First and foremost, this is not my hypothesis. If it were, I would have gone about supporting it in a much different way.
Secondly, you made a fallacy in determining what evidence is and isn't.
For example; the police enter a crime scene at a store. A shooting is reported. However, there is no gun, no bullet casings and no bullet hole. However one of the suspects has traces of gunpowder on his right wrist that is consistent with firing a gun. The problem is, the store sells and makes fireworks. Thus, there are exact chemicals present in the entire store.
The man denies being the shooter. When the traces of gun powder are presented to him, he says there is loads of gun powder all over the building.
Would the police dismiss the gun powder on his right wrist as evidence that he was the shooter? Of course not.
They would have to if it was from the fire works unless he used a black powder pistol.
Nitro cellulose powder smokeless gun powder, and black powder in the fire works would have a totally different chemical makeup.
If it was black powder it most likely came from contamination with the fireworks. If it was smokeless powder it would have came from modern ammunition.
They would consider it
partial/incomplete/unconfirmed evidence and try to rule out other causes. If the other causes could not be ruled out, it would then NOT be evidence.
Again, thermate like residue, and microsperes would be expected in a thermate reaction.
They are Also expected in the World Trade Center Collapses, there are even manufactured micro spheres in the buildings as well as the ones that would have occurred in the fires I have made thousands of micro spheres nothing unusual at all about them at all the kindling temperature of steel is 980c.
Magnetite spheres begin forming at 700c in certian conditions.
This evidence, at the moment, remains inconclusive because natural causes have not been ruled out yet (truth movements job to do it). And no natural causes have been shown to show these effects in the lab (and reported in a journal or official report).
Oh I would say that will not be long in coming after all it is just simple chemistry really you should read up on welding and cutting steel using steel as the fuel with oxygen.
From a debunkers point of view, the burdon of proof in on the CT and thus, no complete/direct/hard evidence exists.
From the point of view of a skeptic, signs of thermate use are reported, but at the moment inconclusive. But, just because the evidence is inconclusive, it doesn't mean NO evidence exists (as demonstrated with the example above-->partial/incomplete evidence can have merit)
On a different note;
You are a NASA Engineer and I am nothing of the sort. I expect you to know more about these things than I, especially considering your high debunking status.
However you have misled me more than once on this thread about thermate.
1. You said barium nitrate was not reported and therefore disproves Thermate--->this is untrue becuase barium nitrate is not always used
That comment of R.Mackey's, was in reference to Jones stating military grade thermate in his paper, Barium nitrate is used in most military grade preprepared thermates.
Barium would be in the collapse Chemistry as well it is a common lubricant in grease and car tires.
2. You also said the by products of a thermate reaction could not cause sulfidation.--->this is not true considering a by-product is SO2.
Yes but you would have to entrap the SO2 in a reducing environment with carbon, then produce sulfur, then react the sulfur with the heated steel at a temperature below 520c that is almost impossible to do given the violent behavior of thermate
Since you are a NASA engineer and have high debunking status, these simple mistakes cannot be forgiven and give me no choice but to be skeptical of your "no evidence" claim.
I think you pulled similar reasoning with DRG in your debunking of his book; debunking 911 debunking. So please don't take it personally.
