If you really want to get into it all, then you will find a far longer list at the end of this posting. You will find a Popular Mechanics magazine article here.RationalWiki also takes you on a rebuttal tour of many of the claims.The Skeptical Inquirer article I referred to earlier, “ The 9/11 Truth Movement: The Top Conspiracy Theory, A Decade Later” examines the leading claims – the supposed free-fall collapse, the supposed presence of nano-thermite and molten steel, the supposedly mysterious WTC7 collapse – and explains why none of those claims withstand any critical examination.Widen your scope and you quickly discover that the arguments presented rapidly fall apart. If you tune in to just one side of the conversation, or simply watch a movie on YouTube, then it is easy to be fooled, or at least confused. The truth is this – the 9/11 Truther movement has failed to establish its claim.Įach and every argument presented as “evidence” has a solid wholly reasonable rebuttal. If you engage, then what you will discover is not truth, but instead much hand-waving, and a tedious gish gallop that is designed to simply wear the skeptic down. Gage travels the world giving presentations, and his group puts on news conferences and mock debates several times a year … 9/11 Arguments and Rebuttals In the past few years, architect Richard Gage’s group, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911 Truth), has provided “Truthers” with the ability to claim that thousands of engineering and architecture professionals demand a new investigation into the cause of the attacks. He claims this proves that explosives must have been used. Physics teacher David Chandler has produced several papers and Internet videos contending that high school physics easily shows that the tower collapses could not have happened from gravity alone. His work with others (including chemist Niels Harrit of Denmark) on detecting nanothermite in WTC dust is frequently cited as “peer-reviewed research” that proves “inside job” claims. Once known as Fleischmann and Pons’s competitor for “cold fusion” research in Utah, Steven Jones has written several 9/11 Truth articles. NASA scientist Ryan Mackey has written a very thorough critique of Griffin’s claims (Mackey 2008). Its basic claims are that Flight 77 could not have accounted for the damage at the Pentagon, that the Twin Tower fires were insufficient to cause their collapse, and that cell phone calls from the hijacked airplanes would have been impossible at the time (Avery 2009).ĭavid Ray Griffin is a theologian whose voluminous writings on 9/11 are frequently cited by other 9/11 theorists. The film, which has undergone several revisions, has been shown on many television stations but is primarily an Internet and DVD phenomenon. The 9/11 truther playersĪ Skeptical Inquirer article from 2011 lays out the key 9/11 Truther advocates …ĭylan Avery and Jason Bermas, the creators of the low-budget documentary film Loose Change, did much to give the 9/11 Truth movement significant momentum in 2005 and in following years. Don’t forget that you need to also disparage the entire 9/11 commission which should be easy, and most of the civil engineering community which is not so easy. If you are a believer then that’s the cue for playing the card marked “ Popular Mechanics is only a magazine, and the NIST study was seriously flawed“. The 9/11 Commission and most of the civil engineering community accept that the impacts of jet aircraft at high speeds in combination with subsequent fires, not controlled demolition, led to the collapse of the Twin Towers, but some groups disagree with the arguments made by NIST and Popular Mechanics, including Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the technology magazine Popular Mechanics have investigated and rejected the claims made by 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Associated with that is the claim that the Pentagon was struck by a missile launched by dark nefarious insider forces.Īs is highlighted by the Wikipedia page … The most popular conspiracy idea is that the twin towers and WTC7 were brought down by a controlled demolition, and that the two fully fuelled commercial aircraft impacting the buildings and setting off raging fires simply does not explain it. ![]() ![]() The Wikipedia page for that is “ 9/11 conspiracy theories“. As with many dramatic events, there is also a thriving narrative of 9/11 conspiracy theories. It describes the background, the actual attacks, the aftermath, the effects, and also lists the various investigations. The basic facts are spelled out on this Wikipedia page titled “ September 11 attacks“. The events of 9/11 are very well documented, you really do not need me to rehash the details because there are many other highly reliable sources.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |