Why the Harrit Nano-thermite paper has not yet been debunked

Ragnarok said:
Mr Mackey, is there a bio about what you do and who you are, available on the web anywhere? I'd love to know a bit about your motivation on this board, and maybe what books you've wrote and the no doubt advanced qualifications you've achieved.

If you dont deem me worthy of reply, maybe one of your acolytes can clue me in?
Click to expand...

classic...preparation for "attack the arguer rather then the argument" is it?

well done. Classic. You do your kind (truther) proud.

TAM:)
 
Nope. Mere curiosity. I take it you know exactly who he is and why he devotes so much of his expertise to a backwater forum on the internet?
 
Ragnarok said:
Nope. Mere curiosity. I take it you know exactly who he is and why he devotes so much of his expertise to a backwater forum on the internet?
Click to expand...
Why, sure. He's a disinfo agent, obviously. His knowledge is manufactured from thin air in the False Knowledge Factory on Space Mountain. He's actually a robot, the Herbert Hoover one in the Hall of Presidents in DisneyWorld to be exact.
At least that's the answer you're looking for, isn't it?
 
Ah, the old disinfo agent technique. Quite impressive. Never heard that one before. There must be some sort of Godwinesque rule about accusing somebody whom you disagree with as being paid to do so. Yea. There is. It means you immediately forfeit the debate.

Yea. That just HAS to be it. I mean you couldn't just be out-and-out wrong, could you Ragnarok?
 
Ragnarok said:
Dave, are you a Bolton fan? If so, I may as well end our discussion here, as I know you'll argue 'til you are blue in the face and are as stubborn as a mule. ;)
Click to expand...

Wong cultural reference. You'll have to try harder than that to come up with an irrelevant reason to ignore me.

I suspect Ryan Mackey isn't a Wanderers fan either, but you never know with these rocket scientists.

Dave
 
Ragnarok said:
Nope. Mere curiosity. I take it you know exactly who he is and why he devotes so much of his expertise to a backwater forum on the internet?
Click to expand...

And the never-ending search for government agents goes on..... :rolleyes:
 
twinstead said:
Ah, the old disinfo agent technique. Quite impressive. Never heard that one before. There must be some sort of Godwinesque rule about accusing somebody whom you disagree with as being paid to do so.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's called "I have an enormous overinflated ego and such a high opinion of myself that the only reason anyone would DARE to argue my super-duper-supreme claims is because they are paid to do so!"

Its more simple known as "Being a Conspiracy Theorist".
 
Ragnarok said:
Mr Mackey, is there a bio about what you do and who you are, available on the web anywhere? I'd love to know a bit about your motivation on this board, and maybe what books you've wrote and the no doubt advanced qualifications you've achieved.

If you dont deem me worthy of reply, maybe one of your acolytes can clue me in?
Click to expand...

You can practically smell the paranoia.

My real published work is easy to find through a simple Google search. I also gave a half-page bio in my whitepaper, since your request has come up before. I've also had that "analyzed" by other paranoiacs such as Kevin Ryan, and there have been discussions of his subsequent useless (and incorrect) ad Hominem behavior here on the Forums.

As for "so much of my expertise," you'll find my 4.2 post per day average to be rather pedestrian, and nothing I've ever posted here made me so much as crack a sweat. Truther arguments are simply not that clever.
 
Last edited:
Ragnarok said:
Nope. Mere curiosity. I take it you know exactly who he is and why he devotes so much of his expertise to a backwater forum on the internet?
Click to expand...

I would not speak for him but I do know he is an engineer with NASA. Seems to me that he could have just as much time to devote to it as the several hundred professors, engineers, and architects claim to have defending their lunacy.

TAM:)
 
R.Mackey said:
My real published work is easy to find through a simple Google search. I also gave a half-page bio in my whitepaper, since your request has come up before. I've also had that "analyzed" by other paranoiacs such as Kevin Ryan, and there have been discussions of his subsequent useless (and incorrect) ad Hominem behavior here on the Forums.
Click to expand...

At least he never accused you of being a Bolton Wanderers fan.

Dave
 
Yeah, that would smart.

LA Galaxy, though, that would be fair... and they stink about as bad...
 
Sorry, but the paranoia seems to be emanating from you lot.

Pehaps you've been defending the torch of truth a bit too long and are all in need of a bit of a rest?
 
Ragnarok said:
Sorry, but the paranoia seems to be emanating from you lot.

Pehaps you've been defending the torch of truth a bit too long and are all in need of a bit of a rest?
Click to expand...
As usual, your logic is lacking here. Mocking you is not displaying paranoia. It's displaying the fact we don't take you seriously. At least I don't.
 
R.Mackey said:
You can practically smell the paranoia.

My real published work is easy to find through a simple Google search. I also gave a half-page bio in my whitepaper, since your request has come up before. I've also had that "analyzed" by other paranoiacs such as Kevin Ryan, and there have been discussions of his subsequent useless (and incorrect) ad Hominem behavior here on the Forums.

As for "so much of my expertise," you'll find my 4.2 post per day average to be rather pedestrian, and nothing I've ever posted here made me so much as crack a sweat. Truther arguments are simply not that clever.
Click to expand...
Learning to type and speed reading helps.
The 911 failed conspiracy theory delusion movement is too busy posting lies to see their heroes Jones and Harrit have no evidence for the conclusion they make up.
 
Originally Posted by R.Mackey
The "nanothermite" samples vary by about a factor of 10 in energy content. This nonuniformity proves it is not a "precision engineered" substance of any kind.

The top end of energy content exceeds the theoretical maximum for thermite by a factor of two, and the observed content of nanothermite by a factor of five. The substance cannot be thermite of any type. Its "contaminants" are, in fact, the dominant species.

Regardless of what it actually is, there's no evidence it was actually in the WTC to begin with, and considerable evidence against. The sampling strategy is wholly inadequate. A more thorough methodology was applied by Lioy et al., and they found no nanothermite at all. They did, however, find that a large fraction of the dust originated as paint, of numerous types.

There is absolutely no coherent explanation for why nanothermite would be in the structure in the first place. It offers no advantages, either as an explosive or an igniter, over cheaper, less troublesome, actually available ordinary technologies.

Absolutely no one has corroborated these findings, and the one person who was given a sample of the dust couldn't even match the visual description claimed by Dr. Jones.
Click to expand...

Are any truthers ever going to address this?
 
Ragnarok said:
Address what? Mackey's rulings and opinions on a substance he doesn't even believe exists?

Does part of Mr Mackey's job at NASA involve him dabbling in chemical physics?
Click to expand...

That would be a resounding NO NB.

to address this bs post.
Ryan Mackey has never said that nanothermite doesn't exist. Please show us that.

The questions and problems raised by Ryan Mackey (and more to the point by SUNSTEALER) are valid criticisms which no twoof will tackle. Why is that? Oh because they completely invalidate ANY "science" (snicker) from that "paper" (snicker).
 
Ragnarok said:
Address what? Mackey's rulings and opinions on a substance he doesn't even believe exists?

Does part of Mr Mackey's job at NASA involve him dabbling in chemical physics?
Click to expand...
You are wasting time attacking Mackey and failing to prove your support of a delusion that thermite brought down the WTC (Jones thinks it was in the ceiling tiles). You suppport a delusoin and attack Mackey for posting the truth.
Attacking Mackey is the only thing you can do since you have no evidence to support the paper. A paper by a few fringe nut case conspiracy theorists based on a delusions of Jones. They are paranoid that the US government did 911. They are finishing their professional careers with nut case ideas; at least we can all relax because only 0.00087 percent of professional engineers and scientists go nuts in their later years if we use the 911 delusoinal fall for these few failures as a guide.

Here is all the evidence Jones used to make up his theory.
From Jones' first paper:
6. The observations of molten metal (I did not say molten steel!) in the basements of all three buildings, WTC 1, 2 and 7 is consistent with the use of the extremely high-temperature thermite reaction: iron oxide + aluminum powder --> Al2O3 + molten iron. Falling buildings are not observed to generate melting of large quantities of molten metal -- this requires a concentrated heat source such as explosives. Even the government reports admit that the fires were insufficient to melt steel beams (they argue for heating and warping then failure of these beams) -- but these reports do not mention the observed molten metal in the basements of WTC1, 2 and 7. Again we have a glaring omission of critical data in the FEMA, NIST and 9-11 Commission reports.
Click to expand...
This is it hearsay used as evidence to make up his thermite scam. He went on 4 years ago to present lies about 911. He lies, you believe? How are you fooled by an old man who makes up lies?

Stop wasting your valuable time attacking Mackey who is correct and go get the knowledge, the education, the logical critical thinking skills necessary to see Jones and Harrit have conclusion that is a delusion. Good luck
 
Ragnarok said:
Address what? Mackey's rulings and opinions on a substance he doesn't even believe exists?

Does part of Mr Mackey's job at NASA involve him dabbling in chemical physics?
Click to expand...

So valid criticism don't count, only appeals to authority? Sorry, bud, but there are a bunch of people here who have advanced degrees in science. Appeals to authority don't work on us.

Will you even bother to address this, "The top end of energy content exceeds the theoretical maximum for thermite by a factor of two, and the observed content of nanothermite by a factor of five. The substance cannot be thermite of any type. Its "contaminants" are, in fact, the dominant species."

How can a substance be defined as thermite when it doesn't even meet one of the most important physical characteristics of thermite?
 
If you're in the mood for being helpful, rather than antagonistic, does anyone want to tell me if there is any truth to this following quote?

One demolition company noted that over 90 percent of the buildings' material was ejected outside their footprints. Of course, material falling outside a building's footprint could not contribute to its collapse.
Click to expand...

It would also seem to be defying the laws of gravity, don't you think? Or am I wrong in believing that collapsing stuff falls downward?

Oh, and has this been taken apart and ridiculed yet? http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/thermitics_made_simple.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom