AE911 truth vs Mick West ( Iron Microspheres)

Cheerful Spring2

Not sure why it taken this long for AE911 truth to dispute Mick West unfounded science on his forum.
Mick will not like it his unfounded disputes got debunked by using mainstream references and footnotes.

https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/technical-articles/articles-by-ae911truth/690-refuting-a-demolition-denier-s-false-claims-about-iron-microspheres

The part Mick West (bold in black) trying to debunk, but he can't, he distorts facts about their study on his forum.

Chris Sarns:
West isn't qualified to second-guess the RJ Lee Group. Let's look at this description of what the consulting firm does: "With more than 30 years in the business of testing materials, RJ Lee had the needed expertise in industrial forensics, in determining the severity of an environmental hazard, and of health risks."

RJ Lee is clear that "the microspheres were formed during the event" — not before, not after, but "during." There is no legitimate reason to doubt the findings of the RJ Lee Group's analysis.

Cheerful Spring2

Reason the Iron Microspheres is an important aspect. Mick trying to claim they were formed after the event, during a clean up or by another reason! Chris shows why Mick West experiments are silly.

Highlighted here why the Iron Microspheres supports the truther version of events..
During their toxicological study of the WTC dust, the RJ Lee Group found that up to 6% of the weight of the dust was composed of previously molten iron microspheres.
Additional evidence of extreme temperatures, unaccounted for in the WTC official story.
NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers) below the required temp for creating Molten Iron spheres.
Mick knows this and another reason why he tries to make any argument they formed after the event.

Cheerful Spring2

I highlighted this point on here myself in the past, but nice there people who see the problem too. Mick experiments does not match the temps in the NIST study. It's blind science to claim the fire was hotter than was reported by the mainstream studies.

Chris Sarns analysis
False. West is deceptively equating the chain reaction that happens when steel wool burns to the iron spheres he created with his blowtorch that burns at 3,100°F (1,704°C).

Furthermore, burning steel wool does not create iron microspheres. Instead, it creates iron oxide (rust).

[NOTE: See my further references to "iron oxide (rust)" after West's 14:42-minute mark and 24:09-minute mark.]

All of West's experiments create iron microspheres using temperatures far above those experienced at the WTC. He has not done a single experiment using the WTC's maximum temperature of 1,800°F (1,000°C).
...................

Mainstream study claim is an extreme heat event occurred inside the Towers- the evidence is the Molten Iron spheres.
NIST heat is too low to have caused it.
Truther claim Nano thermite caused it?
The truthers have a valid theory, but it only one option to explain it. The evidence just shows the heat inside the towers was at the melting point of steel and above,
According to mainstream study (NIST) melting of steel was impossible in a local fire.

Your obessesion with Mick West is really weird.

Have you ever talked to the guy?

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

Your obessesion with Mick West is really weird.

Have you ever talked to the guy?

Yes i have done.

Cheerful Spring2

Mick West supports the official story and people like yourself post his findings here, It not an obsession. We trying to find the “truth” and Mick distorting the truth for his loyal followers online. Should we ignore him when you guys think his opinion matters more?

Cheerful Spring2

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Yes i have done.

So why not bring up your concerns and issues with him rather than here where no one cares?

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

So why not bring up your concerns and issues with him rather than here where no one cares?

I have. He doesn't listen to anyone when his ego off the charts. I not the only one online who raised questions about his experiments and this new article prove of it.

Cheerful Spring2

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I have. He doesn't listen to anyone when his ego off the charts. I not the only one online who raised questions about his experiments and this new article prove of it.

Again, I think you are simply misinterpreting things because of your poor reading skills and inability to admit your mistakes and flaws.
I think what happened, if you actually talked to him is that he showed you up very quickly, you got pissy and left in a huff, and are now moaning about him here because you are too afraid to interact with him directly.

AE9/11 are a bunch of frauds. Them disagreeing with Mick West is meaningless.

