barium nitrate is not a requirement for an aluminothermic reaction as I pointed out in post#3 above, Jones paper explains this which I linked to in post#5, specifically pages 79-81 here:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/v...1SciMethod.pdf
Yes, but Steven Jones does claim it was thermAte. Correct me if I’m wrong, but a thermate reaction will always give off barium nitrate and aluminum oxide.
barium is an element, barium nitrate is a compound of elements: barium, nitrogen and oxygen. XEDS was used to examine the microspheres, it detects elements and their amounts, it does not detect compounds as i said in post#11.
So even if this is true, basically he can’t prove anything? Reason being; these elements were within the WTC anyway, with or without thermate. If he could have found compounds of barium nitrate and aluminium oxide it would have certainly given his claims a degree of respectability.
read the paper and look at the graphs, the XEDS graphs show peaks of aluminum and oxygen, pages 2 and 3 :
http://www.journalof911studies.com/a...CHighTemp2.pdf
Without even reading this, I can confirm to you that aluminium was everywhere in the WTC as it encased the outer beams. And it’s rather obvious that oxygen should be there too.
"The levels of many of the elements are consistent with their presence in building materials, including chromium, magnesium, manganese, aluminum, and barium."
http://www.ehponline.org/members/2002/110p703-714lioy/EHP110p703PDF.PDF
But as seen with Jones’ paper on how Jesus visited America, he is happy to put faith over evidence, and falsify evidence to suit agenda. Very unscientific.
i never said such a thing. you need to read post#3 again...
You said there was much observed dust as the building collapsed and this would account for the aluminium oxide which funnily enough, absent in Jones' reports.
you may be correct about this, i do not recall accurately, but his papers are published for all to see and scrutinise. I remember him talking about barium in one of his earlier presentations, he may have been talking about the US Geological Survey report which did find barium, or he may have been talking about finding barium in his own samples, I suspect the latter but I am happy to be corrected, either way it does not negate the point above that barium is not a requirement.
Nevertheless he still claims that barium being found in dust is evidence of thermate. Glad to see you agree with me that this is a dubious claim.
molten aluminium is silver, not yellow-orange. there are plenty of threads already on the subject, it is pretty clear it is not molten aluminum.
First you need to realize a few things before you fall all over yourself to shout “molten steel”. The molten material just so happens to be coming from exactly the point where the plane crashed to a halt. I shouldn’t need to tell you that a plane is made of large amounts of aluminium. You also will notice that this is the area that is greatly affected by fire and heat, thus it’s logical to assume that the aluminium from the plane was heated to the point were it melted.
The temperatures were well within the range of melting aluminium, and at such temperatures, any molten aluminium would not be silver. At 1800 farenheit which is the temperatures NIST describes, any molten aluminium would have been light orange in appearance. It’s colour and luminosity could also be influenced by contamination from other materials such as glass. It’s very unlikely that it was
pure aluminium. The further the molten material falls, you see it dim to the point were you can almost make out that it is silvery in appearance.
The reason for the material being ejected appears to have been due to the sagging floors which became noticeable at the exact same time the molten material was seen falling out of the windows.
Jones' work is available to be scrutinised by anyone, no matter what their qualifications or experience. NIST refuses to even discuss this with him, despite their team comprising the pioneers of nanothermite technology, preferring to just deny the data.
I think people would be happy to peer review his information if he was even remotely interested in submitting it to the relevant respected journals. When someone questioned him at one of his presentations about where his work has been peer reviewed he dodged the question:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRRfCAaEyLk
"I saw melting of girders in World Trade Center"
- Dr. Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of California Berkeley.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/scien...ass_05-10.html
(Image, only those who can go to the forum can see it)
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/c...01astanehfinds
LOL... this proves (if it hasn’t been proven already) that you are a complete ignorant dumbass. Did you even read the full document? He describes steel being twisted and warped and that this could have only been possible if:
“That could only happen if you get steel yellow hot or white hot—perhaps around 2,000 degrees.”
So I think we can effectively rule out that he made any claims about molten steel.
One huge obstacle you have to overcome is explaining how it would even be possible to demolish a building with thermate. Here’s what NIST has to say about the of thermite/thermate being used to demolish the towers:
"Separate from the WTC towers investigation, NIST researchers estimated that at least 0.13 pounds of thermite would be required to heat each pound of a steel section to approximately 700 degrees Celsius (the temperature at which steel weakens substantially). Therefore, while a thermite reaction can cut through large steel columns, many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited, and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building. This makes it an unlikely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC towers, and sulfur is present [approx. 19% by weight] in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions."
Here is what demolition expert Brent Blanchard had to say about the matter:
"Dr. Jones acknowledges that his investigation is still in the research phase and that questions regarding the viability of his theory remain unanswered. For example, it is unknown how thermite’s destructive process could have been applied and initiated simultaneously on so many beams – in several buildings – undetected and/or under such extreme conditions. It is also unusual that no demolition personnel at any level noticed telltale signs of thermite’s degenerative “fingerprint” on any beams during the eight months of debris removal."
All truthers need to do to debunk this is to get a chunk of steel similar to the consistency and thickness of any of the supporting beams Steven Jones claims were cut by thermite/thermate in the WTC, then stand it up vertically and cut the beam horizontally using only thermite/thermate without it being directly applied by hand.
If the beam can be cut quickly and accurately by thermite/thermate use, then that would give his claims some credibility.
.