On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 13:28:29 -0800, "George Herbert" george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
What is wrong with that page?
It gives far to much credence to their absurd theories.
Look at it this way: if I said to you that 300 people in the world believed that the moon was made of green cheese, and that the "moon made of rock" theory was a hoax perpetrated by the evil American government, and then created articles on Scholars for Green Cheese Truth, List of researchers supporting Moon Cheese Hypothesis, Alternate Explanations of Moon Construction, Evidence for Green Cheese Moon and so on and so on, then the whole walled garden would be gone by morning, and rightly so.
We have a *massive* collection of articles on these nutters and their absurd views, and most of them are "notable" solely for propounding absurd theories which violate Occam's Razor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Researchers_questioning_the_official_account_of... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Truth_Movement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_demolition_hypothesis_for_the_collap...
and so on and so on. All classic conspiracy theory shit: We "know" that their explanation is bogus, they refuse to tell us the truth, what are they hiding, and variations on that theme. If we can't rebut something which is obviously bogus from credible sources, that indicates to me that maybe it should not be there at all. Aetherometry and pseudoscience all over again.
Meanwhile the rest of the world - to a fairly good approximation 100% of it - accepts that it was an act of terrorism, and that the buildings collapsed because nobody had thought to design against being hit square-on by a suicide bomber in an airliner fully loaded with fuel - a remarkable oversight given how often this had happened before.
We might disagree on the reasons behind the reasons, but as far as I can tell nobody with a full deck seriously believes that the WTC and Pentagon attacks were anything other than terrorism.
Guy (JzG)