Comment: What?

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Trust vs Knowledge. (see in situ)

What?

Obviously yours is an argument of trust, not knowledge. You trust your "expert" sources others trust theirs. Great.

This isn't at all true. You've put the word "expert" in quotes like it's supposed to undermine my argument. The data is straightforward and published. Without elemental aluminum, there can be no thermite. The claim of thermitic material that Gage made was completely bogus and was so bad the editor in chief of the paper resigned.

What you're saying is that you have a mathematician who says 1+2=4, and I have one who says 1+2=3, that we're somehow on equal footing here.

The scientific evidence completely busts the point claimed by Gage.

Focus here guy. You've seen evidence from both sides (or haven't, if you haven't read the summary of the independent scientific analysis of the chips), and should make a decision based on that. It's verifiable. Look and decide.

Eric Hoffer