Trying to resolve 9/11

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Still trying to change the subject. Again

Again...

What is the melting point of steel?

You keep talking about melted steel. You have not posted evidence that the pile reached temperatures to melt steel.

You keep posting evidence of corrosions that occurred at temperatures less these the melting point of steel.

What temperature does you source cited state the corrosion occurred. What is the melting point of steel?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

They did three investigations to confirm Aluminum was present. A DSC test, a XED test and MEK test all three confirmed elemental AI and Iron oxide.

You

MEK test

Please post the procedure that is used to show free elemental aluminum in a”MEK test”

In fact, please post the procedure for the “ DSC test“ to find elemental aluminum?

I don’t know about elemental aluminum, but

By Oystein

The results ranged from 1.5 to 7.5 kiloJoules per gram, a wide spread that makes "high-tech nano-stuff" an unlikely explanation. More importantly, 2 of the sample released more than 4kJ/g of energy, which is the maximum energy thermite could possibly release due to the basic laws of this universe.

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Was two more of your blatant falsehoods document and added to you list.

When you going to ever answer these simple true or false questions?

You use XED by comparing the peaks from known samples. Is that false? The Harrit peaks are close or dead on for industrial coatings, not aluminum iron oxide thermite. Is that false?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Quote

Another primer at the WTC: LaClede Standard Primer

oystein-debate.blogspot.com...

At least one other primer has been applied to WTC steel: LaClede Steel Company, manufacturer of the floor trusses [4], used their own shop primer, or LaClede Standard Primer with the following composition [5]:

Pigment: 28.5% by weight

Iron Oxide: 55%

Aluminium Silicate: 41%

Strontium Chromate: 4%

Vehicle: 71.5%

Epoxy Amine and other: 100%

I find this false claim, that there was only one primer (Tnemec) used in the WTC towers, quite often in recent articles by people who want to defend Harrit e.al.'s claim that the red-gray chips are somehow nano-thermitic, for example at AE911T [6a]. These authors need to understand that they err: They have so far overlooked LaClede Standard Primer!

LaClede Standard Primer
The above formulation of LaClede Standard Primer can be broken into chemical elements, with a few reasonable assumptions:

“Iron oxide” is hematite, chemical formula Fe2O3, a red pigment. Hematite pigments are bright red at particle sizes between 100 and 300 nanometers, and in that size it is universally used in all kinds of paints.

“Aluminium Silicate” is kaolin, chemical formula Al2Si2O5(OH)4, a clay mineral very commonly used in paints to control gloss consistence. Kaolin appears naturally in platetelets some micrometers across and some tens of nanometers thick, which tend to stack.

The cured epoxy vehicle is polymeric and it is difficult to give a sum chemical sum formula, but it is dominated by carbon (C, 68% by weight), oxygen (O, 13%), hydrogen (H, 9%) and nitrogen (9%)

With these chemical formulas, I computed the elemental composition of LaClede Standard Primer:

C: 48% by weight

O: 21%

Fe: 11%

H, N: 7% each

Si: 2.5%

Al: 2.4%

Sr: 0.5%

Cr: 0.3%

Using DTSA-II, a free multiplatform software package for quantitative x-ray microanalysis [7], I simulated a bulk sphere with the above chemical composition, using the same 20 keV that Harrit e.al. used:

LaClede Standard Primer has iron oxide. If it burns at 430 Celsius, why would it not make iron microspheres?

You have not got the subject since we started.
You still failing the first hurdle.
Laclede paint is Aluminum silicate and iron oxide.
The fact molten Iron balls and spheres formed on the burned chip can only have been caused by temp over 1500c+
In harrit analyze the reaction occurred at 430c. So evidence there molten Iron on the chip, a high heat reaction happened= nanothermite
Leclede reaction is absurd as the Aluminum silicate is bound material.
Debunkers have failed to acknowledge the unsound reasoning in their own theory, and you just continuing with that makes you look silly.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Quote

Another primer at the WTC: LaClede Standard Primer

oystein-debate.blogspot.com...

At least one other primer has been applied to WTC steel: LaClede Steel Company, manufacturer of the floor trusses [4], used their own shop primer, or LaClede Standard Primer with the following composition [5]:

Pigment: 28.5% by weight

Iron Oxide: 55%

Aluminium Silicate: 41%

Strontium Chromate: 4%

Vehicle: 71.5%

Epoxy Amine and other: 100%

I find this false claim, that there was only one primer (Tnemec) used in the WTC towers, quite often in recent articles by people who want to defend Harrit e.al.'s claim that the red-gray chips are somehow nano-thermitic, for example at AE911T [6a]. These authors need to understand that they err: They have so far overlooked LaClede Standard Primer!

LaClede Standard Primer
The above formulation of LaClede Standard Primer can be broken into chemical elements, with a few reasonable assumptions:

“Iron oxide” is hematite, chemical formula Fe2O3, a red pigment. Hematite pigments are bright red at particle sizes between 100 and 300 nanometers, and in that size it is universally used in all kinds of paints.

“Aluminium Silicate” is kaolin, chemical formula Al2Si2O5(OH)4, a clay mineral very commonly used in paints to control gloss consistence. Kaolin appears naturally in platetelets some micrometers across and some tens of nanometers thick, which tend to stack.

The cured epoxy vehicle is polymeric and it is difficult to give a sum chemical sum formula, but it is dominated by carbon (C, 68% by weight), oxygen (O, 13%), hydrogen (H, 9%) and nitrogen (9%)

With these chemical formulas, I computed the elemental composition of LaClede Standard Primer:

C: 48% by weight

O: 21%

Fe: 11%

H, N: 7% each

Si: 2.5%

Al: 2.4%

Sr: 0.5%

Cr: 0.3%

Using DTSA-II, a free multiplatform software package for quantitative x-ray microanalysis [7], I simulated a bulk sphere with the above chemical composition, using the same 20 keV that Harrit e.al. used:

LaClede Standard Primer has iron oxide. If it burns at 430 Celsius, why would it not make iron microspheres?

Impossible.
Steel/ Molten Iron= equal high temp of 1400c and 1500c or higher.
There no way Iron oxide will react to create Iron spheres at 430c.
Mick West go look at his experiment his using flame torches to heat up steel to high enough temp to create Iron Microspheres.
What he fails to reveal is the Molten Iron- is result of steel heated to very high heat temps.
Since we talking about 9/11 where all that heat coming from. NIST temp ranges are way below the required temp to form Iron spheres.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

False by your own statement

You

You have not got the subject since we started.
You still failing the first hurdle.
Laclede paint is Aluminum silicate and iron oxide.
The fact molten Iron balls and spheres formed on the burned chip can only have been caused by temp over 1500c+

And you

You denying what shown in the paper.
The heated the red/gray chips to 430c and molten Iron formed on the burned chip.

You just stated “ The heated the red/gray chips to 430c and molten Iron formed on the burned chip.”

Again...

LaClede Standard Primer has iron oxide. If it burns at 430 Celsius, why would it not make iron microspheres?


Can you cite from the Harrit / Jones paper the chips were measured burning at a temperature greater than 430C?


Again

New Mexicans for Science and Reason present

9-11 'Truth' Resources

By Dave Thomas

www.nmsr.org...

www.nmsr.org...

For the record, I still contend that burning the steel wool did indeed produce iron-rich microspheres. I have no problem with the fact that the iron might be in the form of iron oxide. If Zugam thinks my iron-rich microspheres "don't count" because of their oxygen content, then he should immediately contact Harrit, et. al., and inform them that their own "iron-rich microspheres" ARE ALSO IRON OXIDES! These images from my experiments, and from the Bentham Open paper prove this point! If the WTC spheres were themselves pure iron, they would not exhibit the large Oxygen spike in Harrit's XEDS spectrum.

Snip

On a related note, in February 2012, I posted a letter from Rich Lee of the R. J. Lee Group at the James Randi Educational Forum (JREF). This company's post-9/11 report (2003) on WTC dust samples mentioned microscopic spheres of iron, which truthers have long maintained could only have been formed with thermite, thus proving their controlled demolition/inside job claim. Ron Wieck, who produces the internet debate program Hardfire, recently asked the R. J. Lee Group to clarify what they thought about the iron microspheres, and Rich Lee himself answered (in part) "What about the iron microspheres? The iron has a thin layer of rust flakes that can be easily removed by sticky tape. The iron is heated red hot or hotter and subjected to hurricane force blast furnace like wind. The iron flakes are liberated as small particles and some iron is vaporized. Like drops of water, the iron flakes form molten spheres that solidify and the fume also condenses into spheres, the most efficient geometrical form. … The formation of iron and other type spheres at temperatures obtainable by the combustion of petroleum or coal based fuels is not a new or unique process. These spheres are the same as iron and alumino-silicate spheres in the well-studied fly ash formed from contaminants in coal as it is burned in furnaces. – Rich Lee"

By Mick West

Burning Paint Chips #1. www.metabunk.org...

I bashed off a bunch of pain chips from my red painted steel wheelbarrow and waved a butane flame over them. Result = iron microspheres

Here's a scale comparison with the Harrit microspheres (left) and mine (right).

Of note, in both their photos and mine the red layer appears undamaged. Curious, since that's supposed to be the one that's nanothermite. What seems to have happened is the iron oxide layer has "burnt" (perhaps with some of the paint, of some intermediate layer), and created some iron microspheres.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Now.

Still trying to change the subject. Again

Again...

What is the melting point of steel?

You keep talking about melted steel. You have not posted evidence that the pile reached temperatures to melt steel.

You keep posting evidence of corrosions that occurred at temperatures less these the melting point of steel.

What temperature does you source cited state the corrosion occurred. What is the melting point of steel?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

They did three investigations to confirm Aluminum was present. A DSC test, a XED test and MEK test all three confirmed elemental AI and Iron oxide.

You

MEK test

Please post the procedure that is used to show free elemental aluminum in a”MEK test”

In fact, please post the procedure for the “ DSC test“ to find elemental aluminum?

I don’t know about elemental aluminum, but

By Oystein

The results ranged from 1.5 to 7.5 kiloJoules per gram, a wide spread that makes "high-tech nano-stuff" an unlikely explanation. More importantly, 2 of the sample released more than 4kJ/g of energy, which is the maximum energy thermite could possibly release due to the basic laws of this universe.

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Was two more of your blatant falsehoods document and added to you list.

When you going to ever answer these simple true or false questions?

You use XED by comparing the peaks from known samples. Is that false? The Harrit peaks are close or dead on for industrial coatings, not aluminum iron oxide thermite. Is that false?

What’s the other list? Your list of falsehoods and contradictions?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

You managed not notice this steel piece connections failed and was exposed to high temp.

Then specifically post that picture separately to see if your argument has merit?


But it’s been cited repeatedly you do post proven falsehoods and blatant falsehoods. A person with credibility would have either apologize or walked away out of shame by now.

You

You lost this debate days ago. Your opinion of me is irrelevant. 
You only make an excuse the connection failed due to buckling so there no point. You still in denial about the Harrit study. 

How? Your claiming thermite? Thermite burns over 2000 degrees Celsius. Is that false?

You explicitly just stated

Iron Microspheres not going to develop in a a fire that 600c or 800c. And there no substantial documentation fires were hot as 1500c at ground zero.

So there was no thermite fires at the WTC?

Posting pictures of steel cut by cutting torch as steel cut by thermite.

You said this.

I have genuine doubts any welder would slice steel like that like that.

What does that even mean?


Let’s not forget this gem
You

Stop repeating things I have previously answered.
Harrit chips were analyzed in inert atmosphere.

Still waiting on you to cite where Harrit analyzed the WTC chips in an inert atmosphere?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

I just cited an F’n source

you

I have gathered over the years it often takess 1600c to 1700 to melt Wrought Iron?

Melting point [°F (°C)][54] 2,800 (1,540)

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Maybe you should actually look items up instead of making crap up

Nothing you will ever set forth on here reverses the fact the red/gray chips created Iron spheres after heating. 
The debunker Oystein recognizes this.


I presume he thinks they faked the images, but with no evidence? Only reason I Can reach since he still believes the paint nonsense.
Oystein for me a troublemaker who appears to not want to test out his own theories. Just will happily accept Milette theory and thats it.
Again it well established before he undertook this experiment there was paint chips in the dust. 
Oystein should be less of troublemaker and should have asked for a red/gray fragment nicely in 2012, instead they call the truth community names and did not try to settle the debate in correct sensible mannered way. 
Red/ Gray chips is believable for me since there is an affirmation from FEMA that steel melted and we can reconcile it occurred inside the buildings. You offered me no reason to doubt that. 

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Nothing you will ever set forth on here reverses the fact the red/gray chips created Iron spheres after heating.

Ok? This is the argument.

you

You denying what shown in the paper.
The heated the red/gray chips to 430c and molten Iron formed on the burned chip.

You just stated “ The heated the red/gray chips to 430c and molten Iron formed on the burned chip.”

Again...

LaClede Standard Primer has iron oxide. If it burns at 430 Celsius, why would it not make iron microspheres?

Can you cite from the Harrit / Jones paper the chips were measured burning at a temperature greater than 430C?

You

The debunker Oystein recognizes this.

Recognizes what. By all means actually quote Oystein and link to the cited source.

You

I presume he thinks they faked the images, but with no evidence? Only reason I Can reach since he still believes the paint nonsense.

How about I actually quote Oystein...

By Oystein

The most basic debunking points are as followed:
They ignited 4 similar looking "chips" and measured the energy release per weight unit. The results ranged from 1.5 to 7.5 kiloJoules per gram, a wide spread that makes "high-tech nano-stuff" an unlikely explanation. More importantly, 2 of the sample released more than 4kJ/g of energy, which is the maximum energy thermite could possibly release due to the basic laws of this universe. This data alone disproves unequivocally that the material cannot possibly be the kind of thermite they claim to have found (aluminium + Fe2O3)
They claim to have found elemental Aluminium, one key ingredient to thermite, in a fifth chip. However, this fifth chip is of a different material than the four others, as is proven by their own data presented in figures 6 and 14. They did NOT dind free aluminium in any of the material that they igited and claimed to be or contain thermite
They compared the exothermic behaviour of their 4 ignition samples with that of real (nano-?) thermite found in literature, and claimed that the graphs are very similar. They are not: Compare figure 19 with figure 29 and note how the position of the peak differs significantly both on the X-axis (by more than 100°C) and the Y-axis (by a factor of 2 to 4.5). This result proves that their samples are not the kind of thermite known to science. (Note too how in figure 29 they only repeat the lowest of the 4 peaks from fig. 19 to make it not quite so apparent that their samples released waaay too much energy/power.)
Sunstealer has identified in insightful posts back in april 2009 that the crystaline structures we see in figures 8-10 resemble kaolinite (aluminiumsilicate) and hematite (iron oxide, Fe2O3). Their elemental composition as per the Harrit paper too points to kaolinite (Al, So Edit: Si, O) and hematite (Fe, O). Since Harrit found all of this embedded in an organic matrix, and since both kaolinite and hematite have been used throughout the ages and still used today as key ingredients to red paint, there can be no dount that the 4 red-grey chips from the ignition experiments is simply a red paint.
Sunstealer just the other day found that in a newer presentation, co-author Steven Jones showed XEDS spectra of primer paint they had scratched from original WTC structural steel. This spectrum resembles the spectrum in figure 14 nearly to a t! Hence, the fifth chip (which they soaked in MEK to find elemental Al) is thus proven to be primer paint from WTC steel

These are the main points where Harrit. Jones e.al. debunk themselves.

Much earned criticism also goes to the choice of Bentham as publishing house (zero impact in the scientific community, bad reputation for accepting even total junk as long as the pay-to-publish 800$ check clears. It has been establiched that not the journal and its editor-in-chief controlled the peer-review process, but instead the authors themselves were in control of their own "peer-review".

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Here is another opinion.,

An analysis of the DSC data in the Herrit-Jones paper

By pteridine

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Based on this figure, we may approximate the following theoretical and measured energies:

Not measured in this experiment:
HMX = 5.5 kJ/g
TNT = 4.5 kJ/g
TATB = 4.1kJ/g
Thermite = 3.9 kJ/g
Measured in this experiment:
Chip #1 = 1.5 kJ/g
Chip #2 = 2.5 kJ/g
Chip #3 = 7.5 kJ/g
Chip #4 = 5.9 kJ/g

The first thing we notice is the wide disparity of values for the “highly engineered” material. This should raise doubts as to sample collection and preparation and even if the materials are the same thing. By other analyses, they appear similar.
Now we note that two of the chips, #3 and #4 have far more energy than if they were 100% thermite. They also have more energy than any of the high explosives or any combination of thermite and any high explosive as a composite. Arithmetically, if we have a 50:50 mix of thermite and HMX we should have an energy of about 4.7 kJ/g -- below that of chips #3 and #4. How can this be?
To explain this, we must understand what is being measured and how. The explosives and thermite have, internal to them, their own oxidants. We include their oxygen in the weight we measured. If we measure heat from a burning hydrocarbon, for example, we DON’T include the weight of the oxygen in the air we use to burn it. Candle wax burning in air has about 10 times the energy/gram of thermite using this convention. What does this mean? It means that some, if not all, of the energy from the red chips is due to burning of the carbonaceous paint matrix in air.
Jones is vague about this problem and says on p27. “We suggest that the organic material in evidence in the red/gray chips is also highly energetic, most likely producing gas to provide explosive pressure.” What might that energetic material be? Jones has no clue. His team lacks the chemical knowledge to postulate a reasonable composition. It has no nitrogen, so it is not one of the explosives shown. It is energetic when burning in air. So is candle wax. Volatilized, it will produce gas but it does not seem to be otherwise energetic. How can this problem be resolved? What experiment must be done to show the possibility of thermite or some composite?
As I have stated above, thermite and explosives have their own oxidants built in. burning hydrocarbons do not. How can Jones discriminate between explosives, thermite and plain old burning paint?
He can re-run the DSC under an argon atmosphere. What a simple and elegant solution. Under argon, all the energy coming out will be from the thermite and its energetic additives. If there is no energy coming out, there is no thermite and all those contortions and obfuscations are for naught. Why wouldn’t Jones do this obvious experiment? Maybe he did and didn’t like the results.

You never did answer this either. Is it true other individuals have tried to replicate Harrit’s results. And is it false all the documented attempts failed. Nobody has confirmed Harrit’s results. Is that false.

Use your head if there was no elementry AI how can the Iron balls appear on burned chip?
Harrit only heated to 430c!.
You evidently see here the XEDS slide after MEK soaking the AI and Si are not bounded that are not identical slides. Millette slides show a bonded material called Kaolin.





It not a paint.

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
Use your head if there was no elementry AI how can the Iron balls appear on burned chip?
Harrit only heated to 430c!.
You evidently see here the XEDS slide after MEK soaking the AI and Si are not bounded that are not identical slides. Millette slides show a bonded material called Kaolin.

It not a paint.

You not answering questions.

Again

You

Nothing you will ever set forth on here reverses the fact the red/gray chips created Iron spheres after heating.

Ok? This is the argument.

you

You denying what shown in the paper.
The heated the red/gray chips to 430c and molten Iron formed on the burned chip.

You just stated “ The heated the red/gray chips to 430c and molten Iron formed on the burned chip.”

Again...

LaClede Standard Primer has iron oxide. If it burns at 430 Celsius, why would it not make iron microspheres?

Can you cite from the Harrit / Jones paper the chips were measured burning at a temperature greater than 430C?

You never did answer this either. Is it true other individuals have tried to replicate Harrit’s results. And is it false all the documented attempts failed. Nobody has confirmed Harrit’s results. Is that false.

Still trying to change the subject. Again

Again...

What is the melting point of steel?

You keep talking about melted steel. You have not posted evidence that the pile reached temperatures to melt steel.

You keep posting evidence of corrosions that occurred at temperatures less these the melting point of steel.

What temperature does you source cited state the corrosion occurred. What is the melting point of steel?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

They did three investigations to confirm Aluminum was present. A DSC test, a XED test and MEK test all three confirmed elemental AI and Iron oxide.

You

MEK test

Please post the procedure that is used to show free elemental aluminum in a”MEK test”

In fact, please post the procedure for the “ DSC test“ to find elemental aluminum?

I don’t know about elemental aluminum, but

By Oystein

The results ranged from 1.5 to 7.5 kiloJoules per gram, a wide spread that makes "high-tech nano-stuff" an unlikely explanation. More importantly, 2 of the sample released more than 4kJ/g of energy, which is the maximum energy thermite could possibly release due to the basic laws of this universe.

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Was two more of your blatant falsehoods document and added to you list.

When you going to ever answer these simple true or false questions?

You use XED by comparing the peaks from known samples. Is that false? The Harrit peaks are close or dead on for industrial coatings, not aluminum iron oxide thermite. Is that false?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

What test did Harrit do to conclusively prove his dust had thermite properties?

An analysis of the DSC data in the Herrit-Jones paper

By pteridine

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Based on this figure, we may approximate the following theoretical and measured energies:

Not measured in this experiment:
HMX = 5.5 kJ/g
TNT = 4.5 kJ/g
TATB = 4.1kJ/g
Thermite = 3.9 kJ/g
Measured in this experiment:
Chip #1 = 1.5 kJ/g
Chip #2 = 2.5 kJ/g
Chip #3 = 7.5 kJ/g
Chip #4 = 5.9 kJ/g

The first thing we notice is the wide disparity of values for the “highly engineered” material. This should raise doubts as to sample collection and preparation and even if the materials are the same thing. By other analyses, they appear similar.
Now we note that two of the chips, #3 and #4 have far more energy than if they were 100% thermite. They also have more energy than any of the high explosives or any combination of thermite and any high explosive as a composite. Arithmetically, if we have a 50:50 mix of thermite and HMX we should have an energy of about 4.7 kJ/g -- below that of chips #3 and #4. How can this be?
To explain this, we must understand what is being measured and how. The explosives and thermite have, internal to them, their own oxidants. We include their oxygen in the weight we measured. If we measure heat from a burning hydrocarbon, for example, we DON’T include the weight of the oxygen in the air we use to burn it. Candle wax burning in air has about 10 times the energy/gram of thermite using this convention. What does this mean? It means that some, if not all, of the energy from the red chips is due to burning of the carbonaceous paint matrix in air.
Jones is vague about this problem and says on p27. “We suggest that the organic material in evidence in the red/gray chips is also highly energetic, most likely producing gas to provide explosive pressure.” What might that energetic material be? Jones has no clue. His team lacks the chemical knowledge to postulate a reasonable composition. It has no nitrogen, so it is not one of the explosives shown. It is energetic when burning in air. So is candle wax. Volatilized, it will produce gas but it does not seem to be otherwise energetic. How can this problem be resolved? What experiment must be done to show the possibility of thermite or some composite?
As I have stated above, thermite and explosives have their own oxidants built in. burning hydrocarbons do not. How can Jones discriminate between explosives, thermite and plain old burning paint?
He can re-run the DSC under an argon atmosphere. What a simple and elegant solution. Under argon, all the energy coming out will be from the thermite and its energetic additives. If there is no energy coming out, there is no thermite and all those contortions and obfuscations are for naught. Why wouldn’t Jones do this obvious experiment? Maybe he did and didn’t like the results.

Not true Jeffrey Farrer and Basille were independent scentists who contacted Steve Jones for samples to test. They confirmed the chips had thermitic properties.
You have no significant questions. I reading rehashed stuff that was debunked days ago and today. I reading info that not worth my time discussing again.
What you trying to claim Harrit was burning Laclede paint chips? 
I can see the evidence there Iron balls on the burned red/gray chips.

If your holding onto the claim Iron oxide and 430c heated created Iron molten balls- provide an experiment. At the moment you just posting info that have no bearing on what i said.
Its your claim back it up?
Or will just reply with another post of nothingness.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Jeffrey Farrer and Basille

Really. Shame. Another blatant falsehood.

Any Updates on Mark Basile's Study?
We skipped August.

66 months now.

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Basile never published results of testing that confirmed Harrit’s results.

Jeffrey Farrer? The quote, cite, and link to published results that confirmed Harrit’s results?

Now..

You not answering questions.

Again

You

Nothing you will ever set forth on here reverses the fact the red/gray chips created Iron spheres after heating.

Ok? This is the argument.

you

You denying what shown in the paper.
The heated the red/gray chips to 430c and molten Iron formed on the burned chip.

You just stated “ The heated the red/gray chips to 430c and molten Iron formed on the burned chip.”

Again...

LaClede Standard Primer has iron oxide. If it burns at 430 Celsius, why would it not make iron microspheres?

Can you cite from the Harrit / Jones paper the chips were measured burning at a temperature greater than 430C?

You never did answer this either. Is it true other individuals have tried to replicate Harrit’s results. And is it false all the documented attempts failed. Nobody has confirmed Harrit’s results. Is that false.

Still trying to change the subject. Again

Again...

What is the melting point of steel?

You keep talking about melted steel. You have not posted evidence that the pile reached temperatures to melt steel.

You keep posting evidence of corrosions that occurred at temperatures less these the melting point of steel.

What temperature does you source cited state the corrosion occurred. What is the melting point of steel?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

They did three investigations to confirm Aluminum was present. A DSC test, a XED test and MEK test all three confirmed elemental AI and Iron oxide.

You

MEK test

Please post the procedure that is used to show free elemental aluminum in a”MEK test”

In fact, please post the procedure for the “ DSC test“ to find elemental aluminum?

I don’t know about elemental aluminum, but

By Oystein

The results ranged from 1.5 to 7.5 kiloJoules per gram, a wide spread that makes "high-tech nano-stuff" an unlikely explanation. More importantly, 2 of the sample released more than 4kJ/g of energy, which is the maximum energy thermite could possibly release due to the basic laws of this universe.

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Was two more of your blatant falsehoods document and added to you list.

When you going to ever answer these simple true or false questions?

You use XED by comparing the peaks from known samples. Is that false? The Harrit peaks are close or dead on for industrial coatings, not aluminum iron oxide thermite. Is that false?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
*,1 2 *,3 4 5 Niels H. Harrit , Jeffrey Farrer , Steven E. Jones , Kevin R. Ryan , Frank M. Legge ,
2673 DanielFarnsworth,GreggRoberts,JamesR.Gourley andBradleyR.Larsen

Look at that, Jeffrey Farrer is not an independent analysis. Shame on you acting like Jeffrey Farrer was independent.

I guess I better be more specific..,

You never did answer this either. Is it true other individuals have tried to replicate Harrit’s team results. And is it false all the documented attempts failed. Nobody has confirmed Harrit’s results. Is that false.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

If your holding onto the claim Iron oxide and 430c heated created Iron molten balls- provide an experiment. At the moment you just posting info that have no bearing on what i said.
Its your claim back it up?
Or will just reply with another post of nothingness.

This is the whole argument.

You

You have not got the subject since we started.
You still failing the first hurdle.
Laclede paint is Aluminum silicate and iron oxide.
The fact molten Iron balls and spheres formed on the burned chip can only have been caused by temp over 1500c+

And you

You denying what shown in the paper.
The heated the red/gray chips to 430c and molten Iron formed on the burned chip.

You just stated “ The heated the red/gray chips to 430c and molten Iron formed on the burned chip.”

Again...

LaClede Standard Primer has iron oxide. If it burns at 430 Celsius, why would it not make iron microspheres?


Can you cite from the Harrit / Jones paper the chips were measured burning at a temperature greater than 430C?


Again

New Mexicans for Science and Reason present

9-11 'Truth' Resources

By Dave Thomas

www.nmsr.org...

www.nmsr.org...

For the record, I still contend that burning the steel wool did indeed produce iron-rich microspheres. I have no problem with the fact that the iron might be in the form of iron oxide. If Zugam thinks my iron-rich microspheres "don't count" because of their oxygen content, then he should immediately contact Harrit, et. al., and inform them that their own "iron-rich microspheres" ARE ALSO IRON OXIDES! These images from my experiments, and from the Bentham Open paper prove this point! If the WTC spheres were themselves pure iron, they would not exhibit the large Oxygen spike in Harrit's XEDS spectrum.

Snip

On a related note, in February 2012, I posted a letter from Rich Lee of the R. J. Lee Group at the James Randi Educational Forum (JREF). This company's post-9/11 report (2003) on WTC dust samples mentioned microscopic spheres of iron, which truthers have long maintained could only have been formed with thermite, thus proving their controlled demolition/inside job claim. Ron Wieck, who produces the internet debate program Hardfire, recently asked the R. J. Lee Group to clarify what they thought about the iron microspheres, and Rich Lee himself answered (in part) "What about the iron microspheres? The iron has a thin layer of rust flakes that can be easily removed by sticky tape. The iron is heated red hot or hotter and subjected to hurricane force blast furnace like wind. The iron flakes are liberated as small particles and some iron is vaporized. Like drops of water, the iron flakes form molten spheres that solidify and the fume also condenses into spheres, the most efficient geometrical form. … The formation of iron and other type spheres at temperatures obtainable by the combustion of petroleum or coal based fuels is not a new or unique process. These spheres are the same as iron and alumino-silicate spheres in the well-studied fly ash formed from contaminants in coal as it is burned in furnaces. – Rich Lee"

By Mick West

Burning Paint Chips #1. www.metabunk.org...

I bashed off a bunch of pain chips from my red painted steel wheelbarrow and waved a butane flame over them. Result = iron microspheres

Here's a scale comparison with the Harrit microspheres (left) and mine (right).

Of note, in both their photos and mine the red layer appears undamaged. Curious, since that's supposed to be the one that's nanothermite. What seems to have happened is the iron oxide layer has "burnt" (perhaps with some of the paint, of some intermediate layer), and created some iron microspheres.

Do you not accept the UGPS thermal images are real?
They clear show only heat about 500c ( some spikes of 600c) a day or two after the event.

WTC7 site





FEMA claimed for it to be corrosion it would a long term heating event in the ground.
Are you really going to believe a corrosive event occurred in a matter of minutes or a couple of hours?
Thermal figures is 100 per cent confirmation of an event inside the building provoked this. And this make the case for controlled demolition a lot stronger.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

It must suck that your arguments are based on nothing but falsehoods, claims you cannot back with cited sources, and you only have junk science.

Only if Harrit would have published results of trying to burn his dust in an inert atmosphere to show it had the properties of thermite. One has to wonder why an individual and his whole team neglected to do such a simple go / no go test for thermite. I guess so fools could go on and on about a paper that is entirely junk science. A paper that makes assumptions instead of producing conclusions and positive identification of what was actually present, and what reactions the dust could actually support.

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
Do you not accept the UGPS thermal images are real?
They clear show only heat about 500c ( some spikes of 600c) a day or two after the event.

WTC7 site

FEMA claimed for it to be corrosion it would a long term heating event in the ground.
Are you really going to believe a corrosive event occurred in a matter of minutes or a couple of hours?
Thermal figures is 100 per cent confirmation of an event inside the building provoked this. And this make the case for controlled demolition a lot stronger.

This is the argument

What is the melting point of steel?

You keep talking about melted steel. You have not posted evidence that the pile reached temperatures to melt steel.

You keep posting evidence of corrosions that occurred at temperatures less these the melting point of steel.

What temperature does you source cited state the corrosion occurred. What is the melting point of steel?

Note. Added on. Please cite where frozen pools of melted steel were found at the WTC?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

What is it like having to ignore questions. Trying to figure out how to post falsehoods without trying to right out lie? To only have BS, and never having the intellectual honesty to directly answer a question.

Let’s start with this blatant falsehood you posted and tried to blame was it Jones for?

Stop repeating things I have previously answered.
Harrit chips were analyzed in inert atmosphere.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
*,1 2 *,3 4 5 Niels H. Harrit , Jeffrey Farrer , Steven E. Jones , Kevin R. Ryan , Frank M. Legge ,
2673 DanielFarnsworth,GreggRoberts,JamesR.Gourley andBradleyR.Larsen

Look at that, Jeffrey Farrer is not an independent analysis. Shame on you acting like Jeffrey Farrer was independent.

I guess I better be more specific..,


You never did answer this either. Is it true other individuals have tried to replicate Harrit’s team results. And is it false all the documented attempts failed. Nobody has confirmed Harrit’s results. Is that false.

Steven Jones started the work years before.
Dishonor on you for not understanding that.
Harrit received samples from Jones and then composed a paper with others.
Basille and Farrer got samples from Jones and got other samples from Museums that had WTC dust.
They signed the Harrit paper because they agreed with the paper findings.

Guess will never see your experiment Iron oxide and  430c creates Iron molten spheres?
I just take it you made a false claim.