quote:

Originally posted by {b.s.e.} Spin that, troll-doll.

It's from 911blogger.com. Is any further spin needed?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov It's from 911blogger.com. Is any further spin needed?

He blithely dismissed solid evidence in favour of some benign prattery from screwloosechange.blogspot, hence my 'Quid pro quo' statement.

Anyways!

quote:

Originally posted by {b.s.e.} Blah blah blah, at least I'll spare you the 'yo mama' horseshit. MTV would love to have you, by the way. Quid pro quo: Spin that, troll-doll.

lols, i love the desperation and attempts by the truthers to try and spin what is blatant evidence that the bentham "journal" is a sham, with no peer review and articles published without their editors being informed.

if you guys knew anything about proper research and peer review you would know that the manner in which bentham operate are highly suspect and not at all the way a proper journal conducts its business. i especially liked this part

quote:

“I was in fact in doubt about them before, because I had on several occasions asked about information about the journal without having heard from them. It does not appear on the list of international journals, and that is a bad sign. Now I can see that it is because it is a bad journal”, says Marie-Paule Pileni and continues: “There are no references to the Open Chemical Physics Journal in other articles. I have two colleagues who contributed to publishing an article which was not cited anyplace either. If no one reads it, it is a bad journal, and there is not use for it”, is the harsh verdict.

if you have $600 you can get published in bentham, regardless of your paper's quality.

still waiting for that peer reviewed article guys. almost 9 years. tick tock!

___________________

quote:

lols, i love the desperation and attempts by the truthers to try and spin what is blatant evidence that the bentham "journal" is a sham, with no peer review and articles published without their editors being informed.

Funny, I wonder if you still believe the 9/11 commission was not a sham?

quote:

Originally posted by {b.s.e.} He blithely dismissed solid evidence in favour of some benign prattery from screwloosechange.blogspot, hence my 'Quid pro quo' statement. Anyways!

Yeah, deny the hard evidence and bicker over bullshit they read from trolling websites. Official story believers are the ones wearing the tinfoil hats this present day apparently. Deflecting common sense/hard facts is the only way you can still believe in fairy tales like Harry Potter and the 9/11 official story.

Maybe I should post one of those retarded tinfoil hat pictures they use to make of people who actually think for themselves.

Maybe not.

so, when do you guys expect this bentham article to get traction and actually do something? what would you say it has influenced the most?

___________________

Paying to publish an article regardless of content isn't exactly a peer-reviewed journal. This is your Holy Grail of evidence?

Also, hyperbole doesn't help your case. To take deficiencies in the scope of the 9/11 commission that exist due to resources and time more than anything else and to extrapolate that into widespread conspiracy among all members of the government (including federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald?) is quite a stretch and doesn't lend a lot of credence to your story.

___________________

You guys are still dancing around the fact that they found nano thermite in the 9/11 debris. This is hard evidence, it did not come from the aircraft, the materials in the trade towers or even the magical jet fuel you guys believe led to "thermal expansion" in the towers eventually causing them to blow the fuck up.

Cannot answer that one can you, no screwloosechange links for this one right KFC?

And yes the fact that the 9/11 commission was a cover up and actually omitted tons of evidence should tell you a lot. Making excuses for an investigation that failed at the highest levels shows the official story cannot hold up when questioned (properly) and neither can the individuals who support it.

The official story, the trade towers , the airplanes, the evidence and the people who believe the fairy tale all have something in common, there is nothing to back them up but a myth which crumbles as soon as you ask one simple question.

The only way around it is to stick to the fairy tale while lying more and have the mass sheep who cannot think for themselves drink the kool aid all day long.

Colorut, you don't understand. If you can't get your views into a legitimate scientific journal, you have no credibility, no matter what you find. I honestly, would like this to happen, so that we can investigate where this thermite supposedly came from. At this time, we can't do that.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut You guys are still dancing around the fact that they found nano thermite in the 9/11 debris. This is hard evidence, it did not come from the aircraft, the materials in the trade towers or even the magical jet fuel you guys believe led to "thermal expansion" in the towers eventually causing them to blow the fuck up.

LOL..

[excerpt from journal]

The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 °C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.

_________________________________

Regardless of the origin and credibility of said journal, the findings are irrefutable. Active nano-thermite is not a bi-product of muthafuckin' office fires, and that the majority of the scientific community will not acknowledge this proverbial 'loaded gun' as fact is worrisome, to say the least; as it speaks volumes of their own 'credibility'.

But hey, at least they're alive, right?

Oh man, do I have a deal or two for some of you guys...

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.