Debunk Alert: Experiment to Test for Eutectic Reaction

Christopher7 said:
There is NO scientific evidence that sulfur from any source other than thermate can actually enter and lower the melting point of steel.

The claim that "The sulfur came from the drywall" was baseless speculation.

Jon's video has put that one to rest. Even Dr. Greening admits that.
Click to expand...

How about burning PVC found in ABUNDANCE in offices? PVC gives off sulfur very easily.
 
triforcharity said:
Argument from personal ignorance and a refusal to learn.

Explain for the the picture of the picec of steel glowing red when it was picked up by the equipment found here. [qimg]http://www.historycommons.org/events-images/626_molten_metal.jpg[/qimg]

Explain that please using your logic. Thanks!
Click to expand...

Umm... there's no proof that is steel. If it was, the hydraulic hoses would likely burst.
 
triforcharity said:
No Chris. This study state SPECIFICALLY that the steel ONLY reached a temp of about 1800 deg. F. This is IMPOSSIBLE if it was THERMATE.
Click to expand...
We have covered this already. You are assuming the thermite can only be applied directly to the beam. That is not the case. Thermite slag could drip onto the beam and slowly melt thru it.
 
Christopher7 said:
1) Sample #1 from WTC 7
The beam melted at about 1000oF because of the sulfur attack.
Click to expand...

I'd like to know why they only found a few pieces from WTC7 if thermate brought the towers down and was so abundant that it kept steel molten (allegedly) for weeks in the rubble pile.
 
Christopher7 said:
Excellent find.

There is an important difference though.

This test is a compartment fire, not a debris pile fire.

The ventilation area as a proportion of the façade area (ie ½ or ¼).

Fires in a debris pile will not have near as much oxygen to work with.

You are comparing oranges and apples.
Click to expand...

Are you're ******* wrong again. Damn, why won't you learn?? Is there something preventing you from doing so?
 
Christopher7 said:
Thermite slag could drip onto the beam and slowly melt thru it.
Click to expand...

Evidence this is possible? Everytime they have tried putting thermite (of any variety) on steel beams it doesnt do a damn thing. Thats why the OP's experiment doesnt include testing thermate on the beam because they know as well as we do it wont do anything to it much less cause this corrosive effect
 
Christopher7 said:
Right. Never mind that office fires cant melt iron but something did. Just change the subject and take a few cheap shots at Prof Jones. :D That's the JREF way.
Click to expand...


please show us your evidence that steel was melted. You have already been shown that there are many other sources of microsphere of iron. Please show us your evidence that these cannot account for all the "melted" iron found.

And its not a cheap shot at Jones.....his other work shows that at best he is delusional. If a person consistantly produces garbage its not unreasonable to lower ones confidence in their ability to do solid work.
 
Christopher7 said:
We have covered this already. You are assuming the thermite can only be applied directly to the beam. That is not the case. Thermite slag could drip onto the beam and slowly melt thru it.
Click to expand...

So please show us the evidence that there was thermite used anywhere. There were no melted beams nor any beams cut by explosives ......so what was this thermite used for? :confused:
 
Christopher7 said:
We have covered this already. You are assuming the thermite can only be applied directly to the beam. That is not the case. Thermite slag could drip onto the beam and slowly melt thru it.
Click to expand...

Not quite there sparky. How hot is thermite slag and how fast does that stuff cool? A thermite reaction is anything but slow.
 
triforcharity said:
How about burning PVC found in ABUNDANCE in offices? PVC gives off sulfur very easily.
Click to expand...
So what? Show the science that confirms that sulfur could create the effect on the WTC beam.
Like the "sulfur from drywall" BS, this is just baseless speculation.

You guy do mental gymnastics trying to fine alternatives while ignoring the simplest explanation - thermite/thermate. Occam rolls in his grave. :rolleyes:
 
Christopher7 said:
So what? Show the science that confirms that sulfur could create the effect on the WTC beam.
Like the "sulfur from drywall" BS, this is just baseless speculation.

You guy do mental gymnastics trying to fine alternatives while ignoring the simplest explanation - thermite/thermate. Occam rolls in his grave. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Thermite would be the simplest explanation if you neglect how much it would actually take to bring down a building. That's not really a point you can handwave away.
 
Christopher7 said:
So what? Show the science that confirms that sulfur could create the effect on the WTC beam.
Like the "sulfur from drywall" BS, this is just baseless speculation.

You guy do mental gymnastics trying to fine alternatives while ignoring the simplest explanation - thermite/thermate. Occam rolls in his grave. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Biederman/Biederman-0112.html

Now, what do you have to say?

ETA: Just FYI, J.R. Barnett is a professor of fire protection engineering, and R.R. Biederman and R.D. Sisson, Jr. are professors of materials science and engineering, at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, Massachusetts,
 
Christopher7 said:
I believe that is a violation of rule ?
It's just a mindless personal attack.
Attack the argument, not the arguer please. :)
Click to expand...

That's the problem. As far as I can see you have no argument.

You have latched onto Thermite and you make the facts and physics jump through hoops to justify it.

I see the same thing on BAUt and Apollohoax with the Pro Hoaxers. They latch onto one little thing and ignore the context. When the problems with the idea are pointed out they torture everything else to fit or they abandon it and jump onto another thing and again ignore the context.

Your Thermite only works if you ignore a whole host of other contradictory evidence or misrepresent it until it vaguely fits into your scenario.
 
triforcharity said:
ETA: Just FYI, J.R. Barnett is a professor of fire protection engineering, and R.R. Biederman and R.D. Sisson, Jr. are professors of materials science and engineering, at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, Massachusetts,
Click to expand...

Small point, Sisson is the director of the Materials Science and Manufacturing Engineering programs at WPI. He's also the dean of the WPI graduate program. I'm taking a couple graduate classes with him in the fall, should be fun.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
What hydraulic hoses would burst?
Click to expand...

Some time ago, there was a much larger version of the picture, that showed them. If it was red hot steel the heat would transfer through the metal. This may not be correct, but it made sense at the time. Close up view reveals that it is probably not metal anyway.

My .02
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom