JREF getting rid of the forum?

The JREF forum has been plagued by technical difficulties due to neglect, and it is down and out now. It may be in the process of some hardware upgrades to keep it going, but things may not be that simple. I am getting some fairly dependable reports indicating that the JREF has finally made the decision to cut the ties to the forum, after several years of dragging its feet. I do know that this was discussed on the forum before it was shut down, and that the following rumor was going around: Some forum members and administrators may be trying to make a deal to run the forum on their own, eventually under a new forum name. JREF may help to upgrade and run the forum during the transition period, which may last a few months. If this is true, 2014 may be the last year for an official JREF forum.

JREF forum member "NoahFence" stated on August 5, 2014 (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=10151286&postcount=3): 

Looks like JREF is disowning the forum.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=281170
and
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=281296 __________________

SPOOKYWEATHER: Ebola - What You're Not Being Told

SPOOKYWEATHER: Ebola - What You're Not Being Told: There are legitimate concerns that the virus can be transmitted easily via airborne droplets. If this is true then a lot more people are...

JREF´s Redwood: Stupid Is as Stupid Does

My last article was about an incident on the JREF forum where one local troll declared to the world that he could not find any data about aluminum in Dr. Harrit´s 2009 nano-thermite paper. The article reveals how a lone truther on the forum humiliated Mr. Spanx by pointing out that Harrit´s paper has been available for more than 5 years, and that it quite clearly shows the evidence for the elemental aluminum in the chips.

It also shows how a fellow JREF-Troll tried to save Mr.Spanx by claiming Harrit´s data does not show aluminum in the residue from the ignited chips, and how the truther debunks that by referring to two graphs in the paper. The truther also noted how Spanx has accidentally debunked the JREF defense against the aluminum in the residue: The JREFers had previously acknowledged the aluminum in the residue, but claimed that Dr. Harrit did not prove a thermite reaction because he did not prove the aluminum in the residue is an oxide. But Mr. Spanx had unwittingly cited a paper that proves this is not necessary.

In this article, I am revealing how another troll tried to save Mr. Spanx with an even more stupid comment: Enter Mr. Redwood! Instead of acknowledging Harrit´s aluminum data for the residue, Redwood tried to go back to pretending there is no aluminum in the pre-ignition data. How sophisticated!

But incredibly, that was not Redwood´s most stupid ploy! No, he also tried to debunk Harrit´s nano-thermite finding by claiming that Spanx´s cited paper on thermite-residues actually proves that normal thermite out-performs nano-thermites (as if it matters). But of course, Mr. Redwood only managed to prove how poor his reading comprehension skills are. He cited a bit from the paper saying that when one compares normal macro-sized thermite to the same thermite made with the sol-gel method, the normal non sol-gel thermite has a noticeably higher IGNITION POINT. The problem is that poor Redwood had "understood" this to mean that normal thermite is more powerful than std thermite, and he said so in a very arrogant post:

"In other words, micron-sized aluminum in thermite outperforms nano-meter sized aluminum, but formulating thermite into a gel makes it easier to ignite. That is all. Class dismissed."

The "lone truther" MirageMemories pointed out Redwood´s flatulent mistake in a very nice and polite way:

"All I see is a lot of posturing in an attempt to divert attention from the acknowledged aluminum revealed in figures 25 and 26 of the 2009 Bentham paper.
Your "money quote", where you seem to think that the words "advanced by 68.1 deg C and 76.8 deg C" refer to the micro aluminum outperforming the nano aluminum actually refer to the fact that when the micro aluminum thermite is prepared as "normal thermite" or "simple" as it is put in table 1, and not prepared as a "nanocomposite" or a "sol-gel thermite", the IGNITION POINT is raised by about 68 and 77 degrees!
Figure 5 and Table 1 in Spanx´s paper actually confirm that the nano aluminum outperforms the macro aluminum in every way: it ignites at a lower temperature, has narrower DSC peaks with more power (best of 4.3W vs best of 2.96W), and more energy (best of 1648J vs best of 955.2J)."

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?

Truth Breakthrough: C-Span with Richard Gage from Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth

On August 1st, 2014, Richard Gage from Architects and Engineers For 911 Truth was on C-Span talking about the events of September 11, 2001 and the need for a new investigation.


_____________________________________

The very fact that public pressure led to the above interview with Richard Gage is extremely significant. It reveals a fundamental truth.

People can beat the system.

The system still thinks it has to lie to the public to get what it wants, so that means it does not have absolute control. If enough people want justice it will happen.

A buzz has been created thanks to this event. Curious people will want to check out the information provided at AE911truth.org or perhaps even watch their film ~ Experts Speak Out:

911 Truth ~ Experts Speak Out


A Grand Jury investigation must be launched into 911 as an act of treason. The evidence for this crime has been in the public domain for many years. Members of NIST, the 911 Commission, and those that gave false testimony during these investigations, should be brought in for questioning and charged accordingly (where the proofs of their crimes are established).

Remember, the truth about 911 will most certainly END the War on Terror.