• 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.

WTC Dust Study Feb 29, 2012 by Dr. James Millette

ergo said:
Glad you agree. It kind of puts to rest your confusion about the need for the nanothermite to "survive" the fires, right?
Click to expand...

Therm*te was just a match, to ignite HExplosives! Did you not get the DR. Jones memo?:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
ergo said:
Glad you agree. It kind of puts to rest your confusion about the need for the nanothermite to "survive" the fires, right?
Click to expand...

Well, if it didn't survive the fires and ignited at the time the fires did, then why did the building not collapse immediately?

Things that make you go hmm.
 
ergo said:
Again, I ask: why would you assume it did? We are talking about a 60 - 90 minute period between fuel ignition and collapse time. Maybe that's how long it takes.
Click to expand...
Wow...

The fact that you go to such extremes to try and prove a point is amazing. Yeah, thermitic material takes an hour or more to cut through a column.
:rolleyes:
 
Myriad said:
This is called smelting. It's been done since ancient times. It takes heat and a reducing atmosphere. Melting the iron is not required.

A peer-reviewed paper? That would be a bit like finding a peer-reviewed paper that says wheat can be made into bread.
Click to expand...
A quote from a Metallurgy 101 textbook might be good enough
 
SmeltingWP [in the smelting process] Iron oxide becomes metallic iron at roughly 1250°C, almost 300 degrees below iron's melting point of 1538°C
 
GlennB said:
SmeltingWP [in the smelting process] Iron oxide becomes metallic iron at roughly 1250°C, almost 300 degrees below iron's melting point of 1538°C
Click to expand...


And that's for reduction all the way to elemental iron. That happens in stages with each stage of reduction requiring higher temperatures. I recall, in a previous post on this topic, concluding that in an ordinary poorly-ventilated wood fire, reduction of other iron oxides and ferrihydrites (the latter of which occur as nanoparticles in lignins in plant materials including wood and some papers) to Fe3O4 (magnetite) was likely, while reduction to FeO (wustite) or elemental iron would require more extreme conditions.

Magnetite looks shiny and metallic, even though it's still an oxide.

This accounts for the use of magnetic scanning to detect otherwise invisible traces of ancient fires, which is a common practice in archaeology.

http://www.bartington.com/Literaturepdf/Case Studies/MS Measurement in Archaeology.pdf

Weakly magnetic iron oxides in the clay and silt particles are transformed into highly magnetic oxides through burning. When the organic matter in a soil burns at ~600-700 °C it produces a reducing atmosphere which can change hematite to magnetite, and probably maghemite on re-oxidation as the burn ceases. Thus hotspots of magnetic susceptibility in ground surveys can help locate large fires, hearths and kilns (Figure 1), and spikes in magnetic susceptibility in vertical sections can point to burned or habitation layers (Figure 2).
Click to expand...


I haven't been able to find a paper describing the resulting magnetite particles (i.e. whether or not they form spheres or any other characteristic size or shape). It's not an issue in archaeology, especially if the subsequent weathering to maghemite changes the particle shape anyhow. However, I have been able to generate metallic ferromagnetic spheres in my own fireplace, by burning wood grown in my own yard.
 
Aye. With a great microscope I could probably study this with the rusty nails left behind in our stove from when I chop old pallets for kindling. Hmmm ... always wanted a good microscope and I need a new hobby.
 
Gamolon said:
Yeah, thermitic material takes an hour or more to cut through a column. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

How long does it take?


(Sorry, MM. It would be lovely if the mods would remove this conversation so we can continue it elsewhere. I don't want to do it.)
 
Last edited:
Miragememories said:
It is normal for exposed iron to oxidize and leave a protective cover which stops oxidation from further penetrating.


MM
Click to expand...

Yes, sometimes. In my town the city has been putting up high voltage power poles that do exactly that. They're very ugly but apparently will save money over the lifespan of the poles by not requiring paint and repaint.
 
Miragememories said:
It is normal for exposed iron to oxidize and leave a protective cover which stops oxidation from further penetrating.
Click to expand...

No. This is true of aluminum (off the top of my head), but not iron. That's why you see steel artifacts rusting clear through in junk yards.
 
ergo said:
How long does it take?
Click to expand...
Tell you what ergo.

You present your evidence supporting your ridiculous claim that a thermitic material could take 60 to 90 minutes to burn and I'll present my evidence that a thermitic material burns rapidly.

Let's see what you have. It's VERY evident that you're just trying to inject unfounded ideas and claims because you know if refutes your beliefs.

This is the same kind of garbage that MM pulls. He makes a statement and then when challenged, never responds. Case in point, the claim he made about thermite being used on the CORNERS only to initiate the collapse, which was then supposedly followed by conventional explosives. He was asked how did just a few "melted" corners worth of steel generate almost 6% worth of iron micro-spheres in the dust from around the buildings.

So I ask you. Provided your evidence that lends credence to your thinking that a thermtic material would take 60 to 90 minutes to burn after ignition on a structural column, in order to sever said column.
 
Hi all,
Two things:
1) This is not an April Fool's joke: I just talked with Jim Millette and he is still interested in publishing a paper if he can ever get some time (business is still very strong at his firm).
2) Since Jim Millette has not looked at the iron-rich spheres in his preliminary study and I have been asking about them here, I created a new thread to talk about that subject. Can we kind of restart things related to that subject there?
 
Gamolon said:
Tell you what ergo.

You present your evidence supporting your ridiculous claim that a thermitic material could take 60 to 90 minutes to burn and I'll present my evidence that a thermitic material burns rapidly.
Click to expand...

No. You laughed off the idea that it could take 60 - 90 minutes. Why? That estimate is, obviously, based on the time to collapse that we observed. I'm not making any other claims about it. Whereas you clearly have another idea. What is it? At least state it first. I'm very interested in seeing how long it takes for thermitic nanocomposites to cut through 260 or so structural steel box columns. I'm also gobsmacked that you would even have any information on this. So go ahead.
 
ergo said:
No. You laughed off the idea that it could take 60 - 90 minutes. Why? That estimate is, obviously, based on the time to collapse that we observed. I'm not making any other claims about it. Whereas you clearly have another idea. What is it? At least state it first. I'm very interested in seeing how long it takes for thermitic nanocomposites to cut through 260 or so structural steel box columns. I'm also gobsmacked that you would even have any information on this. So go ahead.
Click to expand...

So your estimate is based on a fantasy. File under "No :rule10:, Sherlock"


Your estimate is that it could take 60-90 minutes for thermite to cut the columns in the world trade center.

That didn't happen.

So who cares? I can easily laugh at your estimate, with no prior knowledge of thermite's cutting capability due to the simple fact that it wasn't present at the WTC.
 
ergo said:
No. You laughed off the idea that it could take 60 - 90 minutes. Why? That estimate is, obviously, based on the time to collapse that we observed. I'm not making any other claims about it. Whereas you clearly have another idea. What is it? At least state it first. I'm very interested in seeing how long it takes for thermitic nanocomposites to cut through 260 or so structural steel box columns. I'm also gobsmacked that you would even have any information on this. So go ahead.
Click to expand...
Clarify your claim and why you think it's possible for the severing of columns to take 60 to 90 minutes.

Either A:
You think that each individual column on a floor level was cut in succession and that process took 60 to 90 minutes

or B:
You think that ALL columns were cut at the same time on a floor level and THAT process took 60 to 90 minutes

Which is it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom