Trying to resolve 9/11

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

 He asserts they misidentified the substance they have?  But that's a lie because they acknowledged in their own research they checked if the chips were paint. Mclede paint explanation is ridiculous because it Aluminum oxide and Silica ( oxide of Silicon) So how this mix have produced Iron Microspheres?

You left out the Iron Oxide.



It makes up 55% of the Pigment.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

 He asserts they misidentified the substance they have?  But that's a lie because they acknowledged in their own research they checked if the chips were paint. Mclede paint explanation is ridiculous because it Aluminum oxide and Silica ( oxide of Silicon) So how this mix have produced Iron Microspheres?

You left out the Iron Oxide.

It makes up 55% of the Pigment.

How can two oxides ignite and create Iron Microspheres?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Claiming there no proof when molten Iron spheres were located in the dust by the RJ Lee group.

By all means, please quote the additional letter write by R.J. Lee group when questioned if thermite would be the only cause of iron spheres.

The debunkers have always claimed the steel never melted and NIST even said no steel melted.
I guess the R. j lee group lied then?
They're claiming here steel and Iron melted!! There no chance in hell high temp of 1500c occurred in an office fire.


They give a breakdown of differences here between normal dust? not exposed to fire I believe? And WTC dust. Fe sphere is what we are discussing now.

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

2: Widespread 1.5 to 7.5 kilojoules, so it can't nanothermite?
Livermore National Labs- nanothermite was in a lively energitic spectrum of 2 kilojoules. The fact the red/grey chips are yielding higher energy output is absolutely more proof the Harrit team identified an exotic chemical/ explosive in the dust.

So what, there are 24 KJ/G in a HERSHEY'S BAR

www.traditionaloven.com...

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

2: Widespread 1.5 to 7.5 kilojoules, so it can't nanothermite?
Livermore National Labs- nanothermite was in a lively energitic spectrum of 2 kilojoules. The fact the red/grey chips are yielding higher energy output is absolutely more proof the Harrit team identified an exotic chemical/ explosive in the dust.

So what, there are 24 KJ/G in a HERSHEY'S BAR

www.traditionaloven.com...

Energy that fueling the human body to function for hours. What happens when you don't eat? You get tired and possibly even sick. You need high energy to function. Men as big 18 stones can get a boost of energy from just having a bar of chocolate. Chemicals are broken by your body, to prevent harm. That way high energy bars are safe to eat. I not getting your point are you trying to claim a hersh bar is comparable to nanothermite and TNT?

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
Fe sphere is what we are discussing now.

Why stop there lets look at all the things Jones is on about in his "Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Centre destruction" paper.

This is his list:



www.journalof911studies.com...


Every thing on that list is a byproduct of this machine. It's All there.

The cement kiln heats all the ingredients to about 2,700 degrees Fahrenheit in huge cylindrical steel rotary kilns lined with special firebrick. Kilns are frequently as much as 12 feet in diameter—large enough to accommodate an automobile and longer in many instances than the height of a 40-story building. The large kilns are mounted with the axis inclined slightly from the horizontal.

www.cement.org...

And everything on that list was mixed in with the portland cement in the fireproofing.




When the buildings collapsed the fireproofing turned to dust and released all of these byproducts.





All that is needed to disprove nanothermite is another source for the iron spheres, and there it is!

It's a rational explanation, so you obviously won't accept it.

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
I not getting your point are you trying to claim a hersh bar is comparable to nanothermite and TNT?

You were the one making the big deal about the KJ/G in the paint chip.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Crazy man Oystein ruling it because it's more energetic than thermite that's bizarre. He comparing it to known tested thermite, and still has figured it out is previously unknown engineered chemical explosive substance!!!

This shows how intellectually dishonest you are. Was Harrit / Jones claiming some other reaction than Fe2O3 + 2 Al was taking place? You can make thermite burn faster by changing surface area of particles, but you cannot can’t change the kiloJoules per gram.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
Fe sphere is what we are discussing now.

Why stop there lets look at all the things Jones is on about in his "Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Centre destruction" paper.

This is his list:

www.journalof911studies.com...


Every thing on that list is a byproduct of this machine. It's All there.

The cement kiln heats all the ingredients to about 2,700 degrees Fahrenheit in huge cylindrical steel rotary kilns lined with special firebrick. Kilns are frequently as much as 12 feet in diameter—large enough to accommodate an automobile and longer in many instances than the height of a 40-story building. The large kilns are mounted with the axis inclined slightly from the horizontal.

www.cement.org...

And everything on that list was mixed in with the portland cement in the fireproofing.

When the buildings collapsed the fireproofing turned to dust and released all of these byproducts.

All that is needed to disprove nanothermite is another source for the iron spheres, and there it is!

It's a rational explanation, so you obviously won't accept it.

I do disagree because Portland chemical composition does not match the paint chips or red/gray chips.
The Portland cement is about 65%+ Calcium oxide. And far as I know  Harrit and Milette identified no calcium oxide in the XEDs.
Yes, there Iron oxide but the proportion is too low. Plus, it Alumina in the cement ( Aluminum oxide)
Not one of the proportions are high enough to account for the spikes in the XEDs by Harrit, Basille and Farrer.
Iron oxide Aluminum oxide does not flare up and release hot energy
Plus Harrit says the matrix around the Aluminum plates is Carbon. From what I recall there was no carbon content in the Milette paint chips. 
So know you approach or theory doesn't work. 
R.J. Lee study states with no uncertainty the Iron microspheres are the result of the high temp fires. Problem is the just there leave it there. They drop one line on another page alongside an image showing Iron Microspheres and then state this was caused by Iron and Steel melting!!!!
 Everyone realizes the official line by NIST and debunkers is that no steel and Iron melted in the towers and at building seven. The official line is the steel just softened. Debunkers just overlook this as if unimportant info. There undoubtedly enough evidence to show there was extreme temps occuring inside the towers and at WTC7 before collapse failure. Unexplained and ignored by debunkers and NIST.

R.J Study even claimed about 6 percentage ratio of WTC dust had Iron Microspheres-  normal dust, it's just 0.04%- that massive spike of Molten Iron microsphreres found in WTC dust.  
FEMA even specifies a previously unknown seen eutectic liquid of Iron and Sulfur joined up attacked the steel. Debunkers again claim no Iron or steel got hot enough to melt. FEMA also left it to intelligence of others to sort out how fire caused that- since Iron only melts at 1700c- Steel around 1500c ( but they found sulphar so they speculated). Least they were honest enough to highlight this phenomenon may have occurred inside the buildings before collapse.

The problem is. All the WTC building studies claim fires are just 600c to 800c for about 10 minutes to 15 minutes at most throughout the day.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Crazy man Oystein ruling it because it's more energetic than thermite that's bizarre. He comparing it to known tested thermite, and still has figured it out is previously unknown engineered chemical explosive substance!!!

This shows how intellectually dishonest you are. Was Harrit / Jones claiming some other reaction than Fe2O3 + 2 Al was taking place? You can make thermite burn faster by changing surface area of particles, but you cannot can’t change the kiloJoules per gram.

You need to present me a better quote about this. I can't be checking the internet for everything that Oystein wrote 
Energy depends on the chemical distribution.
There maybe Iron Oxide and Aluminum proportions that are unequal across the spread of the chip.
Gram is meanigless that just the weight.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

What do you not get that some of the chips released more energy than what is physically possible from Fe2O3 + 2 Al kiloJoules per gram? What reaction is Harrit / Jones claiming took place. The energies release by the chips are not consistent with Fe2O3 + 2 Al, and the energy peaks are inconsistent to the point they are statistically meaningless.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

What do you not get that some of the chips released more energy than what is physically possible from Fe2O3 + 2 Al kiloJoules per gram? What reaction is Harrit / Jones claiming took place. The energies release by the chips are not consistent with Fe2O3 + 2 Al, and the energy peaks are inconsistent to the point they are statistically meaningless.

Nanothermite.
Thats Oystein claim and his wrong.
Since the energtic release was greater than thermite it can't be nanothermite. He doesn't understand nanothermite will releae more energy its a nanotechoogy explosive. Why else would the military be studying its apllication for use? They hardly want it to be weaker than ordinary thermite?
Livermore National labs nano-thermite spiked at over 2 Kilojules and their sample was tiny.
Again surely there a better explanation provided by Oystein or just randomly posting info that you find online?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

What is the formula for nano thermite again?

If it’s regular Fe2O3 + 2 Al thermite or Fe2O3 + 2 Al nano thermite, or Fe2O3 + 2 Al super thermite, it all contains the same kiloJoules per gram. It doesn’t mater how much is burnt at one time. One gram, or 2000 pounds. Burning lots doesn’t change the energy per gram.

Again

This shows how intellectually dishonest you are. Was Harrit / Jones claiming some other reaction than Fe2O3 + 2 Al was taking place? You can make thermite burn faster by changing surface area of particles, but can’t change the kiloJoules per gram.

What do you not get that some of the chips released more energy than what is physically possible from Fe2O3 + 2 Al kiloJoules per gram? What reaction is Harrit / Jones claiming took place. The energies release by the chips are not consistent with Fe2O3 + 2 Al, and the energy peaks are inconsistent to the point they are statistically meaningless.

The premise that the red/grey chips are paint has been found out.
They're no paint that can sustain an MEK test for 55 hours.
Until you debunkers show the Mclede paint can remain stable and solid in this solution, the arguments are a disaster.
The debunkers have never shown Mclede paint will flare up at 430c and discharge a high energy spike.
You people keep on claiming its paint chip without really doing the experiements to produce it, thats not science. Milette never heated the paint chips he had, that 100 per cent a fact. 

It beyond ridiculous that debunker dispute this work when they presented the Iron molten spheres being produced after the DSC test/flame test. The only way it can be wrong, is by believing they went out of their way to fake the evidence and there associated themselves in cover-up. 
This is just debunkers just not facing up to truth they found nano-thermite in the dust that reveals why all the anomalies found on 9/11 are there. Findings published by FEMA,  R. J Lee and noted by steel Employees, firefighters, and many others. 

That the red/gray chips produced Iron microspheres after igniting at 430c is 100 percent evidence the chips experienced a thermatic reaction. There no way you heating up paint chips to 400c and get a release Iron Molten Microspheres, fact, end of story. Go ahead provide evidence of you conclude otherwise--  (extreme Heat) produces them without thermite- still you require the right heat to see it occur.

Debunkers have no argument at all- it really just comes down they don't trust the people who did the study ( like i said above. Instead of taking the position what if they are right! 

Gram is weight
Kilojoules is just heat/ energy. 
You don't realize there were 4 samples- two were from different people. That's why Oystein going on about 2 samples spiked different..  There was three people who provided control samples for testing. Which rules out fakery!! 
All 4 samples ignited at 430c+ temperature 
2 samples spiked higher, but that could be provoked by higher allocation of nanothermite unigniited on the chip or something else on the chip that  drove it to flare up stronger?
Gram is only mass it doesn't pinpoint what the chemical distribution of one chip is to another chip.
What Oystein trying to dispute? We recognize all four chips igited at identical low temps, discharged a high energy spike. 

The spikes were indistinguishable to nanothermite gels tested by Livermore national labs ( two of the chips) exhibited a similar pattern of igniting at 430c and high energy release was recorded. Two other samples only differ because the energy release was greater. Energy spike showing to be different is not a proper way to debunk the red/gray chips. The heat release can only be caused if there was simillar makeup of chemicals in the chip that all four samples had.
There nothing he wrote disproves the chip are not nano-thermite.. All the evidence collected along with this disproves the Oystein theory. 

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You did not answer anything.

True or false:
The reaction claimed by Harrit / Jones is Fe2O3 + 2 Al?

What is the maximum energy per gram for thermite?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Steel was melted to some degree or another for the better part of 90 days. In the first several weeks it was boiling sufficiently to have iron microparticles released into the air to be recovered by an air sampling machine nearby.

Yes, iron was boiling and there were hot spots visible from space. That's because nuclear events had transpired that day. They didn't call it ground zero for nothing.

a reply to: Salander

Do you know what temperature steel boils at, and there was no source to cause such heat. Your post is total BS.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You did not answer anything.

True or false:
The reaction claimed by Harrit / Jones is Fe2O3 + 2 Al?

What is the maximum energy per gram for thermite?

3.98 KJ is standard energy for one gram of standard thermite with Iron oxide and Aluminum. 
Two of the samples are in the  range or just above typical thermite. 
Oystein upset that one sample spiked to 7.5 Kilojoules.
Yes, he is correct that thermite has never been reported greater than 4 KJ for one gram of it.
Here the issue though standard thermite does not flare up at 430c.  Only Nano thermites go wild at those temps!!  
Standard thermite everyone can make this at home and it is not what they found!!!
Since elemental AI and SI embodied in the red layer at uniform Nano scale proportions  Predicting the results to be the same as standard thermite is just stupid.  Just no way chemicals are just getting together randomly to form this perfect balance.

I bet if you asked Harrit. he would accept he doesn't entirely understand the entire red/gray chips himself.  They're still lot of argument what purpose the grey layer has, and red/layers may consist of something that was not seen?
 The red/layer does contain carbon. Thermite does not. 

Harrit red/gray chips ignited at low temp, heat release took place,  a white hot flame + gas ( unknown what that is) and Iron Microspheres are then presented as a byproduct after the white-hot flame expires. If Paint chip can do that- i need and love to see the experiment!!!!

Kaolin mix ( the paint) would not have divided in the MEK solution. Harrit and his team still defend their claim- the AI and Silicon are not bonded. There a carbon matrix layer enveloping the AI in the red/layer.

If debunkers were truly honest and were analyzing the same substance, why have they not ignited the paint chips by DSC flame? Why I have to continue to mentioning this for debunkers? The fact they haven't confirms it all nonsense and they realize the material not the same. The DSC flame test we be ready to compare results and see if the red/grey chips are the same.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Steel was melted to some degree or another for the better part of 90 days. In the first several weeks it was boiling sufficiently to have iron microparticles released into the air to be recovered by an air sampling machine nearby.

Yes, iron was boiling and there were hot spots visible from space. That's because nuclear events had transpired that day. They didn't call it ground zero for nothing.

That be more in line with vaporization. 
I think the steel just melted- 
I don't believe the temps got that intense personally. I have not seen evidence of steel boiling.

A video for people to watch. Thermite and Ice( Water ignited) watch what happens!!!!!!