The Serious 9/11 Arguments Compilation.

a reply to: Jesushere

So epoxy only goes into paint? It wouldn’t be used in floor coverings or concrete repairs?

buildingwithchemistry.org...

Epoxies in Building and Construction
Epoxy resins are used in the manufacture of adhesives, plastics, paints, coatings, primers and sealers, flooring and other products and materials that are used in building and construction applications. Epoxies are thermoset plastics made by the reaction of two or more industrial chemical compounds.

Epoxy resins are used in a wide array of consumer and industrial applications because of their toughness, strong adhesion, chemical resistance and other specialized properties.

The chips are epoxy based construction materials with clay and pigments added. Not thermite.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere

He carried out a methyl ethyl ketone and saw the Aluminum was not mixed or bonded with the other compounds. If you think this test was not good enough, provide some answers for why you believe this?

How does MEK, which softens epoxy, indicate the presence of free aluminum for a thermite reaction? Does MEK react with aluminum to give some indication of aluminum’s presence? How would it show it was aluminum not bound to oxides, or other compounds?

Again, what specific analysis did Harrit conduct to prove active thermite, and publish a result only active thermite could produce?

The nano-thermite is going to mix with the paint on the steel that's where they have to place it.

One, how would iron oxide powder and aluminum powder mix with cured paint? When thermite supposedly cut and burnt the beam away?

Two, why would there be detectable amounts of a active thermite in WTC dust anyway.

Three. Why are all of Harrits chips supposedly thermite when you claim it would mix with paint. Harrit found no paint chips. Seems impossible from the dust from over 1,400,000 tons of collapsed buildings.

Four. How do you know where the paint contractors acquired all the paint? What paint was used from year to year.

Skeptics have already ruled out one paint. They still think it might be Laclede paint but Dr Milette found no strontium chromate in his sample this cannot be ignored.

What Skeptics?

Who ruled out paint? Harrit backed by a unethically peer reviewed paper in a pay to play journal that did not complete the discovery process with independent lab analysis?

MEK test ( involves using a paint solvent) it verified were the red/grey chips paint. Professor and others saw the aluminium was separated after they dropped one of the chips in. The Oxygen and Silicon were free.

If the red/grey contained aluminosilicate (an ingredient in Laclede paint) the silicon would not be separate from the aluminium.

Professor Harrit also did ignition tests and DSC tests to confirm red/greys was nano-thermite.

Dr Milette, Chris Mohr and Oystein on the JREF forum. Laclede paint is their last hope because if it not that paint then Harrit right the red/chips is nano-thermite.

There were only two paints used to paint the steel and both paints from different manufacturers was red in colour.

Harrit claimed some of the chips have not ignited. That's not unusual maybe heat did not reach those spots on the steel? If nano-thermite was sprayed on or gel on painted on that it probably covered a large surface area of the steel.

A New York Times article of November 2001 cited Dr Jonathan Barnett of Worcester Polytechnic Institute as speaking about “steel members in the WTC debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures.

Debunkers will ignore evidence of melted Iron found on the steel. Finding huge holes in steel beams is not an unusual event? There lot of evidence supporting WTC7 was brought down by CD.

You only have to watch this to notice the flaws in NIST analysis. Do you see not west corner right wall where the floors have not fallen away? If Freefall occurred on 8 floors those floors would be gone completely and fallen down. And there was no deformation of the right wall towards the middle in the actual collapse.

originally posted by: Jesushere

Debunkers will ignore evidence of melted Iron found on the steel.

Debunkers know the difference between melted and corroded.

a reply to: Jesushere

WTF

Are you saying every time the WTC was remodeled, the same paint was used every time? There is not even a guarantee the original contractors used specific paint vs what they could get the cheapest. Or what was available? For two 110 story buildings.

Back to the remodel thing, epoxy with pigments are used in more than paint. Floor coverings and resigns.

Why in the heck would the thermite have a clay that is a signature of paint?

You

MEK test ( involves using a paint solvent) it verified were the red/grey chips paint. Professor and others saw the aluminium was separated after they dropped one of the chips in. The Oxygen and Silicon were free.

MEK is used to free up anything it will not dissolve. I am guessing that would be a majority of metals.

Free oxygen is a gas at room temperature. How do you keep oxygen gas in a dust. You don’t, unless it’s stuck to iron or aluminum as oxides.

Your own cited source has Harrit saying the aluminum he found was aluminum oxide.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

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.

What test did Harrit conduct to prove there was enough freed up aluminum for a thermite reaction. By you sources, he did not.

This is key, “some of the aluminium must, therefore, exist in elemental form in the red material.“

Harrit is spitballing there is free aluminum. He never tested for free aluminum. By your cited source. He never published results of trying to burn his dust in an oxygen free atmosphere. Harrit never published any results from a test that would prove active thermite. He never released his dust to confirm active thermite.

Then you have Millette’s documented results outlining how he specifically looked for aluminum.

aneta.org...

SEM-EDS phase mapping (using multivariate statistical analysis) of the red layer after exposure to MEK for 55 hours did not show evidence of individual aluminum particles (Appendix G).

Break

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.

There was not enough free aluminum in the dust marking it possible it was active thermite.

It doesn’t mater if the chips were from cheap epoxy paint from contractors cutting costs, epoxy floor coverings, epoxy resins, or all the above.

The red chips have the characteristics of industrial coverings. is that false. Like dissolves in MEK. Has pigments. Has clay used in paint. Give exotherms when burnt.

Harrit only claims finding aluminum oxide, is that false by your own cited material?

Harrit hints he only assumed there was free aluminum. Is that false.

You cannot name the published results of what tests Harrit conducted to prove free aluminum. Is that false.

Harrit never released his dust for independent confirmation of thermite. Is that false.

Millette ran an aray of document tests and found no free aluminum. No free aluminum, no active thermite. Is that false.

Mark Basile has not gone through submitting dust to verify thermite. Is that false.

It is obvious the chips are some sort of industrial epoxy coating. Your devotion to the fantasy of thermite and the charlatans that push it is sad.

And you still are ignoring thermite is too slow reacting and inconsistent to pull of sophisticated implosions. I mean the truth movement must think it is ridiculous unreliable and inefficient to think there would be detectable amounts in the WTC dust. And how the thermite systems would maintain their integrity through jet impacts, building damage, and wide spread fires. Or the lack of evidence thermite was cutting multiple columns on every floor of each building, the truth movement’s claim the resistance of each floor had to be removed to achieve the witnessed rate of collapse.

And don’t forget the con of pushing columns cut by cleanup crews as cut by thermite. The major players in the truth movement would never lie.

originally posted by: Jesushere


Dr Milette found no strontium chromate in his sample this cannot be ignored.

Jones/Harrit found it in 2 of their samples:



It's under the purple arrows.

Are you going to ignore this?

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
a reply to: GBP/JPY

I xsee what you mean GOT TAM HAL 9000....TIME FOR A NEUTRON FLUSH, WHERE'S THAT SILVER HANDLE??!!!!

Where is that evidence of planted explosives at the WTC? It should be right there in the video and audio of the multiple views of collapsing buildings at the WTC? Not one piece of steel splinter or cut column by demolitions from buildings that supposedly had to have the resistance of every floor removed to achieve the witnessed collapse speed?

Where is the evidence that office fires and gravity caused the damage at WTC? Yes, it is inside the head of the NIST sycophants and their few remaining supporters.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Jesushere

Debunkers will ignore evidence of melted Iron found on the steel.

Debunkers know the difference between melted and corroded.

FEMA found a liquid on the steel they never saw before in any other building collapse. For most people, this would be the smoking gun. Debunkers though for some reason think it not unusual to find a liquid made of Iron and Sulphur on WTC7 steel? Remember NIST stated the steel beam, girders on floor 12 and 13 were subject to heat temp of 400c

This alone is a smoking gun you can not melt steel at 400c. Finding huge holes in steel is a smoking gun. Find examples where this had happened before in an office fire?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jesushere

WTF

Are you saying every time the WTC was remodeled, the same paint was used every time? There is not even a guarantee the original contractors used specific paint vs what they could get the cheapest. Or what was available? For two 110 story buildings.

Back to the remodel thing, epoxy with pigments are used in more than paint. Floor coverings and resigns.

Why in the heck would the thermite have a clay that is a signature of paint?

You

MEK test ( involves using a paint solvent) it verified were the red/grey chips paint. Professor and others saw the aluminium was separated after they dropped one of the chips in. The Oxygen and Silicon were free.

MEK is used to free up anything it will not dissolve. I am guessing that would be a majority of metals.

Free oxygen is a gas at room temperature. How do you keep oxygen gas in a dust. You don’t, unless it’s stuck to iron or aluminum as oxides.

Your own cited source has Harrit saying the aluminum he found was aluminum oxide.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

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.

What test did Harrit conduct to prove there was enough freed up aluminum for a thermite reaction. By you sources, he did not.

This is key, “some of the aluminium must, therefore, exist in elemental form in the red material.“

Harrit is spitballing there is free aluminum. He never tested for free aluminum. By your cited source. He never published results of trying to burn his dust in an oxygen free atmosphere. Harrit never published any results from a test that would prove active thermite. He never released his dust to confirm active thermite.

Then you have Millette’s documented results outlining how he specifically looked for aluminum.

aneta.org...

SEM-EDS phase mapping (using multivariate statistical analysis) of the red layer after exposure to MEK for 55 hours did not show evidence of individual aluminum particles (Appendix G).

Break

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.

There was not enough free aluminum in the dust marking it possible it was active thermite.

It doesn’t mater if the chips were from cheap epoxy paint from contractors cutting costs, epoxy floor coverings, epoxy resins, or all the above.

The red chips have the characteristics of industrial coverings. is that false. Like dissolves in MEK. Has pigments. Has clay used in paint. Give exotherms when burnt.

Harrit only claims finding aluminum oxide, is that false by your own cited material?

Harrit hints he only assumed there was free aluminum. Is that false.

You cannot name the published results of what tests Harrit conducted to prove free aluminum. Is that false.

Harrit never released his dust for independent confirmation of thermite. Is that false.

Millette ran an aray of document tests and found no free aluminum. No free aluminum, no active thermite. Is that false.

Mark Basile has not gone through submitting dust to verify thermite. Is that false.

It is obvious the chips are some sort of industrial epoxy coating. Your devotion to the fantasy of thermite and the charlatans that push it is sad.

And you still are ignoring thermite is too slow reacting and inconsistent to pull of sophisticated implosions. I mean the truth movement must think it is ridiculous unreliable and inefficient to think there would be detectable amounts in the WTC dust. And how the thermite systems would maintain their integrity through jet impacts, building damage, and wide spread fires. Or the lack of evidence thermite was cutting multiple columns on every floor of each building, the truth movement’s claim the resistance of each floor had to be removed to achieve the witnessed rate of collapse.

And don’t forget the con of pushing columns cut by cleanup crews as cut by thermite. The major players in the truth movement would never lie.

Laclede paint I believe was used in 1957/ 1967 when the WTC7 tower was built. It might have got repainted with Tnemec primer paint later, but I not sure? It was the paint confirmed was used on the steel by NIST. There no documentation or record of other primers used as far as I know.

You just repeating things I have already answered and not going over again.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Jesushere


Dr Milette found no strontium chromate in his sample this cannot be ignored.

Jones/Harrit found it in 2 of their samples:

It's under the purple arrows.

Are you going to ignore this?

There no need Dr Milette and Harrit agree on this was just surface contamination.

The barely noticeable spike is the giveaway!

originally posted by: Jesushere

There no need Dr Milette and Harrit agree on this was just surface contamination.

Contaminated with Cr ? How convenient.

Jones has not said anything since it was discovered his nano thermite paint chip was Laclede paint.

Can you quote where Milette said the Cr spike was surface contamination.

The barely noticeable spike is the giveaway!

Cr makes up less than 1% of the paint. How big do you think the spike should be.

waypastvne Instead of me writing a long-winded post. I will give you this link to read, I found it last night. www.internationalskeptics.com...

it's a debate between Jay Howard and Oystein about the red/grey chips.

You find everything you need to know about this subject there. My opinion and yes I am biased Jay Howard won the debate. T

The Red/grey chips are nano-thermite it just ain't paint.

a reply to: Jesushere

So what you are saying is... If you remove Strontium chromate from the Lacede paint it automatically becomes nanothermite capable of destroying large sky scrapers.




Awesome !

a reply to: Jesushere

Laclede paint I believe was used in 1957/ 1967 when the WTC7 tower was built.

They started building in 84 and the opening was in 87 for WTC7.


57/67?

a reply to: InhaleExhale

They started building in 84 and the opening was in 87 for WTC7.

Ohh come on !
If you start worrying about the details this conspiracy will get nowhere.

Oh I forgot 17 years and nothing.

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: InhaleExhale

They started building in 84 and the opening was in 87 for WTC7.

Ohh come on !
If you start worrying about the details this conspiracy will get nowhere.

Oh I forgot 17 years and nothing.

You can argue back and forth over the buildings being a controlled demolition. I myself am not an engineer so I can't argue technical aspects. I can only use intuition, common sense, and research. It sure as hell looks like controlled demolition with 3 buildings falling straight down in one day. Of course, I could be wrong, planes and fire could have brought the buildings down.

That being said...

You can't deny the vast number of "coincidences" that took place surrounding the event. There were obvious beneficiaries involved at high levels, and it was very obviously used to ignite a drawn out war in the middle east, in the homeland, and abroad. It doesn't take a lot of dot connecting to see the wealthiest groups at the highest levels very much took advantage of the situation to further their agenda.

Arguing back and forth over the minute details of exactly how the buildings fell is irrelevant, considering all the other evidence that points to the whole situation beimg planned out and executed by at least some people that have authority within the US government and world stage

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: InhaleExhale

They started building in 84 and the opening was in 87 for WTC7.

Ohh come on !
If you start worrying about the details this conspiracy will get nowhere.

Oh I forgot 17 years and nothing.

I wouldn't call the Patriot Act and The National Defense Authorization Act ,homeland security nothing our government doing a great job moving forward to protect us while they are BREAKING ALL THE RULES

a reply to: Jesushere

How can it be thermite when this conspiracists swears WTC nukes by falsely claiming first responders as radiation victims...

By Salander

www.abovetopsecret.com...

There is ample proof of nuclear events at WTC.

But if one chooses to deny the evidence, there is not much that can be done.

a reply to: Jesushere

it's a debate between Jay Howard and Oystein about the red/grey chips.

You find everything you need to know about this subject there. My opinion and yes I am biased Jay Howard won the debate. T

By the same guy that claimed

Laclede paint I believe was used in 1957/ 1967 when the WTC7 tower was built.

And

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Corroding steel requires a temp of 1000c to 1500c.

I am still waiting on that NASA proof....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

neutronflux Nasa exposed this event for what it really is anyway. When images were taken hot spots showed up in excess of 1300c on Sep 16th and could have been hotter on Sep 11th

And for the inward bowing of WTC 2’s outer vertical columns, you claimed

www.abovetopsecret.com...

There not outer columns, that's the perimeter wall you looking at in the GIF video.

All this to defend Harrit’s fraudulent claim of an ethically peer reviewed paper? And his claim of thermite based off an exothermic reaction of epoxy. Without you able to cite a published result that actually proves a thermite reaction, or you not able to cite a published test that proves free aluminum for a thermite reaction.