Discover Magazine: "The 9/11 Cover-Up"

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Don't worry, Discover has not drank from the Kool-Aid jug. They instead are offering a serious treatment of the air quality issues in lower Manhattan. (http://discovermagazine.com/2007/oct/the-9-11-cover-up/article_view?b_start:int=0&-C=)

This is good from a debunking perspective for two reasons, troofers are incapable of treating this issue with the proper respect and seriousness it deserves. And this article, which they would use as stroke material for their sick fantasies is in a respected scientific publication... the last place they would ever look for it.

[T.A.M.]

truthers are USING the first responders, and in particular the air quality issue, as an appeal to emotion, to make attacking their vile conspiracy spew harder for their critics...common, but deplorable tactic.

TAM:)

[~enigma~]

truthers are USING the first responders, and in particular the air quality issue, as an appeal to emotion, to make attacking their vile conspiracy spew harder for their critics...common, but deplorable tactic.

TAM:)
nothing is getting harder. They signed their own death warrent by making noise to attract real scientists. TM isn't dead but this is the 11th hour.

[T.A.M.]

nothing is getting harder. They signed their own death warrent by making noise to attract real scientists. TM isn't dead but this is the 11th hour.

I agree that they have opened up the doors to a better approach from the scientific community, through the very exposure they sought, but they are obfuscating the issues, the lines, by including the 9/11 first responder issue, one that should be completely separate and distinct, with the truther claims of an "inside job".

TAM:)

[~enigma~]

I agree that they have opened up the doors to a better approach from the scientific community, through the very exposure they sought, but they are obfuscating the issues, the lines, by including the 9/11 first responder issue, one that should be completely separate and distinct, with the truther claims of an "inside job".

TAM:)
Science doesn't get confused with humanitarian issues. A CD, missile at the pentagon or any scientific issue is not going to be shielded by first responders. By making such a fuss, the TM made a fatal error and attracted the attention they shouldn't have. They were fine as long as they kept themselves to the internet but they are quickly finding out the real world plays a bit tougher.

[Alareth]

They were fine as long as they kept themselves to the internet but they are quickly finding out the real world plays a bit tougher.

The real world is part of the conspiracy.

[carlvs]

And this article, which they would use as stroke material for their sick fantasies is in a respected scientific publication... the last place they would ever look for it.

And we should all be glad that the Cters likely don't read Skeptical Inquirer... I would rather not think of the fun they could have had with this hit piece that appeared in the Jan / Feb 2007 (http://www.csicop.org/si/2007-01/) issue:

World Trade Center Illness:

Manufactured Mass Hysteria

MICHAEL FUMENTO
I still wonder what was in the editor's heads when they decided to include this hit piece - especially considering the author's questionable (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_Fumento) past (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan2006/nf20060113_2851_db035.htm)...

[CurtC]

I still wonder what was in the editor's heads when they decided to include this hit piece - especially considering the author's questionable (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_Fumento) past (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan2006/nf20060113_2851_db035.htm)...
Those links don't seem very damning to me.

[Brainster]

And we should all be glad that the Cters likely don't read Skeptical Inquirer... I would rather not think of the fun they could have had with this hit piece that appeared in the Jan / Feb 2007 (http://www.csicop.org/si/2007-01/) issue:

I still wonder what was in the editor's heads when they decided to include this hit piece - especially considering the author's questionable (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_Fumento) past (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan2006/nf20060113_2851_db035.htm)...

Fumento was right about The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS. That noted neocon-sympathetic newspaper the New York Times recently ran a piece (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/07/nyregion/07sinai.html?ex=1190088000&en=6f225621bcd6f7c8&ei=5070) debunking the ridiculous 70% of first responders claim.

The clinic’s doctors presented their findings in what other experts say were scientifically questionable ways, exaggerating the health effects with imprecise descriptions of workers’ symptoms and how long they might be sick.

Researchers in this field say that the clinic’s data collection was so badly planned that its usefulness may be limited. Others say that doctors at the clinic, which has strong historical ties to labor unions, have allowed their advocacy for workers to trump their science by making statements that go beyond what their studies have confirmed.

The 70% figure is absurd on its face; there would be no need for a study at Mount Sinai if that number were real.

Boos to Discover for jumping too uncritically at this story. I don't have a dog in this fight, although obviously I hope that the first responders and those who worked the pile don't develop long-term problems. I have very strong doubts that those who lived nearby (most of whom were evacuated) are going to suffer any significant medical problems.

This is Gulf War Syndrome all over again.