A real list of 9/11 experts

Josh Redstone · 9th September 2006, 08:26 AM

I wanted to kind of put my feelers out and see if there is an idea like this already out there on the Internet. If not, I think there should be.

As you all know there's a group out there called the Scholars for 9/11 Truth, who are academics, students, etc., who supposedly have relevant credentials when it comes to debunking the 'official story' of 9/11. Of course, these credentials, more often than not, have nothing to do with engineering or demolition. Why, there's even a thread here about how Stephen Jones might not actually have a PhD =)
Anyways, the group claims they are about 300 in number, when really there are only about 70 or 80 with any real credentials, and most of those aren't even relevant to this whole situation. So, my idea is something like Project Steve (see wikipedia), in the sense that real experts (such as civil engineers, demolition experts, firefighters, etc.) with relevant experience would sign some sort of list, all in agreement that the WTC was not demolished with bombs of thermite, than planes really did hit them, in order to refute the conspiracy theorist's claims. I'm sure the number of experts would be much higher than the number of 'experts' who belong to the Scholars for 9/11 truth.

So anyways my questions to you all are; has anything like this ever been done before, and if not, do you think it would be a good idea to do it?

MarkyX · 9th September 2006, 08:37 AM

Anything written by Popular Mechanics.

There is your list.

Hamradioguy · 9th September 2006, 08:51 AM

Great idea! There may be various "expert this" and "expert that" lists around but I've not seen anything like what you propose. No list is ever likely to change the mind of a fanatical CTer, but it could go a long way to help with those who aren't sure.

I'm a volunteer firefighter with close to 40 years experience and have an explosives license from the State of Vermont but am no expert. You'll want the real thing. For starters I'd suggest Dennis Smith who wrote "Report from Ground Zero". And his book is filled with names of those who do qualify as experts. Harry Carter, PHd, is the former president of the International Society of Fire Service Instructors, and might be a good source for leads.

T.A.M. · 9th September 2006, 08:56 AM

Josh:

First of all, welcome to the JREF Skeptics forum on Conspiracy Theories.

Secondly, I have been thinking of a similar list or organizing of the "professionals" and "experts" on the debunking side for sometime. In the end, the biggest fear, is that by doing so you increase the standing of the "scholars for 9/11 Truth by recognizing them. As well, you validate their power as a group by having to take the step of organizing a group to oppose them.

Beyond these considerations, I certainly think it is an idea that deserves a look, and a debate.

TAM

Arkan_Wolfshade · 9th September 2006, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by MarkyX

Anything written by Popular Mechanics.

There is your list.

To expand on that, if you look in the back of the new PM Debunking 9/11 book, they have an extensive list of experts that they worked with while writing the article/book.

mamapajamas · 9th September 2006, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by T.A.M.

In the end, the biggest fear, is that by doing so you increase the standing of the "scholars for 9/11 Truth by recognizing them. As well, you validate their power as a group by having to take the step of organizing a group to oppose them.

At this point in time, this fear is moot. The crazies are already taking over the debate. It's too late to worry about anyone taking them seriously... it's already happening.

What we actually need is not merely a list of experts to read, as many of their reports are so dry as to be boring as hell, but there should also be a downloadable video pointing out how ridiculous some of the CT claims are... like that business of totally ignoring the hundreds of eyewitnesses who personally saw Flight 77 go down in the Arlington/DC area and not a "missile" (the logistics problems alone in getting "fake witnesses" out into the area within minutes of the crash to talk to the news media to establish the "fiction of a plane crash" are completely preposterous!), or the problem of a number of Jewish people who were NOT in the WTC on 9/11 (they simply weren't due to arrive until after 9:00 am... there were some 50,000 people not there, not the mere 5000 or so Jews!).

These things need to be addressed in a way that a common layman like myself can understand. I do NOT understand the specifics of the engineering of the Twin Towers and why they should or should not have fallen, and my eyes just glaze over when people get into the details. But I CAN understand that there was a lot more burning than just the jet fuel, so the fire was a hell of a lot hotter than the kerosine-only CTers would like for us to believe.

These views need to be gotten out onto the Net in a clear and understandable way, preferably on vid for those incapable of reading. And I have absolutely no clue how to go about making this happen. But the simple fact that we're talking about a conspiracy supposedly being maintained by a government that can't even keep classified information out of the New York Times points out the stupidity of the arguments.

I'm thinking about something along these lines: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...20220921158523

9/11 was basically a result of government agencies doing what all government agencies do... they screwed up royally as they always do.

Gravy · 10th September 2006, 05:43 AM

Originally Posted by mamapajamas

These views need to be gotten out onto the Net in a clear and understandable way, preferably on vid for those incapable of reading.

