Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JCL
Looks like the chemical signature of dust, with lots of residue consistent with byproducts of a fire. Sorry, I don't know more precisely than that. I am not sure why it matters.
Gypsum is 18% sulfur, by weight (I had to look up the percent, I thought it was less than that). Gypsum isn't just in the wallboard, it is a binder in cement, used in concrete. Sulfur is fully expected in the residue. (I've switched to the US spelling, but I still think of it as sulphur).
Why aren't the red-gray chips simply paint? Their composition appears to match the paint used on the structure of the WTC.
Pictures appear to show pancaked floors compressed together. That is entirely consistent with buildings that fall down. I don't know how many floors of debris there should have been. I also don't know how to quantify how much of the debris was turned into dust by the collapse. Why does it matter, since it is a result of the buildings falling down? We aren't debating whether the buildings collapsed, just what caused the collapse.
|
I believe it was confirmed that they red-gray chips were not from structure...but they were still active, as evident in the calorimeter test by Jeff Farrer. Looking forward to NIST's own results of this particular test, if they ever decide to publish.
I mention debris as there were no significant chunks of concrete, nor even office furniture but i have yet to see images or video showing otherwise. What i do see, is a pulverization of two of the 3 structures...yet officials have yet to test for any exotic accelerants. This should be standard, considering '93.
Nist has abandoned the pancake theory...the videos in itself negate this. If this were the case, then why no resistance with near free fall speed? And the top that tipped over, of WTC2, would not have pulled such a disappearing act.