I know that 9/11 conspiracies are off limits here, but I thought some of my fellow BAUTers would want to know about a new documentary that aired on The History Channel (US) yesterday (Saturday 11 August 2007).

It's called "9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction". It's two full hours long. Here's a link to the web site: http://www.history.com/shows.do?acti...isodeId=240087
Unfortunately they aren't showing any upcoming reruns.

I saw most of it. It covers all the major "Truth Movement" claims, including sections on the Twin Towers, Pentagon, Flight 93, 7 World Trade Center, lack of military response, and more. Many of our favorite CTists were interviewed, including the three main "Loose Change" folks and the leading lights of "Scholars for 9/11 Truth". On the other side, one important voice was that of the fellow behind the Popular Mechanics debunking.

The tone of the show was right on target. The truthers were, IMHO, "PWNED!!1!"

There were a couple minor points that could have been handled better, or truther claims that went unchallenged -- similar to the "glove in the vacuum box" situation in the Apollo Hoax show that featured Jay Windley. But overall, it was a big win for rationality. I must say, I wouldn't have expected that from the History Channel of late.

Anyhow, you may want to keep an eye out for any future replays.

__________________
Bring back Firefly!

"It is quite clear that Occam's razor does not sharpen in your pyramid." (Nicolas)

"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." (Paul Simon)

Rock on!
I'm glad to hear about programs pushing rationality over sensationalism.

Will do; in the meantime, a couple of recent (July 2007) interpretations making the rounds:
Part 1 (00:09:55)
Part 2 (00:06:20)
and a
USAF Engineering Test (00:00:48)
NOTE: All 3 links load directly---high-speed Internet connection recommended for the first two.

__________________
*

i watched that last weekend, and was actually impressed with the "loose change" people.
they actually change their movie when they learn that something they had in the movie was wrong instead of just blindly sticking to the conclusions they jumped to first.
eventually, they will admit everything in their little movie was wrong, and just retract the whole thing.

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

Yeah, that'll be the day...

My take was that they reluctantly withdrew parts only when they thought it made them look bad - not out of concern for accuracy. They seemed like total goofs to me. Their reaction when proved wrong on their assumptions was more like "well then how far can we push this without being exposed as liars."

And most of their garbage was based on very ill-founded assumptions, with little or nothing based on facts or actual research. Nice to see the History Channel exposing idiocy instead of feeding it.

__________________
Don of Borg - Cool, Calm, Collective.

"Within the next generation I believe that the world's leaders will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I remember reading that, at least originally, the loose-change didn't believe any part of their movie, it was just going to be a project or some-such. Then they got offered money to make it, and did an about-face.

Anyways, I'm also surprised that the History Channel would show something that was actually skeptical, it must be a sign of the end-times.

__________________