Cheerful Spring2

Kingmob, i highlighted this before. To be taken seriously your observations and experiments have to match existing conditions inside the building. No mainstream study about the collapse claims the heat exceeded 1000c.

Author is correct here.
All of West's experiments create iron microspheres using temperatures far above those experienced at the WTC. He has not done a single experiment using the WTC's maximum temperature of 1,800°F (1,000°C).

Cheerful Spring2

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Kingmob, i highlighted this before. To be taken seriously your observations and experiments have to match existing conditions inside the building. No mainstream study about the collapse claims the heat exceeded 1000c.

Author is correct here.
All of West's experiments create iron microspheres using temperatures far above those experienced at the WTC. He has not done a single experiment using the WTC's maximum temperature of 1,800°F (1,000°C).

Again, talk to Mick West about it.

You are not taken seriously at all.
AE9/11 is not taken seriously at all.

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

AE9/11 are a bunch of frauds. Them disagreeing with Mick West is meaningless.

Again this another fail by you to understand the context.
RJ- Lee study claimed the Iron Microspheres formed during the event.

The millions of Molten Iron spheres were produced inside the two towers.

I don't think it is a fraud to highlight Mick West position is wrong. If Mick believes fire was hotter, it down to him to prove it.

NIST dispute fires got above 1000c. RJ- lee was not involved in the studying the collapse, their sole interest was the WTC dust, and finding out what it contained and was it harmful to human health.

The Iron Microspheres is a hot topic in the truther/debunking 9/11 arena.

Cheerful Spring2

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I don't think it is a fraud to highlight Mick West position is wrong.

It's fraud to beg for money to publish a fraudulent paper.

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

If Mick believes fire was hotter, it down to him to prove it.

Then complain to your Mick West about it.
Just because you're too afraid of him doesn't mean you should post here as if you've proved him wrong.
That's just cowardly.

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

Then complain to your Mick West about it.
Just because you're too afraid of him doesn't mean you should post here as if you've proved him wrong.
That's just cowardly.

Ae911 posted an article going over each Mick West claim one by one. It's long and detailed debunk of his nonsense. It should not have taken this long

Cheerful Spring2

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Ae911 posted an article going over each Mick West claim one by one. It's long and detailed debunk of his nonsense. It should not have taken this long

And AE9/11 is a bunch of frauds as we've all agreed. They aren't taken at all seriously by anyone.
What's you point?

You really should just talk to Mick West about your issues with him.
But again, you are too afraid to do so. Probably because you were humiliated by him or someone else at his site.

I like how AE9/11 calls him a "demolition denier".
Like a "Flat Earth Denier".

And how they use a goofy photo of him with a samurai sword to make him look silly.

Top stuff there.

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

And AE9/11 is a bunch of frauds as we've all agreed. They aren't taken at all seriously by anyone.
What's you point?

You really should just talk to Mick West about your issues with him.
But again, you are too afraid to do so. Probably because you were humiliated by him or someone else at his site.

I like how AE9/11 calls him a "demolition denier".
Like a "Flat Earth Denier".

And how they use a goofy photo of him with a samurai sword to make him look silly.

Top stuff there.

Who cares what they call him.
Whats important is they posted Mick position and they gave an answer to all
of it, down to the end of the page.
Mick protected by Metabunk and he controls the flow of information on there.
I'm sure Mick will reply soon enough.

Cheerful Spring2

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Mick protected by Metabunk and he controls the flow of information on there.

Lol did you get banned from there and is that how you're spinning it?

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

Lol did you get banned from there and is that how you're spinning it?

I have an account, but talk to him privately now and again. I have no interest posting in the main forum. Mick West making the claims, his followers are sheep.

I did make an account on international skeptics forum and was banned after making one post lol. Posters replied by got no chance to reply to them. That site controlled.

It was only seven lines about the missing construction elements on the girder at column 79, the mod was fast ending my time there.

Cheerful Spring2

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I have an account, but talk to him privately now and again. I have no interest posting in the main forum. Mick West making the claims, his followers are sheep.

Mm hmm.
You are just too afraid because you were shown up due to you complete lack of any knowledge.

That's very funny.

But if you really do talk to him privately, you should.
No one cares about your weird obsession with him.

No one cares what a bunch of con men claim about him either.

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

Mm hmm.
You are just too afraid because you were shown up due to you complete lack of any knowledge.

That's very funny.

But if you really do talk to him privately, you should.
No one cares about your weird obsession with him.

No one cares what a bunch of con men claim about him either.

The con is Mick West reporting information inaccurately; you accept that standard as truthful.

Cheerful Spring2

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

The con is Mick West reporting information inaccurately; you accept that standard as truthful.

Lol. If you say so... :rolleyes:

The Nal

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I have.

I am guessing you PM him, correct?

Why not post on the forum? if you are genuinely interested in the subject why not post on any proper scientific, engineering, history, skeptic forum?

I suspect you are terrified of exposing the fact that your beliefs on 911 are complete nonsense, so you cling to pseudo-scientific crank outfits like AE911, conspiracy blogs and truther groups

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I am guessing you PM him, correct?

Why not post on the forum? if you are genuinely interested in the subject why not post on any proper scientific, engineering, history, skeptic forum?

I suspect you are terrified of exposing the fact that your beliefs on 911 are complete nonsense, so you cling to pseudo-scientific crank outfits like AE911, conspiracy blogs and truther groups

Skeptic/ conspiracy spots online have the strongest information and I bet you right now if you went on history forum  or science forum talking about this they would not have a clue what you on about.

You tried in the past to get a question answered on an engineering forum and you are a debunker and nobody replied to you. That’s evidence you not find the
new answers on there. 

They're not beliefs, it facts.
R.j Lee STUDY reported 6 per cent of dust that covered Manhattan had Molten Iron Spheres.
If you understand the science and you don’t obviously, the spheres are a byproduct of a thermite reaction, seen after a high energy/heat source or explosion occurrred..
Its molten Iron- the temp to produce it will be 1400c to 1500c.

You not find any study says fire reached these temps.
Debunkers like yourself prefer to ignore that and believe everything ok and can be explained. #
The explanations don't match the science.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Skeptic/ conspiracy spots online have the strongest information

Lol. Conspiracy theory forums are a hotbed of creative nonsense, from 5G coronavirus crapology to chemtrails. They contain as much "fact" as paranormal or "supernatural" discussion forums.

You avoid proper information sources because you aren't interested in proper information only conspiracy woo or validating your "secret Nazi's did everything" world view.

Cheerful Spring2

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

If you understand the science and you don’t obviously, the spheres are a byproduct of a thermite reaction, seen after a high energy/heat source or explosion occurrred...

But no, Mick West showed that it's possible to get Iron Microspheres without magic thermite or silent explosives or space lasers.
You did not actually read what he wrote and you're just parroting what you've been told to parrot by proven con men and fraudster.

It's very funny that you think you can tell people they don't understand science.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Lol. Conspiracy theory forums are a hotbed of creative nonsense, from 5G coronavirus crapology to chemtrails. They contain as much "fact" as paranormal or "supernatural" discussion forums.

You avoid proper information sources because you aren't interested in proper information only conspiracy woo or validating your "secret Nazi's did everything" world view.

Some of us find it suspicious 9/11 was the first time in history a steel-framed building collapsed because of fire.. There is no known examples anywhere where fire alone progressively dropped a steel-framed building to the ground. Debunkers of course think it silly to believe something else may have happened, totally ignoring it was one-time thing. 

This first time it happened and what occurs during the official investigation.
The government agency NIST removes construction elements from girders and beams on the eastside of the building to allow a collapse to occur. Removing materials to get your computer model to react in a certain way, this is pseudoscience. Plus NIST not detecting the building underwent free fall, after six years, is evidence,  they never understand the reason for the collapse in the first place.
Nothing you said here has anything to do with 9/11.  Chemtrails and 5G  are off topic ramblings.  

Timberrrrrrrr

Ah here we go again, every fùcking thread he starts posting the same shìte about NIST, you should be banned from creating new threads and only allowed post in one 9-11 thread to keep the verbal Diarrhea confined.

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

But no, Mick West showed that it's possible to get Iron Microspheres without magic thermite or silent explosives or space lasers.
You did not actually read what he wrote and you're just parroting what you've been told to parrot by proven con men and fraudster.

It's very funny that you think you can tell people they don't understand science.

Mick West is diverting attention away from the facts.  Not one of his experiments resembles the acknowledged mainstream conditions inside the building on 9/11.
R.J. Lee group says in their report the Iron molten spheres were generated inside the buildings, not afterwards.
Mick performed no experiments to show towers fire can produce Iron molten spheres.

He done experiments to show they can be produced by other ways, outside conditions, not in dispute!
Mick has to show people how fire inside the buildings made them, and he has not done so. You guys never ask why he hasn’t and why does he still ignore a mainstream study findings?
 

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Some of us find it suspicious 9/11 was the first time in history a steel-framed building collapsed because of fire

No you're perpetually suspicious of "the powers that be" and have the same tendency towards many idiotic conspiracy theories and beliefs. It's nothing to do with the facts, it's to do with paranoid people with low critical thinking

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Mick West is diverting attention away from the facts.  
 

He's not. He's just become an "enemy" to you because you see this as a petty game of sides, not facts.

You have no interest in facts or evidence, you just make up stuff in your head (e.g. "millions died in Syria"), and when you are corrected, you just go on the attack and fall back to more made-up stuff

Cheerful Spring2

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Ah here we go again, every fùcking thread he starts posting the same shìte about NIST, you should be banned from creating new threads and only allowed post in one 9-11 thread to keep the verbal Diarrhea confined.

NIST is the official body hired to investigate the collapse of the buildings on 9/11. We have their theories and we have truther theory and both conflict with each other.
Bring up NIST is not that unusual since they are pushing the fire collapse only theory and ignoring other explanations that exist.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

We have their theories and we have truther theory and both conflict with each other.

Another convenient little lie

There is one theory supported by the FEMA investigation, the NIST investigation, insurance investigations, and experts consensus - the buildings fell due to fire

There is no other theory based on credible evidence.

There are other theories, mini-nukes, remote controlled aircraft, projections, energy weapons, controlled demolitions. They have no credible evidence. And those theories change from person to person, i.e. they are made up in people's heads.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

No you're perpetually suspicious of "the powers that be" and have the same tendency towards many idiotic conspiracy theories and beliefs. It's nothing to do with the facts, it's to do with paranoid people with low critical thinking

Find me one steel framed high rise in Europe and US and Asia has collapsed due to fire in 50 years?

9/11 does not count.

Find me one example that proves fire can progressively collape a building of this make.

Stop waffling and provide examples.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Find me one steel framed high rise in Europe and US and Asia has collapsed due to fire in 50 years?

Find us one skyscraper that has been secretly blown up by controlled demolition..

Oh you can't, then by your logic it couldn't have happened. Why do you keep shooting yourself in the foot like this?

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Find us one skyscraper that has been secretly blown up by controlled demolition..

Oh you can't, then by your logic it couldn't have happened. Why do you keep shooting yourself in the foot like this?

See what i mean you there are no examples and yet you find the controlled demolition theory insane? You don't wonder why some people find NIST explantation to be nonsensical?

banie01

Why does every single thread CS starts, contributes to or looks at...

Descend into a shítshow of repetitive nonsense.
How many more rage quits can we have?

I thought Hulseys disaster would be the end of it.
But now, CS now uses Boards to launch a fairly direct personal attack on someone who so far as I know isn't even a member here?

Surely, CS needs to address their issues with Mr West, directly to Mr West?
Rather than spouting more parrot talk gleaned from AE911 to a forum that has consistently and repeatedly been debunked at every turn on here?

Why does CS post here bítching about Metabunk?
Rather than post publically over there, and deal with the crux of his venom?

Cheerful Spring2

banie01 wrote: »

Why does every single thread CS starts, contributes to or looks at...

Descend into a shítshow of repetitive nonsense.
How many more rage quits can we have?

I thought Hulseys disaster would be the end of it.
But now, CS now uses Boards to launch a fairly direct personal attack on someone who so far as I know isn't even a member here?

Surely, CS needs to address their issues with Mr West, directly to Mr West?
Rather than spouting more parrot talk gleaned from AE911 to a forum that has consistently and repeatedly been debunked at every turn on here?

Why does CS post here bítching about Metabunk?
Rather than post publically over there, and deal with the crux of his venom?

Banie back backing up his friends, in another debate.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

See what i mean

No.

Here is your logic; if something didn't happen in the past it can't happen in the future

Therefore skyscrapers haven't been secretly blown up in the past, so it didn't happen in 2001.

That's your logic. Are you contradicting that? making a special exception?

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Banie back backing up his friends, in another debate.

It's correct. You recycle the same broken truther points over and over

You can keep writing the same nonsense over and over because there are no rules against it here. It's a safe space for that. On proper forums there are rules against that type of behavior - which is why you're here.

banie01

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Banie back backing up his friends, in another debate.

No CS.
I actually don't have friends on boards.
The people who post here are just 1s and 0s, my only interest in all this is the actual weight of evidence or the lack of same.

You are a proven liar, over multiple of these "debates"
You misrepresent, lie, change position and opinion when called out.

But anyway, the regulars in this corner of Boards know that all too well.

So, why are you rambling on here with personal attacks on Mick West?
Rather than over on his own site?

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

No.

Here is your logic; if something didn't happen in the past it can't happen in the future

Therefore skyscrapers haven't been secretly blown up in the past, so it didn't happen in 2001.

That's your logic. Are you contradicting that? making a special exception?

When fire never dropped a steel framed-column building in the past or since 9/11 there must be a reason for that?
The NIST explanation is faulty as I have pointed out here for years.

Controlled demolition is a recognized method to remove multiple stacks of columns across the width of a building to facilitate a free-fall collapse.
It is important, NIST missed in their investigations here something completely removed 8 floors of columns inside the building below. Freefall is a strong indicator of a controlled demolition of columns holding up the building. 

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's correct. You recycle the same broken truther points over and over

You can keep writing the same nonsense over and over because there are no rules against it here. It's a safe space for that. On proper forums there are rules against that type of behavior - which is why you're here.

They're not truther talking points.

This is NIST saying this in Aug 2008. This was said during the presentation of their draft paper about the collapse, which you guys simply are not getting.

NIST ruled out Freefall and then changed their mind in Nov 2008, their timelines that people like yourself ignore.

Truther argued this occurred pre Aug 2008.
: “[A] free-fall time would be an object that has no structural components below it....

NIST refuted their claim during the conference.
What the analysis shows...is that same time it took for the structural model to come down...is 5.4 seconds. It’s about 1.5 seconds, or roughly 40 percent, more time for that free fall to happen. And that is not at all unusual because there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case.”

Timberrrrrrrr

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

When secret controlled demolition using super secret termite never dropped a steel framed-column building in the past or since 9/11 there must be a reason for that?
YOUR explanation is faulty as HAS BEEN pointed out here for years.

Random waffle removed

See how it looks when I switch it a little?

Cheerful Spring2

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

See how it looks when I switch it a little?

The difference is we know controlled demolition have dropped steel-framed buildings in history.
They're no examples of fire collapsing rows of steel columns inside a steel-framed building and causing a complete collapse:)

The Nano thermite thesis centres on the material the found in the WTC Twin Towers dust. Nanothermite is more energetic than thermite, its a substance on the nanometer scale and can only be produced in sophisticated high level chemist workshop. 

