@ alle Thermit Twoofer
Ich bin gerade ein wenig verwirrt, VT-logen behaupten z.Z. für Sie wäre alles bewiesen^^
OK wenn dem so ist , dann ist dem so.
Wer kann den bösen Debunkern denn nun ein paar Fragen beantworten ?
;)1. Why wasnt aluminum oxide tested for during or after the reaction of the material?
2. Why wasnt wtc primer paint (primer at the time of building the wtc and primer from the upgraded areas of the wtc) tested so it could be ruled out?
3. Was brooklyn bridge primer/paint analyzed to rule that out, even though this is the area of one sample?
4. Could you give the details concerning the paint you guys did test.
5. Is there anyway to split the multi-layered chips up so you could analyze the red and grey areas within to make sure they have the same makeup throughout?
6. are there any differential scanning calorimetry machines that go beyond the 700C range so we could know the exact temp this material gets too?
7. Can you please demonstrate how (nano)thermite(mate) can horizontally cut a steel box column like the ones in the WTC?
8. Please provide the manufacturer's Specifications (in terms of composition, etc...) of the type of paint used in the "control" testing to eliminate paint as a possible source of the red/grey microchips?
9. Why won't you prove that super-duper-mega-nanotherm*te can do what you claim?
10. Have you submitted your paper to any Legitimate Journals that are not "Open Access" or "Pay to Publish" types, and if so, has it been accepted by any of them?
11. What other INDEPENDENT LABS (besides Basile and your french friend) have you submitted your samples to for analysis, and will you be providing unaltered documents with their results for general consumption?
12 Which structural elements of which WTC buildings do you claim were cut with thermate?
13. Did BYU Verify the results of your paper, or did they merely read through it, and give it the "ok"?
14. Did you know any referee involved?
15. What were the refs issues with your work?
16. Given the MEK caused significant "swelling" of your chips, do you feel confident that this did not damage your sample, and as a result, cause an inaccurate post solvent Spectra?
17. Why are you backing in evidence and ignoring other elements.
18. What happen to the super duper thermATE, which had sulfur and we told you there was tons of sulfur in the wallboard but you said it was not the same, but now the sulfur in the wallboard contaminated your sample of super thermite?
19. What evidence do you have that a thermitic redox reaction can start at 430oC?
20. What percentage of the original aluminum and iron oxide underwent a thermitic reaction?
21. What evidence do you have that the thermitic reaction was "explosive?"
22. Do your chips have metal crystals hanging on the underside, like Merseille's?
23. Have you attempted to get any paint samples from the actual WTC steel?
24. were you ever spammed by Bentham Publishers organisation?
25. will you submit samples to NIST or any other nationwide chemistry or engineering organization or University for analysis?
26. What analyses did you undertake to determine that the compounds found and claimed to be "thermite" were indeed "thermite" and not compounds that may be found in an office environment?
27. What is the tested energy release rate in BTU/Hr for the material?
1) what do other domain experts have to say about whether your method of determining elemental Al in your chip samples is foolproof or not? AFAIK, all aluminothermics utilized Al particles in spherical form. Thus, unless your method of determining elemental Al is considered foolproof, I expect that material scientists will be demand more proof. What, in fact, does a sample of, say, 5 - 10 material scientists have to say about this issue (even queried on an informal basis)? Have you asked, or do you intend to ask?
2) Can the nanofoil, multilayer technology employed by rtn (see rtnfoil.com) be used to layer ferrous layers with sol-gel layers? It seems to me that their layers are of single metals, not more complicated sol gels. This company was founded in 2001, by the way. Also, please note that their nanofoils can be made thousands of layers thick, and even be used as structural elements. They can be engineered to be parts of missiles, and function as incendiaries.
Quote:
Formed in thick
sheets and rods, this material can bear loads
and act as structural members. The material
can be designed to ignite on impact or ignite
with high heat for use in applications that
include missile skins and frames, shell casings,
and shape-charge liners.
3) Do you intend to do more investigations of paint chips, to see if they can explain your results? In particular, the 'gray' layer has been suggested to be rust spall. Also, a poster at JREF posted the following:
Someone on Usenet nominated this. Apparently its been around for decades.
http://www.rustrustler.com/"As the paint dries, 6 to 8 layers of aluminum flakes rise to the surface to form a metal barrier that protects against the elements. It also works well on metal surfaces that have already begun to rust, and will help prevent further corrosion. Rust Rustler Aluminum Paint also comes in a spray can that covers 50 square feet per can - 3 to 4 times the coverage of ordinary spray paints! Rust Rustler covers more and lasts longer!"
4) Why did you not clearly identify the specific paint used in your paper? Would you please do so, now, if possible? Some people would like to consult it's manufacturer's data sheet.
5) Googling: SEM images "paint chip"
will yield many hits. Do you intend to contact other researchers who have already studied paint chips using a SEM? (I assume that you haven't already done so.)
Use of thermite
=================
I realize that you are focussing on the existence of thermite, not it's use. Consequently, these questions should probably be thought of as future research questions, and not questions you can answer, at the moment.
1) While nano-scale aluminothermics are expected to be explosive, there is a problem in terms of matching the sounds of explosions to whatever sounds exploding thermite might make in a building which has not been emptied (and thus has some muffling due to absorption by carpets, etc.). As nanoscale aluminothermics are comparable to high explosives, we expect them to have a similar sound. Do you intend to study sound output of engineered aluminothermics? What sound, e.g., is associated with micron scale aluminothermic?
2) The most plausible use of aluminothermics, by far, seems to me to be as an igniting agent for the jet fuel, in order to make a large fireball. I do not believe that jet fuel is very volative, and at 450 mph or so, the fuel will have traversed the building in about 1/3 of a second. Yet, by looking at videos of the impacts, it appears that the deflagration has encompassed the length and breadth of any available fuel in this short space of time. While flowing by and through columns and such, at such high speed, will act to aerosolize the fuel, somewhat, there is a constraining factor, provided by floors sections which remain intact.
Do you intend to study the use of aluminothermics with respect to fireball production?
Note that, as nanofoils can be used to make structural, load-bearing components, one can imagine such components incorporated into the jet planes.
3) Non-explosive aluminothermic could be studied in terms of heating up columns asymetrically to 600 deg C, or so. However, would not any plausible use of aluminothermics to cause weakness, leading to a tilt, leading to a collapse, also cause melting at the contact surface?
29. How did you acquire these "red chips"? I remember reading somewhere that "some guy" picked them up on the Brooklyn Bridge and gave them to you.
30. Have these "red chips" been compared to the red auto paint used on FDNY vehicles?
31. Why are there different proportions or mixtures of elements from one chip to the next, as though they were not all made by the same formula?
32. What were the results of those samples you sent out for independent analysis?
33. Will you make regular appearances on the media and give more lectures. Generally keeping the heat on so to speak. The same for Kevin Ryan and the others.
34. Will new credentialled scientists confirme your results by reproducing them every couple of weeks. That would be a big help to keep the iron in the fire.
35. Where are the control samples and their spectra?
36. What is distribution of thermite products in debris?
37. How can it be discerned from products of paint?
38. If the red chips are claimed to ignite at 415ºC according to DSC data, why did you have to use oxyacetilene to see some reaction? Why didn't you just heat the samples up to 415ºC in open air to see the ignition? How likely is to get these chips in experimental use of thermite on steel?
39. This post will form part of the rebuttal to Jones' paper. I've collated the information quickly in order to show JREF posters and any lurkers as soon as possible, but the evidence is quite damning.
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
All of the chips used in the study had a gray layer and a red layer and were attracted by a magnet.
Quote:
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.
http://darksideofgravity.com/marseille.pdfComparing this report and Jones' we see from these SEM photo-micrographs that samples a-d are identical to the chip in the above report.
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
Quote:
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
Quote:
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
Quote:
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).
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.
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
Quote:
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.
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.
Why was XRD analysis not performed on the samples?
Quelle der Fragen
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4619184&postcount=53Danke für die Antworten ^^
