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.

 

Trying to resolve 9/11

page: 94
17
<< 91  92  93    95  96  97 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You


Harrit established there was elementary aluminum present in the red/layer. You declare there isn't it. But I Can see from the XED test slides there is!



How? When Harrit had to assume Al2 based on aluminum to oxygen ratio, had to assume the aluminum was not bound to anything else, and ignored the aluminum may have been original produced with a layer of oxidation.

Harrit never published results that positively showed the aluminum was free to create a thermite reaction.

Now your turn...

You trying to change the subject while we are still working on your list?

Then by all means quote where you answer this:
What you need to cite. Cite a source that shows aluminum iron oxide thermite can ignite at 430 C, and under what circumstances / conditions.

Then by all means quote where you addressed this:
The chips Harrit burnt where never positively found to have free Al2 by an actual analysis. If so. Please cite the analysis that positively confirmed free Al2?

Then by all means quote where you addressed this:
Two of the chips burnt had less energy per gram than thermite which is strange for a reaction that is self sustaining. And we are only getting started on your list.

So? That brings us up to the two chips Harrit burnt that had more energy per gram than what is possible for a thermite reaction. So the XEDs peaks for aluminum iron oxide thermite would be only aluminum, iron, and oxygen? So none of the XEDs conclusively shows aluminum iron oxide thermite because of the numerous other elements. So by XED and by energy per gram what was burning was not aluminum iron oxide thermite. Gee. Only if Harrit conducted some analysis like tying to ignite his paint chips in an inert atmosphere.

You use XED by comparing the peaks from known samples. The Harrit peaks are close or dead on for industrial coatings, not aluminum iron oxide thermite. Is that false?
edit on 12-12-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed




posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Hulseyreport

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.
edit on 12-12-2019 by neutronflux because: Had miss quote

edit on 12-12-2019 by neutronflux because: Added right quote

edit on 12-12-2019 by neutronflux because: Fixed quote



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Why would I continue a debate with someone like who's naive about the facts?
You don't read my replies properly, and you often reiterate the same points I explained? 
By the way, Dr Milette confirmed by his own burning test that he set fire to paint flakes!
I pointed this out to you days ago he burned the paint chip samples at below 400c and they turned to ash! 
If you don't believe me- read the findings.

The red/gray chips did not turn to ash at  below 400c, it flared up. We have video evidence that proves a reaction had taken place a white flame got released in the Calorimeter.
There no known industrial coating paint that can inflame at 430c and release Iron Microspheres,. end of the story.  Use your brain man- you're advocating a claim there is a 1960 or 1970s paint that was thermatic and when got exposed to a fires,  started melting the steel  and created Iron Molten spheres ( if you want to believe it go ahead) #

That paint theory was debunked years ago. It waste of time for me.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You will not answer my questions?

You


Harrit established there was elementary aluminum present in the red/layer. You declare there isn't it. But I Can see from the XED test slides there is!


How? When Harrit had to assume Al2 based on aluminum to oxygen ratio, had to assume the aluminum was not bound to anything else, and ignored the aluminum may have been original produced with a layer of oxidation.

Harrit never published results that positively showed the aluminum was free to create a thermite reaction.

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



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You


There no known industrial coating paint that can inflame at 430c and release Iron Microspheres,


Really? Then cite a source?

Or is this like?

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.

Or like?
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?


Or like you posted the below picture as proof of thermite when it was obviously cut and sooted up by a cutting torch?

You


originally posted by: Hulseyreport
For me this evidence of cut steel by nanothermite.
Same steel piece- and exposed to high heat.



Why would I trust anything you post at this point?
edit on 12-12-2019 by neutronflux because: Fixed quote

edit on 12-12-2019 by neutronflux because: Fixed more



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You


Use your brain man- you're advocating a claim there is a 1960 or 1970s paint that was thermatic and when got exposed to a fires, started melting the steel and created Iron Molten spheres ( if you want to believe it go ahead) #


Where did I f’n ever say the paint had thermite properties.

Again





New Mexicans for Science and Reason present

9-11 'Truth' Resources

By Dave Thomas

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.







New Mexicans for Science and Reason present

9-11 'Truth' Resources

By Dave Thomas

www.nmsr.org...

www.nmsr.org...

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"





Thermite burns over 2100 C? Is that false?

You yourself stated there is no proof of fires with temperatures at which thermite burns.

You


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.


And didn’t you say, or imply, iron spheres cannot form until 1700C? Your the one that stated “ And there no substantial documentation fires were hot as 1500c at ground zero.“. So, no thermite fueled fires.
edit on 12-12-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Milette paints chips when heated below 400c turned to just ash. 
Milette saw no white hot flame.
He saw no Iron Microspheres after burning!. 
That 100 per cent verification he was looking at various paint chips. There absolutely no need to take the analysis any further is there?

You wrong he did!
The red/gray chips were immersed in a paint solution before burning! He later undertook an XRAY spectrum analysis of the rich Silicon and Alumium particles after soaking.
. And he observed the Alumium rich layer had insufficient silicon and Silicon rich layer was studied and they discovered there was no Aluminum present. The peaks were irreconcilable with a bound material Kaolin Clay. 

