Thursday, March 13, 2014

Mohr R.J. Lee: Part Two

April 23, 2014, update: As noted in another article, Lee´s premise of melting rust-flakes is untenable because even if there was a supply of rust-flakes in the cores of the Towers, they would have been unlikely to burn since they are heat-stable up the the "melting point of over 1,500°C." Lee´s hurricane wind story would therefore have to crank up the hypothetical fire-temperatures at the Towers beyond the 1500C MP, or about 500C above the maximum temperature obtainable in an open air carbon fire.

The previously published Part One of this article reveals that R.J. Lee´s hypothetical "hurricane wind story" - even if proven true - could not account for the observed iron spheres in the WTC dust: Mr. Lee admits the result would be iron-oxide spheres, not iron spheres.

Mr. Lee does not mention this hurricane wind/blast-furnace scenario in his official WTC dust studies, so this story is not an official explanation for the reported molten and vaporized metals. Mr. Lee offers this "hurricane story" in a letter to a member of the JREF forum as a hypothetical explanation for the observed "extreme temperatures". It does not cite any sources so it is not meant to give a factual account of what actually happened. There is no evidence for high winds stoking the WTC fires, and no sources to support the notion that such winds could turn a normal building into a blast furnace.

Rev. Chris Mohr claims in his Skeptic Magazine article that survivors from the Twin Towers reported hurricane winds in the core but he cites no source. There are no reports of any high winds fueling the weak fires at the tops of the Towers, which were the only fires in the Twin Towers. There are no reports of fiery hurricane winds blazing down people in the cores of the Towers, but one survivor from the bottom floors of one Tower heard explosions and felt a wind that had a "hurricane-type force". But this wind was obviously not melting spheres or carrying molten spheres since the witness survived and did not complain about any heat. Maybe the "wind" was thrust from explosives? There was no fire below this witness either (for the wind to fuel), so as Mr. Talboo and I already summed up for Rev. Mohr in the second part of our Harrit vs. Millette essay, this "hurricane narrative" has been thoroughly debunked, even by his friend Oystein on their own forum:
" incredible story involving hurricane winds producing the spheres found in the dust collected at the WTC, but skeptics have refuted that fairy-tale. Even Oystein admits it, stating that, to some extent they "made up" a "vivid story", and in another comment he says, "on the science and the details, their story... is almost certainly nonsense."
Chris Mohr has confirmed that he has read the essay quoted above, so it is peculiar that he is still refusing to acknowledge rebuttals to this fairy-tale in light of his own view of himself as an investigative journalist. But, Rev. Mohr does not want to hear that:
  "....[MirageMemories] accuses me of being blind, biased, unwilling to look at anythinhg that challenges MY beliefs! I might mention that I am the one who did not take RJ Lee at his word when he said iron-rich spheres are common in fires. I didn't even accept Crone's Particle Atlas and all the iron-rih shperes it shows."
Finally, Mohr implies in the above quote that said Particle Atlas supports his belief that normal fires create iron spheres, but of course it shows iron-oxide spheres, not iron spheres. The following comment by Oystein demonstrates how the JREF forum helps to spread this kind of non-sense:
"RJ Lee certainly understand that iron-rich microspheres are abundant. common an expected in most kind of ashes, including those from building fires[1].."
So, how does the JREF forum magically change iron-oxide spheres into iron spheres? Notice that little qualifier (the number 1) in the quote above? I have to give Oystein a nod for actually including the qualifier in the same comment, but unfortunately for Rev. Mohr, none of his forum friends have cared to explain the significance of it:
"[1] The McCrone Particla Atlas, Volume III, Edition Two (Ann Arbor Science Publishers, 1973), which is probably the standard reference.......... (this is mostly scanning a variety of particles shown in the SEM images; O and C were not measured with the 1973 equipment)."
The fact that the equipment did not record the oxygen content prevents the casual reader from realizing that those spheres are iron-oxide spheres like all fly ash spheres - as explained in Part 1 of this article! It is of course Chris Mohr´s prerogative to ignore these shenanigans by his forum friends, but maybe it would be wise to follow Dr. Greening´s example.