First, I applaud you for watching at least part of the interview of chemical engineer Mark Basile.(XXYOUTUBE-JZNQq7XBLwcX X ) I agree with you in part -- I would like to see a paper detailing his methods, data, analysis, and conclusions. Some of his experiments are of course available on-line, if you were interested enough to put a little effort into a search, and the slow-motion videos he has made of the red-gray chips from the World Trade Center dust igniting and producing molten iron and other thermitic byproducts are better seen in video format than as interpreted in text, but it would be great to have data from spectroscopic analysis, too.911, You are like the creationists, the climate change deniers, or the potheads who try to demonstrate that cannabis is a cure-all miracle drug.
You don't understand the scientific method, or good science from junk science. You cherry-pick the data that fit your crackpot theory, quote it out of context, and ignore the rest.
I was especially amused by the guy claiming to be a chemical engineer who admitted that he did not have the proper equipment to test the dust. So he made up some other test method and concluded, nonetheless, that there was thermite in the dust. This guy has no paper documenting his test method or its reliability based on testing blanks, standards and other quality control measures. If this guy was legit, he would have written up his study so everyone else could understand and scrutinize what he did. But instead, he is just another talking head on youtube who you rely on as an expert.
Your most recent post demonstates just how pranoid and disturbed you really are. Ted Kaczynski would be proud of you.
Understanding the "scientific method" in some general way is part of it. You also need to understand the purpose of the analytical tools (and the math and the jargon). Basile admitted that he didn't have access to a differential scanning calorimeter (DSC), a tool used for thermal analysis, but a DSC isn't necessarily what you would use to identify thermite. If you want to identify the elements present in a sample, you can do a spectroscopic analysis.
By the way, you never did explain how the "ACTIVE THERMITIC MATERIAL DISCOVERED IN DUST" paper that I linked to previously
had been "thoroughly discredited." I'm not aware of a single peer-reviewed paper that challenges that team's conclusions, and if you are interested in seeing data from a DSC (as well as spectroscopic analysis and high-magnification photographs of the crystaline structures of the thermitic material, read the paper.