More Evidence of "Truther" Deception

The Journal of Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories has yet more evidence of “truther” deception.

First, as we see here, “truthers” tend to be VERY selective when using photographic and video evidence.

This quote from here makes the point quite nicely: “Photos of the towers fires at different stages/intensities are also used to suggest that the fires were not intense enough to weaken the structural steel in the towers. As if one photo from one face of the building and at one point in time depicts the entire event. That’s obvious to anyone seriously investigating this.”

In addition, the 911 “Truth” Movement deliberately distorts pictures of the collapse of the towers as well ( source).

For example, as we see here , “truthers” assume that the debris being flung out is steel when, as points out, anyone with half a brain- which is more that “truthers” have- knows said debris is the aluminum cladding.

Second, the thermite claim is another “truther” lie. As we see here on the bottom of page 9 of this site, CT’s tend to cherry-pick photos, such as the photos of iron workers cutting the steel beams and claim that’s proof of thermite and that there’s no evidence that iron workers cut the beams to remove AFTER the collapse.

However, if you refer to the top of page 10 of this paper, you’ll see that, as usual, the REAL evidence proves the “truthers” wrong. Oh, and one more thing, before “truthers” claim that photo is a lie or government propaganda, I suggest you refer to this quote from here: “ But what’s really telling is where the photo came from. The same place the conspiracy theorists got theirs.”

Conspiracy theorists also use misleading comparisons, such as the claim that steel frame buildings can’t collapse as a result of fire ( source).

For example, if you refer to the pictures about halfway down page 10 of this site, you’ll see the buildings “truthers” use to attempt to prove their lies.

The problem is those buildings in said photos are REINFORCED CONCRETE; the WTC was NOT reinforced concrete ( source).

This quote from here emphasizes the lack of credibility of the “Scholars” for 911 Truth: “To date the “Scholars” have yet to produce a single credentialed member in the fields of structural or civil engineering, which would seem an important omission, given that the bulk of their argument lies in the field of explaining the collapse of the World Trade Centers, as well as the facts of the crash at the Pentagon. They do, however, have an overabundance ‘experts’ qualified discuss the meaning of life and man’s place in the universe. While there is nothing inherently wrong with being a professor of philosophy or theology, this combined with other evidence does indicate that their search is more for spiritual truth, than scientific truth, and does show why they produce work of such questionable academic standards. Trying to pass off this spiritual quest as rigorous academic work is inherently misleading.”

In short, every single “truther” argument is about as logical as putting a screen door on a submarine.


Posted August 1, 2008 by Victor Chabala in Real 9/11 Facts

Tagged with

%d bloggers like this: