It was Paint for sure!

The debunkers claim that the "paint chips" were not thermite or thermate, and I agree with that much. However they certainly contain components of an incendiary. If the chips were paint, here is the challenge:

Prove it.

Show me an MSDS sheet for any paint that coincides with any independent look at the chips. Or if you have the information strait from the manufacturer that would work too. Or if you have an independent look at both the chips in question and legit paint chips that would be well too.

Basically what it boils down to is you can't prove a negative, and a lot of the debate here revolves around just that. I have issued the challenge because I have taken it myself and failed. It should be very easy to prove a positive fact that is a matter of public record. I eagerly await responses based on evidence.

reply to post by jprophet420


so you want proof that paint can be explosive? or that the paint chips in the dust of the wtc has explosive material? or what? prove what?


i am yet to see any theory that is correct. so i dunno how anyone can say prove anything. either side.

I think you should ask Alex Jones or Dr.Steven Jones this question.
Your point is a good one
Somewhere there is a record of the paint used in the building either in old receipts or invoices.
This could be a real piece of evidence that has so far been overlooked

Considering a lot of steel is shipped in a 'primed' state with iron-oxide primer to delay corrosion until final assembly and coating, and many types of paint use iron-oxide and / or aluminum as pigments, particularly aluminum in radiant heat barrier type coatings, I wonder how iron-oxide and aluminum particles (a.k.a. thermite) were found in the ruins?

Not saying what I said is the correct answer, just supposing....

reply to post by Myendica


If the chips were paint, here is the challenge:

Prove it.

Thought that was pretty clear.

The reverse has been asked of Jones, right?

That is, prove that is thermxte by heating it in an inert atmosphere.

The burden is on him....

Why do we need thermate anyway? The molten element that leaked out of the South Tower shortly before it was (ahem) blown up was not iron but lead from all the stacks of batteries used by Fuji Bank as back-up for its computers in the case of a power failure. It has been proven recently that they were housed exactly on the 79th floor where the molten metal poured out. The floor had been reinforced to support the tons of batteries. There were Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) battery rooms on some floors of the Towers and Building 7. These battery rooms supplied continuous battery power to computers if the electricity failed for any reason. These batteries contained tons of lead which melts at low temperatures [327 C (621 F)]. The heat from the fires in the debris pile could easily have melted this lead or the aluminum from the plane which were probably the metals that were seen flowing through the pile. NIST reported UPS in the 13th floor of Building 7 and the 81st floor of Tower 2. There were also quantities of lead, tin, silver and even gold used in the computer circuit boards.

So much for Dr Jones' distraction. For the simple truth see:
iamthewitness.com...

Proof Red Layer is NOT thermite - Kaolinite Found

- By Sunstealer

Jones claims that samples a-d are essentially the same material and I agree with him. His paper's EDS spectra are very close and this confirms that the materials are identical.

From the Nano-Thermite Paper:

An analysis of the chips was performed to assess the similarity of the chips and to determine the chemistry and materials that make up the chips.

All of the chips used in the study had a gray layer and a red layer and were attracted by a magnet.

Similarities between the samples are already evident from these photographs.

We also have information from another source of Jones' chips namely a chip that has also had SEM and EDS analysis performed on them.

darksideofgravity.com...

Comparing this report and Jones' we see from these SEM photo-micrographs that samples a-d are identical to the chip in the above report.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0aade1ff198b.jpg[/atsimg]

We can now closely look at the morphology of the chips a-d and compare the structures therein to see whether there are any similarities between observed structures in the sample and known structures.

Jones' paper clearly examines these structures in samples a-d and notes:

The results indicate that the small particles with very high BSE intensity (brightness) are consistently 100 nm in size and have a faceted appearance. These bright particles are seen intermixed with plate-like particles

By placing the beam on a cluster of plate-like particles, the spectrum in Fig. (11a) was generated. The spectrum in Fig. (11b) was acquired from a cluster of the smaller bright faceted grains. Again it was observed that the thin sheet-like particles are rich in Al and Si whereas the bright faceted grains are rich in Fe. Both spectra display significant carbon and oxygen

The results indicate that the smaller particles with very bright BSE intensity are associated with the regions of high Fe and O. The plate-like particles with intermediate BSE intensity appear to be associated with the regions of high Al and Si. The O map (d) also indicates oxygen present, to a lesser degree, in the location of the Al and Si. However, it is inconclusive from these data whether the O is associated with Si or Al or both.

Until now.

The following photo-micrograph shows samples a-d (on the left) and Kaolinite (on the right).

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/07419a957e6a.jpg[/atsimg]

Examining the two side by side clearly shows similarity in size, crystal shape and thickness between the two groups of plate-like particles. Note the exact same style of grouping where platelets have "sandwiched" together in the top middle of b) and the top left of c) in Jones' samples and the exact same phenomenon in the photo to the right. This indicates very strongly that these particles are indeed Kaolinite.

There are many such photo-micrographs of Kaolinite available.

Therefore it is now essential that we examine EDS data of known samples of Kaolinite and compare them with the EDS data generated in Jones' paper. Note that I also include data from the chip sent in the report linked earlier. I have scaled these SEM spectra as best I can in a short space of time in order that the KeV scale matches across spectra.

Continued.......

One of Jones' claims, as is that of the author of the above linked report, is that the EDS spectra of the red layer show signs of contamination:

The resulting spectrum, shown in Fig. (14), produced the expected peaks for Fe, Si, Al, O, and C. Other peaks included calcium, sulfur, zinc, chromium and potassium. The occurrence of these elements could be attributed to surface contamination due to the fact that the analysis was performed on the as-collected surface of the red layer. The large Ca and S peaks may be due to contamination with gypsum from the pulverized wallboard material in the buildings.

Gypsum is a naturally occurring mineral and aswell as being used in wall board or drywall is also used in the manufacture of paint. The following are EDS spectra from Kaolinite with Gypsum, Fig 7 c) of Jones' paper and finally slide/page 14 of the above link.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5b0d44993e18.jpg[/atsimg]

It is abundantly clear that the spectra share more than enough characteristics to say that not only is gypsum present, but that Kaolinte is too.

The plate-like structures seen in the photo-micrographs, of both "thermite chip" samples, share not only the same crystalline morphology and grouping, but also the same EDS signature.

This means that there is very little doubt remaining as to what these platelets are. In light of this evidence it is safe to say that these platelets consist of Kaolinite, which does not contain any "elemental aluminium". The SEM examination in Jones' paper does not show any other particle type (other than the rhomboidal Fe2O3) and no other data in the EDS spectra for samples a-d indicate it's presence.

Therefore these samples CANNOT be thermite.

QED.

For Jones to now claim that elemental aluminium is present then the only way to confirm this is by XRD analysis or a suitable equivalent.

We can also say that because Kaolinite is present and that it is embedded in a Carbon based matrix with Rhomboidal Fe2O3 that a more likely explanation for the red material is paint.

When we look at the material that the "red layer" in the samples is attached to and the notable difference in the structure compared to the "red layer" along with it's EDS spectra it is clear to see that this is a form of Iron Oxide. The corresponding Carbon peaks and the possibility of Mn peak at 5.9KeV indicate the source of this oxide as being steel.

If you also not in the second photo on this page you can clearly see this oxide layer is also attached to a crystalline fibrous material that again does not share morphology with the "red layer" or the "gray layer". The French paper linked has EDS data of this layer. Notable we do not see the underside of the "gray layer/iron oxide layer" in samples a-d in Jones paper.


Addition.

We can also see the EDS spectra of pure Kaolin for comparison and untreated clay which will explain any queries with the Carbon peak also noting that Carbon is closely associated with Fe in steel.

www.scielo.org.ar...

We can also confirm the presence in other spectra by comparing them eg Fig 11a), Fig 14 (noting the correlating high Ca, O and S peaks - gypsum), etc.

source

reply to post by jprophet420


i dont know what it is, other than a bunch of scientist say its thermite... i couldnt prove anything... just some dude

Originally posted by micpsi
Why do we need thermate anyway? The molten element that leaked out of the South Tower shortly before it was (ahem) blown up was not iron but lead from all the stacks of batteries used by Fuji Bank as back-up for its computers in the case of a power failure. It has been proven recently that they were housed exactly on the 79th floor where the molten metal poured out. The floor had been reinforced to support the tons of batteries. There were Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) battery rooms on some floors of the Towers and Building 7. These battery rooms supplied continuous battery power to computers if the electricity failed for any reason. These batteries contained tons of lead which melts at low temperatures [327 C (621 F)]. The heat from the fires in the debris pile could easily have melted this lead or the aluminum from the plane which were probably the metals that were seen flowing through the pile. NIST reported UPS in the 13th floor of Building 7 and the 81st floor of Tower 2. There were also quantities of lead, tin, silver and even gold used in the computer circuit boards.

So much for Dr Jones' distraction. For the simple truth see:
iamthewitness.com...

Have you ever melted LEAD, tell me what color that is?. Have you ever melted ALUMINUM, once again, what color is that?. How about STEEL, not convinced, how about THIS, yes a very stupid thing to do but beautiful none the less. Now compare that to THE SOUTH TOWER. Lead and Aluminum do not glow orange when being melted or poured(apart from the crucible) and nothing will ever convince me that, that is an Alloy poring out of the south tower.

Kaolinte wont produce iron rich spheres attached to chips.

An Alumnothermic reaction occured; the iron spheres prove that.

Since some chips have iron spheres attached to them, it's more than
safe to say the chips produced the iron sphere(s).

That argument is so good until you look at the photographs side by side and the substances look nothing alike, and say that you can see the similarities. Thats just plain poppycock.

Here's my question:

If there is a substance, that initiates a powerful exothermic reaction at a certain temperature, whether it uses its own oxygen or an external source that the designer KNOWS is going to be present (ie the atmosphere), does it really matter?

I think it's pathetic that "debunkers" will go so far as to try to make the argument hinge on the technical definition of conventional thermite (thermite being able to burn underwater with its own oxygen source), when it's obvious this stuff generates even more energy than said substance and could be used for exactly the same purpose. And in fact would have worked for that purpose even better than conventional thermite.



PS -- anyone still in denial about the STEEL/IRON that was dripping from WTC2 is just that -- in denial. Every walking talking human being with a functioning pair of eyes has the natural capability of distinguishing molten aluminum (which is SILVERY on the surface when exposed to the atmosphere) from molten steel/iron.

[edit on 28-9-2009 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by bsbray11
Here's my question:

If there is a substance, that initiates a powerful exothermic reaction at a certain temperature, whether it uses its own oxygen or an external source that the designer KNOWS is going to be present (ie the atmosphere), does it really matter?

I think it's pathetic that "debunkers" will go so far as to try to make the argument hinge on the technical definition of conventional thermite (thermite being able to burn underwater with its own oxygen source), when it's obvious this stuff generates even more energy than said substance and could be used for exactly the same purpose. And in fact would have worked for that purpose even better than conventional thermite.



PS -- anyone still in denial about the STEEL/IRON that was dripping from WTC2 is just that -- in denial. Every walking talking human being with a functioning pair of eyes has the natural capability of distinguishing molten aluminum (which is SILVERY on the surface when exposed to the atmosphere) from molten steel/iron.

[edit on 28-9-2009 by bsbray11]

OK, lets pretend for a second that the paint is "thermite" or whatever. When was it applied and how was it initiated? Was it applied during construction 30 plus years ago when the steel was fabricated? The it must have been planned 35 years ago, when the material was spec'd.

reply to post by hooper


You obviously know a lot more about the buildings and who all has been in them over the years than I do. Do you have any proof that it would had to have been applied during construction and not possibly any later?

Originally posted by bsbray11
reply to post by hooper

 

You obviously know a lot more about the buildings and who all has been in them over the years than I do. Do you have any proof that it would had to have been applied during construction and not possibly any later?

I think that is what I am asking. If you are talking about the paint, it was applied during fabrication, either here in the US or in Japan. If you are talking about the "thermite" then somebody would have had access to the structure, remove the material around the steel, removed the paint and then applied the thermite, and then recovered everything - all with nobody ever noticing.

reply to post by hooper


Someone would have to have access, yes. Somebody would obviously notice, too. Now what they thought was actually being applied to the columns is another issue. All of these are total unknowns that YOU are assuming to know, or pretending to know the answer to. There was at least one Arabic individual wandering the basements of the towers just days before 9/11 with a fake ID, that got past security, etc., that we know about. Who the hell knows who else has been messing around in there over the course of so many years, and with all the maintenance records and security videos destroyed?

Are you aware that 2 undetonated military bombs were removed from inside the Murrah Federal Building after the OKC bombing? At least one of them was attached to a gas pipeline in the building. I can post the memos from FEMA, Army, the DoD and civilians testifying to these bombs being safely removed. Have you heard of this before? How many people have told you this before? Was anyone watching when *somebody* brought those bombs into that building? You see, you have to be very naive to assume the criminals who do this stuff would feel any responsibility to tell you about it. And you simply don't know if any civilians or anyone else saw the black deed actually being done. But this stuff DOES happen. You have to take responsibility into your own hands, to figure out what you really DO know and what you just DON'T know about any given situation. You can't just pretend all good and pretty things happen when your own head is turned away.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by bsbray11
reply to post by hooper

 

Someone would have to have access, yes. Somebody would obviously notice, too. Now what they thought was actually being applied to the columns is another issue. All of these are total unknowns that YOU are assuming to know, or pretending to know the answer to. There was at least one Arabic individual wandering the basements of the towers just days before 9/11 with a fake ID, that got past security, etc., that we know about. Who the hell knows who else has been messing around in there over the course of so many years, and with all the maintenance records and security videos destroyed?

Are you aware that 2 undetonated military bombs were removed from inside the Murrah Federal Building after the OKC bombing? At least one of them was attached to a gas pipeline in the building. I can post the memos from FEMA, Army, the DoD and civilians testifying to these bombs being safely removed. Have you heard of this before? How many people have told you this before? Was anyone watching when *somebody* brought those bombs into that building? You see, you have to be very naive to assume the criminals who do this stuff would feel any responsibility to tell you about it. And you simply don't know if any civilians or anyone else saw the black deed actually being done. But this stuff DOES happen. You have to take responsibility into your own hands, to figure out what you really DO know and what you just DON'T know about any given situation. You can't just pretend all good and pretty things happen when your own head is turned away.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by bsbray11]

I don't think you realize the enormity of the task you are describing. We are not talking about sneaking a pipe bomb into the bathroom. Imagine repainting the steel in a skyscraper. It would be in the news, there would be inspectors all over the place. Permits, submittals and huge paper trail. Not to mention leasees losing a large quantity of their rental space, etc., etc. etc.

As for the Murrah building - I think I heard rumors about that but that it was ultimately just that rumors or misunderstandings.

reply to post by hooper


In science we follow evidence and a lot of time the answer is something we thought was completely impossible.

Pre 911 we thought that scenario (OS) was completely impossible.

Manhattan project, pearl harbor... 2 know conspiracies that involved as much planning and action as the scenario in debate and were seen to fruition.

And quite frankly any believer of the OS that cant imagine a precedent like that being set surely can't imagine all the other precedents set that day either. Does not compute.