It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by Thermo Klein
I haven't seen any proof of molten steel being discovered days, weeks, after 9/11.
But, supposing there was, how would this support use of therm*te ? Is there a property of therm*te that can keep steel molten for long periods ?
It really amazed me to see him flip flop like that. Maybe that was the intent of the special? Just to get people thinking about it.
Originally posted by Thermo Klein
ok you all win... middle school mentality, pixies, this "gem of information", bringing in disreputable people only to discount them and claim my sources should be in the same boat! unbelievable... and sad.
Condescending and rude is just something I'm not used to when trying to ascertain whether something scientific happened.
On the other hand in some incredulous crazy ways you've managed to shred the main things I ~thought~ were accepted facts about thermite/thermate. I'll do a little more research and choose how I feel about this in a normal, scientific, and adult manner.
Time to leave the playground and head for the library...
Originally posted by Thermo Klein
Pretty sure that "Pixie theory" explains it all...
This thread has become a total mockery of anything resembling logic or science, so if I find some irrefutable scientific sources I'll U2U you.
Originally posted by iamcpc
Oh you must be talking about when someone made the statement:
"Half (or 1/3rd) the temperature to melt steel DOES NOT soften steel - it just simply doesn't work that way. "
And then didn't present any scientific sources or expert testimony to back it up?
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by Thermo Klein
High-tech explosive mixtures were found in the dust of the Twin Towers, from numerous locations around the area, and by various sources.
Citation, a peer-reviewed journal: The Open Chemical Physics Journal
The Open Chemical Physics Journal
Ooooh, naughty naughty! You not only trying to sneak in that rubbish paper Steven Jones wrote again, you're trying to claim it was peer reviewed when it never was. Jones never gave his material to anyone else to look at, he never gave proper chain of custody to even show it actually came from the WTC area, and he PAID to get this paper published. Heck, Jones doesn't even have any explosives experience so why anyone would believe that such a person could recognize Thermite from chewing gum is an exercise in gullibility in the extreme.
Jeez, Dr. Judy Wood isn't exactly a fountain of credibility with her "lasers from outer space" caims and even she says the whole thermite bit is rubbish. Move along, there's nothing to see here.
Originally posted by Thermo Klein
Originally posted by iamcpc
Oh you must be talking about when someone made the statement:
"Half (or 1/3rd) the temperature to melt steel DOES NOT soften steel - it just simply doesn't work that way. "
And then didn't present any scientific sources or expert testimony to back it up?
You're right again - I made the misguided assumption that people on ATS presenting knowledge about Chemistry would have had at least a high school education in the field - not to mention stoichiometry or enthalpy.
my bad, yo.
Originally posted by dragnet53
But yet Popular mechanics is known for Yellow Journalism. Hell, I believe they invented it!
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
By definition, wallowing in 9/11 conspiracies IS scandal-mongoring and sensationalism, and is most certainly unethical.
Previous studies discussing observations
of the WTC dust include reports by the RJ Lee Company
[14], the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) [15], McGee
et al. [13] and Lioy et al. [16] Some of these studies confirmed
the finding of iron-rich microspheres, which are also
peculiar [5, 8, 11, 13-15] but the red/gray chips analyzed in
this study have apparently not been discussed in previously
published reports. It is worth emphasizing that one sample
was collected about ten minutes after the collapse of the second
Tower, so it cannot possibly have been contaminated by
clean-up operations [17].
Originally posted by Thermo Klein
To me, ego has nothing to do with being right, it has to do with finding truth. If together we get closer to what actually happened then we should all, as a team, by happy!
So... I have to agree that this (below) seems fishy.
Previous studies discussing observations
of the WTC dust include reports by the RJ Lee Company
[14], the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) [15], McGee
et al. [13] and Lioy et al. [16] Some of these studies confirmed
the finding of iron-rich microspheres, which are also
peculiar [5, 8, 11, 13-15] but the red/gray chips analyzed in
this study have apparently not been discussed in previously
published reports. It is worth emphasizing that one sample
was collected about ten minutes after the collapse of the second
Tower, so it cannot possibly have been contaminated by
clean-up operations [17].
Emphasis added by me.
It's from the beginning of the Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe Journal article.
I'm actually pretty curious about this whole idea of thermite now! For several years I assumed thermite being there was just another fact being covered up, but I gotta say my interest is piqued!
The abundant iron-rich spheres are of particular interest in this study; none were observed in these particular chips prior to DSC-heating [Differential Scanning Calorimeter]. Spheres rich in iron already demonstrate the occurrence of very high temperatures, well above the 700 °C temperature reached in the DSC, in view of the high melting point of iron and iron oxide [5]. Such high temperatures indicate that a chemical reaction occurred.
We agree with the RJ Lee report that the abundance of “spherical particles of iron and silicates” is proof of high temperatures, and that these particles are not common in normal office dust, but we do not agree that this abundance is necessarily due to the “fire that accompanied the WTC Event”. Before drawing such a conclusion, one must scrutinize the temperatures and other conditions needed to form these molten spheres (iron melts at 1,538 °C (2,800 °F) while iron (III) oxide melts at 1,565 °C (2,849 °F) [6] and aluminosilicates melt around 1,450 C [7]) and then compare with conditions reached in the WTC fires. We will turn to this task, after considering other data which also point to anomalously high temperatures during the WTC destruction.
Originally posted by Thermo Klein
Your link above isn't working...