POSITIVE EVIDENCE for WTC7 Controlled Demolition
- Thread starter 1337m4n
- Start date
Par
Master Poster
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 2,768
Well, yes. That was rather my point: Without the former, the latter isn’t of much use.
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 8,339
You do realize the elements found in the steel are exactly the same I have created in experiments using fluorinated hydrocarbons burning in a high sulfur diesel fire DA.
It is just oxidized steel and plastic after all, even some cutting tools will produce it as the contaminates are minor trace elements in a huge number of steels.
So far the Truth movement has drawn a big zero for evidence of thermite-thermate.
Until it is proved that the materials are not of natural origin in the fires and collapse, or the cutting that occured there is no way they can be taken as evidence of themite.
http://news.thomasnet.com/fullstory/491099
http://www.madehow.com/Volume-4/Acetylene.html
Since Hydrogen sulfide, and hydrogen Fluoride are common trace contaminates in Acetylene gas I do not think that finding them in a sample of Oxidized Steel,
Fe3O4, really is that important now do you Sizzler?
Right now without more evidence the supposed thermite residue is a non issue.
The burdon of proof is not on the official hypothesis.
But, if it were, nothing in any of the reports, or scientific journals has determined that "thermate like" residue, microspheres and unreacted thermite (not confirmed yet) are natural under the official hypothesis (via lab experimentation and not just theory).
The burdon of proof is not on the official hypothesis so there is no need for the above.
But, from a skeptics point of view.
1. thermate evidence (microspheres, residue) fit the CD hypothesis
2. thermate "like" evidence (microspheres, residue) may or may not fit the official hypothesis
thus, more research needs to be done and skepticism remains. now some truthers believe the research needs to be done in the form of a new "official" investigation.
I however believe independant scientists should be responsible (at least for the CD hypothesis).
-----
You have the right idea. I've seen a few of your experiments on other threads. I think the deisel fuel is a good possibility and I hope more "official" (sorry, lack of better word) tests are done and published. Whether one believes in CD or not, having information about sulfidation of steel members in a fire is something everyone could benefit from; especially considering how much sulfur is available in building loads.
Last edited:
cisco
Muse
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 709
Thanks. Thank you very much for your answer. I understand now.
But you forgot to solve using Occam's Razor.
Follow-up question:
Is it possible Stephen Jones, David R Griffin, Alex Jones, et al are lazy, or their original hypotheses suit some agenda such as money, politics, ego, pride, etc?
I don't like Occam's Razor for various reasons in various situations. We could have discussion about that in a different thread if you'd like.
Follow up answer;
Anything is possible. I wouldn't be extremely shocked if someone actually proved it with direct evidence.
I haven't seen anything that leads me to believe that they are doing that; other than DRG's series of books ($$$).
I don't think they are lazy. However I do believe that they have made a lot of mistakes and are not following usual scientific publication methods.
I think they focus too much on their own hypothesis and not enough on demonstrating that their evidence is not usual under the official hypothesis.
I also don't agree with some of their tactics, but I do understand the bad tactics of both sides considering how controversial this issue is.
Last edited:
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 8,339
Sizzler,
the information is out there to show how to reduce the sulfate in the gypsum.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4704136-description.html
http://www.springerlink.com/content/hh6322273382k215/
PS. I am about 2 years ahead of Dr. Jones on this and yes I have produce spheres and pyrite from gypsum and I know the way it was done.
I do hope to have more published on this soon although I can not promise you anything.
Instead of researching Dr. Jones has been out rounding up followers and seeking donations I did not do that I used what little I had got creative and never gave up the research I had a friend who would not let me stop and talked me into continuing the experiments.
My friend however needs a break, so it may be a while before anything is published if at all.
It is very complicated though so please give us time to finnish this and have the work properly published.
Last edited:
Yeah I am interested in that. Picked up on that from the greening paper but don't exactly know much about it.
Thanks for the links i will check them out for sure.
cc,
I looked at those papers you linked me to. I then tried to find more background information about the whole reduction process.
If you don't mind, I have a few very basic questions before I start to understand what you linked me to.
1. Reduction releases SO2?
2. SO2 will cause sulfidation? Or is sulfur as an element needed?
3. Gas state versus solid state is important?
Also, not related, but what is the basic chemical equation for thermate (standard mix)?
I looked at those papers you linked me to. I then tried to find more background information about the whole reduction process.
If you don't mind, I have a few very basic questions before I start to understand what you linked me to.
1. Reduction releases SO2?
2. SO2 will cause sulfidation? Or is sulfur as an element needed?
3. Gas state versus solid state is important?
Also, not related, but what is the basic chemical equation for thermate (standard mix)?
CrazyChainsaw has you pretty well covered, but since you addressed me...
You're not bringing us anything new. You're still simply looking for excuses to prop up your belief in thermite. There is no evidence for thermite.
The newsletter you linked falls well below the standard of a scientific journal. However, even so, you cherry-picked it:
(Source) (Emphasis added)MEi Newsletter said:
They're talking about quantities of thermite used to ignite residential structures, not cut steel beams or pillars. There is no "slag" created. Much less thermite is involved.
The telltale signs of thermite are three:
- When burned, thermite creates a dazzling, brilliant fountain of light and sparks, enough to be seen at a great distance. It is remotely possible this was contained behind interior walls or obscured by smoke in the WTC 7 case, so we'll give this one a pass, but you cannot suppose thermite at the perimeter in any structure for this reason alone.
- Thermite leaves behind a white powdery residue of metal oxides, and this will survive virtually any heating. It's quite characteristic. That's one of the "burn patterns" they're talking about above. None was found. No thermite.
- Thermite also creates, as a product of its function, melted iron. In the quantities needed to even weaken a single significant member of any WTC structure, it must have left a blob or ingot of iron or iron slag. This slag would survive the debris fire afterward, and thus would have been recovered in cleanup. None have been found. No thermite.
Additionally, the "weird" elements listed above are because the arsonists are using homemade thermite. They can't get hold of reagent-quality aluminum or iron oxide, but instead file down bent automobile wheels and rusty pipes. This is not what we expect in the mythical WTC 7 thermite case, unless you expect me to believe the NWO hired a batallion of amateur arsonists to homebrew a few truckloads of ghetto thermite. Not likely. More likely, the NWO would use pure iron oxide and aluminum, which leave no "unusual" chemicals at all. Why give themselves away by adding relatively exotic metals? There's no point.
We don't. No ironworker indicated anything unusual. Dr. Jones's EDX results, as explained here endlessly by Dr. Greening and others, appear to be incorrect. Dr. Jones has not published his results or done anything else that would permit verification.
Likewise, studies of the smoke plume, dust, and debris found nothing unusual at all.
There is no evidence of thermite. What you've brought us isn't evidence of thermite, and also isn't interpreted properly.
Find a new hypothesis.
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 8,339
1. Reduction with carbon releases Co2, and S.
2. Sulfur in the molten state that changes rapidly to hydrogen sulfide rotten egg smell noted in the rubble pile.
3. There is no standard mix, Thermate is a chemical that can be tailored to the specific job, so it depends on what the thermate is used for.
4. Thermate and thermite residues can vary widely most cheap thermites use iron ore while more expensive blends use Fe3O4 created from refined iron either though oxidation or chemical processing.
Some thermates-thermites even use fly ash as a source of the iron oxide.
Usually sulfur is used in silicon thermite reactions.
http://www.amazingrust.com/Experiments/how_to/Thermite.html
Sulfur is sometimes added to cheap grade thermites help the aluminum oxidize with Silicon dioxide in the low grade iron ores.
I do not expect to find sulfur and silicon in high grade products.
Thermite chips manufactured do contain silicon but not sulfur no need the iron oxide and aluminum on them will not react with the silicon because the silicon is not in powder form. IT merely acts as a substrate on which the materials are deposited.
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2007
- Messages
- 14,519
And what have you done so far to rule out such a possibility?
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
Yes there is evidence of slag formation at the ends of severed columns(IIRC beams run horizontally, columns are vertical).
So how did it get there? Well the greatest evidence concerning this, in fact the only direct evidence, is that it was formed during the clean up/rescue phase well after the buildings had collapsed. In order to start removing debris from the pile to any great extent one would have to first cut all columns sticking up out of the pile lest in removing debris these columns fall over and kill or injure more people.
The cutting of these columns need not be pretty, they are going to be scrapped eventually and thus a neat, even and low slag cut will only slow things down.
Given no direct evidence of the use or existance of thermite in the towers and the direct evidence of various torch cutting methods being used in the clean up operation it leaves the contention that thermite was used prior to or during the collapse very much at an extremely low probability of being true.
A W Smith
Philosopher
white thermit welding residue, Also note the white residue on the finished weld on the rail in the background
Last edited:
There he goes again, a dismissive "thank you" and then another question... It never ends.
I don't mind. All I can do is try to answer the questions as accurately and as understandably as I can. This stuff's not easy to grasp in any intuitive way.
What the questioner does with the information, I have no control over.
Sizzler asks reasonable questions, and appears to pay attention to the answers. That's appropriate participation on an educational forum.
Respectfully,
Myriad
Your reference to the sulfur "anomaly" shows that you haven't read Dr. Greening's paper. Do you intend to read it?
Did you notice I quoted his paper several times?
I enjoyed the Greening paper. It was very informative.
Scroll back and you'll see that I used a few quotes in there. Thanks for the link.
Thanks a lot CC.
thanks again