Wednesday, October 29, 2008

D'oh! to "Our wacky, outrageous, factually-bereft beliefs should never be confused with their wacky, outrageous, factually bereft beliefs!"

Scholars for 9-11 Truth & Justice Misrepresented in Draft Bill Sent to 8 House Members

Contact: Victoria Ashley, STJ911 committee member
Phone: 510-769-5109

Scholars for 9-11 Truth & Justice Misrepresented in Draft Bill Sent to 8 House Members

Berkeley, CA, October 22, 2008
-- On October 18, 2008, an OpEdNews article titled, "8 House Members View Draft Bill on Independent Science/Tech Probe of WTC 1, 2, 7 Collapses," was published by four members of the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice ( The authors of the article and draft bill are not spokespersons for Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, and therefore are individually responsible for it.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice does not endorse the draft bill due to the inclusion of numerous unscientific claims and misrepresentations, and condemns in the strongest of terms any associations between the organization and the claims presented by the authors of this bill. As stated at the front page of their website, Scholars for 9-11 Truth and Justice "take[s] care to present the strongest, most credible research available..." [Editor's note: *Hysterical laughter*]

While in agreement with the authors of this bill that a new investigation into the tragic events of September 11, 2001 is warranted, representatives of the Scholars group note that the draft bill and article lack basic scientific rigor and credibility, with statements such as, "the entire WTC [complex] was destroyed by directed energy weaponry (DEW)," and the ideas that "nuclear materials, missiles or DEW weapons were used." The sister publication of the Scholars group, The Journal of 9/11 Studies (, has numerous peer-reviewed scientific articles refuting such claims. [Sic; a "Letter" and an "article" are different things, and we've only seen one that has been since refuted]

Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice believes that a much better bill can be crafted using the strong analysis in articles by its members, several of which are recently published in scientific journals, including The Open Civil Engineering Journal, The Environmentalist, and the Journal of Engineering Mechanics.[Editor's note: This is actually one article published twice, besides the now-infamous Letter. Read it, and try and see if you can find out what exactly it has to do with 9/11 denier theories. When you fail, try to figure out why these guys deliberately weaseled their own theories out of existence to get published]

Kevin Ryan, a former Underwriters Laboratories (UL) manager who was fired in 2004 for publicly questioning the NIST report [sic], and a committee member of the Scholars' group, says the bill is harmful to the cause of exposing the truth. "Basically," he said, "asking Congress to investigate many poorly defined, and highly implausible hypotheses minimizes the chances that Congress would be willing or able to investigate the actual evidence for the demolition of three WTC buildings." In fact, the bill also omits any mention of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee, which provided hundreds of questions left unanswered by the 9/11 Commission [sic].

Scholars' member Dr. Steven E. Jones, a Professor of Physics, also notes that statements attributed to him in the bill are "errors . . . misrepresenting my published statements." Dr. Jones goes on to say, "It is unacceptable to misrepresent my views, as is done in this document by Ellis et al., and to ignore my published technical papers in established journals."

Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice is a non-partisan organization of over 500 independent researchers [sic, probably]analyzing the September 11, 2001 attacks with a strong emphasis on the scientific method.

I'm reminded vaguely of listening to a famous argument between two effete anarchist pseudo-intellectuals wherein both parties spend the entire evening shouting about the trivial, minute, hair-thin differences between anarchists/anarcho-syndicalists/anarcho-pacifists/anarcho-capitalists/anarcho-left-libertarians/autarchists/crypto-anarchists/anarcha-feminists/green anarchists/primitivists/insurrectionists/Christian anarchists/panarchists/autonomists/DIYs/Makhonivists/infoanarchists/paleolibertarians/agorists/consequentialists/deontologists/geolibertarians/minarchists/neolibertarians/propertarianists/voluntarists/Objectivists/civil libertarians/Constitutionalists/libertarian conservatives/thick and thinnists and ultra-liberals. Though I suppose that giving them even the "pseudo-" would be a bit of a stretch.

No comments: