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 bsbray11
I don't suppose he ever elaborated on why reproducing the theoretical mechanism that produced this crap at Ground Zero wouldn't work? If the answer is "no"... Enough said? Mr. Canoli even thought it was a reasonable idea to test your fracking theories.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Well according to FEMA it was a liquid eutectic that formed on the columns. Your post is the first I have heard in my life of a corrosive gas attack on the steel. Have any references?
Originally posted by turbofan
Pssst...Hey Joey...did you happen to see the thermite paper and read it?
Originally posted by bsbray11
reply to post by Joey Canoli
Well according to FEMA it was a liquid eutectic that formed on the columns. Your post is the first I have heard in my life of a corrosive gas attack on the steel. Have any references?
Originally posted by pteridineTurbo,
Jones also tries to explain why his analysis of the red chips have them showing more energy per unit mass than theroetically possible with thermite. He says maybe it was combustion of the binder because he ran the DSC in air.
Will you now agree that a DSC under inert is a requirement for the proper analysis of the red chips and that the "oxygen excuse" was a valid argument?
Yes or No?
Originally posted by GenRadek
Also in the initial FEMA report, they also mention corrosion, however, they do not jump to thermites or any such source.
www.fema.gov...
Originally posted by turbofan
It's about time you answered this question. YOu're not fooling anyone
wth your lack of understanding on this topic.
Originally posted by GenRadek
bsbray, I posted this a few pages back:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
My whole post mentions the different mechanisms for corrosion and the chemistry that would have been in the WTC debris. It goes through all the possible sources of the gases which helped accelerate corrosion.
It mentions how corrosive sulfuric acids, steam, salts, hydrogen, and such can deteriorate and create the effects observed in the pile weeks and months later. It would also explain the source of heat. This does require a little bit of going through chemistry and how exactly these gases can corrode the steel and the reactions that occur.
www.corrosionsource.com...
www.corrosionsource.com...
Also seawater I believe was used on the pile as well. This also is a very corrosive agent which can help corrode the steel as was observed.
www.corrosionsource.com...
You see, there are many many alternate reasons for why the steel and iron was discovered in this condition. They are much more plausible and sensible explanations than jumping to claims of thermites and desperately trying to squeeze water out this "rock". Its not going to happen.
Also this site gives more to the explanation of why there were such temperatures observed in the pile:
Iron Burns!
also regular iron oxidation can account for this as well. The above site goes into greater details.
I would encourage you to go through the sites listed above and just see how an understanding of chemistry is very important to understand the events witnessed at Ground Zero, weeks and months later. it is information like this which helped me come to a conclusion that the claims being made by Jones and his followers are based on faulty science and ignore basic chemistry facts. The fact that he completely IGNORED the obvious: ie corrosion as a factor and the corrosive environment in which the steel was subjected to for the time lengths, show me his incompetence and his inability to study or research just how corrosion works and what is the chemistry behind it. Corrosion and oxidation of the steel due to corrosive conditions in the pile are better explanations than some magical thermites that defy the laws of physics, chemistry and logic.
Originally posted by turbofan
You were just dismissing thermite/thermate as a possible substance
in your prior posts.
Originally posted by turbofan
It's one in the same.
So then do you agree, or disagree with Jones/Harrit?
Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Originally posted by bsbray11
Well according to FEMA it was a liquid eutectic that formed on the columns. Your post is the first I have heard in my life of a corrosive gas attack on the steel. Have any references?
Any references that state that THIS is what happened? No.
A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel. This sulfur-rich liquid penetrated preferentially down grain boundaries of the steel, severely weakening the beam and making it susceptible to erosion. The eutectic temperature in this region of the steel beam approach 1,000 C (1,800 F) which is substantially lower than would be expected for melting this steel.