I’m doing a research paper on the psychology of CTers and I need a little help on some data.
On the Popular Mechanics debunking 911 Myths, they say the following:
“PM consulted more than 300 experts and organizations in its investigation into 9/11 conspiracy theories. The following were particularly helpful. (Approximately 70)”
Does anyone know what the vetting process was for choosing the “over 300 experts” was? Did they:
Did they go straight down the line of ‘over 300 experts’ and find that everyone of the first 300 picks didn’t think there was a conspiracy, or was it like saying, “4 out of 5 doctors recommend…” and you go down a line until you get a cluster of 4 out of 5 just due to statistics?
Did they run parallel investigations with experts on both sides of the issue? Example would be to get a demo guy that agreed with the Official Story and one demo guy that didn’t agree with the OS, and run parallel investigations, each being given the same evidence.
is there a link to the rest of the ‘over 300 experts’? I have been unable to find a list. (I’m not good at doing deep searches)
Did they ‘draw from a hat’ when they picked their experts so they would get a good random selection that nobody could question and accuse them of “salting the gold mine”?
This makes it clear that there was no predetermined list of experts that they would consult. As questions came up during their research, they would identify people who could provide answers. In some cases these were eyewitnesses and field personnel, and in some cases they were subject matter experts who would weigh in on the theoretical soundness of a given scenario. Thus, the answer to your questions 1 and 4 is “no, why on earth should they?”
Similarly, the above quote states quite unequivocally that, for some of the conspiracy claims, they were unable to find anyone with any expertise who agreed. They didn’t try very hard (if at all) to find someone, anyone, who would defend each claim – and again, why on earth should they? They weren’t judging or moderating a debate, they were writing an article. They solicited the opinions of experts because they are not experts themselves, and are therefore not qualified to judge. So, question #2: “no.”
Finally, there appears to be no list of all the experts. I expect that everyone quoted in the article is included in the “300”, so go ahead and count 'em up, if you feel so inclined.
[Some critics claim that we “cherry-picked” sources who would be favorable to our “agenda.” The fact is, for each question we studied, we simply approached the top experts in that particular field. The irony is that we were unable to find anyone with any degree of authority, in the public or private sector—first responders or university professors, engineers or flight instructors—who agreed with the claims made by 9/11 conspiracy theorists.]*
This is where I’m puzzled. There are obviously signifigantly more experts that question the Official Story than there are for the ‘over 300’ experts for Popular Mechs. If you go by numbers alone, PM is outmanned and outgunned.
I guess the question I would have is, why didn’t they ask some of these people?
You can look these up on the internet, but you can’t find the ‘over 300’ that PM states.
200+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
700+ Engineers and Architects
200+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency Veterans
29 Structural & Civil Engineers Cite
25 U.S. Military Officers
8 U.S. State Department Veterans
7 Senior Federal Engineers and Scientists
8 Senior Republican Administration Appointees
41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency Veterans
As far as I can tell, this list is much longer than Pop. Mechs. list. Their qualifications are as valid as any of the PM picks. Just google 911 pilots/patriots and you see the lists.
So, I’m trying to get to the bottom of how PM vetted their experts, and why did they not pick some of these guys?
Popular Mechs. quote:
*“The irony is that we were unable to find anyone with any degree of authority, in the public or private sector—first responders or university professors, engineers or flight instructors—who agreed with the claims made by 9/11 conspiracy theorists.”
*
It seems that they either didn’t look very far or they are not good at picking.
For one thing, that would be cherry picking people that believed in the conspiracy. That list of people you have is exclusively CT people. A similar list of non-CT people would be in the hundreds of thousands. How many engineers, architects, law enforcement officers, millitary officers, pilots and aviation professionals do you think are in this country?
When I used the word ‘picking’ I didn’t mean it in the cherry picking sense. I meant it as in ‘choosing’. You bring up a very good point about there being many more who don’t believe than do. So the odds of getting the first 300 plus would be greater than not.
However, I still the vetting process used and the names and creds of the people they picked. I have tried calling and emailing, but to no avail. They just refer you to the main site, probably due to being inundated with questions. If you know where I can get a hold of a list like that, I would appreciate it very much.
Jake, what are the qualifications of the experts you mentioned, what are their specific objections to the conclusions drawn by the investigations, and what did they actually say vs. what Alex Jones said they said?
Also, what are you doing this research paper for? A class? A blog? A newspaper?
I am a CTer,(and for the record i am not an anti-semite. Anyway. One thing which annoys me is how all CTers get lumped together, i personally think alex jones is insane.
I do not believe all aspects of any conspiracy theory, but i do sometimes agree with a general basis of a theory, And struggle with explaining my view to die hard non believers as my grasp of the English language when it comes to laying out a cohesive argument with my view points is difficult for me as my head works “out of the box” so to speak. When arguing the case for or against a theory it is very hard to have a objective discussion without intial prejudices etc coming in to it from both sides which tilts the viewpoint to polar opposites.
For example, on the long running thread i was briefly involved with i was accused of using youtube to back up my claims, but as i said in that thread any information you find will be biased one way or the other, i would assume most Cters such as alex jones are in it for the money as much as to “get the truth out” so anything from them easily could be biased towards whatever they want to argue, and anything from “the man” is biased…because its from “the man”
I find it very frustrating to attempt to explain a view that is not mainstream as the non believers are just as biased to the official line as any CTer. I think that the way inwhich everyone in the American intel agencies dropped the ball and the speed and extent the bush cheny White House took advantage of the situation is telling, but hind sight is 20/20. We were not in the meeting during those times and seeing the intel reports etc so it is possible that bush et all where simply doing their best but with stories coming out about the NSA domestic spying programme and the assassination squads which it is claimed didnt do anything for 8 years but did exist.
I just find it hard to believe that we were the primary concern for the White House at the time.
Now i would just like to add that i was not wanting to join this thread because i know i will be slammed for being a CTer but if i can offer any assistance to the Op’er in understanding the psychology of someone like me, i am willing to help.
Their qualifactions are in general the same as the PM guys. Look up 911 Patriots, I believe is the site, and you will see all kinds of highly qualified people.
I don’t care what their objections are. I am writing a paper for a literary journalism class I am taking at the UW extension school analysing the psychology of CTers as opposed to Official Story people.
Right now I am doing research. If you know where I could get the names of the PM guys, I would appreciate it. I have tried calling PM and emailing them, but you get referred to the maind site. Probably due, no doubt, to having been innundated
with questions and remarks.
Accidents happen, and i dont expect anyone or anything to be perfect, but it reaches a point where did they drop the ball or did they have their hands tied or what.
The U.S. intelligence community didn’t predict the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the fall of the Soviet Union, the invasion of Kuwait, etc. ISTM that these are more shocking failures than not knowing that 9/11 was going to happen on 9/11.
All you have to do is provide some actual evidence to back your claim. I’ve yet to see a site that provided anything other than speculation, or – as is usual for these conspiracy theories – repeats “facts” that are merely speculation, or which are just out-and-out lies (it is, for instance, the conspiracy theorists who first mentioned that the steel had melted due to the heat; all reports at the time said it had been structurally weakened, and there were no reports of molten steel – yet conspiracy theorists still quote this “fact.”)
Telling of what? That they took advantage of a situration? If you find a hundred dollar bill on the sidewalk, and take advantage of it by using it to buy things, does this mean you must have dropped it? People take advantage of whatever situation presents itself.
Ultimately, the issue is a matter of naivete. You have to be pretty naive about human nature to believe in any mass conspiracy.
So, if you have facts, let’s hear them. I’ve been listening to various conspiracy theorists for almost half a century, and I’ve yet to see any one of them actually present any evidence to back their claim. It’s always speculation and raising objections (though not refuting) to the truth.
This sounds like the Cui Bono Fallacy: If you benefited from it, you must have caused it.
George Bush and Dick Cheney benefited from the Electoral College, which means… what? What can you derive from that statement? Certainly not that they had a hand in its creation.
You benefited from your own conception. Want to run with that for a ways?
But is that not the key issue, as the evidence would be in question.
Just assume for one moment that everything the alex jones of the world say is 100% true, that all the media everyone in power was in on it etc etc, then any evidence that is shown anywhere would be in question, so anything written anywhere by the government or the mainstream media would be questionable.
Now step back and assume that alot of what the alex jones say, that the government was directly involved and controlled the message so to speak, once again any evidence from them or reported by the mainstream media would be in question, just as before because the mainstream media is only working on the facts presented to them.
Now step back and assume that everything the government has told us is true and they had no fore warning, no idea what was happening and had to hit the ground running to respond to the events as they unfolded. Everything the government told us, and everything the mainstream media told us is true, and everything the questioners say is false or distorted.
i think that is a fair representation of what are the possibles about 911, so that makes it impossible to show either side evidence that can be viewed as untainted by either side. And when the alex jones of the world have echo chambers at each and every website and no matter who or what is in control of the white house they are also part of the conspiracy, its a constant media machine the day Obama became president, “the Obama Deception” was released, and the Birthers were born etc etc. And as easy as it is to research anything online it all comes down to who do you believe, what do you take from the information presented etc.
The molten steel aspect of 911 for example, there are videos and transcripts online of fire fighters talking about “molten steel” so to any echo chambered Cter or alex jones…thats Proof!!! with video evidence…and it was shown on CNN!!! now is it more likely that it was the aluminum from the planes… obviously. Alot of Cters do not try and fact check anything( as its impossible to find a unbiased source of information) and most do not even think if something is reasonable and swallow everything as fact.
For example, with Obama, if he was not a US citizen, why would the Dems even put him up for office? it makes no sense whatsoever. But the alex jones of the world know most will not check the facts(as its impossible to find a reliable source in that mindset etc) he can say whatever he wants. He is not a journalist so he has no needs of standards.And with the state of most main stream media either not pressing for answers to tough questions or out right lying( Faux News) i can easily see why anyone who tries to research anything will easily find enough evidence to back their own belief about a subject.
It is not hard to think that if you can find examples of fox news outright lying to you to assume…they have lied in the past about other things. And with the state of news in this country resting between pointless political talking points and sensationalism. It is amazing for example how close glenn beck is to alex jones the only difference between them is the focus of their irrational beliefs… and the fact one is on a “news” channel.
So ultimately it is worthless to throw evidence at each other as neither will believe the other, none of us will change our minds and it will become a argument which will help no one.