Trying to resolve 9/11

a reply to: Pilgrum

The USA is still a bit crazy. You can buy smokeless gunpowder online. The regulations concerning black powder is more stringent because it’s more temperamental than smokeless gunpowder. Fire works are a huge business here in the USA.

The below fire works are very common

Artillery Attack
SKU: MEBC6178A Category: Artillery Shells
Description
Stock Locations
Description
Effects:
1 Tubes
12 Shells
# of Breaks: 12
Size: 17″ H X 7″ W X 5″ D
Wholesale Information
Packing: 12/12
Case Weight: 45 lbs
UPC: 715244-061785
SKU: MEBC6178A
CBM: .142
EX#: 2014070974
Category: Artillery Shells

www.wincofireworks.com...

You can get SPECTRACIDE STUMP REMOVER GRANULES which contains POTASSIUM NITRATE from most lawn care centers. When it says contains potassium nitrate, I think it’s mostly potassium nitrate.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

The fact they found evidence of Iron Microspheres in the dust ( R.J Lee)  

They also found a large amount Mineral Wool in the dust. That came from the fireproofing, so did the iron spheres. The iron spheres were made back in the seventies and were trapped inside the fireproofing just like the mineral wool. The iron spheres and the mineral wool were released when the building collapsed.

That is a rational explanation. Your nanopaintchip theory is not.

Again you omitting all the scientific evidence demonstrated in the Harrit Study.
There red/gray chips ignited at 430c temperature and ran wild and produced Iron molten Microspheres. 
They're not a known paint or thermite heated to 430c- can form Molten Iron Spheres at 30 percent of expected temp to melt Iron.
The debunkers have shown not one real experiment when you heat up paint chips, their Iron spheres forming on the burned chip later.
The debunkers have never contradicted this study in any significant way, end of story.
Heating up Iron and Steel wool to melting point temps is not going to be taken seriously. by the other side.
Even Dr Milette declined to burn test his chips in the DSC. His analysis is damaged and did not carry out similar tests.
He was told in the beginning there were paint chips in the dust. The truthers informed Chris Mohr. It not like he stumbled onto something that wasn't already known. 
Dr. Milette found paint chips. 
Harrit found nano-thermite. 
I would not rule it out there was Iron fillings blended in with the concrete and fireproofing but none of that solves why they're these red chips flaring up at 430c and producing Iron Molten Spheres. 
Until the debunkers present a valid explanation why that happened, I can't accept your debunking is anyway serious. 

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

Inert atmpsphere is not needed. Thermite possesses its own oxygen supply. What do you think will adjust by burning in open air?> 

If it doesn't burn in an inert atmosphere then it's not thermite by your own reasoning.
External oxygen also gives a false calorimeter reading.

It's almost as if the analysis is deliberately misleading to fit a pre-conceived agenda?

Inert atmosphere is meaningless unless you identify what you seek to test. I believe Harrit tested the red/gray chips in inert atmosphere with air and chips ignited. There a claim online by debunker Oystein that nano-thermite was analyzed in inert/gas atmosphere. But I have been unable to find much more on that alleged test... Oystein requested to see them do a similar test. 

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Again you omitting all the scientific evidence demonstrated in the Harrit Study.
There red/gray chips ignited at 430c temperature and ran wild and produced Iron molten Microspheres.

All processes that are not exclusive or conclusive to something being thermite.

Is it false regulate thermite Fe2O3 + 2 Al ignites around 4000F with a magnesium igniter? Can you cite a source at what temperature nano thermite of Fe2O3 + 2 Al ignites?

They're not a known paint

Based on what.

You

can form Molten Iron Spheres at 30 percent of expected temp to melt Iron.

I would think anything burning in an oxygen atmosphere containing small iron oxide particles which are found in paint would make iron spheres. The whole surface area to material ratio thing.

You

The debunkers have shown not one real experiment when you heat up paint chips, their Iron spheres forming on the burned chip later.

What’s a real “experiment”?

By Mick West

www.metabunk.org/making-iron-microspheres-grinding-impacts-welding-burning.t9533/

Burning Methods (external ignition)

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.

www.metabunk.org...

You

Harrit found nano-thermite.

Base on what property or results that could only be caused by a thermite reaction?

Again

What do you not get what was burnt by Harrit was not thermite.

The chips did not burn in an inert atmosphere. The chips had inconsistent kilojoules per gram. To quote pteridine, “ note that two of the chips, #3 and #4 have far more energy than if they were 100% thermite. “

Exactly what properties of thermite did Harrit’s/ Jones chips have?

I guess the better question would be, “ Exactly what properties exclusive to thermite did Harrit’s/ Jones chips exhibit? “

Lots of processes can make micro iron spheres. Making iron spheres is not exclusive to burning thermite.

Lots of reactions are exothermic. An exothermic reaction is not exclusive to thermite.

Only if Harrit / Jones showed the paint chips could burn in an inert atmosphere. Makes you wonder why the results of such a test that would prove beyond a doubt the paint chips could sustain a thermite reaction were never published. Strange.

a reply to: waypastvne

Thank you
Where were these trusses connected to, at their opposite ends?

a reply to: democracydemo

Detail of the trusses and mounting seats:

a reply to: Pilgrum

Detail B, interior column. That would be it.

How many of these interior columns where there per building?

a reply to: democracydemo

There appear to be 6 core columns on each face of the core structure with a 'C' channel approx 1' wide welded across to provide the seats for the trusses which were about 3' apart. IE seats welded to the channel which is welded to the core columns. There were about 20 more core columns in the interior of the core.

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: waypastvne

Thank you
Where were these trusses connected to, at their opposite ends?

The core truss seats are pointed out in this photo.




Right click and open in new tab to see full photo.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Again you omitting all the scientific evidence demonstrated in the Harrit Study.
There red/gray chips ignited at 430c temperature and ran wild and produced Iron molten Microspheres.

All processes that are not exclusive or conclusive to something being thermite.

Is it false regulate thermite Fe2O3 + 2 Al ignites around 4000F with a magnesium igniter? Can you cite a source at what temperature nano thermite of Fe2O3 + 2 Al ignites?

They're not a known paint

Based on what.

You

can form Molten Iron Spheres at 30 percent of expected temp to melt Iron.

I would think anything burning in an oxygen atmosphere containing small iron oxide particles which are found in paint would make iron spheres. The whole surface area to material ratio thing.

You

The debunkers have shown not one real experiment when you heat up paint chips, their Iron spheres forming on the burned chip later.

What’s a real “experiment”?

By Mick West

www.metabunk.org/making-iron-microspheres-grinding-impacts-welding-burning.t9533/

Burning Methods (external ignition)

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.

www.metabunk.org...

You

Harrit found nano-thermite.

Base on what property or results that could only be caused by a thermite reaction?

Again

What do you not get what was burnt by Harrit was not thermite.

The chips did not burn in an inert atmosphere. The chips had inconsistent kilojoules per gram. To quote pteridine, “ note that two of the chips, #3 and #4 have far more energy than if they were 100% thermite. “

Exactly what properties of thermite did Harrit’s/ Jones chips have?

I guess the better question would be, “ Exactly what properties exclusive to thermite did Harrit’s/ Jones chips exhibit? “

Lots of processes can make micro iron spheres. Making iron spheres is not exclusive to burning thermite.

Lots of reactions are exothermic. An exothermic reaction is not exclusive to thermite.

Only if Harrit / Jones showed the paint chips could burn in an inert atmosphere. Makes you wonder why the results of such a test that would prove beyond a doubt the paint chips could sustain a thermite reaction were never published. Strange.

Show me just one experiment when paint chips are burned to 430c, a chemical reaction takes place and Iron Microspheres form?
Just one good experiment that clean, clear and not ambiguous?
You claiming Harrit didn't reveal it was Nano-thermite is laughable
Sorry Mick West knocking chips off with a hammer from his wheelbarrow! ( a barrow made of steel and iron)  He thus continues to apply a butane torch and welding tools to produce Iron Microspheres. Are we now claiming people torched the steel inside the building to produce the Iron Molten spheres?
They're not an accepted mechanism to produce molten iron naturally by cold a process.  You can only create rich Molten Iron Spheres by excessive heat or a by chemical reaction.
Yes, the paint chip was analyzed in the inert air atmosphere.

Oystein read a claim a lab analyzed the nanothermite in both an inert air atmosphere and inert gas atmosphere. Harrit tested his chips in inert air atmosphere. Oystein just prefers to discount that there no known paint that burns at 430c and creates Iron Molten spheres. 

There maybe organic materials in the red/gray chips that may not be well understand. Harrit team is 100 per positive the red layer has elemental AI, Iron oxide, Oxygen, Carbon, and Silicon. The true test they know AI free a chemical reaction occurred at low temp during in the calorimeter tests and Iron spheres formed. Key thing is the red/chips ignited at temp only detected in nanothermite tests. 

Paint chips he analyzed were burned, they discharged no flash of white-hot flame. 
Debunkers have never demonstrated how it can be paint since remember Laclede paint mix Oystein released online  ( if the composition is correct) is a blend of Aluminum oxide and Iron Oxide pigment. There is not a chance a chemical reaction can occur there to produce Iron Sphere that are molten. 
Again the red/chip does explain why the steel was severed, split open, and bend and there cut gaps. It demonstrates why there is millions of molten Iron spheres in the dust all across Manhattan.  It explains the heat anomalies in the debris. Fire does not begin to explain this and if did this phenomenon would have been reported in the past long before 9/11.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Show me just one experiment when paint chips are burned to 430c,

I think it’s called an office fire, and office fires are much hotter?

Please cite a source where super Fe2O3 + 2 Al thermite ignites at a lower temperature than normal thermite. Cite a source how super Fe2O3 + 2 Al thermite is even ignited?

Again. You might want to read and actually try to understand the below by pteridine

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

By pteridine

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

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

It demonstrates why there is millions of molten Iron spheres in the dust all across Manhattan.

One. Quote were it was documented actual spheres in a molten state where found in Manhattan.

Two. It’s been explained over and over that many processes make iron microspheres. It not exclusive to thermite

originally posted by: waypastvne

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

By waypastvne

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: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Show me just one experiment when paint chips are burned to 430c,

I think it’s called an office fire, and office fires are much hotter?

Please cite a source where super Fe2O3 + 2 Al thermite ignites at a lower temperature than normal thermite. Cite a source how super Fe2O3 + 2 Al thermite is even ignited?

Again. You might want to read and actually try to understand the below by pteridine

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

By pteridine

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

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

It demonstrates why there is millions of molten Iron spheres in the dust all across Manhattan.

One. Quote were it was documented actual spheres in a molten state where found in Manhattan.

Two. It’s been explained over and over that many processes make iron microspheres. It not exclusive to thermite

originally posted by: waypastvne

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

By waypastvne

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.

Nonsense.
Pasting rubbish doesn't alter the data or facts.
Red/Gray chips ignited at 430c and created Iron Molten Spheres.
There nanothermite chips. 
Melting of Iron requires 1500c temp and highter temp.
There no paper office fire that can get that hot, end of the story. You can continue thinking there was fantasy fire events taking place if you choose. 
Comparing values of thermite energy amount to nanothermite is another delusion. Energy outputs are established by what a material contains. There clearly materials in the red and gray layers that can boost energy. Carbon clearly adopted for something in red/gray chip. 
I appreciate you can't follow along but the R. J. Lee group claimed 6 per cent of the Manhattan dust had them. Tables I got  and showed you. Theres literally thousands of tons of dust particles engulfing Manhattan on 9/11 spreading out for miles. 

Why do we need another scenario when the nanothermite chips explains all the anomolies? You staring at very low probability events to explain away the melting of the steel and Iron and lead and other metals. You ignore the high heat in the rubble, the millions of Iron spheres in the dust. The anomoly how does concrete be pulvised in mid air before touching the ground? Steel hurled out sideways from the core? We have images of molten concrete melted with Steel into one big rock!. There never been a local fire that induced all that ever full stop.  The liquid of Iron and Sulphar that FEMA claimed formed ( so Iron did melt into a liquid state at WTC7) that clearly problematic for the official story since NIST claimed fires are only 600c inside the building at the most dangerous periods for only 15 minutes. Fire can be 600c all day and still the steel would not melt to Molten Iron state.  

a reply to: Hulseyreport

What are you rambling about. It’s known that burning small particles of iron oxide, like you find in industrial coatings, in temperatures well below the melting point of iron will result in iron microspheres. The whole surface area thing.

New Mexicans for Science and Reason present

9-11 'Truth' Resources

By Dave Thomas

www.nmsr.org...

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"

Again. Many processes involving iron makes iron microspheres.

When an oxygen supply like a normal earth atmosphere, many things Ignite at 400 Celsius. Many thins burn around 1500 Celsius.

Every day aluminum/iron oxide thermite takes a magnesium igniter burning at 4000 F to set off the thermite, and the thermite burns around 2000 C.

You have not cited any sources on the actual temperature that “super” thermite ignites at, and under what conditions.

Two of the Harrit Jones chips has less energy per gram that what thermite has. Two chips had more energy per gram that what is possible for an aluminum/iron oxide reaction.

For Harrit’s / Jones’s chips, what properties where exhibited that are exclusive to a thermite reaction to prove beyond a doubt they had thermite. The answer is none.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

You ignore the high heat in the rubble, the millions of Iron spheres in the dust.

No, you ignore the many processes that can create iron microspheres.

originally posted by: waypastvne

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

By waypastvne

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.

New Mexicans for Science and Reason present

9-11 'Truth' Resources

By Dave Thomas

www.nmsr.org...

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"

www.metabunk.org/making-iron-microspheres-grinding-impacts-welding-burning.t9533/

www.metabunk.org...

By Mick West
Iron rich microspheres can be made in various ways. In this thread I investigate some of them, and try to make some microspheres of my own.

Burning Methods (external ignition)

Burning Paint Chips #1. www.metabunk.org...
Steel Wool #1: www.metabunk.org...
Iron Filings #1: www.metabunk.org...
Toner: www.metabunk.org...
Steel Wool #2: www.metabunk.org...
Burning Paint Chips #2: www.metabunk.org...
Iron Powder 320 Mesh: www.metabunk.org...
Iron Filings 50 Mesh: www.metabunk.org...
*Pyrophoric iron: www.metabunk.org...

Sparking methods (Spark from solid objects

Steel on steel impact. www.metabunk.org...
Angle Grinder: www.metabunk.org...
Bic Lighter: www.metabunk.org...
Flint Striker: www.metabunk.org...
Rust on aluminum impact: www.metabunk.org...
1600's Flint: www.metabunk.org...

Melting Methods (External Energy/Heat Melts)

Arc Welding #1 (Magnet capture): www.metabunk.org...
Arc Welding #2 (Water capture): www.metabunk.org...
Thermite (Al + Fe2O3): www.metabunk.org...
*Oxy cutting
*Thermal lance cutting


* = Methods I've not personally tried

a reply to: Pilgrum

What was the design within the whole core column structrure? They had to be connected, core column to core column right?

a reply to: waypastvne

Where did you get this photo? It's fascinating. Which floor is it from?

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: Pilgrum

What was the design within the whole core column structrure? They had to be connected, core column to core column right?

