9/11: Debunking The Myths [Popular Mechanics examines evidence and consults experts]

PopularMechanics ^ | March 2005 Cover Story | Editors of PM

[fight_truth_decay]

PM examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11.

For background on this investigative feature, please click here.

FROM THE MOMENT the first airplane crashed into the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, the world has asked one simple and compelling question: How could it happen?

Three and a half years later, not everyone is convinced we know the truth. Go to Google.com, type in the search phrase "World Trade Center conspiracy" and you'll get links to an estimated 628,000 Web sites. More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published; many of them reject the official consensus that hijackers associated with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda flew passenger planes into U.S. landmarks.

Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia. Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet, talk radio and in other media. Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories: The Pentagon was struck by a missile; the World Trade Center was razed by demolition-style bombs; Flight 93 was shot down by a mysterious white jet. As outlandish as these claims may sound, they are increasingly accepted abroad and among extremists here in the United States.

To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.

In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history.--THE EDITORS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next

[fight_truth_decay]

I posted the PM story as a comment within another FR article earlier today; but thought Popular Mechanic's findings might deserve its own thread and/or discussion.

CLAIM: No fighter jets were scrambled from any of the 28 Air Force bases within close range of the four hijacked flights. "On 11 September Andrews had two squadrons of fighter jets with the job of protecting the skies over Washington D.C.," says the Web site emperors-clothes.com. "They failed to do their job." "There is only one explanation for this," writes Mark R. Elsis of StandDown.net. "Our Air Force was ordered to Stand Down on 9/11."

Flight 175's Windows CLAIM: On Sept. 11, FOX News broadcast a live phone interview with FOX employee Marc Birnbach. 911inplanesite.com states that "Bernback" saw the plane "crash into the South Tower." "It definitely did not look like a commercial plane," Birnbach said on air. "I didn't see any windows on the sides."

Intercepts Not Routine CLAIM: "It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers," says the Web site oilempire.us. "When the Air Force 'scrambles' a fighter plane to intercept, they usually reach the plane in question in minutes."

Widespread Damage CLAIM: The first hijacked plane crashed through the 94th to the 98th floors of the World Trade Center's 110-story North Tower; the second jet slammed into the 78th to the 84th floors of the 110-story South Tower. The impact and ensuing fires disrupted elevator service in both buildings. Plus, the lobbies of both buildings were visibly damaged before the towers collapsed. "There is NO WAY the impact of the jet caused such widespread damage 80 stories below," claims a posting on the San Diego Independent Media Center Web site (sandiego.indymedia.org). "It is OBVIOUS and irrefutable that OTHER EXPLOSIVES (... such as concussion bombs) HAD ALREADY BEEN DETONATED in the lower levels of tower one at the same time as the plane crash."

"Melted" Steel CLAIM: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."

Seismic Spikes CLAIM: Seismographs at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y., 21 miles north of the WTC, recorded the events of 9/11. "The strongest jolts were all registered at the beginning of the collapses, well before falling debris struck the earth," reports the Web site WhatReallyHappened.com.

A columnist on Prisonplanet.com, a Web site run by radio talk show host Alex Jones, claims the seismic spikes (boxed area on Graph 1) are "indisputable proof that massive explosions brought down" the towers. The Web site says its findings are supported by two seismologists at the observatory, Won-Young Kim and Arthur Lerner-Lam. Each "sharp spike of short duration," says Prisonplanet.com, was consistent with a "demolition-style implosion."

Further Claims: with FACTS-DEBUNK DEBUNK DEBUNK.

"Because of more questions being posed by conspiracy theorists to PM after the online article, the editors of PM said they may do a follow-up article. Conspiracy theories were said to be coming from the "Far Far Far Left" and the "Far Far Far Right", reports a PM editor on Art Bell's radio show (03.06.05)."

Freeper, DugwayDuke, in posts #14 and #15 also lends some insight into the identity of these Far Far Far Right groups who once walked the hallowed halls of FR and probably still do.

[fight_truth_decay]

*PING*

[Dad yer funny]

ping for after supper,...like dessert

[seadevil]

I read that article (on a Delta flight, no less...lol). It was an outstanding article. But no matter what evidence is brought forth, the black-helicopter crowd (by the way, now that Bubba isn't in office, I guess they all landed for maintenance) will still be there. It's amazing to me that some people's lives are so devoid of anything meaningful that they'll do or say almost anything to feel important or to justify a pre-conceived notion; to the point of abject stupidity.

[Publius6961]

"There is NO WAY the impact of the jet caused such widespread damage 80 stories below," claims a posting on the San Diego Independent Media Center Web site (sandiego.indymedia.org).

It is to cry when seeing how total morons, ignorant of even the most rudimentary elements of science, chemistry, mechanics, dynamics, fluid mechanics, statics and physics, can make absolute claims like this one.

Why is it that doofuses who know the least say it the loudest?

[G.Mason]

The lumens emitted from these theories are so brilliant that even with sunglasses on I am blinded.

I must, therefore, give this to my brother for study, as he, being a member of The Flat Earth Society, will be able to see it.

[LS]

As a caveat, let me say I know that a hijacked jet hit the Pentagon---we have Barbara Olsen's cell phone records if nothing else to prove it---and that there is one very bad photographic sequence of a Pentagon security camera that captures a tiny partial glimpse of the plane.

