Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts
I mentioned this book before based on what others had written, but now I've had a chance to read it. I'm impressed with the restraint and the professionalism. Claims by various conspiracy-minded people are listed, and then addressed. Where someone has a point, or part of a point, that is granted. But where the myths don't stand up to scrutiny, the ways in which the claim doesn't stand up are laid out clearly and succinctly. There are endnotes for anyone wanting more detail.
Fair warning: the editors are civilized as well as thorough - no sensationalism here - but there are a few times when a gruesome detail must be mentioned as part of the refutation (i.e. this might be tough reading for survivors of those killed, or anyone with an active imagination; I know I had a tough go of it now and then simply because what happened was horrible and is hard to think about). For the most part, it's a good series of lessons on why buildings stand up or fall, differences between collapses due to implosions caused by set explosives and those due to structural failure, the physics of crashes, and policies and technologies in place in September 2001. People who have been misrepresented by conspiracists get a chance to say what they said or didn't say, meant or didn't mean. There's also a look at "The Conspiracy Industry" and its targets and methods. All in all, a very straightforward bit of reporting, well-written at the layman level.
Related reading: The 911 Myths blog set up by Popular Mechanics.
No comments:
Post a Comment