Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

[beachnut]

I am not questioning its authenticity. I am questioning its logic and scientific validity. As are others.

If you took chemistry and if you were able to talk to real scientist, instead of spewing nonsense, you would understand iron spheres in fires are common. But you will not take action, you will post more nonsense, nothing, and remain in ignorance.

You don't care, otherwise you would do the work to verify the information. BIG hint: you don't show the skills so far to glean useful information using your current techniques, what ever they maybe. It appears you do zero research past repeating lies from the nuts in 911 truth.

Why can't you verify anything?

 

[ergo]

It's been five months and we still have not heard back from RJ Lee regarding their letter positing hurricane winds and blast-furnace-like temperatures acting on rust flakes to produce microspheres in the WTC dust.

Oystein, why has Ron Wieck not followed through on this, as he said he would?

Why, as so-called "skeptics", are none of you inquiring into this bizarre non-explanation?

 

[DGM]

Why, as so-called "skeptics", are none of you inquiring into this bizarre non-explanation?

Speaking for myself. It's really a non-issue. Iron rich micro-spheres are common and in no way an indicator of, well anything. Basically, who cares?

 

[Oystein]

Oystein, why has Ron Wieck not followed through on this, as he said he would?

Why, as so-called "skeptics", are none of you inquiring into this bizarre non-explanation?

Ron told me that he did try to get a response from RJ Lee, but didn't get one. I am merely relaying the message here, so don't shoot me.
I don't consider this as bizarre.

 

[tfk]

It's been five months and we still have not heard back from RJ Lee regarding their letter positing hurricane winds and blast-furnace-like temperatures acting on rust flakes to produce microspheres in the WTC dust.

Interesting. So much for Ron Wieck's brand of "investigative journalism."

Since it can be shown that iron microspheres can be produced by "zero wind, a bic lighter & a steel brillo pad", what idiot said that it required "hurricane winds & blast furnace-like temperatures" to produce them??

Let me take a wild guess...

 

[ergo]

Ron told me that he did try to get a response from RJ Lee, but didn't get one. I am merely relaying the message here, so don't shoot me.
I don't consider this as bizarre.

You don't consider it explanatory, either.

Why, if such spheres and other kinds of melted and boiled particles are created through common fire events, wouldn't RJ Lee simply have said this? Why invent rust flakes, hurricane winds and blast-furnace like temperatures? Why is Jim Millette looking further into the microspheres if they are as common as melted Brillo pads?

 

[Oystein]

You don't consider it explanatory, either.

Why, if such spheres and other kinds of melted and boiled particles are created through common fire events, wouldn't RJ Lee simply have said this? Why invent rust flakes, hurricane winds and blast-furnace like temperatures? Why is Jim Millette looking further into the microspheres if they are as common as melted Brillo pads?

Correct, I think that RJ Lee shot some unnecessary just-so story from the hip, and forgot the obvious: microspheres are common in many types of ashes. Also, their high value of almost 6% by weight is an outlier; dust samples from many other locations showed the usual 1.5-2.5% or so concentration of iron.

Millette is doing it in response to the Harrit paper, on Chris Mohr's request, and that's driven by mere s cientific curiosity, and not to acknpwledge the twoofer notion that microspheres somehow "mean" anything with regard to collapse initiation mode.

Twoofers claim, without actually making a complete argument, that iron microspheres were created by thermite and nothing else. Ergo, can you confirm that this is indeed what twoofers like you claim?

 

[Voodoosix]

dont welders and electrical shorts produce these "spheres" as well?

 

[Oystein]

Lots of processes do. Questions are: How much? And what are we actually talking about chemically - pure iron, iron oxide, or mixed bags of stuff with notable iron content?

Twoofer try to make it appear as if a major proportion - 6%?? - of the dust was pure, spherical iron, and pretend that thermite is the only explanation.

Well.

There were probably 50,000 tons of dust spilled all over Manhattan. 6% of that is 3,000 tons. Add to that any amount of bulk molten steel that Twoofers also like to wank about.

The thermite that makes twoofers all wet is Fe2O3 + 2 Al, and it reacts to 2 Fe + Al2O3. By weight, that's 52% iron, 48% alumina, or roughly 50:50. So we are talking about 6,000 tons of thermite here.

And we are talking about 3,000 tons, or 6% by weight in the dust, of alumina.

Truthers, who marvel at the high concentration of iron spheres in the dust and claim it comes from thermite, apparently never wonder why there wasn't an equal amount (by weight; twice as much by volume) of alumina also found in all the dust samples.

• RJ Lee didn't find lots of Al (the same table that has the infamous just under 6% iron spheres shows "Hi Temp Si/Al-rich" particles as 0.54% by weight - typically about half of that could be described as Al_xO_y).
• Lioy e.al. found the total Al concentration in three dust samples to be under 0.1%.
• McGee e.al. found between 0.6% and 2.4% Al in the smallest fraction (<2.5 µm) of WTC dust - this is signifacntly less than the Al concentration found in several non-NYC control samples (Washington DC ambient air; oil fly ash; Mount Saint Helens ash).

