Originally Posted by
16.5
Hey Swing, let me let you in on a little tip, in "science" you don't necessarily have to repeat a test! You can take the data that the proponent of a theory publishes, and analyze that data, and using that same data, point out where they have gone wrong.
Exactly.
Why are truthers so stupid and assume the only way you can refute something is to do your own tests. The great thing about this paper is the data that is clearly displayed on public view. They will no doubt have other spectra and photos, but ofcourse there is limited space for a paper.
If people actually bothered to look at Fig 2 with an objective mind and if they actually knew what thermite was "nano" or not they would know that the two do not correlate. They would also note the scale in the bottom right hand corner and work out approximate thickness's. The mind might start to work and throw up the anomaly: how can approximately 20 microns of thermite melt steel
5000 times it's own thickness (for a 5mm thick)
I know it's hard because everyone has problems with scale when looking at SEM images - it's hard to get it into your head exactly how small things are when magnified
50,000 times.
Here is a mm to micron (µm) converter. Play around with it to see just how big these sample thickness's are compared with the macro world.
http://www.convertunits.com/from/mm/to/micron