Sunday, 30 November 2008

Debunking the '9/11 Debunkers' With Stewart Bradley

While some 9/11 Truthers will debate endlessly with debunkers about the evidence of controlled demolitions in the WTC, I have found that path to be futile. Even after directing them to the WPI Study, cleverly buried in Appendix C of the FEMA report, which details the WTC steel being "melted like swiss cheese" by temperatures impossible by burning jet fuel in a diffuse environment, the debunkers still stubbornly insist that does not "prove" the use of a thermite type demolition charge. Although they can offer no alternative hypothesis to explain this phenomena, trying to convince them of any foul play on 9/11 is like banging your head against a wall.

So in my own experience at debating 9/11 with debunkers, a list has developed of common debunker tactics, which I call the "Four Ds of Debunking":

1. Deceive - Misrepresent the claims of 9/11 researchers into "Straw Man" issues that are easily knocked down.

2. Dodge - Try to avoid or ignore any 9/11 evidence that you cannot explain away.

3. Deny - Refuse to acknowledge that any irrefutable evidence given is relevant to the 9/11 argument.

4. Discredit - Use any possible ad hominem accusation to ruin the credibility of 9/11 researchers.
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20081129155152524

Mr Bradley favours the Let It Happen On Purpose argument when debating debunkers. However it is clear from the scientific evidence that the attacks MUST have been an Inside job.

Although Bradley, in this instance, has focused on the Molten Steel aspect of the scientific 911 evidence he should remember that clear evidence of Thermite WAS found from samples found in the dust and from the steel.

In response to the debunkers claim that the evidence indicating the WTC steel had been melted does not constitute "proof" of Thermite, I would point out that on this planet, as far as anyone knows, there can be NO OTHER explanation for this phenomena other than by the action of some type of explosive incendiary (barring the possibility that the building steel fell into some invisible blast furnace that happened to be in the basements). Although melted steel does not definitively isolate Thermite, it constitutes hard evidence of an exotic agent.

Regardless, we have independent scientific analysis that tells us this agent was a military-type, sulfur-rich version of Thermite know as Thermate. The debate here is over, and it has been for some years.

I would also add that some of the debunkers appear to be paid, or ideologically motivated, shills who deliberately lie for ulterior purposes. Not everyone is being honest in this high stakes information war.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, November 30th, 2008.]

No comments: