Hi, I'm a great fan of your work.Thanks for the compliment. I wrote one of the authors of the paper and shared your comment with him, here is his reply:
Recently, a debunker offered a unique criticism of the thermite issue that I've never seen before. I'd really appreciate if you could address and debunk his criticism. That would really help the truth movement.
Without further ado, here is a link to the criticism: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4607894#post4607894
the debunker added - "And something not mentioned there is that he did not test the combustion of the substance in an inert atmosphere. Thermite has its own oxidizer, so test it in a oxygen free environment and it might help to prove that it is indeed thermite. Why don't you ask them why they refuse to run this simple test?"
I would really appreciate it if you could address these concerns. Thank you."
We ran the test the way we did because the literature described a previous test of nanothermite that was run in an ordinary atmosphere. If we had run it in an inert atmosphere, we would not have been able to compare apples to apples in terms of the energy released.
We agree that the test you are describing should be run by someone. We did our study on a shoestring budget as pro bono work, and there are many tests that we have not been able to run yet. It would be nice if others would pick up the ball and do some tests rather than continuing to ask us to do everything. I'm not saying that every one of our critics should perform such tests, but those who have the qualifications and the interest in the topic should consider investing a little more than they have been investing so far to get to the bottom of what really happened on 9/11.
Also, some people seem to think that it is up to us to answer every possible question about the topic of our paper before one single part of it will be taken seriously. When will the data that we DID provide either be explained differently in a manner that has scientific integrity, or else be accepted for what it is, and a new investigation following proper procedures be initiated? Some people will never believe us no matter how many tests are run. They wouldn't believe in the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center even if Mark Loizeaux produced a signed confession. - Gregg Roberts, 911research.wtc7.net, ae911truth.org
The Kaolinite talking point is addressed in this video.
Note: Mark Loizeaux is quoted as saying, "I'd make a great terrorist," but he didn't really sign a confession statement. :)
