Debunk Alert: Experiment to Test for Eutectic Reaction

[Christopher7]

Please show your source that the Editor-in-Chief of the Bentham family of Journals reads and approves all the articles.

This is hardly relevant.

Verification that what you claim is true is "hardly relevant"? I must respectfully disagree.

If Benthams editors approve each article for publication

Key word here is "If"

then Jones and Harrit cheated and their paper was never peer reviewed.

If pigs had wings . . .

and their paper was never peer reviewed.

If Benthams editors do not approve each article, then they do not have a proper peer review process, and Jones and Harrits paper was never peer reviewed.

It was reviewed by the reviewers. Editors assign articles to reviewers who actually do the reviewing.

 

[Scott Sommers]

Blah, blah, blah, says the Truth, blah, blah, blah.

Anyone can learn enough about academic publishing so that they don't get laughed when they talk about it. The problem is that you'll probably have to get educated to do this, and in the course of this, probably come to an understanding that Truthism is sill.

Honestly, why would someone choose to be laughed at when they could be taken seriously?

Blah, blah, blah, says the Truther.

 

[Christopher7]

Blah, blah, blah, says the Truth, blah, blah, blah.

blah, blah, blah, says the Truther.

Nay, nay, says the denier. Here is a list of reasons why I don't believe the thermite paper is valid. Here is a list of reasons why I don't believe Steven Jones.

Haven't seen your list of reasons why y'all don't believe Neils Harrit and Dr. Farrer yet but I'm sure you have one.

The iron spheres are the result of molten iron being atomized into tiny droplets, one quarter the width of a human hair, with explosives. They made up nearly 6% of the WTC dust.

No one has come up with a viable alternate explanation for the abundance of iron spheres inside and on top of the Bankers Trust building. Any microscopic spheres from cutting would not be carried, like spheres in the dust cloud from the collapses, to the interior and roof of a building several hundred feet away.

 

[funk de fino]

Two huge stundies in his comeback thread. Thats the C7 I know.

It doesnt get any better. Should have stuck to the woodworking mate.

How many pieces were found with this "melting" C7?

 

[Oystein]

From the second link:
"The formation of the microspheres is considered to be due to local high temperatures which cause melting of the metal."

Yes. Local high temp. As would be achieved by grinding. Note: That paper does not mention thermate anywhere.

 

[Oystein]

liquefy: become or make liquid

Correct. liquify = become or make liquid

But since
melt = become liquid from solid state by adding heat
your conclusion that liquify means melt is wrong, as it ignores the many other ways that something could be made liquid other than adding heat to a solid body.
For example, having a hot body undergo a eutetic reaction might result in a liquid - without adding extra heat.

 

[Christopher7]

Two huge stundies in his comeback thread. Thats the C7 I know.

It doesnt get any better. Should have stuck to the woodworking mate.

Hi Funk. I always have to chuckle when I see your avatar and read your witticisms.
Now I feel at home again.

How many pieces were found with this "melting" C7?

Two pieces in the FEMA report, affectionately known as Sample #1 and Sample #2.

 

[NutCracker]

Honestly, why would someone choose to be laughed at when they could be taken seriously?

Blah, blah, blah, says the Truther.

That's what I'm asking myself as well. The Dunning–Kruger effect?

 

[Christopher7]

Yes. Local high temp. As would be achieved by grinding.

Are you supposing that steel beams and columns grinding together would cause the abundance of microspheres? That's very creative but where is the data to show that actually happens?

Note: That paper does not mention thermate anywhere.

Imagine that. Perhaps it's because they were not looking for thermite or nano-thermite. They focused on MMVF [man-made vitreous fibers] like the USGS report.

 

[Christopher7]

Correct. liquify = become or make liquid

But since
melt = become liquid from solid state by adding heat
your conclusion that liquify means melt is wrong, as it ignores the many (?) other ways that something could be made liquid other than adding heat to a solid body.
For example, having a hot body undergo a eutetic reaction might result in a liquid - without adding extra heat.

You are playing with semantics. The beam melted.

 

[funk de fino]

Two pieces in the FEMA report, affectionately known as Sample #1 and Sample #2.

So, out of all the tons of steel that was inspected, and forensically examined, there were only two pieces. Two pieces. One from the towers that was attacked in the pile, and the other from WTC7. How does this evidence support thermite? There would be many, many more pieces of this type of damage available surely? We would have physical evidence of the pools of molten steel. It would have been put aside also surely?

 

[funk de fino]

You are playing with semantics. The beam melted.

C7, in your own words, explain to me what Eutectic means to you.

 

[Oystein]

Thermite burns at 4500^oF. That is more than hot enough to vaporize lead at 3182^oF.

Why would anyone apply thermite to lead if they want to collapse a building??? Is lead part of the critical structural elements or at least near them?

If however thermate with its 4500°F was so abundantly and ubiquously used on the towers, why didn't we all see the shine of the extremely bright light that burning therm*te emit all over?

 

[Scott Sommers]

That's what I'm asking myself as well. The Dunning–Kruger effect?

This is a very interesting suggestion. For anyone interested, the original paper by Kruger and Dunning (1999) is available on the Internet from the top download on my link.
Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own
Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1999, Vol. 77, No. 6. pp. 121-1134

You often see Truthers ramble on about conformity and obedience when they barely seem able to speak the words properly. I speculate about this a lot, but I don't get much response here when I post about the psychological and social motivations of Truthers, other than the usual JREF stuff about the mentally ill or how's Truthers don't fit into the left-right political spectrum.

Anyway, I appreciate this. Thank you.

 

[Oystein]

He was forced to retire because he questioned the OCT. That is a frontal attack on his first amendment right and a warning to others. It does have the effect of silencing many.
...

No. He was forced to leave BYU because he ventured amateurishly into scientific fields that he is not qualied for, failed big time, and thus put the good reputation of BYU's science departments at risk. A university cannot allow its faculty to engage in grossly bad science for very long.

 

[Scott Sommers]

No. He was forced to leave BYU because he ventured amateurishly into scientific fields that he is not qualied for, failed big time, and thus put the good reputation of BYU's science departments at risk. A university cannot allow its faculty to engage in grossly bad science for very long.

Not only that, but there was no protest from the faculty association or students. In fact, every single professor who has done more than sign their silly petitions has been fired. Strangely, Truthers hardly seem to have noticed this. I suspect they don't understand what it means.

 

[Oystein]

...
Perhaps English is not your first language. The sentence is quite clear. Lead was vaporized. This does not mean that it was heated a little bit and put off vapors, it means lead was completely vaporized.
...

Nonsense.

A scientific paper might very well report finding water in my apartment that was previously vaporized. It would be an obvious and true finding.
However it would not mean that ALL the water in my apartment had boiled, it would not even mean that any water all had EVER boiled.

The word "completely" is added by you and in no way implied in what your source writes. The most that your source implies is that temperatures got hot enough for lead vapors in significant amounts to form. This happens when lead is molten.

 

[T.A.M.]

We do not know what they looked at, only what they reported. Their primary concern was MMVF [man-made vitreous fibers].

That was not their primary concern, but rather the most common product/compound/entity within the dust, IIRC. Like I said, they CLASSIFIED over 400,000 particles from their analysis of the dust, yet no mention of strange red/grey chips. Funny how only Jones samples seem to have them, and even Fred henri's samples did not.

TAM

 

[Oystein]

...
R.J. Lee Group report pg 21 [pdf pg 25]
The amount of energy introduced during the generation of the WTC Dust
and the ensuing conflagration caused various components to vaporize.
...

Note how they don't say "boil"?

 

[T.A.M.]

Indeed, our opinions are irrelevant. Only the facts matter.

Fact: Iron microspheres made up nearly 6% of the dust in and on top of the Bankers Trust building. The dust was deposited there on 9/11 when the huge clouds of dust from the collapses of the Trade Towers enveloped lower Manhattan.

yes, amazing that from the collapse of a building that held 2000 people full of hemoglobin, tonnes of other organics, thousands of tonnes of steel, we would get dust that held 6% microspheres...simply amazing.

TAM