Paul Tassopulos

May 21 2009, 05:43 AM

View on Scribd
.pdf Direct Download

DrBabs

May 21 2009, 08:53 AM

3 problems with the samples........

Quote:

 

In addition to the elements quantified by ICP/MS analyses, the SEM dispersive X-ray analyses showed large signals for iron and calcium, which are major components of construction materials.

Quote:

 

Iron melts at 1538ºC, so the presence of these numerous iron-rich spheres implies a very high temperature.

Quote:

 

The new study reinforces and extends conclusions that DELTA Group reached in February 2002 in what is still the most extensive analysis of the dust and smoke from the hot collapse piles after the trade center collapse.

In the 2002 report, DELTA researchers described their analysis of over 8,000 air samples collected Oct. 2-30, 2001, on a rooftop at 201 Varick St., one mile north-northeast of the trade center complex.

Attached to this post:

spherical_iron_particle_magnified_w_txt.jpg (215.31 KB)

achimspok

Aug 5 2009, 12:01 PM

Hi Matt, I came over here as you see. (Indeed I found the forum via a comment on my 12 sec video.)

So what we are talking about?
First, there are two characters - Jones and Greening.
Jones is the one, who was discredited by something he should have done 20 years ago and nobody knows for sure. Jones is the one who cannot stop mentioning that the towers came down near free fall speed just like NIST stated in the report and we know since some years the towers didn't came down at this speed but in some strange way nobody had explained by now.
Greening is the one who calculated the "free fall speed collapse" by doing a whole bunch of nonsense: A) consistent upper block B) free falling for one floor height onto the weaken lower block C) crushing the lower block without collapsing upwards as well D) collecting a floor by floor debris pile without losing 1 gram of mass E) doing a series of inelastic collisions just like one moving car crashing into a stationary car BUT imho there is a little difference between in the resulting velocity if you weld the stationary car onto the street just like the floors of the WTC were no floating masses but attached to the core and perimeter.

Now, Harrit, Jones and some other found something strange in the dust. They don't argue that nano thermite is the only imaginable answer but they argue that the finding are alarming and some further research must follow may be to find out that all of these strange things are just the same as you would find in the ash of a waste incinerator.
Greening seemingly needed just one day to find out that it is all the same as you would find in those ashes, did he? No! He is arguing that fast and rhetorical as he did in the case of his free fall collapse. (It seems he always proof everything he want to proof or debunk everything he want to debunk just by a snap of his fingers.)

Jones found iron µ-spheres. Greening answers that these spheres are typical for waste incinerators. Greenings first source isn't available anymore. His second source looks like that:



The first thing Greening seemingly proves is that the nano particles found by Jones in the red layer obviously are not the result of some kind of waste incinerator like the WTC towers because the smallest particle in the ash and smoke is a 100 times bigger.

Jones et al. put these strange nano particles in a calorimeter. It ignited at 430°C. This is very unusual for any ash of any incinerator that burns at temperatures between 600-900°C, isn't it? The following reaction was extremely "exotherm". In other words, the reaction generated a lot of heat (energy) and the result of that reaction - e.g. iron rich µ-spheres. Jones did not stating that it MUST BE nano thermite but he strongly requests further analysis.

So even if Greenings ash would be explosive... It would be interesting to understand the "mechanism" that forms iron rich micro spheres at temperatures lower than 900°C. Googling for "Incinerator iron micro spheres APC ..." brings no result. So may be Greenings 1% iron in the APC residue is just some iron oxide in a sphere of previously molten aluminum??? We don't know.
I want to be honest. I didn't read the whole conversation because that conversation started as the usual rhetorical battle to impress somebody who cannot know. It's a propaganda battle both sides and it leads into nothing but frustration.
It's the very same like the strange free fall collapse - calculation. NIST stated the collapse was near free fall because otherwise they would have to explain the strange seismic pattern. Greening "proved" something that never happened because it's impossible. Jones still arguing it happened but that he knows that it is impossible and that's why it must be CD. Wow, in the case of WTC7 it was indeed very very near free fall but not because of a consistent upper block free falling onto the lower block and probably not because of a buckling column 79 followed by some loony toon chain reaction. In that case we know that NIST never studied the seismic records because they simply forget to subtract the propagation delay of the seismic wave and gave a wrong collapse time. But the seismic records make absolutely no sense if you believe in a 17 seconds later onset of the collapse. And btw I don't understand the NIST idea of a failing column 79 as long as the NIST motion analysis shows the building started to swing in the opposite direction first.

Who is looking for truth? May be all of them. And all of them defending their theories against all "enemies"... whatsoever. In the end there is just one method to find any truth. If Jones found explosive layers of nano particles - and his arguments are not that bad - then someone (may be NIST + Jones + Greening) have to take their place around one electron microscope and have to find an explanation! It would be a great event for any student at any university to be part of it. Some university that have an electron microscope and may be a calorimeter should invite these 3 parties (and may be some more) and pay the event by selling T-Shirts and television rights worldwide! THAT WOULD BE THE PROPER NEXT STEP! Anyone who find excuses not to follow the invitation should have some very good arguments.

Any other idea?

Quote:

 

On September 12, a regional EPA office volunteered to send 30 to 40 electron microscopes to Ground Zero to test bulk dust samples for the presence of asbestos fibers, according to EPA whistle-­blower Cate Jenkins, yet the local EPA office declined the offer, opting for the less effective polarized light microscopy testing method instead. Jenkins had further alleged that regional office personnel were told by the local EPA office: 'We don’t want you f**king cowboys here. The best thing they could do is reassign you to Alaska.'

achimspok

Aug 5 2009, 12:01 PM

So even if Greenings ash would be explosive... It would be interesting to understand the "mechanism" that forms iron rich micro spheres at temperatures lower than 900°C. Googling for "Incinerator iron micro spheres APC ..." brings no result. So may be Greenings 1% iron in the APC residue is just some iron oxide in a sphere of previously molten aluminum??? We don't know.