Debunking 9/11 Naysayers
Ran across a good succint article... it really gets to the heart of the "naysayers".
I reviewed what the 9/11 conspiracy theorists call "TRUTH" only to be sorely disappointed at the shallowness of what they call undeniable "facts".
The so called 75 experts used to move forward the 911truth site sure do not know what they are talking about.
Some 75 experts on the "other side" can produce forensic evidence, scientific analysis, photos, simulations, and expert testimony and yet will not be able to disproved the myths that underlie many conspiracy theories because they only hold to their belief based on feelings and emotions and that feeling is that they all hate Bush.
Read Article Here
The 9/11 denial movement has enjoyed a measure of success in recent months in gaining national attention. We have seen them on CNN, heard them on radio shows, and their books and websites abound. These conspiracy theorists are eager to confront and deny any truth about the 9/11 tragedies. All except for one. No 9/11 denier is willing to face or admit this truth: They want 9/11 to have been a government conspiracy rather than a terrorist attack.
I do not make such a statement casually. It is based extensive interactions with many 9/11 deniers over several months. I have participated in several Internet forums that discuss 9/11 conspiracy theories. I have even posed as a 9/11 denier to trade theories and rumors. Conspiracists don't arrive at their conclusions based on a skeptical and dispassionate evaluation of forensic evidence or expert analysis. Instead, they avidly embrace and utilize any circumstantial evidence that appears to support their favorite theory. They ignore logic. They employ logical fallacies in their arguments. It is this lack of objectivity and reasoning that betrays the fact that the 9/11 denier is motivated, not by truth, but by the desire to defend and validate their desired theory, namely that 9/11 was "an inside job".
During these interactions, I offered forensic evidence, scientific analysis, photos, simulations, and expert testimony that disproved the myths that underlie many conspiracy theories. For my temerity, I was rewarded with insults and name-calling, and I was frequently labeled as a "government shill" or a "paid disinformation agent". According to the 9/11 deniers, this information had been manufactured or influenced by "the conspiracy cabal." Thus, rather than evaluating the offered information, 9/11 deniers attacked both the messenger and the source.
For example, during an exchange on the theory that the Twin Towers collapsed due to demolition explosives, I questioned the lack of support of this theory by any demolitions expert or structural engineer. I noted that NIST, as part of its extensive investigation, had enlisted the services of hundreds of professionals including engineers, scientists, architects, and demolitions experts. Wouldn't the findings of these professionals be considered valid expert analysis? The answer according to the conspiracy theorist was "no". Why? Because, to the 9/11 denier, NIST is a government agency controlled by the conspiracy. And, no engineers have come forward because they are being suborned with "lucrative" government contracts.
In Stephen Covey's seminal work, "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People", one habit is "begin with the end in mind". That habit is excellent for organizing projects. However, it is utterly out of place in the search for truth and answers. Scientific rigor and methodical evaluation of possibilities are keys to finding answers and truth. The conspiracy theorists, however, have fully internalized the "begin with the end in mind" habit in regards to 9/11. In their case, the "end" is that our government, in some shape or manner, perpetrated the 9/11 attacks or knowingly allowed them to occur. They start with that goal in mind and work backwards to find any circumstantial evidence that might support that goal.
Recent polls have suggested that this 9/11 denial viewpoint might encompass up to one-third of Americans. For example, an August poll by the Scripps Survey Research Center at Ohio University found that "More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East." Of course, the same poll also found that 38% believe that the government assassinated President Kennedy and 40% believe that the government is hiding the existence of extra-terrestrial life. Perhaps paranoid conspiracism is simply a mindset of our times.
In investigating the details of this poll, several interesting findings came to light. The detailed results that prompted the conclusion noted in the preceding paragraph show that 16% thought that government involvement was "very likely", 20% thought it "somewhat likely" and 59% thought it "not likely" while 5% didn't care to answer. However, when asked very specific questions on likely conspiracy theories, rather than a general question, the results dropped. Only 6% thought it "very likely" that a missile hit the Pentagon or that the Twin Towers were collapsed by demolition explosives compared to 80% who found those scenarios "not likely".
This poll also identified a rising level of anger against the federal government and concluded that "Widespread resentment and alienation toward the national government appears to be fueling a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories". The poll also noted that those most likely to accept conspiracy theories included young adults, frequent Internet users, Democrats, racial and ethnic minorities, and those with only a high school education.
Why do I mention this poll and note these results? Because they again demonstrate that 9/11 deniers are motivated, not by a desire to find an objective and scientifically demonstrable truth, but rather because they want 9/11 to have been a conspiracy rather than a terrorist attack. A government conspiracy validates their anger at the federal government, it helps their political and/or societal agenda. An "inside job" suits the goals of these people far more than the reality of the worldwide terrorist threat.
The 9/11 deniers refer to themselves as "truth activists". That is a half-truth. They are certainly activists. But they are not pursuing truth.
Ran across a good succint article... it really gets to the heart of the "naysayers".
I reviewed what the 9/11 conspiracy theorists call "TRUTH" only to be sorely disappointed at the shallowness of what they call undeniable "facts".
The so called 75 experts used to move forward the 911truth site sure do not know what they are talking about.
Some 75 experts on the "other side" can produce forensic evidence, scientific analysis, photos, simulations, and expert testimony and yet will not be able to disproved the myths that underlie many conspiracy theories because they only hold to their belief based on feelings and emotions and that feeling is that they all hate Bush.
Read Article Here
The 9/11 denial movement has enjoyed a measure of success in recent months in gaining national attention. We have seen them on CNN, heard them on radio shows, and their books and websites abound. These conspiracy theorists are eager to confront and deny any truth about the 9/11 tragedies. All except for one. No 9/11 denier is willing to face or admit this truth: They want 9/11 to have been a government conspiracy rather than a terrorist attack.
I do not make such a statement casually. It is based extensive interactions with many 9/11 deniers over several months. I have participated in several Internet forums that discuss 9/11 conspiracy theories. I have even posed as a 9/11 denier to trade theories and rumors. Conspiracists don't arrive at their conclusions based on a skeptical and dispassionate evaluation of forensic evidence or expert analysis. Instead, they avidly embrace and utilize any circumstantial evidence that appears to support their favorite theory. They ignore logic. They employ logical fallacies in their arguments. It is this lack of objectivity and reasoning that betrays the fact that the 9/11 denier is motivated, not by truth, but by the desire to defend and validate their desired theory, namely that 9/11 was "an inside job".
During these interactions, I offered forensic evidence, scientific analysis, photos, simulations, and expert testimony that disproved the myths that underlie many conspiracy theories. For my temerity, I was rewarded with insults and name-calling, and I was frequently labeled as a "government shill" or a "paid disinformation agent". According to the 9/11 deniers, this information had been manufactured or influenced by "the conspiracy cabal." Thus, rather than evaluating the offered information, 9/11 deniers attacked both the messenger and the source.
For example, during an exchange on the theory that the Twin Towers collapsed due to demolition explosives, I questioned the lack of support of this theory by any demolitions expert or structural engineer. I noted that NIST, as part of its extensive investigation, had enlisted the services of hundreds of professionals including engineers, scientists, architects, and demolitions experts. Wouldn't the findings of these professionals be considered valid expert analysis? The answer according to the conspiracy theorist was "no". Why? Because, to the 9/11 denier, NIST is a government agency controlled by the conspiracy. And, no engineers have come forward because they are being suborned with "lucrative" government contracts.
In Stephen Covey's seminal work, "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People", one habit is "begin with the end in mind". That habit is excellent for organizing projects. However, it is utterly out of place in the search for truth and answers. Scientific rigor and methodical evaluation of possibilities are keys to finding answers and truth. The conspiracy theorists, however, have fully internalized the "begin with the end in mind" habit in regards to 9/11. In their case, the "end" is that our government, in some shape or manner, perpetrated the 9/11 attacks or knowingly allowed them to occur. They start with that goal in mind and work backwards to find any circumstantial evidence that might support that goal.
Recent polls have suggested that this 9/11 denial viewpoint might encompass up to one-third of Americans. For example, an August poll by the Scripps Survey Research Center at Ohio University found that "More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East." Of course, the same poll also found that 38% believe that the government assassinated President Kennedy and 40% believe that the government is hiding the existence of extra-terrestrial life. Perhaps paranoid conspiracism is simply a mindset of our times.
In investigating the details of this poll, several interesting findings came to light. The detailed results that prompted the conclusion noted in the preceding paragraph show that 16% thought that government involvement was "very likely", 20% thought it "somewhat likely" and 59% thought it "not likely" while 5% didn't care to answer. However, when asked very specific questions on likely conspiracy theories, rather than a general question, the results dropped. Only 6% thought it "very likely" that a missile hit the Pentagon or that the Twin Towers were collapsed by demolition explosives compared to 80% who found those scenarios "not likely".
This poll also identified a rising level of anger against the federal government and concluded that "Widespread resentment and alienation toward the national government appears to be fueling a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories". The poll also noted that those most likely to accept conspiracy theories included young adults, frequent Internet users, Democrats, racial and ethnic minorities, and those with only a high school education.
Why do I mention this poll and note these results? Because they again demonstrate that 9/11 deniers are motivated, not by a desire to find an objective and scientifically demonstrable truth, but rather because they want 9/11 to have been a conspiracy rather than a terrorist attack. A government conspiracy validates their anger at the federal government, it helps their political and/or societal agenda. An "inside job" suits the goals of these people far more than the reality of the worldwide terrorist threat.
The 9/11 deniers refer to themselves as "truth activists". That is a half-truth. They are certainly activists. But they are not pursuing truth.