The horizontal connections throughout the towers was the floors so there was a relatively lightweight support structure within the core area with 5" lightweight concrete laid over it so very much like the floors between core and outer wall but with much shorter spans. None of the floors provided vertical support for anything other than themselves. What they provided was horizontal stabilising and damping between the inner (core) and outer (external wall) tubes.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

You ignore the high heat in the rubble, the millions of Iron spheres in the dust.

No, you ignore the many processes that can create iron microspheres.

originally posted by: waypastvne

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

By waypastvne

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.

New Mexicans for Science and Reason present

9-11 'Truth' Resources

By Dave Thomas

www.nmsr.org...

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"

www.metabunk.org/making-iron-microspheres-grinding-impacts-welding-burning.t9533/

www.metabunk.org...

By Mick West
Iron rich microspheres can be made in various ways. In this thread I investigate some of them, and try to make some microspheres of my own.

Burning Methods (external ignition)

Burning Paint Chips #1. www.metabunk.org...
Steel Wool #1: www.metabunk.org...
Iron Filings #1: www.metabunk.org...
Toner: www.metabunk.org...
Steel Wool #2: www.metabunk.org...
Burning Paint Chips #2: www.metabunk.org...
Iron Powder 320 Mesh: www.metabunk.org...
Iron Filings 50 Mesh: www.metabunk.org...
*Pyrophoric iron: www.metabunk.org...

Sparking methods (Spark from solid objects

Steel on steel impact. www.metabunk.org...
Angle Grinder: www.metabunk.org...
Bic Lighter: www.metabunk.org...
Flint Striker: www.metabunk.org...
Rust on aluminum impact: www.metabunk.org...
1600's Flint: www.metabunk.org...

Melting Methods (External Energy/Heat Melts)

Arc Welding #1 (Magnet capture): www.metabunk.org...
Arc Welding #2 (Water capture): www.metabunk.org...
Thermite (Al + Fe2O3): www.metabunk.org...
*Oxy cutting
*Thermal lance cutting


* = Methods I've not personally tried

You can maintain if you wish the Concrete held millions of Iron Molten spheres.
For me just wishful as nobody produced evidence of this ever!
This is Waypastne wacky theory. The mainstream researchers have never upheld.
If it was correct, this would be shut case years ago.
Harrit red/gray chips explain satisfactorily why there were millions of Molten Iron spheres in the dust. 
Of course their other processes but which one makes more sense!

Read the feedback from Rich Lee. Not the early part that is drafted by a debunker.

1:He says they found melted Iron
2: He even mentions some of Iron vaporized. That's even worse for the official account.
3: Rich says Iron spheres are obtainable by the ignition of petroleum and coal-based fuels.
Sure, that's not impossible if the heat is plentiful, which I never quarreled with.

Rich Lee- Never made a reply to how the millions of Iron spheres developed in the physical fires on 9/11. He just announced their different processes. 
Remember all still require heat. 

But since we recognize at WTC7 some of the steel melted and there was no petroleum there to explain why the fires are so hot.. We must consider other possibilities as truer than others.

Many mainstream 9/11 researchers overlook the WTC7 site, the heat there was inadequate to melt steel, Iron and different metals. Red/ gray chips and  NIST study of the collapse are problems for the official account.
NIST study is peppered with omissions, inconsistencies, and outright lies. There plenty of evidence WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition. NIST gave the truthers all the evidence they desired in Aug 2008 when they denied freefall. 

Stop posting Mick flawed experiments. It only making a fool of yourself pasting it with every post.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

You can maintain if you wish the Concrete held millions of Iron Molten spheres.

False argument you. Please quote from the postings in this thread all the sources and processes that create micro iron spheres.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Harrit red/gray chips explain satisfactorily why there were millions of Molten Iron spheres in the dust.

Industrial coatings containing small particles like iron oxide used as a pigment create micro iron spheres when exposed to fire?