In summary: Truthers have no explanation for iron microspheres that isn't contradicted by other evidence, such as the low concentration of Al, and the absence of alumina spheres.

 

[Robrob]

You don't consider it explanatory, either.

Why, if such spheres and other kinds of melted and boiled particles are created through common fire events, wouldn't RJ Lee simply have said this? Why invent rust flakes, hurricane winds and blast-furnace like temperatures? Why is Jim Millette looking further into the microspheres if they are as common as melted Brillo pads?

Notice your above comment is questioning the questioners, not admitting the iron spheres as "not evidence." Since they are common, the real question would be why truthers still insist on seeing them as evidence of anything?

 

[Redwood]

Lots of processes do. Questions are: How much? And what are we actually talking about chemically - pure iron, iron oxide, or mixed bags of stuff with notable iron content?

Twoofer try to make it appear as if a major proportion - 6%?? - of the dust was pure, spherical iron, and pretend that thermite is the only explanation.

Well.

There were probably 50,000 tons of dust spilled all over Manhattan. 6% of that is 3,000 tons. Add to that any amount of bulk molten steel that Twoofers also like to wank about.

The thermite that makes twoofers all wet is Fe2O3 + 2 Al, and it reacts to 2 Fe + Al2O3. By weight, that's 52% iron, 48% alumina, or roughly 50:50. So we are talking about 6,000 tons of thermite here.

And we are talking about 3,000 tons, or 6% by weight in the dust, of alumina.

Truthers, who marvel at the high concentration of iron spheres in the dust and claim it comes from thermite, apparently never wonder why there wasn't an equal amount (by weight; twice as much by volume) of alumina also found in all the dust samples.

• RJ Lee didn't find lots of Al (the same table that has the infamous just under 6% iron spheres shows "Hi Temp Si/Al-rich" particles as 0.54% by weight - typically about half of that could be described as Al_xO_y).
• Lioy e.al. found the total Al concentration in three dust samples to be under 0.1%.
• McGee e.al. found between 0.6% and 2.4% Al in the smallest fraction (<2.5 µm) of WTC dust - this is signifacntly less than the Al concentration found in several non-NYC control samples (Washington DC ambient air; oil fly ash; Mount Saint Helens ash).

In summary: Truthers have no explanation for iron microspheres that isn't contradicted by other evidence, such as the low concentration of Al, and the absence of alumina spheres.

If by some chance, Jones or Harrit ever try to peddle their bilge in my neighborhood, I want to ask them two questions (unless I have to pay to get in):

1. Have you checked for the presence of aluminum oxide? If not, why not? If aluminum oxide is absent, to what do attribute this?

2. Have you checked for the presence of actual paint chips? If not, why not? If you did, how did you test for paint chips, and how do they differ from thermite?

 

[ergo]

Correct, I think that RJ Lee shot some unnecessary just-so story from the hip, and forgot the obvious: microspheres are common in many types of ashes. Also, their high value of almost 6% by weight is an outlier; dust samples from many other locations showed the usual 1.5-2.5% or so concentration of iron.

You think RJ Lee Group "forgot" that microspheres are common products of common fires? Heh.

Millette is doing it in response to the Harrit paper, on Chris Mohr's request, and that's driven by mere s cientific curiosity, and not to acknpwledge the twoofer notion that microspheres somehow "mean" anything with regard to collapse initiation mode.

This is highly unlikely. Millette has already fulfilled his obligation to Chris Mohr. He no more needs to investigate a phenomenon that folks like yourselves declare is "commonplace" than he needs to, in your minds, do a DSC test. If he has already, to your minds, "proven" that there was no thermitic material in the WTC dust, and won't even do a DSC test to replicate the findings he is attempting to disprove, why would he go into further study of something that is, to your minds, "unremarkable"? According to his own stated findings, there is no need to study the microspheres, just as there is "no need" to do DSC. So why do one and not the other?

If some of you actually made some effort to apply consistency in the so-called logic that you like to use, you might ask yourselves tahe same question. But you don't. And you don't.

 

[tfk]

dont welders and electrical shorts produce these "spheres" as well?

Are you old enough to remember the opening credits to NYPD Blue? Drums beating & subway train flying down the tracks, giving off lots of sparks. Steel wheels on steel rails. What temp do you think those type of sparks are?

Ever heard of commutator arcing in motors? Arcing in contacts?

LOTS of processes produce arcs between metals. Lots of times, those metals are steel or other iron alloys.

 

[Oystein]

You think RJ Lee Group "forgot" that microspheres are common products of common fires? Heh.

