University of Alaska Fairbanks Professor Launches New 9/11 Research Project

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

And the University of Edinburgh model shows fire caused the collapsed buildings at WTC. What's your point.

Their model. But no examples of their improbable expansion theory working in the real world.

originally posted by: sg1642
a reply to: Doctor Smith

I take it you are referring to the metal pouring from the building? Aluminium when heated enough will glow red regardless of what you read on the internet. That still doesn't have much to do with what was in my post. I was pointing out that there would have been magnesium to add to the equation. One thing I have wondered though is how the molten metal can be explained as aluminium from the aircraft because if that was the case we would have seen the aluminium cladding literally melting down the sides of the building due to the fire would we not?

Maybe it could turn red if it was heated in a refinery with pumped in air but it wasn't. The fires never could get that hot.

originally posted by: Flatcoat
a reply to: hellobruce

You really are very confused! Nanoo nanoo thermate is NOT a explosive, yet you claimed evidence of explosions!

Just to clarify, what exactly is nanoo nanoo thermate? Is it anything like the nano-thermite developed by LLNL?

I'm afraid Bruce spent way too much time watching sitcoms instead of studying. The thermite he was mentioning is Morks from planet Ork. Not the LLNL Explosive Thermite.

originally posted by: Flatcoat
Just to clarify, what exactly is nanoo nanoo thermate?

The stuff apparently found in dust that was painted on to the WTC - apparently it is also explosive! Some claim iit was thermite, but they refuse to get their paper peer reviewed.

Commonly known as paint!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Dr. James Millette of MVA Scientific Consultants has now posted his progress report on the WTC dust. Dr. Millette is a member of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences and works with internationally known microscopy experts. An ad hoc international team of these experts, as well as architects, engineers, and other specialists, contributed their expertise to this study.

In summary, red/gray chips with the same morphological characteristics, elemental spectra and magnetic attraction as those shown in Harrit et al.1 were found in WTC dust samples from four different locations than those examined by Harrit, et al.1 The gray side is consistent with carbon steel. The red side contains the elements: C, O, Al, Si, and Fe with small amounts of other elements such as Ti and Ca. Based on the infrared absorption (FTIR) data, the C/O matrix material is an epoxy resin. Based on the optical and electron microscopy data, the Fe/O particles are an iron oxide pigment consisting of crystalline grains in the 100-200 nm range and the Al/Si particles are kaolin clay plates that are less than a micrometer thick. There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles detected by PLM, SEM-EDS, or TEM-SAED-EDS, during the analyses of the red layers in their original form or after sample preparation by ashing, thin sectioning or following MEK treatment.

Conclusions The red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments. There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite.

Paint!

a reply to: hellobruce

It was not just paint, and you know that.

Steven Jones was able to separate every single particle under an electronic microscope, he found un-burnt thermite in the paint chips.

And your "opinion" is, it's red paint. I haven't seen any evidence that disproves Jones thermite paper.

"Opinions" are not facts when discussing 911.

originally posted by: Informer1958
"Opinions" are not facts when discussing 911.

But that is all truthers have, is opinions. They refuse to look at the facts!

a reply to: hellobruce

But that is all truthers have, is opinions. They refuse to look at the facts!

This thread is not about what you think about Truthers.

So being a Truther means everyone that does not believe in the official narratives are lairs? Tell me, what is a truther?

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Flatcoat
Just to clarify, what exactly is nanoo nanoo thermate?

The stuff apparently found in dust that was painted on to the WTC - apparently it is also explosive! Some claim iit was thermite, but they refuse to get their paper peer reviewed.

Commonly known as paint!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Dr. James Millette of MVA Scientific Consultants has now posted his progress report on the WTC dust. Dr. Millette is a member of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences and works with internationally known microscopy experts. An ad hoc international team of these experts, as well as architects, engineers, and other specialists, contributed their expertise to this study.

In summary, red/gray chips with the same morphological characteristics, elemental spectra and magnetic attraction as those shown in Harrit et al.1 were found in WTC dust samples from four different locations than those examined by Harrit, et al.1 The gray side is consistent with carbon steel. The red side contains the elements: C, O, Al, Si, and Fe with small amounts of other elements such as Ti and Ca. Based on the infrared absorption (FTIR) data, the C/O matrix material is an epoxy resin. Based on the optical and electron microscopy data, the Fe/O particles are an iron oxide pigment consisting of crystalline grains in the 100-200 nm range and the Al/Si particles are kaolin clay plates that are less than a micrometer thick. There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles detected by PLM, SEM-EDS, or TEM-SAED-EDS, during the analyses of the red layers in their original form or after sample preparation by ashing, thin sectioning or following MEK treatment.

Conclusions The red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments. There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite.

Paint!

That's old news. It hasn't been peer reviewed so it's only a red herring. It has been debunked. Here is the response.

a reply to: hellobruce

Right. The famous Millette paper. Sponsered by JREF and Chris Mohr, never peer-reviewed, and written by a scientist who just happened to work for NIST. Not exactly credible.....

a reply to: Flatcoat

Here's an interesting find on NIST

But despite a number of variations in NIST’s story, it never considered explosives or pyrotechnic materials in any of its hypotheses. This omission is at odds with several other striking facts; first, the requirement of the national standard for fire investigation (NFPA 921), which calls for testing related to thermite and other pyrotechnics, and second, the extensive experience NIST investigators have with explosive and thermite materials. One of the most intriguing aspects of NIST’s diversionary posture has been their total lack of interest in explosive or pyrotechnic features in their explanations. Despite the substantial evidence for the use of explosives at the WTC (Jones 2006, Legge and Szamboti 2007), and the extensive expertise in explosives among NIST investigators (Ryan 2007), explosives were never considered in the NIST WTC investigation.

The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Despite the substantial evidence for the use of explosives at the WTC (Jones 2006, Legge and Szamboti 2007),

There's your problem right there.
There isn't evidence of EXPLOSIVES.
Just explosions. Big difference.

Every year houses explode in the US.
Not by explosives but by gas build up.
Just because it goes boom doesn't mean it was caused by thermite/TNT etc.
These distinctions are important.

The issue with the NIST investigation is that it was dry-labbed, plain and simple. They started with their conclusion and then worked backwards, adjusting things when necessary so that their conclusion would be "correct". There's a reason NIST has never released the data they used to model their simulations, and it's not because of "national security" hocus pocus.

a reply to: samkent

There were explosions in the WTC caused by gas buildup? I don't believe I've ever seen that mentioned or suggested before.

As the building fell, pockets of trapped air blew out windows. Just like popping a paper bag. Explosives would have created 130dB sound wave and been heard up to a half a mile away. Car bombs usually blow out windows up and down the street. No windows were blown out due to an demolitions explosion at WTC of adjacent buildings.

WTC 7 did not free fall. It fell slower. WTC 7 did not fall floor by floor. The truther arguments of controlled demolition are lies. WTC 7 did not pancake. Truthers never mention why and when the penthouses a top WTC 7 fell into WTC 7. Truthers never mention the aerial pictures of WTC 7 after it fell. They keep showing the small clip of footage from the side. A misleading clip.

WTC 7 structure started to fail. As the inside structure failed piece by piece, the penthouses finally was drawn into WTC 7. Not untill the penthouses total disappeared did the outer walls start to fall. The outside walls only fell once the interior could not bare their weight. The four side fell on top of the rubble pile clearly shown in aerial pictures. If it was a controlled demolition 1) how did the penthouses fall before the floors seem to fall. 2)if the building pancaked floor by floor, how did most of one side of the exterior wall fall on to the top of the rubble pile. Please explain how this is possible with controlled progressive whole floor by floor collapse of WTC 7.

I think this truther just debunk thermite in WTC7. What caused this guys seismograph readings.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So WTC 7 was knocked down by explosives not heard or recorded on video, but made seismograph readings. Or WTC 7 was knocked down by quite thermite which was picked up by seismograph when it was burning. Which truther has the truth. Oh my. And the NIST has bad physics?

Actually fire usually works by heating up a material to point it off gasses and burns. If a material is hot enough to gasify with no oxygen for combustion, it will create a gas untill it finds an ample oxygen supply.

a reply to: neutronflux


LOL!

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Doc. You are so yesturday. The truther movement has moved to energy waves. Large amounts of building mass went missing. So its obvious the WTC buildings were brought down because half the buildings were evaporated by energy waves.

Since you didn't get the truther memo, better study this. drjudywood.com...

Remember: Thermite out, energy beam truth. Hard to keep up with the truther lies........

Oh, Steve Jones works for the CIA....
edwardmd.wordpress.com...

a reply to: Doctor Smith

www.abovetopsecret.com...

There never did a Peer Reviewed paper, so I have a hard time believing the report. Ever heard of bought and paid for science?

This paper reads like damaged control to me.

Interesting, where is their burn study?