Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media

25. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
it dosn't surprise me that PM would come up with theries that suport the gouvernment, to much to lose i think that truth seekers should try to keep there names away from the public. what do you think would happen to them if they didn't

24. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
Sulfur in drywall would create sulfur dust. That's not what what we're talking about. We're talking about sulfur in metal compounds.

23. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
popular mechanics did not make there case.just name calling.thinking they know it all...wrong!

22. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
I agree that it must have taken months to prep the towers with explosives. It had to be done by the Clintons.

21. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
The thing that the conspiracy theorists fail to prove in their passion laden words, that anything they say is backed up by fact. it seems that any time i read any accoun by "the truth movment" or watch something like "loose change" that all i get is some pitiful lowlife crying that George Bush is the devil,he planned 9/11 so that he could get rich and get into Iraq!!! It make me wonder if they have read the newspaper lately, and realized that no one in government has gained from the war in Iraq. some other bothersome things about conspiracy theorists. 1. It is very hard to find a conspiracy theorist that even puts a name on there wbe page. they are hard to cite! I did an essay pertaining to 9/11 and conspiracy theories, and more often than no, all i got was a URL and maybe a title to the article. 2. People like the kids that are mkaing "loose change" Does anyone realize that they are a bunch of kids with no more than a high school education? all they are doing is fooling around on there computor, editing video clips and doing voice overs. It is pathetic. 3. Like I said before, conspiracy thoerists rarely include any facts. they point out an event 9 like the puff of dust when the towers collapse) and then conclude that they mustbe explosions. So... because it LOOKS like an explosion it is one?I wonder when they became such experts in explosives.

20. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
Tell me how the buildings fell at the same rate sas something thrown off the top then,as in no floors to stop rate of fall dildo murderer allower.

19. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
wow...you conspiritors need to get a life or at least become obsessed with something truthful and worthwhile

18. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
It was no surprise that the History Channel's program "9/11 Conspiracies", which aired on Monday night, was a blatant attack on the 9/11 Truth Movement using dishonest deceptions, and fraudulent journalism. After producer Brad Davis promised 9/11 researchers the show would be impartial in order to secure interviews, the show was then written and edited to portray the 9/11 Truth Movement in a completely negative light. The show starts by connecting the 9/11Truth movement to Anti-semitism and Holocaust Deniers. Interviews with movement leaders were edited to only show hesitant responses that left out their best information. It was repeatedly implied that 9/11 research was not based on any evidence or scientific method but rather was "made up" by internet kooks. Contact information for dozens of scientific professionals, 9/11 first responders, and 9/11 victims family members, all who question the official story, was given to the show producers but none of them were contacted for interviews. On the other hand, the Popular Mechanics debunkers were always given final word on every topic and constantly referred to their "experts" without ever saying who these experts were or describing the methods used to form their conclusions. They also gave the Popular Mechanics book a big plug, but when introducing David Ray Griffin you can see a copy of "Debunking 9/11 Debunking" in the foreground but never mention the book which rebuts Popular Mechanics and NIST point by point. But I guess that would have been fair. Also no mention of the molten metal pools at the base of the WTC buildings, no footage of the Pentagon before the outer wall collapse, Cheney's war games, the surviving hijackers, the phony bin Laden video, ..I could go on and on!

17. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
The "red hot molten metal that poured from the windows" was one tiny stream in one short video -- about 1,000 times less than would be required to support the nutbar conspiracy theories. And, why was it exactly where the plane hit? What are the odds if enough thermite, or thermate, or nano-thermate, or goblin-thermite, was placed all around the WTC and detonated that we would see precisely one tiny stream of molten metal right where the plane hit? Zero. The color isn't proof of the vast conspiracy but proof of (drumroll, please) impurities. Where are Mr. Jones' chemical analyses? Not what he says they show, but actual copies of real lab reports? Post 9 is very instructive - it would be really, really hard to plant explosives, but it must have happened. I am still waiting for a SINGLE witness at a WTC building seeing explosives being planted. Finally, it's pathetic for conspiracy people to call for investigations - they will reject any results that don't support their crazy theories, no matter who does it. Popular Mechanics? Part of the plot. History Channel -- ditto. People misquoted who say, "No, I don't support the conspiracy theory"? - someone got to them.

16. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
I always suspected, but now I'm sure. Tonight, The "History" Channel has hung itself, with it's completely biased and one sided hit piece on 9/ll truth, as a co-conspirator in the 9/11 cover up. We all know that your network is owned and operated by the same major global corporations that control all main-stream media. Your lies do not stack up and your so-called "experts" (Popular Mechanics who are owned by Hurst Publishing - literally found in the encyclopedia under "yellow journalism") could never survive in a real debate when challenged on ALL the facts surrounding 9/11 and the collapse of those buildings, instead of just a few points that you select, and then have your "experts" LIE THROUGH THEIR TEETH to "debunk" the point. I HATE The History Channel - you are servants to those who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks and you do no justice to the victims - you instead, help their killers to remain at large. Suggested reading: The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions And Distortions by David Ray Griffin - let's see the History Channel "debunk" EVERY SINGLE POINT in this book. It CAN'T be done. Another fine book: Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory by David Ray Griffin Suggested Documentaries that you CAN NOT debunk on every single point made: 9/11 Mysteries, 9/11 Revisited, 9/11 Press for Truth (tells the story of real 9/11 victims, "The Jersey Girls", for without whom, there never would have been ANY INVESTIGATION AT ALL OF 9/11, and their utter dismay and dissatisfaction in the results of the so called independent commission). But you won't try to debunk all that History Channel because you know that you can't.

15. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
Listen for those who think that the sulfur was created through a thermite reaction. WTC towers used drywall which was sulfur based and the airplanes feul!! I aplaud you popular mechanics finally people who bring the facts the 9-11 and proof to the CTs that there acusations are blasphemy.

14. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
YELLOW JOURNALISM The term originated during the circulation battles between Joseph Pulitzer's New York World and William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal from 1895 to about 1898, and can refer specifically to this period. Both papers were accused by critics of sensationalizing the news in order to drive up circulation, although the newspapers did serious reporting as well. The New York Press coined the term "Yellow Journalism" in early 1897 to describe the papers of Pulitzer and Hearst. The newspaper did not define the term, and in 1898 simply elaborated, "We called them Yellow because they are Yellow."[1] Popular Mechanics is part of HEARSTCORP................ Very intersting This is all yellow journalism! Popular Mechanics is a joke they will only tell the side of the story the owner tells them too...Lets see if you post this I would be impressed if you do.

13. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
Professor Steven Jones Ran Tests on WTC1 WTC2 steel and found high amounts of sulphur... a THERMATE\THERMITE reaction produces sulphur.. here are but one of the uses of Thermite: Thermite reactions have many uses. Thermite was originally used for repair welding in-place thick steel sections such as locomotive axle-frames where the repair can take place without removing the part from its installed location. It can also be used for quickly cutting or welding steel such as rail tracks, without requiring complex or heavy equipment.

12. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
Website: http://www.infowars.com
Popular Mechanics = Hurst publishing = Encyclopedia meaning Hurst publishing = Yellow journalism! Yellow journalism! = Find out for yourself if you haven't worked it out yet!

11. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
To #10, "Baseless"?? You have got to be kidding. Don't you think it's kind of weird the government keeps holding sh*t back? Take the Pentagon footage for example. If they have nothing to hide, why can't they just release the full recordings instead of a slideshow?

10. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
I just have to point out the weird screed of the first comment. This is a great example of the weird hybrid between science fiction and quasi-religious fanatacism some of these conpiracy theorists live in. The bit about molten and evaporated steel is just wrong, but then invents a "nano variant of thermite," what does that collection of buzz words even mean? I'd actually be in favor of a second round of 9/11 hearings to expose the fallacy of all these beliefs. I actually believe these sort of widespread baseless allegations can be their own sort of danger to democracy, and I am glad that this resource is out there to help the sane defeat the crazies.

9. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
Just taking the Twin Towers - there are those who believe it was controlled demolition. i.e. Somehow the Towers were rigged with explosives throughout the entire structure and then these explosives were electronically charged by transmitters so that a computer could effect the collapse. If you think about the enormity of that procedure and method you will agree that to achieve this would take many many hours - days, even months. The amount of equipment and people needed to perform this task would be enormous. It would take teams of workers - several diferent teams of workers. And their presence surely could not go unnoticed even if they were working on weekends and nights. However,it also has to be said that with patience and careful planning it could - could - be achieved and it could - could - be done secretly if over a somewhat lengthy period. The conclusion, then, to those who say the Towers were felled this way, is to accept that it could have happened vene though simply thinking about it seems unreal. But, yes, it could have been done. What could NOT have happened is an enormous building collapsing as it did WITHOUT explosives. This building was not made of plaster and paper. Yet it fell as if made of chalk. The explanation that fires made the building weak is fair enough for the floors above the hit spot but those collapsing floors above the hit spot could not have pushed down and forced the remaining 80 floors below it to crumble as they did. I still think it's laughable that people actually believe these enormous buildings could have simply collpased to dust as they did. It doesn't make sense and never will. And the absence of the enormous steel cenral girders protruding upwards makes the pancake theory even more ridiculous.

8. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
I was a staunch Bush Republican a few weeks ago when I started to study this. By no means do I buy all of the claims of the conspiracy theorist. I wanted to study the PM point of view hoping that it might perhapes answer my questions. I was disappointed. Even if the heat of the jet fuel fires could have weakened the steel, could that account for the total for failure of the WTC buildings? What turned all of that concrete into dust?

7. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
"9-11 conspiracy is BS. No doubt most of these so called conspiracy theorist have a degree of grudge on US governmnet for their politcal gain. I say **** EM!" It's not a conspiracy theory, it's a hypothesis on how the collapses happened, taking into account the evidence and probability of the two hypothesis (demilition vs. planes fire) the demolition is more probable. You can't just write this off using "conspiracy Theory" to stereotypically humiliate other hypothesis that occurred through viewing the anomalies of the disaster. I think it's quite obvious in some cases that the theorists on this subject are un biased and are simply trying to investigate what has happened as the official report does not add up and is full of holes. There is plenty of suspicious lucid connections between the weeks coming up to September the 11th and what happened on the day including various inconsistencies and anomalies reported by both notable figures that are involved in areas of the centers interests and abnormal practices that occurred.

6. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
What are some of the consequences of the truth being exposed? The more I try to disprove the official story, the more IT seems likes a conspiracy theory. I read some article that mentioned the possibility of a civil war/revolution when the truth comes out. What are peoples' opinion on this thought? Thanks!

5. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
9-11 conspiracy is BS. No doubt most of these so called conspiracy theorist have a degree of grudge on US governmnet for their politcal gain. I say F*** EM!

4. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
national geographic has a book to sell with the illuminati's blessing. nothing more!

3. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
The alledged scientist says: "For example, none of the reports deals adequately with the streams of red hot molten metal that poured from the windows of the initial collapse zone"... Yo dude! What planet did this alledgedly happen on? Was it within 80 million light years of reality?

2. RE: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
Website: http://www.twf.org
The National Institute of Science and Technology, which investigated the collapse of the twin towers of the World Trade Center, in its August 30, 2006 FAQ, writes: NIST's findings do not support the "pancake theory" of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor systemÑthat connected the core columns and the perimeter columnsÑconsisted of a grid of steel "trusses" integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram below). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.

1. Re: Debunking 9/11 Myths In The Media
I am a natural sceptic and a former UK Government-sponsored scientist. I have looked dispassionately at the evidence and the official reports (FEMA, NIST and 'The 911 Commission'). The official hypothesis that three (not two) Manhattan sky-scrapers were brought down by a combination of fire and aircraft damage fits the evidence but only with a considerable stretch and certain omissions. For example, none of the reports deals adequately with the streams of red hot molten metal that poured from the windows of the initial collapse zone (all agree that the fires were not hot enough to melt steel and molten aluminium cannot become red-hot), nor the "sulphidation" and "evaporation" of steel beams. The single most significant challenge to the official hypothesis is Steven Jones' chemical analysis of the slag taken from pieces of solidified molten metal at ground zero. They bear the fingerprint of a highly advanced 'nano' variant of thermate - a hybrid incendiary-explosive particularly adept at cutting through structural steel. The authorities have denied using thermate during the clean-up operation. Use of this compound in the destruction of the three buildings would explain most of the anomalies of the reports. Prof. Jones has called for independent labs to repeat the tests on other pieces of WTC steel (there are many of these exhibited as monuments in peace parks, etc. around the U.S.). The evidence therefore strongly suggests that thermate was involved in the destruction of one or more of World Trade Center buildings 1,2 and 7. As thermate would need setting on the steel columns to produce the documented effects, one must assume that this was a deliberate act warranting a criminal investigation.

Comment Title
Your Name
Email Address
Website	make public
Comment
Please enter the characters shown below:
	Make sure your comment is relevant to the topic discussed. Comments not relevant to the topic will be deleted. Neither you nor Popular Mechanics has the ability to make your e-mail address public in this Blog. However, we ask that you submit your e-mail address to us just in case we need to contact you. Thank you for your understanding--The Editors.