Follow-up: Popular Mechanics debunks 9/11 conspiracy theories

A friend referred this to me when I mentioned a recent poll by Scripps-Howard saying that 36% of Americans believe that 9/11 was either assisted by the U.S. government, or it was not involved, but knew it was going to happen and did nothing to prevent it.

About 1-1/2 years ago Popular Mechanics published an articled titled “9/11: Debunking the Myths.” The article explains the following stories and claims, quoting authoritative sources for each:

  • The “pod” underneath the right wing of Flight 175
  • The supposed Air Force stand-down order
  • The claim that Flight 175 was a military aircraft or fuel tanker
  • The claim that it’s routine to intercept civilian flights that do not respond to air traffic controllers
  • The claim that the plane crashes could not have caused all the damage that occurred before the buildings collapsed
  • The claim that the steel could not have melted (false premise) at the temperatures reached by the jet fuel fire (also a false premise)
  • The claim that only explosive charges could have created the concrete dust that people saw as the towers collapsed
  • The claim that seismic spikes recorded by seismographs show that demolition charges were set off
  • The claim that WTC 7 was brought down by demolition charges
  • The claim that the impact holes in the Pentagon were too small to be from a plane
  • The claim that a missile must have hit the Pentagon because windows around the crash site were still intact
  • The claim that no airplane wreckage was found at the Pentagon (this is also answered by links in my previous post on this topic)
  • The White Jet at the Flight 93 crash site
  • The claims that Flight 93 was hit by a heat-seeking missile

The article lists 71 acknowledged sources for their investigative piece, some of whom have been quoted in conspiracy theorist literature inaccurately. They said that in all, 300 experts and organizations were consulted for the piece.

You’ll notice that every fact segment for every conspiratorial claim referenced in the article is answered with direct quotes from identifiable experts. This is what scholarship is supposed to look like!


One Response to Follow-up: Popular Mechanics debunks 9/11 conspiracy theories

  1. stinker says:

    Alsok, check out the book “Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory” due out in March by Dr. David Ray Griffin.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: