Tha would be your wrong assumption Scott. My statements about Hoz have nothing to do with his disagreeing with me. Here's two examples. The first is something I would expect someone who has studied Highschool chemistry to know. I stated repeatedly that Aluminium is a strong reducing agent, and that the Data Sheet for MEK, the solvent used by Harrit, explicitly states that you should not mix MEK with strong reducing agents. Hoz comes along, and in amongst his abuse makes the comment that: Which is the complete Opposite of what I said. In order to behave in the way Hoz describes, the Aluminium would be acting as an Oxidant, not a reductant. In high school, we got taught a mnemonic. LEO goes GER Loss of Electrons, Oxidation. Gain of Electrons, Reduction. The Oxidant is reduced. The reductant is Oxidized. So the reaction I was referring to would have the metallic aluminium being oxidized, not reduced by the MEK. His criticism of the use of the term 'Aluminoferric thermite' is a second example. Again, that's basic nomenclature that you get taught in Highschool. Fe(0) is Ferro (eg: http://www.raghavsteel.com/ferro-alloys.html ). Fe(II) Is Ferrous. Fe(III) is Ferric. Finally (for now) there's this beautiful post: Post #2276 where we have him saying this: Inspite of having previously made this post, post #2279 which included the following table: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The point that you have to understand here is that I'm not saying that he knows nothing about chemistry because i'm trying to be mean to him because he disagrees with me, i'm stating that he knows nothing about chemistry because he keeps getting basic things wrong that get taught at highschool level, like the role of oxidants and reductants in redox reactions, inspite of having implied enough times that you actually take what he has to say seriously from a chemistry perspective. Do you understand yet my point?