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.

 

WTC Steel Analysis Reveals Thermite and Thermate By-Products

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
I like how the "disbelievers" have to resort to name calling, etc. Do you have ANY sources for your charachter assassination of this man?


The important thing here is that there are numerous sources for Fe-slag and the sulphur. It is impossible to say, unequivocally, that the source is a thermite or thermate reaction.

In fact, it is quite unreasonable to suggest that … given the more abundant and more likely sources.

Yet Jones does just that … and he doesn’t mention anything about Al2O3 … you added that … but to make a fine point there was copious Al (on the facing of the towers and less from the 767 airframes) which would oxidize quite readily in the presence of jet-fuel fires. Probably why Jones doesn’t suggest Al2O3 is evidence of anything … or if he did I missed it.




posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Well...

Apperently you didn't check the MSDS sheet on it...



STABILITY: Stable under normal storage conditions.

CONDITIONS TO AVOID: Storage in poorly ventilated areas. Storage near a heat source.

MATERIALS TO AVOID: Alkali or alkaline earth metals such as sodium and potassium.

HAZARDOUS POLYMERIZATION: Will not occur.

HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION: Chlorides and fluorides. Hydrochloric acid and hydrofluoric acid, possibly carbonyl halides.


Link

It does emit Hydrochloric acid and hydrofluoric acid when it decomposes or is heated...

So try again...



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 06:45 PM
link   


Cry straw man all you like, it's like a mathematician saying 2+2 = 22, it's really not complicated, common sense is practically all you need to work it out, no degrees required.


I don't believe Steven Jones ever said that, someone is misquoting him.



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 06:46 PM
link   
I believe if you look at my post you will notice I said the same thing as your source ... except the part where I clarified that HCl and HF do not contain sulphuric acid, which was the whole point ... freon-22 is not a source of sulphur.


Originally posted by Jedi_Master
Well...

Apperently you didn't check the MSDS sheet on it...



STABILITY: Stable under normal storage conditions.

CONDITIONS TO AVOID: Storage in poorly ventilated areas. Storage near a heat source.

MATERIALS TO AVOID: Alkali or alkaline earth metals such as sodium and potassium.

HAZARDOUS POLYMERIZATION: Will not occur.

HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION: Chlorides and fluorides. Hydrochloric acid and hydrofluoric acid, possibly carbonyl halides.


Link

It does emit Hydrochloric acid and hydrofluoric acid when it decomposes or is heated...

So try again...





posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by vor75
I believe if you look at my post you will notice I said the same thing as your source ... except the part where I clarified that HCl and HF do not contain sulphuric acid, which was the whole point ... freon-22 is not a source of sulphur.


Sure they both do...


Hydrochloric acid was first discovered around the year 800 by the alchemist Jabir ibn Hayyan (Geber), by mixing common salt with vitriol (sulfuric acid). Jabir discovered or invented many important chemicals,


en.wikipedia.org...

And...


Industrially, hydrofluoric acid is produced from the mineral fluorspar, also known as calcium fluoride (chemical formula CaF2) and concentrated sulfuric acid.


en.wikipedia.org...

Sorry try again...

They both contain sulfuric acid...



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jedi_Master

Originally posted by vor75
I believe if you look at my post you will notice I said the same thing as your source ... except the part where I clarified that HCl and HF do not contain sulphuric acid, which was the whole point ... freon-22 is not a source of sulphur.


Sure they both do...


Hydrochloric acid was first discovered around the year 800 by the alchemist Jabir ibn Hayyan (Geber), by mixing common salt with vitriol (sulfuric acid). Jabir discovered or invented many important chemicals,


en.wikipedia.org...

And...


Industrially, hydrofluoric acid is produced from the mineral fluorspar, also known as calcium fluoride (chemical formula CaF2) and concentrated sulfuric acid.


en.wikipedia.org...

Sorry try again...

They both contain sulfuric acid...



