Posted on 08/16/2006 3:02:58 AM PDT by ajolympian2004
(New book from Popular Mechanics just released August 15, 2006)
Introduction
The first conspiracy theories about 9/11 began to emerge while the wreckage was still smoldering. As evidence accumulated that conclusively linked the hijackings to Al Qaeda, some self-proclaimed skeptics searched for alternative explanations. Many seemed driven to find a way to blame the United States for somehow abetting, or even orchestrating, the tragedy.
In the years since the attacks, these assertions have grown progressively more lurid and pervasive. If you search the phrase “9/11 conspiracy” on the Internet, you will discover more than 800,000 Web pages. A few skeptics make a responsible effort to sift through the mountain of available information, but a vast majority ignore all but a few stray details they think support their theories. In fact, many conspiracy advocates demonstrate a double standard. They distrust the mainstream media coverage and government sponsored investigations of 9/11, yet they cherry-pick from those same sources to promote their extreme notions: that the hijacked planes weren’t commercial jets, but military aircraft, cruise missiles, or remote-control drones; that the World Trade Center buildings were professionally demolished; that American air defenses were deliberately shut down; and more.
Increasingly, such beliefs are migrating from the fringes and into the mainstream. French author Thierry Meyssan’s The Big Lie, which argues that the U.S. military used one of its own guided missiles to attack the Pentagon, was a bestseller in France, and his claims have been widely repeated in European and Middle Eastern media. When Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wrote to President George W. Bush in May 2006, his rambling missive included broad hints that the American government was involved in organizing the attacks. Allegations of American complicity in 9/11 have become standard fare on talk radio, and among both radical left- and radical right-wing groups. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, a Democrat from Georgia, has held a Capitol Hill hearing on the topic. Celebrities have gotten into the act as well. “Why did Bush knock down the towers?” rapper Jadakiss asked in his 2004 hit “Why?” And, in an interview with conspiracy-oriented talk-show host Alex Jones, actor Charlie Sheen embraced a variety of popular conspiracy theories.
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion,” Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York was fond of saying. “He is not entitled to his own facts.” Sooner or later, even the wildest 9/11 theories rely on factual claims. And facts can be checked.
Popular Mechanics became involved in investigating 9/11 conspiracy theories in the fall of 2004, after an advertisement ran in the New York Times for the book Painful Questions by Eric Hufschmid, demanding that the 9/11 investigation be reopened. Hufschmid’s book includes a number of tangible claims regarding 9/11. It states, for example, that because jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel, the fires in the World Trade Center towers could not have caused their collapse. And it claims ample evidence exists to show that demolition-style explosives were prepositioned in the buildings.
As editors of a magazine devoted to science and technology, we saw these claims as significant. Was there hard evidence to support them? And, if so, what would be the implications for our understanding of 9/11? At the very least, we thought, someone should look into these allegations. If there were even a hint of truth to these or similar claims, then the conspiracy theorists had a point: There should be a deeper investigation.
Parts 2, 3 and 4 here -
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/3491861.html?page=1&c=y
---
Book blog site - (summary, book excerpts, etc.)
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog/911mythsblog
Forward by John McCain -
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/3491861.html?page=3&c=y
At Amazon -
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/158816635X/sr=8-1/qid=1155720312
---
Famous Daniel Moynihan quote (former Senator from New York) -
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. He is not entitled to his own facts."
Actually, they were professional skeptics and self-proclaimed experts.
do we really need Popular Mechanics to debunk an issue that should require no thought at all?
I for one will use Popular Mechanics for all my birdhouse building blueprints, but there is no need to Debunk 9/11. Just put those who believe in a US conspiricy on 9/11 in the bug-house where they belong.
....actually they were lefty hate pimps who would say anything for a little publicity
The hate President Bush at all costs conspiracy theory wackos do not live in the realm of common sense so I think it's great that Popular Mechanics puts their conspiracies to rest through scientific analysis that is beyond contestation.
It is great to have some at last debunked all these 9/11 theories. Got to remember that these folks are scared of a growing islamofacist movement, so they have to come up with viewpoints that neatly fit their thinking.
what is it , 36% in the most recent poll?
Poll....whose Poll....
CNN.....Washington Post....DU.
Please.
Well, it's nice that Popular Mechanics gave enough credence to the conspiracy wackos to "conduct an independent investigation" of the theories. And, they managed to snag one of the all-time time wackos of our time, John McCain to write the forward. Wowsers.
People can and will believe whatever they want. On 9/11, I saw video footage of two commecial jets slamming into the two tallest skyscrapers in New York City; I saw huge fireballs erupting from those crashes; and, I saw that after burning furiously for approximately an hour and one-half, the supporting structural members were no longer able to support the weight of the remaining structure and collapsed. There's nothing suspicious about it; it is explained in the theories of physics and it has been better explained by others not trying to sell a book.
I think they will try to resolve the issues relating to the fall of WTC 7 and using cell phones at 25,000 feet.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1676998/posts
Scripps Howard/ Ohio University
"using cell phones at 25,000 feet. "
I don't think there was ever any conclusive statement that anyone was using a cell phone. It was just an assumption and was propagated as such.
From the very get-go I'd always thought (assumed) that people were using the SkyPhones embedded in every bank of seats and every row of virtually all U.S. commericial airplanes.
"Poll....whose Poll.... CNN.....Washington Post....DU."
I'd doubt the Post would support the conspiracy theory about the Pentagon attack. They ran a two-page spread of short eyewitness interviews the first few days after 9/11. Maybe 50 to 75, and no one disputed what had happened.
People don't understand that 9:40AM in DC is normally bumper-to-bumper traffic on the several highways that surround the Pentagon. On any normal day there would have been literally hundreds of witnesses as to what happened. And so there were.
Every person who can be reached to not accept the growing idea that there was a conspiracy the better...one more stumbling block for the lefty moonbats. I think it's cool they did this, and may very well buy it just to have the info handy....
One witness was a fireman who was stopped by the road near the Pentagon and out of his vehicle. He stated that the plane flew so low above him, he jumped under his car for protection.
There are numerous eyewitnesses to the Pentagon crash. I have met two of them, one on 9/11 and one several months later who told me that she had seen the plane crash into the Pentagon from her apartment in nearby Pentagon City. She spent months in therapy getting over the sight. I personally drove home past the burning Pentagon and smelled the jet fuel. The mother of one of my son's Little League classmates was an Arlington County EMT and she found pieces of the plane in the wreckage, as well as remains of passengers.
Personally, I think it's a good idea for a magazine like Popular Mechanics to speak out about this. Lots of people read it and it's good to have someone on the side of reason talking about it instead of the regular media whores.
Great work by Popular Mechanics.
I had just had a discussion with a lib friend who had just seen some BS conspiracy film showing how what happened could have not possibly happened unless the building was filled with thermite, etc, etc. I'm like, "That makes absolutely no sense!' and she goes off with this scientific fact and not. I knew it was the same sort of science that says we never made the moon landing but did not have the correct scientific data available to prove what happened, had happened.
So now, armed with scientific data, I was able to respond to BS-science with the data that Pop Mech put together.
I am seriously considering taking out a subscriptioin to Popular Mechanics now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.