We keep hammering on the Blog that masquerades as an “academic journal” known as http://www.journalof911studies.com/. The predictions I made in a SKEPTIC Magazine article have held out: their content has dried up, and when a wellspring does gurgle up from the muck, it’s something like its last entry, August 2nd’s, by the well-known fraud Kevin Ryan: The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites.
What is a nano-thermite, you ask? Well, as Ryan misinterprets it, it’s a teeny tiny version of a thermite mixture that is orders of magnitude more powerful than its larger-grained namesake. It wouldn’t be a Kevin Ryan entry without a lie or two, and he wastes no time:
The high surface area of the reactants within energetic sol-gels allows for the far higher
rate of energy release than is seen in “macro” thermite mixtures, making nano-thermites
“high explosives” as well as pyrotechnic materials (Tillitson et al 1999).
And, of course, if we actually go to the source he cites (warning: 255 pages long, one of which he uses), we find this claim to be absolutely untrue. A “high explosive” is something that explodes instead of burns. A “low explosive” is the opposite. The article specifically states that its authors are continuing to test the new mixture’s “rate of burn” and that “Thermitic reactions are extreme exothermic reactions that involve a metal reacting with a metallic oxide to form a more stable oxide and the corresponding metal of the reactant oxide,” virtually precluding anyone from honestly thinking that they’re talking about a high explosive.
But most damning of all, the second to last paragraph of the article Ryan uses states:
Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) of this energetic nanocomposite showed an exotherm at ~260C, indicating that it is indeed energetic, whereas the trace for neat AP shows no exothermic reaction in the absence of the fuel skeleton.
Around two hundred and sixty degrees Celsius? Why, that’s cooler than the jet fuel!
How on earth could Kevin Ryan have missed this? Answer: he couldn’t have. No one could honestly be perusing legitimate resources to update their hysterical quasi-Blog and stumble across a mere one-page article, quote from all over it, and miss that one sentence. At the risk of being redundant, it appears that the 9/11 conspiracy theorists are once again trying to deliberately lie to people to give their personal beliefs a veneer of academic plausibility, which they so desperately need but so utterly lack.