No, they can be - as your post says - produced by reacting Sulphuric acid (H2SO4) with other compounds ... that does not mean they contain sulphuric acid.

Hydrofluric acid - hydrogen and fluorine - HF (no sulphur)
Hydrochloric acid - hydrogen and chorine - HCL (no sulphur)

Freon-22 - also no sulphur

This is basic chemistry ... thanks. Moving on.



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
Mmmmm. That IS odd, considering that it was a couple of months before they could even bring in trucks to haul it away, due to instability in the underground structure. No trucks, no cranes, no nothing. They even had to get special dredges to clean out debris from the river (the debris was much to large, heavy and bulky for NYC's usual dredge contractor to even consider removing it) before they could get a barge in, which is how most of the debris was removed. But to you, I suppose, this is immediately

I traveled every day between Brooklyn and Queens on the Brooklyn Queens Expressway and it was not 2 months before I started seeing load upon load of steel being taken in big huge trailers to Staten Island. It was a matter of 2 weeks maybe 3 tops. It was under guard in Staten Island. For the most part the trucks were not escorted but all along the route were soldiers and state troopers from the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel to the Verrazano Bridge and to Freshkills and the Bridges going out to jersey.


Pie



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 07:20 PM
link   
have any of you guys ever tried to light a pile of thermite? i have, and it's damn hard to do. without a strip of magnesium and an acetylene torch, you're going to have a heck of a time getting it to spark up. even if a number of sophisticated incendiary charges were placed throughout the building, i don't see them all working perfectly.

i can't imagine the quantities that would be necessary to bring down the WTC, either... and where would they have been placed? directly on load-bearing beams? who did that?

even if there is anything to this, it raises as many questions as it answers.

personally, i'm withholding judgement until someone else runs the same tests and gets the same results.

[edit on 8-6-2006 by The Parallelogram]



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by vor75

No, they can be - as your post says - produced by reacting Sulphuric acid (H2SO4) with other compounds ... that does not mean they contain sulphuric acid.




You know my chemistry 101 leaves much to be desired, but the reactant can still be found in tests to determined what the chemical is...

Especially if you break it down by heating or it is decomposed ( no matter what the reactant is )...

The WTC Towers already broke it down by the heat from the fires...



posted on Jun, 8 2006 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Parallelogram


i can't imagine the quantities that would be necessary to bring down the WTC, either... and where would they have been placed? directly on load-bearing beams? who did that?


Good point. Especially if you subscribe to the belief that thermite kept burning for weeks afterwards. Imagine how much you would need, not only to cut columns, but also to burn for weeks afterwards. Why would you use so much of the stuff? To me it makes no sense.



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 12:11 AM
link   
My apologies if this link as already been posted.


www.youtube.com...

Peace,

~Jammer+



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Good point. Especially if you subscribe to the belief that thermite kept burning for weeks afterwards. Imagine how much you would need, not only to cut columns, but also to burn for weeks afterwards. Why would you use so much of the stuff? To me it makes no sense.


Seems like thermite would be almost the perfect zero point energy source wouldn't it ?



Ya know so little fuel for so long a burn, seems like we could use thermite to power a steam turbine and provide almost endless electricity...







posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jedi_Master
Seems like thermite would be almost the perfect zero point energy source wouldn't it ?

Actually I hear NIST and FEMA are investigating the promising possibilities in this area for gravity, jet fuel, and office furniture.



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 01:54 AM
link   


And I also hear their looking into boiled egg farts, and beer along with hot peppers as an alternative fuel source...




posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 04:06 AM
link   
so what are some explanations of the flowing from the side of the building??

www.checktheevidence.com...

[edit on 9-6-2006 by devolution]



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
you can't reduce the melting point of any alloy without changing the mixture during the manufacturing process.


You are ignoring the fact that a chemical reaction was occuring.

You guys have some hilarious sources for the S. Most of the places you say it came from would have produced zero free elemental S, trace amounts or only highly localized S.

I do not think anyone is saying the thermite reaction went on for "weeks" as someone stated above, just that the moltem metal stayed hot.

FYI - How much thermate does it take to melt a solid big block engine? About 1 CUP.

Jones must REALLY piss off the gov't considering the responses this thread is getting.


[edit on 9-6-2006 by Slap Nuts]



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jedi_Master


And I also hear their looking into boiled egg farts, and beer along with hot peppers as an alternative fuel source...



Seems like your alterneative sources for sulphur are about as likely.

The smileys really add to your point.



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slap NutsYou guys have some hilarious sources for the S. Most of the places you say it came from would have produced zero free elemental S, trace amounts or only highly localized S.[edit on 9-6-2006 by Slap Nuts]


Jones doesn't go into any detail to specify if he's found native sulpur or sulphur salts ... if he simply analyzed the sample and got a wt% result for sulphur, it doesn't tell you if it's native or ionic.

.. however, native sulphur is a reactant in the thermate-reaction he goes on about >> sulphur-salts (ionic-sulphur) is the product. So ionic sulphur would be the indictor ... problem is, as we have been pointing out, there are many other sources for S-salt, such as gypsum.



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jedi_Master
Howdy folks...

Just a FYI...

Freon-22 ( used in the heating and cooling of the WTC Towers ) when it decomposes or is heated, it emits hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acids ( both contain sulfuric acid ), and both are highly corrosive...


Can you show me where sulfur is in HCL or HF? I don't see an S anywhere.

Hydrochloric acid: source en.wikipedia.org...


The chemical compound hydrochloric acid is the aqueous (water-based) solution of hydrogen chloride (HCl) gas.


Hydrofluoric acid: source en.wikipedia.org...


Hydrofluoric acid is a highly corrosive solution of hydrogen fluoride in water. Gaseous hydrogen fluoride is sometimes called anhydrous hydrofluoric acid. Hydrofluoric acid is a very strong acid. This is because it has lots of free electrons and thus will bond to other atoms very easily (with exception to the group 8/0 elements) and disrupt structure. Hydrofluoric acid is notoriously known to dissolve glass (SiO2):

SiO2(s) + 6 HF(aq) → H2[SiF6](aq) + 2 H2O(l)


Now, it says that the production of hydrofluoric acid uses sulfuric acid to make it, but the acid itself does not contain sulfur...the by-product does. Anyway, using heated freon does not make hydrofluoric acid by the use of sulfuric acid, so no sulfur would be present at all.

Freon: source en.wikipedia.org...


A haloalkane, also known as alkyl halogenide, halogenalkane or halogenoalkane, and alkyl halide is a chemical compound derived from an alkane by substituting one or more hydrogen atoms with halogen atoms. Substitution with fluorine, chlorine, bromine and iodine results in fluoroalkanes, chloroalkanes, bromoalkanes and iodoalkanes, respectively. Mixed compounds are also possible, examples are the chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) which are mainly responsible for ozone depletion. Haloalkanes are used in semiconductor device fabrication, as refrigerants, foam blowing agents, solvents, aerosol spray propellants, fire extinguishing agents, and chemical reagents.

Freon is a trade name for a group of chlorofluorocarbons used primarily as a refrigerant. The word Freon is a registered trademark belonging to DuPont.


I saw no indication of sulfur anywhere in the freon section also.

Conclusion: No, heating freon will not create sulfur. If I'm wrong, please post the chemical formula for these reactions.



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by devolution
so what are some explanations of the flowing from the side of the building??

www.checktheevidence.com...

[edit on 9-6-2006 by devolution]


Burning jet fuel
Burning plastic

There are hundreds of things that it could be. Me I rule out thermite because of the color. In the thermite videos everything is a shade of yellow, in this video it is orange. There are ways of estimating temperature based upon the color of the light being emitted. If this was thermite I would expect it to be yellow because of the high temperatures involved with a thermite reaction.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join