I wonder, why do people find it implausible when it all occurred on a day the US was attacked. There holes in the official narrative when Al Qeada terrorists were allowed to enter the US freely in 2000 and the CIA knew this and kept the information from the FBI. It not like they had no info to stop the plot days, weeks, months before 9/11. The 19 were not hiding out in some remote desert in Las Vegas. They were living in cities and using their real names.

Timberrrrrrrr

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

The difference is we know controlled demolition have dropped steel-framed buildings in history.
They're no examples of fire collapsing rows of steel columns inside a steel-framed building and causing a complete collapse:)

Never one prepared secretly and quietly though so because it's never happened before or since then it never happend on 9-11.

This is your claim not mine, if it's never happened before or since then it can't have happened that day.

Waffle deleted

Cheerful Spring2

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Never one prepared secretly and quietly though so because it's never happened before or since then it never happend on 9-11.

This is your claim not mine, if it's never happened before or since then it can't have happened that day.

This logic is flawed because to all purposes the population was not aware 19 guys were going to hijack the planes on 9/11 and fly them into buildings.  Just because you didn’t see them enter the buildings pre 9/11 doesn’t mean it did not happen. We have no security footage from inside the tower garage floors, or footage from inside the towers for the months leading up to the event. We don’t know who had access and what was possible. Debunkers assume it was not possible to wire up buildings for demolition and not be noticed. They forget the steel core is not exposed to the public you access it through doorways with restricted access.  Who ever did this are high level operatives and people in charge could make it happen.Plus you don’t need to wire up every floor for demolition. You just need to plant stuff on enough key supports to start a collapse. 

Timberrrrrrrr

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

This logic is flawed because to all purposes the population was not aware 19 guys were going to hijack the planes on 9/11 and fly them into buildings.  Just because you didn’t see them enter the buildings pre 9/11 doesn’t mean it did not happen. We have no security footage from inside the tower garage floors, or footage from inside the towers for the months leading up to the event. We don’t know who had access and what was possible. Debunkers assume it was not possible to wire up buildings for demolition and not be noticed. They forget the steel core is not exposed to the public you access it through doorways with restricted access.  Who ever did this are high level operatives and people in charge could make it happen.Plus you don’t need to wire up every floor for demolition. You just need to plant stuff on enough key supports to start a collapse. 

Waffle waffle waffle, the same blah blah blah that you have spouted for years. You have no evidence for any of this just lots of maybe/could have/might have.

The Nal

"Who ever did this are high level operatives and people in charge could make it happen"

Lol

Cheerful Spring2

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Waffle waffle waffle, the same blah blah blah that you have spouted for years. You have no evidence for any of this just lots of maybe/could have/might have.

There plenty of evidence but people like yourself ignore it.
There photographs of melted steel columns, flanges, beams- NIST said was not possible to melt A36 steel by fire. 
There evidence of Iron microspheres in WTC dust, this is evidence for nanothermite reaction/some explosive used. Fires at 1000c can not make Molten Iron spheres, end of the story.
There evidence firefighters, and workers,  saw molten steel flowing like a liquid in the rubble pile- ignored by NIST.
There explosions heard on videotape- ignored by NIST.
I could go on all day explaining the anomalous findings, NIST ignored. 

Just look at the top of the towers you will notice the top half peeled like a banana and there was nothing left to crush the bottom end.  NIST believe is floor trusses pulled everything down. What you actually see is the perimeter sucked in and then everything inside is pushed outwards. That’s an implosion
occurring inside the building. 

Cheerful Spring2

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

There evidence of Iron microspheres in WTC dust, this is evidence for nanothermite reaction/some explosive used. Fires at 1000c can not make Molten Iron spheres, end of the story.

But there are many other ways of creating microspheres that don't involve magic nanothermite.

That's the point Mick West was making. You seem to not understand that.

It's probably because you don't actually understand the science again and you're just parroting what you are told to by the con artists you follow religiously.