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.

 

James Fetzer: Sulfidation of WTC steel

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2006 @ 11:38 PM
link   
Sulfidation of the WTC steel is attracting a great deal of interest among 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists, who believe the observed sulfur contamination is evidence of thermate reactions. What procedure do the Scholars propose for identifying and then ruling out other known sources of sulfur contamination observed on the WTC steel?

For example, others have proposed that the gypsum wallboard (which is pure hydrous calcium disulfate and was used in WTC construction in the 10s of thousands of kilograms) as well as gasoline, diesel and other fuels (which have a measurable quantity of sulfur contamination normally present) present at the WTC site are potential sources. The author of the linked paper has proposed stoichiometry for several possible reactions that would liberate sufficient quantities of elemental sulfur from known sources to account for the observed contamination.

Have these known sources and reactions been considered and ruled out before concluding that thermate is responsible? If so, can you provide reasoning and/or stoichiometry to account for your conclusion?




posted on Jul, 13 2006 @ 06:50 PM
link   
This question had better be directed to Steve than to me. Even the NIST admitted it had found sulfur residue it could not explain. I find it unreasonable that NITS would have overlooked explanations such as you suggest were they available and appropriate. He (Steve) has now reported discovering therimite residue on other samples of steel. My opinion is that, together with the massive evidence that the buildings were destroyed from the top down (Professor Wood has compared them to enormous trees turning into sawdust from the top down!) The impact of the planes was negligible, the fires burned too low and too briefly to have caused the steel to weaken much less melt, there was not enough kinetic energy for a floor's collapse to bring about another floor's collapse or for that occurrence to bring about the pulverization of the concrete flooring, plus the speed of fall--10 seconds for the South Tower, 11 for the North--even exceeded the rate of free-fall for a grand piano released in space and only affected by air resistence, which would have come down in 12 seconds! Not to mention the enormous pools of molten metal that were found at the subbasement level three, four, and five weeks later. For more, consult Steve. But there had to have been another source of immense energy to blow steel beams outward and even upward and create that massive cloud of very fine dust.

[edit on 13-7-2006 by James Fetzer]

[edit on 13-7-2006 by James Fetzer]



new topics
 
0

log in

join