If I acquired dust samples and analyzed them, I wouldn't know where to publish the
Top Expert come forth:9/11 Bldg 7 downed with explosives
Originally posted by pteridine
I agree that facts are not important to you. You do not recognize the errors of the Jones
paper even when I explain them. Please go to all your favorite websites and ask the
questions about DSC in air and imbalances in energy output. I suspect that the people who
frequent such sites are no more competent than the Jones team and might not realize how bad
the Bentham paper is, but maybe someone will suggest that they have moved on and that Jones thermite paint is passe.
I have many publications in peer reviewed chemistry and technology journals
and regularly review papers for Analytical Chemistry and Catalysis.
That is why when I read Jones' paper, I had to tell the non-technical readers of ATS why it didn't prove
what it is claimed to have proved. If it had proved the claims, I would have so stated.
Jones and other such will not be able to buffalo ATS readers based on their reputations in
the CT communities.
You wouldn't know where to publish the results, looks to me you can,t tell the truth.
[edit on 13-8-2010 by impressme]