I am just surprised that a public building like the Pentagon, especially on a day when other big landmarks were attacked, was not more photographed. I can't see any reason why people who might have photos or film of the plane wouldn't come forward, but it just seems weird that there weren't more photos of that plane. Again, NOT a conspiracy theory, just an observation. I know we only had one film of the first aircraft that hit the WTC, and that only by accident of a couple of French filmmakers with the FDNY. It just seems odd that some events in history are photographed to death and others just aren't.

[saquin]

I think it's just that there were a heck of a lot more people around the area of the WTC than there were around the Pentagon.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

"It just seems odd that some events in history are photographed to death and others just aren't."

Try this site. It's the most complete one I've found of all the news related to 9/11. Talk about a day that was photographed to death! http://www.september11news.com/

[armymarinemom]

ping

[TomB]

I am just surprised that a public building like the Pentagon, especially on a day when other big landmarks were attacked, was not more photographed. I can't see any reason why people who might have photos or film of the plane wouldn't come forward, but it just seems weird that there weren't more photos of that plane. Again, NOT a conspiracy theory, just an observation. I know we only had one film of the first aircraft that hit the WTC, and that only by accident of a couple of French filmmakers with the FDNY. It just seems odd that some events in history are photographed to death and others just aren't.

How many pictures are there of the FIRST impact of the WTC? A couple? And that was in the most photographed city in the world at an altitude that made it sure it couldn't be missed. The only reason there are so many pictures of the SECOND impact is because people were already looking that way.

Likewise, there was no reason for anyone to be pointing a camera at the Pentagon at that time, not to mention the plane came in at treetop level so even if there were people with cameras, they didn't have time to snap the shot.

Honestly, it really isn't that hard to understand.

[LS]

Thanks. Good site.

[LS]

Actually, I think there is only one video shot of the first plane impact on the WTC. Maybe the Pentagon isn't the object of a lot of tourists' shots, but you'd think it would be, along with the WH, Congress, and the memorials. Or maybe there isn't a good place from which to get a still pic of the Pentagon. I just thought it odd, and it wouldn't surprise me if, like in the JFK assassination, years after the fact people came forward with other photos.

[Ethan_Allen]

The Perplexing Puzzle of the Published Passenger Lists

'....Alleged Hijackers
On September 27, the Associated Press released a story about the hijackers. The version that I read, published in the ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, referred to these men as alleged hijackers. I shall do the same. I located this article by using www.daypop.com. Daypop is the most complete archive of recent news stories onthe Web. Daypop allows you to search for stories that are up to four weeks old. I searched for "passenger list" and "hijackers." Daypop produced three pages of links -- not that many. Almost all of these links were to the same AP story, which was published by numerous on-line news sources. Here is the version I used.

http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/terrorism/nation/0927hijackerlist.html

The headline reads: "FBI releases updated list of alleged hijackers." Above the headline is a link that says, "Click here to see 19 suspected hijackers." I clicked it. A large box popped up. It took a while for the photos to appear. There are 19 photos, along with names. The names appear to be Middle Eastern -- Arabs. Most of the men look like Arabs, although a few might pass as Mexicans. Only one of them looked vaguely like a European. They are divided into four lists, according to which flight they are said to have boarded. ****There were five men on American Airlines Flight 77, five on AA Flight 11, five on United Airlines Flight 175, and four on UA Flight 93 -- the flight that crashed in Pennsylvania.....'

'...Let's go to American Airlines Flight 77. This plane crashed into the Pentagon.

*** We are told that 64 people were on board. **** I count 56, including 6 crew members. There is no explanation offered for the absence of 8 names. **** There is no Arab name on this list. Something is definitely wrong here....'

AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77 PASSENGER LIST
American Airlines Flight 77, from Washington to Los Angeles, crashed into the Pentagon **** with 64 people aboard. [I ONLY COUNT 56 - Ethan Allen]

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html

No Arabs on Flight 77
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=++no+arabs+on+flight+77

I'm waiting to hear your explanation. There must be one.

[Ethan_Allen]

'I am just surprised that a public building like the Pentagon, especially on a day when other big landmarks were attacked, was not more photographed. I can't see any reason why people who might have photos or film of the plane wouldn't come forward, but it just seems weird that there weren't more photos of that plane'

FILM OF PENTAGON CONFISCATED 911
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=FILM+OF+PENTAGON+CONFISCATED+911

[Ethan_Allen]

'Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia. Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet, talk radio and in other media. Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories: **** The Pentagon was struck by a missile;...'

Hey, I'm with Rumsfeld:

RUMSFELD SAID MISSILE HIT PENTAGON
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=+RUMSFELD+SAID+MISSILE+HIT+PENTAGON

Sounded to me like it came from the south. Loud, low, fast, and whiny. Since I had already been forewarned that something would happen in September, I immediately thought missile, even as I was standing in front of the TV watching the towers burn. Some people closer to the Pentagon said the plane (?) they saw was silent. I've read reports that depleted uranium was in the air for about a week.

I don't know exactly what happened that day, but count me as one who does NOT believe the official story.

[ncpatriot]

Art Bell had a guy from PM on his show last night talking about this.

[fight_truth_decay]

years after the fact people came forward with other photos. That was a subject adked on the Bell show. The PM editor responded that some of the "evidence" may have been withheld for investigative purposes, as in any crime investigation; and may be released in a couple years.

[fight_truth_decay]

Many more conspiracy theories will be in the next report, if one is done, reported the editor of PM on the Bell show.

[traumer]

Good reading... will continue later - it's rather long :o)