Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2009
- Messages
- 18,903
This question came up in another thread, where it is off-topic. I am opening a new one. I think it is best to keep this in a separate thread, if everyone could agree to not debating the Harrit-paper as such!
So please do not repeat any of the discussions we had before about
- why the red-grey chips are or aren't thermitic
- why they are or aren't all the same material
- if anything was CDed on 9/11
etc.
The topic here is very limited: If the red-gray chips analysed by Harrit, Jones e.al. are paint, but not the twin tower steel primer Tnemec, what paint are they?
So here is how this debate starts:
Not that I know of.
It still seems that the red layer is some kind of paint (the hematite pigment and kaolinite filling along with its very appearance as a distinctly red, evenly coloured thin layer suggest nothing put paint), but I am not aware that anyone has identified the particular brand and formulation yet, or what it was painted on to make it so apparantly abundant. The grey layer has been described as either anti-corrosion primer, or rusted steel painted with red primer that flaked off. Again, I am not aware of anyone looking more deeply into it tan Sunsteeler did more than 2 years ago.
It is very usual for red paints to contain hematite and kaolin, and red is not an unusual colour to paint things, so it's still anyone's guess.
Sample 2 (b, Delessio) was collected before WTC7 fell, so chip (b) can't be from WTC7. It is likely from WTC1 or 2, but of course could also be from the Brooklyn Bridge, where the sample was swiped off. I haven't looked if there are indications that (b) differs from (a), (c) and (d). It seems to be a thinner layer, judging from fig. 5, but the XEDS spectra for both layers (Fig. 6 and 7) as well as the BSE images (Fig. 8) show that it is very likely the same material ((c) looks slightly different in the XEDS, but that may well be due to impresision in sample preparation).
NIST talks about the original WTC primer, called Tnemec. I wonder if they missed a second primer? Speculation: Part of the twin towers had already been stripped of asbestos-containing fire-proofing. Did they do a paint job at that occasion, too?
So please do not repeat any of the discussions we had before about
- why the red-grey chips are or aren't thermitic
- why they are or aren't all the same material
- if anything was CDed on 9/11
etc.
The topic here is very limited: If the red-gray chips analysed by Harrit, Jones e.al. are paint, but not the twin tower steel primer Tnemec, what paint are they?
So here is how this debate starts:
I also mentioned your article on "nanothermite" and "chip (e)" (based on Sunstealer's findings) in my own article on nanothermite) Although it is rather off-topic here, I would like to ask you here again: Mostly thanks to Sunstealer, it is quite clear now that the chip (e) was a particle of WTC primer paint. But what about chips (a) to (d), are there some new ideas about their origin? Are there some hints that layered (perhaps even originally red?) materials consisted mostly of iron, aluminium, silicon, oxygen and carbon were used in a great amounts in WTC? (But we should perhaps move this OT to other, more on-topic forum)
Not that I know of.
It still seems that the red layer is some kind of paint (the hematite pigment and kaolinite filling along with its very appearance as a distinctly red, evenly coloured thin layer suggest nothing put paint), but I am not aware that anyone has identified the particular brand and formulation yet, or what it was painted on to make it so apparantly abundant. The grey layer has been described as either anti-corrosion primer, or rusted steel painted with red primer that flaked off. Again, I am not aware of anyone looking more deeply into it tan Sunsteeler did more than 2 years ago.
It is very usual for red paints to contain hematite and kaolin, and red is not an unusual colour to paint things, so it's still anyone's guess.
Sample 2 (b, Delessio) was collected before WTC7 fell, so chip (b) can't be from WTC7. It is likely from WTC1 or 2, but of course could also be from the Brooklyn Bridge, where the sample was swiped off. I haven't looked if there are indications that (b) differs from (a), (c) and (d). It seems to be a thinner layer, judging from fig. 5, but the XEDS spectra for both layers (Fig. 6 and 7) as well as the BSE images (Fig. 8) show that it is very likely the same material ((c) looks slightly different in the XEDS, but that may well be due to impresision in sample preparation).
NIST talks about the original WTC primer, called Tnemec. I wonder if they missed a second primer? Speculation: Part of the twin towers had already been stripped of asbestos-containing fire-proofing. Did they do a paint job at that occasion, too?
