Chain of Custody

You actually think that this reply is valid? Very sad. When RJ Lee says "during the event" it's a metaphor for during the collapse. Anybody can decipher that. Well, almost anybody.
Click to expand...

You're assuming. I assume you know what happens when you assume.

LMAO!! 6% of the dust bro....the dust....dust. It is purely in regards to the amount of iron rich micro spheres that were present in the dust. Not 6% of the earths core. That would be a separate thing totally. I understand what you are trying to say but you are comparing the planet to the WTC 1 and 2 towers. You can't do that.

I hope someone can help this poor soul out on this.
Click to expand...

Again - 220 floors of concrete and STEEL and you're implying that finding iron in the dust is strange?

Un-friggin-believable.

FYI - you still owe JREF an apology.
 
Last edited:
=Oystein;7959821]Buddy, you didn't just say it was a torch. You said specifically, and I quote:


To which Justin corrected you:

Thanks, Justin!


It is once again exceedingly obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about. It was only a few days ago when you were surprised that someone would know how hot an oxyacetylene torch can get. Do you remember that you have already been schooled on the issue of oxyacetylene before?

How was "I schooled"? I said there was nothing in the paper saying that the red gray chip was put to test temperatures of 3000C. i was not surprised to learn that someone knew how hot a torch gets.

Yet you chose to once again display your ignorance. Apparently you STILL don't know what's special about an oxyacetylene torch.

A before O or up you go. I took welding a long time ago in high school. I know whats special about OA torches. I stand corrected on the type of torch it is. However, I was making reference to it being a torch, rather than a cigarette lighter, is what I originally meant.

Dave uses a lighter.

Pretty insignificant to respond to that though.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Again - 220 floors of concrete and STEEL and you're implying that finding iron in the dust is strange?



No im implying that finding formerly molten iron is strange.
 
Two questions:

1) How did a thread on chain of custody turn into a debate on iron-rich microspheres?
2) Jim Millette is doing a study looking for unignited thermitic materials in the dust as claimed in the Bentham study, not iron microspheres. Why have iron microspheres become so important, with demands for special before-and-after studies? Maybe SLT and other would like to raise money and hire him to do a series of experiments re microspheres?
 
chrismohr said:
Two questions:

1) How did a thread on chain of custody turn into a debate on iron-rich microspheres?
2) Jim Millette is doing a study looking for unignited thermitic materials in the dust as claimed in the Bentham study, not iron microspheres. Why have iron microspheres become so important, with demands for special before-and-after studies? Maybe SLT and other would like to raise money and hire him to do a series of experiments re microspheres?
Click to expand...

Good questions.

I apologize for my part in allowing the derail.

SLT - enough.
 
Ivan said:

"I don't know what two kinds of chips is Kevin Ryan talking about, since it is still his "top truther secret":cool: I just guess that his red "paint chips" are chips of Tnemec paint (or some other red primer) and alleged "thermitic chips" are chips identical with Bentham chips (a) to (d), aka Laclede paint chips. For me, Kevin Ryan simply keeps (at least) two kinds of paint chips. It's up to him to show me(us), that I am (we are) wrong:cool":[/QUOTE]

Kevin Ryan has his own samples of WTC paint. They are not a secret by any means I can asure all of you that. I have recived four pictures not from him, but from another associate. Two of what the red gray chips look like (before and after ignition) and two of what the WTC paint samples look like under microscopy. They do not look anything alike.

To make reference that one is withholding evidence by stating Kevins paint samples are his "top truther secret" is a strong accusation and I beleive an appoligy to him is in order. The only ones whom are withholding evidence is the NIST.

So all your posts about not knowing the chemical composition for the paint samples Ryan has, or that were in the Bentham paper have been answered.

The composition of WTC paint, both the Tnemec and Laclede varieties, is public knowledge and was reported in the NIST reports. Kevin Ryans samples are WTC paint.



See attached.
 

Attachments

  • nano2 (4).jpg
    nano2 (4).jpg
    65.7 KB · Views: 1
  • paint1.jpg
    paint1.jpg
    137.5 KB · Views: 2
  • nano3.jpg
    nano3.jpg
    49.5 KB · Views: 1
  • paint2.jpg
    paint2.jpg
    125.6 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
chrismohr said:
Two questions:

1) How did a thread on chain of custody turn into a debate on iron-rich micro spheres?
2) Jim Millette is doing a study looking for unignited thermitic materials in the dust as claimed in the Bentham study, not iron microspheres. Why have iron microspheres become so important, with demands for special before-and-after studies? Maybe SLT and other would like to raise money and hire him to do a series of experiments re microspheres?
Click to expand...

The spheres are important because they are the signature of a thermitic reaction. If iron rich tear dropped shaped spheres were there, in the abundance that they were, then unignited themite of some kind was there also. Period!

If the topic is the red gray chip, or the dust, which it is in a way, you can be sure that the spheres will soon follow.

They all flow together Chris, you should know this by now with all your research you have done. The chain of custody topic stopped back at "wait for the study to be completed". Your just trying to get the sphere talk stopped because you have no answers for that one.

Can the name of this thread be changed?
 
Last edited:
chrismohr said:
Two questions:

1) How did a thread on chain of custody turn into a debate on iron-rich microspheres?
2) Jim Millette is doing a study looking for unignited thermitic materials in the dust as claimed in the Bentham study, not iron microspheres. Why have iron microspheres become so important, with demands for special before-and-after studies? Maybe SLT and other would like to raise money and hire him to do a series of experiments re microspheres?
Click to expand...

Good questions and I'm guilty as well. But this thread has a title Chain of custody, which is perhaps rather general, so some derails from paint issue can be expected:cool:

SLT: please, explain the meaning of pasted pictures. Things like scale, units, captions and this kind of stuff:cool:
 
superlogicalthinker said:
The spheres are important because they are the signature of a thermitic reaction. If iron rich tear dropped shaped spheres were there, in the abundance that they were, then unignited themite of some kind was there also. Period!

If the topic is the red gray chip, or the dust, which it is in a way, you can be sure that the spheres will soon follow.

They all flow together Chris, you should know this by now with all your research you have done. The chain of custody topic stopped back at "wait for the study to be completed". Your just trying to get the sphere talk stopped because you have no answers for that one.

Can the name of this thread be changed?
Click to expand...

Nope. Make a new thread.
 
superlogicalthinker said:
The spheres are important because they are the signature of a thermitic reaction.
Click to expand...

No they're not. Why don't you start a new thread and show everyone I don't know what I'm talking about?

I bet you can't. (The fact you never took Chem-1 is going to bite you in the ass).

:p
 
Last edited:
superlogicalthinker said:
Thanks, Justin!
Click to expand...
Cool.
You need to do this more often.

superlogicalthinker said:
How was "I schooled"? I said there was nothing in the paper saying that the red gray chip was put to test temperatures of 3000C. i was not surprised to learn that someone knew how hot a torch gets.
Click to expand...
What it does say in the paper is that the chip was subjected to an OA torch.
Since the flame of an OA torch is 3000°C hot, it follows logically that the chip was subjected to extreme temperatures.
And I thought we had schooled you enough. I was wrong. You are apparently totally incapable of any logical thinking.

superlogicalthinker said:
A before O or up you go. I took welding a long time ago in high school.
Click to expand...
How long ago would that have been?

superlogicalthinker said:
I know whats special about OA torches.
Click to expand...
Yeah? What is special about an OA torch? Tell us in your own words!

superlogicalthinker said:
I stand corrected on the type of torch it is. However, I was making reference to it being a torch, rather than a cigarette lighter, is what I originally meant.

Dave uses a lighter.

Pretty insignificant to respond to that though.
Click to expand...
But you chose to make that insiginificant response.
Now what's really insignificant is the difference between a torch and a lighter. There really is hardly any. The difference between OA and buthane is a lot more significant.

You made an insignificant point and flunked on a more significant one.

That's what we call a FAIL around here.


Stop making excuses for your displays of arrogant stupidity!
 
superlogicalthinker said:
sheeplesnshills said:
I stand corrected. Mea culpa.
Click to expand...

That was a horrible attempt at trying to say that the paper didn't show molten iron as it's bi product.

So really what you were asserting is that thermite, when ignited, does not produce molten iron as its end product.

WOW!
Click to expand...

Yes, that wasn't a smart post by sheeplesnshills.

But look how he responded when the stupidity of his point was explained to him?

He admitted he was wrong without making arrogant excuses!


There is a lesson in humbleness for you to be learned. Instead you chose to be arrogant yet again and commit a foul after the play has ended. Your character is showing. It doesn't look too good.
 
superlogicalthinker said:
Ivan said:

"I don't know what two kinds of chips is Kevin Ryan talking about, since it is still his "top truther secret":cool: I just guess that his red "paint chips" are chips of Tnemec paint (or some other red primer) and alleged "thermitic chips" are chips identical with Bentham chips (a) to (d), aka Laclede paint chips. For me, Kevin Ryan simply keeps (at least) two kinds of paint chips. It's up to him to show me(us), that I am (we are) wrong:cool":[/QUOTE]

Kevin Ryan has his own samples of WTC paint. They are not a secret by any means I can asure all of you that. I have recived four pictures not from him, but from another associate. Two of what the red gray chips look like (before and after ignition) and two of what the WTC paint samples look like under microscopy. They do not look anything alike.

To make reference that one is withholding evidence by stating Kevins paint samples are his "top truther secret" is a strong accusation and I beleive an appoligy to him is in order. The only ones whom are withholding evidence is the NIST.

So all your posts about not knowing the chemical composition for the paint samples Ryan has, or that were in the Bentham paper have been answered.

The composition of WTC paint, both the Tnemec and Laclede varieties, is public knowledge and was reported in the NIST reports. Kevin Ryans samples are WTC paint.



See attached.
Click to expand...

This post is totally incoherent.

Which image shows what? Are there scales?
Kevin has what kind(s) of WRC paint?
Kevin has which kind of red-gray chips? Ones with Zinc, or ones without Zinc and Kaolinite instead? Or omnnes with Titanium? Or the Lead kind of chip? Ones wher the gray layer is A242 steel (iron with bit of Manganese), or where the gray layer is carbon without iron? Do you realize that Kevin and his friends have a whole bunch of different kinds of chips in their Harrit e.al. paper?

So which is which?

Please sort it out! Try to organize your data, and try to arganize your thoughts! The way you did is just another big FAIL!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom