"Has nanothermite been oversold to the 9/11 Truth community?"

[James H. Fetzer]

Kyle has missed the basic distinction between incendiaries and explosives.
It is difficult for me to explain how he could have missed it. No one claims
that thermite cannot cut steel: that is what incendiaries are all about! The
question is whether there is something justifiably called "exposive thermite"
or "explosive nanothermite". I suggest that Kyle give this another go. If he
rereads this article more carefully, he may understand what Mark is telling
us. And Kyle can ALWAYS attempt to meet "The Nanothermite Challenge"!

As Hightower observed to Gage, however: "This paper offers no evidence to me that explosive velocities anywhere near that of TNT (22,600 feet per second) can be produced by the nanothermites as described and presented. On page 10, it states, One limitation inherent in any thermite energetic material is the inability of the energetic material to do pressure/volume work on an object. Thermites release energy in the form of heat and light, but are unable to move objects.'"

You can find an example of thermite being used to do pressure/volume work in the form of cutting steel columns in this video, most notably starting at about 10:20 into it:

Steven E. Jones and other nanothermite theory advocates should be upfront and truthful about these issues, and clearly elaborate upon the factors missing from their theory that need further fleshing out.

Given the limited amount of dust samples available to them, I contend they've described the thermitic nanocomposite found in it as best as almost anyone could rightly be expected to. The few people in the world who have both the expertise and and access to reproduce such a sophisticated material could surely provide better answers to questions on how it might have been used, but I don't expect any of them to talk as long as our government is unwilling to properly investigate the matter.