Actually Hoz I have read plenty. I haven’t watched the videos you posted in the last link because I am at work. But I have watched plenty of those as well and will be very surprised I get home and there is anything there I haven’t seen before. As I discussed in my previous post, people using the word 'explosion' is not suspicious at all. It appears that supermegathermite can be whatever the conspiracy theorists want it to be depending on the week. It cuts, burns, explodes, burns in the rubble for six weeks, produces molten metal, ruins cars ect. On top of that hundreds of tons of the stuff is completely inconspicuous. I am aware of the site. I have even posted some mission statements here of some of the people who signed up. From the comments many of them make they appear to be very poorly informed regarding the events of 9/11. It doesn’t matter what qualifications you have when you make comments about all three buildings falling at freefall speeds or molten steel or Silverstein admitted he demolished WTC7. Many of them just say that WTC7 looked like a controlled demolition so they signed up. That's it. 700 people after nearly eight years? Many of them poorly informed? Not impressive. . The credibility of the website is further damaged by the main bullet point claims regarding the characteristics of a controlled demolition. Some of them can be shown to be false with little work. Pyroclastic? With the failure to get something published in a relevant, reputable journal the truthers are reduced to compiling lists on a webpage. It’s about as much credibility in the scientific community as myspace. 700? My mate has more facebook friends that that.