Certainly not. Or else their report would not have contained this:

Considering the high temperatures reached during the destruction of
the WTC, the following three types of combustion products would be
expected to be present in WTC Dust. These products are:
• Vesicular carbonaceous particles primarily from plastics
• Iron-rich spheres from iron-bearing building components or contents

Many years later now, someone asked Rich to explain "iron-sphere", and the relatively high concentration of supposedly almost 6%. I think what Rich forgot there, when he made up a vivid story for the layman who asked him, was that a) the spheres are usually iron-rich, not iron and b) their value is an extreme outlier, compared to what other researchers found.

So there really wasn't anything to be explained. Rich wasn't wise to try and come up with something.

This is highly unlikely. Millette has already fulfilled his obligation to Chris Mohr. ...

True, but Chris is a charming man and asked Millette about it, and perhaps Millette is a nice man and still does it, even though it goes beyond his obligation.

 

[ergo]

Many years later now, someone asked Rich to explain "iron-sphere", and the relatively high concentration of supposedly almost 6%. I think what Rich forgot there, when he made up a vivid story for the layman who asked him, was that a) the spheres are usually iron-rich, not iron and b) their value is an extreme outlier, compared to what other researchers found.

So, in your mind, RJ Lee Group decided to "make up" a "vivid story", rather than simply inform Ron in plain language that iron microspheres are common and expected in residue from office fires?

It seems to me that you're the one making things up here.

 

[ergo]

True, but Chris is a charming man and asked Millette about it, and perhaps Millette is a nice man and still does it, even though it goes beyond his obligation.

What would Chris have asked Millette about the microspheres, and what would Millette be investigating about them?

 

[beachnut]

So, in your mind, RJ Lee Group decided to "make up" a "vivid story", rather than simply inform Ron in plain language that iron microspheres are common and expected in residue from office fires?

It seems to me that you're the one making things up here.

You never been in a high-rise fire on multiple floor with a damaged building. You don't do science, which has you unable to grasp why iron-rich spheres are formed in fire. You refuse to gain knowledge, you prefer to troll posting nonsense on 911. Like your moon size debris field physics, your post fail to make a rational point.

Why do you insist on remaining in ignorance on 911?

 

[chrismohr]

What would Chris have asked Millette about the microspheres, and what would Millette be investigating about them?

Hi Ergo,

Last year I asked Jim Millette what the source of these particular iron-rich spheres are that appear in the WTC dust. Millette himself had reported on them years ago in an EPA Report he worked on, if I'm not mistaken. When I asked him about the spheres, he said, yes, that has not been thoroughly researched and I would like to include that in my final report.

Millette is scrupulously neutral and never makes statements or draws conclusions until the experimental evidence is in. He may yet research the actual source of these microspheres if he ever fulfills his desire to put out a full scale published peer reviewed report on the WTC dust.

Unfortunately, he also explained to me that now that the project is unfunded, it has to take a back seat to his paid commitments at his lab. In addition, an employee who took a strong interest in this would work on it whenever it was a slow day at the office, so progress was made just because that employee took on some of the work. Now that this employee has changed jobs, no one on his staff is taking as strong an interest in it. The final results are not yet in, but that's where we are as of September 1....

 

[Oystein]

So, in your mind, RJ Lee Group decided to "make up" a "vivid story", rather than simply inform Ron in plain language that iron microspheres are common and expected in residue from office fires?

It seems to me that you're the one making things up here.

I think RJ Lee or his staff shot something from the hip that isn't quite thought through. So in that sense, yes, I think to some extent they "made up" a "vivid story". It ain't totally wrong in describing some of the conditions and that these might add somewhat to the level of microspheres commonly and expectedly found in the dust, but leaving the impression this is the explanation sine qua non wasn't wise - all in my opinion.

If you want to disagree and rather believe that RJ Lee did not "make up" a "vivid story", in other words told a true, factual and significant story, well, that is your prerogative.

RJ Lee certainly understand that iron-rich microspheres are abundant. common an expected in most kind of ashes, including those from building fires^[1], and they certainly understand well that the WTC was an extreme case of such fires, resulting in very high amounts of ashes with significant amounts of these things so common in such ashes.


[1] The McCrone Particla Atlas, Volume III, Edition Two (Ann Arbor Science Publishers, 1973), which is probably the standard reference for any scientist who wishes to identify the origin of dust particles, shows fractions of various types of ashes on pages 775 to 780. Of the 18 examples presented there, more than half have spheres specifically pointed out, 13 are dominated by Al, Si and Fe (this is mostly scanning a variety of particles shown in the SEM images; O and C were not measured with the 1973 equipment).

 

[Robrob]

So, in your mind, RJ Lee Group decided to "make up" a "vivid story", rather than simply inform Ron in plain language that iron microspheres are common and expected in residue from office fires?

It seems to me that you're the one making things up here.

Funny how you are overlooking Ron's error in the first place. Why would he claim "iron-rich micro-spheres" were unique and proof of something when they weren't?