The MEK solution had thus demonstrated that the aluminium and Silicon was severed and not bound.  It's experiment clearly demonstrates Milette chips are very different.  Look at the slides I showed you! The silicon is near diminished in the AI XED side and Oxygen quantity is also problematic. 

Everything here reveals the red/gray is not paint, even though there are similar chemicals that you find in paint in the matrix.  The diameters of the particles further yields a result it not an industrial paint.  Iron Oxide + AI pigment at the nanoscale would never be used to coat steel surfaces. 


edit on 12-12-2019 by Hulseyreport because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Hulseyreport

With all your document falsehoods, why would I find you credible at this point.

You will not even answer a simple true or false.

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



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Rest assured sir, few here find you credible at this point.


(post by spiritualarchitect removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

Rest assured sir, few here find you credible at this point.


From one who only has pseudoscience as proof of nukes at the WTC? Please expand on your lack of understanding concerning firefighters, fighters and cancer, and you exploiting the illnesses of first responders as false evidence of radioactive fallout.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: spiritualarchitect

Then you answer.

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

It’s a simple true or false.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

With all your document falsehoods, why would I find you credible at this point.

You will not even answer a simple true or false.

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



Here is Milette paper found in the last couple of days.
www.911facts.dk...

His report is a bit of mess and painful to read some of his slides and they're not all indicated well. I can not single out any XED slide for the chips ( after the MEK soaking) I see slides for a washed chip with clean water.
 Well, plenty of XEDs slides for fresh untreated chips that have not been truly checked out yet. But that will merely just give you chemical signature peaks for the untreated chips! 
You can't declare  Aluminum is bonded with the Silicon by only doing an Xray spectrum test of the untreated paint chip! We need that MEK/ XED slide!

What are they comparing the peak with-  the debunkers you know?



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Again. You post blatant falsehoods. It’s been repeatedly cited and proven.

You have questions you need to answer.

You


Harrit established there was elementary aluminum present in the red/layer. You declare there isn't it. But I Can see from the XED test slides there is!


How? When Harrit had to assume Al2 based on aluminum to oxygen ratio, had to assume the aluminum was not bound to anything else, and ignored the aluminum may have been original produced with a layer of oxidation.

Harrit never published results that positively showed the aluminum was free to create a thermite reaction.

Now your turn...

You trying to change the subject while we are still working on your list?

Then by all means quote where you answer this:
What you need to cite. Cite a source that shows aluminum iron oxide thermite can ignite at 430 C, and under what circumstances / conditions.

Then by all means quote where you addressed this:
The chips Harrit burnt where never positively found to have free Al2 by an actual analysis. If so. Please cite the analysis that positively confirmed free Al2?

Then by all means quote where you addressed this:
Two of the chips burnt had less energy per gram than thermite which is strange for a reaction that is self sustaining. And we are only getting started on your list.

So? That brings us up to the two chips Harrit burnt that had more energy per gram than what is possible for a thermite reaction. So the XEDs peaks for aluminum iron oxide thermite would be only aluminum, iron, and oxygen? So none of the XEDs conclusively shows aluminum iron oxide thermite because of the numerous other elements. So by XED and by energy per gram what was burning was not aluminum iron oxide thermite. Gee. Only if Harrit conducted some analysis like tying to ignite his paint chips in an inert atmosphere.

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



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Post bunk all day. You have not yet discussed the known fact Milette paint chips turned to ash when burned at 400c
Are we not comparing the red/gray chips to Laclede paint?
When you going to stick to facts instead of posting endless debunked crap?
You, the only person who looks silly here not me.
edit on 12-12-2019 by Hulseyreport because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Here a paper from 2004 about nanothermites that conclusively shows they ignite at 400c. You argument busted.




www.depts.ttu.edu...



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
Post bunk all day. You have not yet discussed the known fact Milette paint chips turned to ash when burned at 400c
Are we not comparing the red/gray chips to Laclede paint?
When you going to stick to facts instead of posting endless debunked crap?
You, the only person who looks silly here not me.


Hey. You posted proven And cited falsehoods all through this thread. People that you call “debunkers” have answered and addressed your concerns with openness and honesty. The people you call “debunkers” have asked you credible questions that you ignore. You make accusations of people posting bunk with no actual quoted examples and facts to back your innuendo.

I am not going to enable your goal post moving, and subject changing.

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?

You will not even address a clear example of your willingness to post a falsehood, and will not answer to a clear question out of intellectual honesty.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Hulseyreport

All this from an individual that cannot answer a simple true or false.


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

It’s a simple true or false.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 03:55 PM
link   
You often show your ignorance. You still deny Harrit found free elemental AI even though his SEM- XED slides show the opposite. You just copying and pasting silly debunker talk points that's all. 





Highlight with images the two peaks compared to known paint peaks?



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Ok? For what nano particle size? Compared to the quoted particle size in the Harrit samples. There is a reason why I wanted you to quote a specific iron oxide and aluminum particle size from the Harrit report. And you never addressed what thermite gel was, and if Harrit had particles from thermite gel.

And how can you find anything by Harrit credible?



www.internationalskeptics.com...

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.



What lab verified Harrit’s results?
edit on 12-12-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 91  92  93    95  96  97 >>

log in

join