Mohr? I thought Ron contacted Stephen.
 
It seems to me that most of these spheres must either have formed during the fires, or been present even before 9/11 and released during the collapses.
Indeed! There is evidence that some of the iron-rich micro-shperes came from brake dust shed by the cranes used for construction, when they were actually building the buildings. (There is a thread on here somewhere, where this is discussed).

My questions thus are:
  • What do we know about this already?
  • Can ironspheres form during "normal" fires, and if so, how?
  • Did Jones and Harrit really find ironspheres, and did they really form when they burned their chips?
  • How many such spheres are already contained in building materials, such as concrete?
[/QUOTE]


As far as what we know about it already: the spherules in question, have been made into a religion in the "truth" movement - largely because they ["truth"ers] don't really have a clue what the iron-rich spheres actually mean. The incessant spamming of the iron-rich spheres by them, has become extreme hyperbole on their part.

As far as iron-rich spheres forming during "normal" office fires: 1st, it is a bit of a misnomer on the part of conspiracists to call the fires in the buildings that day "normal." However, given that iron was in abundance in most of the office contents, as well as the building materials themselves: yes, it very much IS possible for these spherules to form during such conditions and even R.J. Lee said so in their report. Iron is found in pigmentation (particularly red pigmentation - of which there was plenty in the buildings on account of the red primer paint applied to the steel elements).

As far as Jones and Harrit actually finding anything: the jury is still out on that one. Jones never had his samples verified by any independent labs or bother to offer a chain of evidence for his samples. That said, it wouldn't be surprising if he did. As mentioned above, the buildings were packed with iron, both from the components themselves, as well as office contents (such as ink) and as the buildings collapsed, friction certainly caused formation of spheres as the components collided with each other during collapse. The other part: when Jones and Harrit "tested" their samples: they only tested them in open air, which precludes their results from proving a reaction. They didn't conduct full testing on the samples and ignored elements that were inconvenient to their claims.

Between the fires affecting office contents such as ink and electronics, as well as the iron content in paint and pigmentation, along with the fact that the processes of welding the steel during construction and the cranes shedding brake dust, the sources of the iron, are well in abundance and are in NO WAY exclusively explained by thermite reactions. The claim of thermite based on iron-rich micro-spheres, is one of the most scientifically fraudulent arguments a person can make.
 
Also, remember that the spheres were IRON-RICH; they were not exclusively iron. This means that they contained OTHER elements besides iron.
 
It seems to me that most of these spheres must either have formed during the fires, or been present even before 9/11 and released during the collapses.
Your questions have been thoroughly discussed on this thread. As to when the iron rich microspheres were created:

The RJ Lee Group report 2003
Pg 17 [pdf pg 21]
Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC event, producing spherical metallic particles.

ETA: Even if some iron spheres were created before the WTC event that does not alter the fact that iron melted during the WTC 7 event.

Please read some of this thread so you can see what has already transpired.

 
Last edited:
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....
Seconded.
 
Your questions have been thoroughly discussed on this thread. As to when the iron rich microspheres were created:

The RJ Lee Group report 2003
Pg 17 [pdf pg 21]
Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC event, producing spherical metallic particles.

ETA: Even if some iron spheres were created before the WTC event that does not alter the fact that iron melted during the WTC 7 event. Please read some of this thread so you can see what has already transpired.

I have read through this thread. The abundance and variation of iron-containing materials in the buildings are so vast that it would be impossible NOT to have a presence of iron spheres in the dust. To claim that it was exclusively the result of a thermite reaction, is 100% fraudulent. The point being, is the spheres in question are iron-rich, not exclusively iron.
 
But of course, you and Oystein know better than the professionals who studied the dust. :rolleyes:

The professionals who studied the dust (RJ Lee, McGee, Lioy, Millette...) make no claims that any of that dust came specifically from Wtc 7, afaik
 
The professionals who studied the dust (RJ Lee, McGee, Lioy, Millette...) make no claims that any of that dust came specifically from Wtc 7, afaik
What part of "during the destruction of the WTC" don't you understand?

ETA: WTC 7? So what?
 
Last edited:
But of course, you and Oystein know better than the professionals who studied the dust. :rolleyes:

But of course, YOU know better than the professionals who studied the dust?

You see, I would typically phrase something like that as a question instead of placing a "rolleyes" at the end of a sentence.

People would probably take you a little more serious!
 
I asked him if the melted iron and vaporized lead confirmed temperatures of 2800oF and 3182oF respectively.

I would rather hear it from RJ Lee directly.

Did it go thru Chris Mohr? I thought Ron contacted Stephen.
Not through me, it came from Ron as you thought. Has anyone heard if Ron made that phone call to Rich Lee?
 
I asked him if the melted iron and vaporized lead confirmed temperatures of 2800oF and 3182oF respectively.

I would rather hear it from RJ Lee directly.

Did it go thru Chris Mohr? I thought Ron contacted Stephen.

Yes, through Ron. Haven't heard back from him yet. Of course your question is not, and will not be, included.
 

Back
Top Bottom