Okay, reading is required, but MarkyX anticipated this need long ago, and has just produced an expanded version of his "Screw Loose Change" video, which covers many of the prevaiing conspiracy theories. http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/

T.A.M. · 10th September 2006, 06:09 AM

Originally Posted by mamapajamas

At this point in time, this fear is moot. The crazies are already taking over the debate. It's too late to worry about anyone taking them seriously... it's already happening.

What we actually need is not merely a list of experts to read, as many of their reports are so dry as to be boring as hell, but there should also be a downloadable video pointing out how ridiculous some of the CT claims are... like that business of totally ignoring the hundreds of eyewitnesses who personally saw Flight 77 go down in the Arlington/DC area and not a "missile" (the logistics problems alone in getting "fake witnesses" out into the area within minutes of the crash to talk to the news media to establish the "fiction of a plane crash" are completely preposterous!), or the problem of a number of Jewish people who were NOT in the WTC on 9/11 (they simply weren't due to arrive until after 9:00 am... there were some 50,000 people not there, not the mere 5000 or so Jews!).

These things need to be addressed in a way that a common layman like myself can understand. I do NOT understand the specifics of the engineering of the Twin Towers and why they should or should not have fallen, and my eyes just glaze over when people get into the details. But I CAN understand that there was a lot more burning than just the jet fuel, so the fire was a hell of a lot hotter than the kerosine-only CTers would like for us to believe.

These views need to be gotten out onto the Net in a clear and understandable way, preferably on vid for those incapable of reading. And I have absolutely no clue how to go about making this happen. But the simple fact that we're talking about a conspiracy supposedly being maintained by a government that can't even keep classified information out of the New York Times points out the stupidity of the arguments.

I'm thinking about something along these lines: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...20220921158523

9/11 was basically a result of government agencies doing what all government agencies do... they screwed up royally as they always do.

Fair enough. If the feeling is that the "Scholars" already have credibility, and hence must be countered, than go for it...I will help in anyway someone suggests.

TAM

Dave1001 · 10th September 2006, 07:05 AM

Originally Posted by Josh Redstone

I wanted to kind of put my feelers out and see if there is an idea like this already out there on the Internet. If not, I think there should be.

As you all know there's a group out there called the Scholars for 9/11 Truth, who are academics, students, etc., who supposedly have relevant credentials when it comes to debunking the 'official story' of 9/11. Of course, these credentials, more often than not, have nothing to do with engineering or demolition. Why, there's even a thread here about how Stephen Jones might not actually have a PhD =)
Anyways, the group claims they are about 300 in number, when really there are only about 70 or 80 with any real credentials, and most of those aren't even relevant to this whole situation. So, my idea is something like Project Steve (see wikipedia), in the sense that real experts (such as civil engineers, demolition experts, firefighters, etc.) with relevant experience would sign some sort of list, all in agreement that the WTC was not demolished with bombs of thermite, than planes really did hit them, in order to refute the conspiracy theorist's claims. I'm sure the number of experts would be much higher than the number of 'experts' who belong to the Scholars for 9/11 truth.

So anyways my questions to you all are; has anything like this ever been done before, and if not, do you think it would be a good idea to do it?

You're implying that a small subset of Scholars for 9/11 Truth are experts in relevant fields, yet remain open to some CT theories of 9/11. Do others agree with this assessment? If so, then who are they are where can I read their writings on the topic?

rwguinn · 10th September 2006, 01:41 PM

list of experts:
ASME
ASCE
NSPE
MIT Engineering Department
there are several 10's of thousands, right there...

Josh Redstone · 10th September 2006, 05:34 PM

Thanks for the replies and the welcomes.
Like mamapajamas said, I doubt there's much point in worrying about something like this being a motivating factor in the Conspiracy Theorists trying even harder to spread their word, they don't need any more excuse to do that than they've already got.

Anyways, the whole point of this would be to organize the list of experts, as well as their opinions, testimonies, etc., into one, easy to read web page where anyone could just drop by and see, with the click of a mouse, who doesn't support the conspiracy buffs.

So thanks for the suggestions on where to start, I'll probably get started soon

9th September 2006, 08:26 AM	#1
Josh Redstone Thinker Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 205	A real list of 9/11 experts I wanted to kind of put my feelers out and see if there is an idea like this already out there on the Internet. If not, I think there should be. As you all know there's a group out there called the Scholars for 9/11 Truth, who are academics, students, etc., who supposedly have relevant credentials when it comes to debunking the 'official story' of 9/11. Of course, these credentials, more often than not, have nothing to do with engineering or demolition. Why, there's even a thread here about how Stephen Jones might not actually have a PhD =) Anyways, the group claims they are about 300 in number, when really there are only about 70 or 80 with any real credentials, and most of those aren't even relevant to this whole situation. So, my idea is something like Project Steve (see wikipedia), in the sense that real experts (such as civil engineers, demolition experts, firefighters, etc.) with relevant experience would sign some sort of list, all in agreement that the WTC was not demolished with bombs of thermite, than planes really did hit them, in order to refute the conspiracy theorist's claims. I'm sure the number of experts would be much higher than the number of 'experts' who belong to the Scholars for 9/11 truth. So anyways my questions to you all are; has anything like this ever been done before, and if not, do you think it would be a good idea to do it?

9th September 2006, 08:37 AM	#2
MarkyX Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,158	Anything written by Popular Mechanics. There is your list.
MarkyX Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,158	__________________ MarkyX's Haunted Bloghouse - Read my boredom

9th September 2006, 12:02 PM	#5
Arkan_Wolfshade Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Making Mytheon come to life Posts: 7,158	Originally Posted by MarkyX Anything written by Popular Mechanics. There is your list. To expand on that, if you look in the back of the new PM Debunking 9/11 book, they have an extensive list of experts that they worked with while writing the article/book.
	__________________ Amy: You should try homeopathic medicine, Bender. Try some zinc. Bender: I am forty percent zinc. Amy: Then take some echinacea, or St. John's Wort. Professor: Or a big fat placebo. It's all the same crap.

9th September 2006, 03:34 PM	#6
mamapajamas Thinker Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 131	Originally Posted by T.A.M. In the end, the biggest fear, is that by doing so you increase the standing of the "scholars for 9/11 Truth by recognizing them. As well, you validate their power as a group by having to take the step of organizing a group to oppose them. At this point in time, this fear is moot. The crazies are already taking over the debate. It's too late to worry about anyone taking them seriously... it's already happening. What we actually need is not merely a list of experts to read, as many of their reports are so dry as to be boring as hell, but there should also be a downloadable video pointing out how ridiculous some of the CT claims are... like that business of totally ignoring the hundreds of eyewitnesses who personally saw Flight 77 go down in the Arlington/DC area and not a "missile" (the logistics problems alone in getting "fake witnesses" out into the area within minutes of the crash to talk to the news media to establish the "fiction of a plane crash" are completely preposterous!), or the problem of a number of Jewish people who were NOT in the WTC on 9/11 (they simply weren't due to arrive until after 9:00 am... there were some 50,000 people not there, not the mere 5000 or so Jews!). These things need to be addressed in a way that a common layman like myself can understand. I do NOT understand the specifics of the engineering of the Twin Towers and why they should or should not have fallen, and my eyes just glaze over when people get into the details. But I CAN understand that there was a lot more burning than just the jet fuel, so the fire was a hell of a lot hotter than the kerosine-only CTers would like for us to believe. These views need to be gotten out onto the Net in a clear and understandable way, preferably on vid for those incapable of reading. And I have absolutely no clue how to go about making this happen. But the simple fact that we're talking about a conspiracy supposedly being maintained by a government that can't even keep classified information out of the New York Times points out the stupidity of the arguments. I'm thinking about something along these lines: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...20220921158523 9/11 was basically a result of government agencies doing what all government agencies do... they screwed up royally as they always do.
mamapajamas Thinker Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 131	Last edited by mamapajamas; 9th September 2006 at 03:58 PM.

10th September 2006, 05:43 AM	#7
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Originally Posted by mamapajamas These views need to be gotten out onto the Net in a clear and understandable way, preferably on vid for those incapable of reading. Okay, reading is required, but MarkyX anticipated this need long ago, and has just produced an expanded version of his "Screw Loose Change" video, which covers many of the prevaiing conspiracy theories. http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links

9th September 2006, 08:51 AM	#3
Hamradioguy Pyrrhonist Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Northern Vermont Posts: 2,272	Great idea! There may be various "expert this" and "expert that" lists around but I've not seen anything like what you propose. No list is ever likely to change the mind of a fanatical CTer, but it could go a long way to help with those who aren't sure. I'm a volunteer firefighter with close to 40 years experience and have an explosives license from the State of Vermont but am no expert. You'll want the real thing. For starters I'd suggest Dennis Smith who wrote "Report from Ground Zero". And his book is filled with names of those who do qualify as experts. Harry Carter, PHd, is the former president of the International Society of Fire Service Instructors, and might be a good source for leads.

9th September 2006, 08:56 AM	#4
T.A.M. Keeper of the Kool-Vax Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Far East...of Canada Posts: 20,816	Josh: First of all, welcome to the JREF Skeptics forum on Conspiracy Theories. Secondly, I have been thinking of a similar list or organizing of the "professionals" and "experts" on the debunking side for sometime. In the end, the biggest fear, is that by doing so you increase the standing of the "scholars for 9/11 Truth by recognizing them. As well, you validate their power as a group by having to take the step of organizing a group to oppose them. Beyond these considerations, I certainly think it is an idea that deserves a look, and a debate. TAM

10th September 2006, 06:09 AM	#8
T.A.M. Keeper of the Kool-Vax Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Far East...of Canada Posts: 20,816	Originally Posted by mamapajamas At this point in time, this fear is moot. The crazies are already taking over the debate. It's too late to worry about anyone taking them seriously... it's already happening. What we actually need is not merely a list of experts to read, as many of their reports are so dry as to be boring as hell, but there should also be a downloadable video pointing out how ridiculous some of the CT claims are... like that business of totally ignoring the hundreds of eyewitnesses who personally saw Flight 77 go down in the Arlington/DC area and not a "missile" (the logistics problems alone in getting "fake witnesses" out into the area within minutes of the crash to talk to the news media to establish the "fiction of a plane crash" are completely preposterous!), or the problem of a number of Jewish people who were NOT in the WTC on 9/11 (they simply weren't due to arrive until after 9:00 am... there were some 50,000 people not there, not the mere 5000 or so Jews!). These things need to be addressed in a way that a common layman like myself can understand. I do NOT understand the specifics of the engineering of the Twin Towers and why they should or should not have fallen, and my eyes just glaze over when people get into the details. But I CAN understand that there was a lot more burning than just the jet fuel, so the fire was a hell of a lot hotter than the kerosine-only CTers would like for us to believe. These views need to be gotten out onto the Net in a clear and understandable way, preferably on vid for those incapable of reading. And I have absolutely no clue how to go about making this happen. But the simple fact that we're talking about a conspiracy supposedly being maintained by a government that can't even keep classified information out of the New York Times points out the stupidity of the arguments. I'm thinking about something along these lines: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...20220921158523 9/11 was basically a result of government agencies doing what all government agencies do... they screwed up royally as they always do. Fair enough. If the feeling is that the "Scholars" already have credibility, and hence must be countered, than go for it...I will help in anyway someone suggests. TAM

10th September 2006, 07:05 AM	#9
Dave1001 Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 3,717	Originally Posted by Josh Redstone I wanted to kind of put my feelers out and see if there is an idea like this already out there on the Internet. If not, I think there should be. As you all know there's a group out there called the Scholars for 9/11 Truth, who are academics, students, etc., who supposedly have relevant credentials when it comes to debunking the 'official story' of 9/11. Of course, these credentials, more often than not, have nothing to do with engineering or demolition. Why, there's even a thread here about how Stephen Jones might not actually have a PhD =) Anyways, the group claims they are about 300 in number, when really there are only about 70 or 80 with any real credentials, and most of those aren't even relevant to this whole situation. So, my idea is something like Project Steve (see wikipedia), in the sense that real experts (such as civil engineers, demolition experts, firefighters, etc.) with relevant experience would sign some sort of list, all in agreement that the WTC was not demolished with bombs of thermite, than planes really did hit them, in order to refute the conspiracy theorist's claims. I'm sure the number of experts would be much higher than the number of 'experts' who belong to the Scholars for 9/11 truth. So anyways my questions to you all are; has anything like this ever been done before, and if not, do you think it would be a good idea to do it? You're implying that a small subset of Scholars for 9/11 Truth are experts in relevant fields, yet remain open to some CT theories of 9/11. Do others agree with this assessment? If so, then who are they are where can I read their writings on the topic?
Dave1001 Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 3,717	__________________ I'm here to discuss ideas, not to get personal. I won't criticize you personally, please don't criticize me personally. I won't direct ad hominems at you, please don't direct ad hominems at me. I won't attack you or put you down, please don't attack me or put me down. Thanks.

10th September 2006, 01:41 PM	#10
rwguinn Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes Posts: 8,456	list of experts: ASME ASCE NSPE MIT Engineering Department there are several 10's of thousands, right there...
	__________________ "Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." "I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275

10th September 2006, 05:34 PM	#11
Josh Redstone Thinker Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 205	Thanks for the replies and the welcomes. Like mamapajamas said, I doubt there's much point in worrying about something like this being a motivating factor in the Conspiracy Theorists trying even harder to spread their word, they don't need any more excuse to do that than they've already got. Anyways, the whole point of this would be to organize the list of experts, as well as their opinions, testimonies, etc., into one, easy to read web page where anyone could just drop by and see, with the click of a mouse, who doesn't support the conspiracy buffs. So thanks for the suggestions on where to start, I'll probably get started soon