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.
"...While the application of a thin film might have suited
specific desired outcomes, it is also possible that the quenching
effect of the steel the material was in contact with may
have prevented a thin film of a larger mass from reacting.
The fact that most of the chips have a distinctive gray layer
suggests that the unreacted material was in close contact
with something else, either its target, a container, or an adhesive."
Hi Turbo,
Originally posted by turbofan
Originally posted by pteridineNo Jones supporter has offered an explanation of why these demolition chips extinguish after being ignited.
I don't know why I bother debating you? You answer my questions with more
questions and you clearly cannot provide examples to support my four
criteria.
Why do some of the chips extinguish? Who knows, it could be improper
chemical ratio to complete the reaction is some of the chips.
There's a reason, and a good scientific one at that.
When you can show me an example model of a naturally made, or human
made product that burns 100% efficient, 100% of the time, we will go
futher into this particular question of yours.
No Jones supporter has explained the excess energy produced other than as a combustion. You can't either, apparently, and keep defelecting the issue.
Simple. The chips are comprised of elements and ratios far superior
to that of the control sample used.
Perhaps your technical skills aren't as good as you think they are.
Far better than yours.
Now I've answered YOUR questions, time to answer MINE.
P.S. For those that starred any of the posts made by Butcher, Pterdine,
or OKbmd, I question your scientific comprehension of this topic and
challenge you to a ONE-ON-ONE debate on the ATS debate sub-forum.
Same challenge goes to the three members just mentioned.
Originally posted by turbofan
Originally posted by pteridineNo Jones supporter has offered an explanation of why these demolition chips extinguish after being ignited.
Why do some of the chips extinguish? Who knows, it could be improper
chemical ratio to complete the reaction is some of the chips.
There's a reason, and a good scientific one at that.
When you can show me an example model of a naturally made, or human
made product that burns 100% efficient, 100% of the time, we will go
futher into this particular question of yours.
No Jones supporter has explained the excess energy produced other than as a combustion. You can't either, apparently, and keep defelecting the issue.
Simple. The chips are comprised of elements and ratios far superior
to that of the control sample used.
Originally posted by okbmd
reply to post by turbofan
" #3. Grab your video camera and heat a chip of iron to its melting point
temperature. Show me the solidified (once molten) iron in the form of a SPHERE.
I'll be waiting. "
This is what you asked for . I provided what you asked for but , now it's not good enough ?
I have not been debating the 'chip' .
You asked for evidence of the formation of spheres from once molten iron . I gave you that .
But , in typical truther fashion , you ignore the evidence and move the goal-posts , now challenging me to debate the chips .
Epic fail .
And by the way , that's about as scientific as it gets when you ask to be shown something and then it is shown to you .
Checkmate .
Aluminium-molybdenum(VI) oxide
Aluminium-copper(II) oxide
Aluminium-iron(II,III) oxide
Antimony-potassium permanganate
Aluminium-potassium permanganate
Aluminium-bismuth(III) oxide
Aluminium-tungsten(VI) oxide hydrate
Aluminium-fluoropolymer (typically Viton)
Titanium-boron (burns to titanium diboride)
Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by pteridine
We've gone over this before because you don't understand the science!
The spheres prove a thermitic reaction because the ignition temperature
is not enough to cause the sphere, or melt iron.
Combustion is not FAST enough, or does not create enough of a pressure
change to form the iron into spheres!
Get it? Got it?
Back up your THEORY with an example of PAINT forming an iron sphere
when HEATED to 430 degrees.
Further to that, use the XEDS analysis to pick out the elements present
which (in your mind) could have produced the heat, and quick transisition
in temperature to produce an exotherm more narrow than a known control
sample of nano-thermite.
If the thin layer of oxide quenched the reaction, wouldn't a steel beam do the same thing?
Yes, it would.
The highly engineered material apparently wasn't designed
to react on steel beams which further questions the theory taht it was anything but paint.
Jones has disproved his theory by saying that the reaction could be quenched by a small amount of oxide.
Originally posted by okbmd
reply to post by turbofan
Are you saying that applying a flame to it is not heating it ?
You can heat the material to the point that it will drip , without having to cut it
Once it starts to drip , spheres WILL form .
Okay so you are admitting that you can get a thermitic reaction from a flame and steel in the presence of atmospheric oxygen, apparently.
Originally posted by turbofan
[IT SAYS HEAT IRON to it's melting point!
Lighting steel wool causes a thermitic reaction.