JREF Troll Spanxed: Harrit et al Do NOT Need Aluminum-Oxide Proof.

Readers sometimes wonder if some particular "debunker" is a paid disinformation agent. Sure, there are paid disinformation trolls out there, but it is good to keep in mind that most of the so-called "debunkers" are just normal people, with nothing better to do than to troll and rant anonymously on some forum, and that most of the really stupid comments are made by people that really are that stupid - au naturel.

Note: this article reveals that a hostile JREF troll accidentally debunked the old JREF defense-mantra that Harrit et al failed to prove a thermite reaction because they failed to prove that the aluminum in the spheres was in the form of Al2O3 aluminum-oxide: as it turns out, this is not necessary.

1) A commenter, known as Spanx, complained on the JREF forum (July 11, 2014) that he cannot find any data for aluminum in Dr. Harrit´s 2009 nano-thermite paper.

2) The lone truther on the forum, MirageMemories, replied that the references to aluminum are easy to find.

3) Someone who likes calling himself "kid meatball" then tried to save Spanx by claiming no aluminum was found in the residue of the ignited chips.
 
4) MM replied and corrected Mr. Kid, quoting Harrit et al:

"... iron-rich spheres were found in the post-DSC residue which contained iron along with aluminum and oxygen…"

5) Spanx still could not take the hint and kept on citing a paper on thermite residue, and ranting about aluminum in Harrit´s paper:

"Why doesn't the 2009 Bentham paper match known Thermite ? http://www.ysxbcn.com/down/2014/01_en/36-p0263.pdf Where is the Al in the Bentham paper ?"

6) The reply from MirageMemories exposes Spanx´s ignorance and tries to conceal the laughter:

"You can obtain a copy of the 2009 Bentham paper here;
http://benthamopen.com/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.htm
Dr. Harrit´s paper has been available for reading for more than five years now, and the numerous graphs and figures are quite easy to read and understand, for most people.
The aluminum in the chips before ignition can be seen seen in figure 7.
The finding of elemental aluminum is shown in figure 17.
The aluminum in the post ignition residue is quite clearly shown in figures 25 and 26."

MM´s response goes on to really embarrass Spanx by informing him that he has effectively debunked the only defense that more "sophisticated" fellow JREFers had used against the evidence for aluminum in the residue of the ignited red/gray chips:

 "I am really surprised that this "no aluminum" statement is being raised. Even Oystein and Sunstealer never attempted to pretend that no aluminum can be found in Harrit´s paper. What they did try and do was claim figure 17 showed aluminum in a chip that did not match the others, and, that Harrit did not prove a thermite reaction because he does not prove that the aluminum in figures 25 and 26 is in the form of Al2O3 aluminum oxide.
Your linked paper (http://www.ysxbcn.com/down/2014/01_en/36-p0263.pdf), provides an effective debunking of that argument by showing that the aluminum in the residue does NOT have to be in the form of Al2O3, because it can be found in aluminum-iron-oxygen compounds.
This bears particular consideration when you look at figures 25 and 26."

As always, whenever Spanx et al find themselves with stinky pants, they change the subject in the next comment and imagine this prevents people from smelling Mr. Stinky...and still some of them wonder why the forum lost its credibility years ago..

Anyone remember their former leader, Dr. Greening, and why he left in disgust?