The Serious 9/11 Arguments Compilation.

a reply to: Jesushere

Finding Aluminum oxide in a sample is meaningless.

How is that meaningless. Harrit’s assumption of elemental aluminum is based of the presence of aluminum oxide?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Using
a conventional quantification routine, it was found that the
aluminium significantly exceeded the oxygen present (approximately
a 3:1 ratio). Thus, while some of the aluminium
may be oxidized, there is insufficient oxygen present to account
for all of the aluminium; some of the aluminium must, therefore, exist in elemental form in the red material

Contradict yourself much?

a reply to: Jesushere

I don't think there is any need to address this when Dr Milette confirmed the chips had termite properties. You can't have thermite properties without aluminium present.

Based on what analysis with the results only active thermite could produce by Harrit?

neutronflux
Again, can you cite the actual recorded survey? Cite the actual equipment used? Can you cite if the thermal imager had the correct emmistivity for a jumbled pile of material. If the point to spot ratio was correct for the heights it was used at.

Is it false you claimed the pile got hotter between surveys? What made that happen. With all the thermal imaging you cite, why was a hot spot of 4,000 degrees F by your fantasy of thermite burning never recovered?

If you think the 2800f in the rubble quote is not accurate contact the person who made the quote and ask was he misquoted or wrong? He quoted as saying a helicopter recorded thermal heat spikes each day and ranged from 400c to 2800f in different spots. It not up to me to prove this wrong it down to you because you're opposed to this being true!

Nasa quote was incorrect I read and thought it said 1300c instead of 1300f, a mistake not a big deal when there another source confirming that claim anyhow and his claim the heat underneath the rubble was 1500c higher then what i stated.

a reply to: Jesushere

Again, a exothermic reaction neither proves or disproves thermite.

How is that meaningless. Harrit’s assumption of elemental aluminum is based of the presence of aluminum oxide?

No, it's not where they state that go on a post that quote?

Again, a exothermic reaction neither proves or disproves thermite.

You obsessed with this word. Harrit proved the chips are thermite. The only difference is the Skeptics think primer paint is causing the thermite reaction. Nobody disputing the chips has thermite properties

originally posted by: Jesushere
How is that meaningless. Harrit’s assumption of elemental aluminum is based of the presence of aluminum oxide?

No, it's not where they state that go on a post that quote?

Please quote from Harrit’s work where he actually determined the amount of oxide free aluminum to prove there was enough in his samples to label them active thermite.

a reply to: waypastvne

Nano thermite doesn't work like that is not C4 or demolition. The explosive power is not the noise it's cutting through steel part that's explosive.

originally posted by: Jesushere
Again, a exothermic reaction neither proves or disproves thermite.

You obsessed with this word. Harrit proved the chips are thermite. The only difference is the Skeptics think primer paint is causing the thermite reaction. Nobody disputing the chips has thermite properties

What analysis did Harrit run that would exploit a result only thermite could produce. He did no such analysis.

He had an exothermic reaction and some aluminum oxide, then spit balled there must be enough oxide free aluminum for a thermite reaction. That is pseudoscience. Harrit’s paper was unethically peered reviewed with declaring active thermite with no actual proof there was oxide free aluminum.

neutronflux
Please quote from Harrit’s work where he actually determined the amount of oxide free aluminum to prove there was enough in his samples to label them active thermite.

This question is for Professor Harrit. You require more information you ask him.

originally posted by: Jesushere

NIST even did their own test on the ceramic coating (Tnermec) primer paint and they said there no organic binder exists to combust." NIST debunked primer paint can ignite and explode. Harrit tests on the primer paint match NIST test.

The paint chips that Jones/Harrit are calling thermite are Laclede paint from the trusses not the Tnermec paint from the columns. It is a perfect match for the chips Jones/Harrit found.

a reply to: Jesushere

Harrit’s paper is junk science, and it’s his worst enemy concerning the scientific community. It has nothing to do with the false narrative the world is against him because thermite. The world is against him because he sold out with junk science to play to a target audience.

originally posted by: Jesushere
neutronflux
Please quote from Harrit’s work where he actually determined the amount of oxide free aluminum to prove there was enough in his samples to label them active thermite.

This question is for Professor Harrit. You require more information you ask him.

So this claim by you was false?

Elemental aluminium was found in his samples he stated that unless you seeing something I don't quote away. Free what you mean by that?

Because elemental aluminum would be the active thermite?

originally posted by: Jesushere
a reply to: waypastvne

Nano thermite doesn't work like that is not C4 or demolition. The explosive power is not the noise it's cutting through steel part that's explosive.

Explosions exceed the speed of sound. If it dosn't exceed the speed of sound then it is not an explosion it's a deflagration.

If it exceeds the speed of sound then there is a bang.

en.wikipedia.org...

waypastvne Laclede paint ok whats source for this where does NIST claim this was used? NIST even says everything had to painted uniformly with the same colour.

I have seen this talked about a lot on skeptic forums but have yet to see a link to verify its use, maybe it exists if you find post the link

explosions exceed the speed of sound. If it dosn't exceed the speed of sound then it is not an explosion it's a deflagration.

If it exceeds the speed of sound then there is a bang.

en.wikipedia.org...

I referring to how it would cut through steel that doesn't necessarily mean there be a lot of noise. Nano thermite was designed to be the more impactful maybe explosive wrong word to use.

So this claim by you was false?

Whataboutery and nonsense. You requiring more information that's not in the paper he wrote, how brain dead are you do not understand that? This can be clarified by asking Professor Harrit.

Harrit’s paper is junk science, and it’s his worst enemy concerning the scientific community. It has nothing to do with the false narrative the world is against him because thermite. The world is against him because he sold out with junk science to play to a target audience.

Its junk science to people on JREF and they are clowns. Professor Harrit is a peer-reviewed scientist with impeccable credentials. Is the world against him, hardly. Probably numbering in the thousands amount of people who are aware of Harrit findings? Politicians and the official media are never going to tell you the truth.

originally posted by: Jesushere

I have seen this talked about a lot on skeptic forums but have yet to see a link to verify its use, maybe it exists if you find post the link

The LaClede Steel Corporation fabricated the trusses and used their own in house paint to paint them. The formula is in the image i posted,

Detailing of these trusses was similar to that employed in open-web joist fabrication and, in fact, the trusses were manufactured by a joist fabricator, the LaClede Steel Corporation.

www.fema.gov...

waypastvne he LaClede Steel Corporation fabricated the trusses and used their own in house paint to paint them. The formula is in the image i posted,

That's not proof where is quoted they used this paint on the floor trusses? How would we even know what colour the paint was? You sure that's even same company there could be a Laclede paint company? Sorry if you got no reference,this is worthless info to explain away Harrit findings.