Newest Slur: "Those Who Question 9/11 Are Creationists"
George Washington's BlogWednesday, May 21, 2008
The newest attack strategy against those who question 9/11 is to say that we are creationists. If you regularly read social networking sites, newsgroups, or bulletin boards, you will see this slur being used regularly.Is it true?Well, initially, everyone who believes in creationism started with a religious belief, and then tried to make arguments which fit that belief.On the other hand, every single person I know who questions 9/11 initially believed the government's version of events.* However, once we looked at the evidence of what happened - the documentary, audiovisual, physical, chemical, and historical record - we began to realize that the government's story has more holes than swiss cheese.There are numerous accounts of people who set out to defend the official version but, after meticulous study, were shocked to learn that that version is impossible.
In other words, they followed the scientific method, which is the opposite of creationism. Indeed, many scientists followed this exact route in reaching their conclusion that high-level people within the U.S. government aided and abetted the 9/11 attacks.Similarly, legal scholars are trained to weigh conflicting evidence, and determine which side's story is believable. Many legal scholars followed this route before concluding that elements within the U.S. government are guilty for 9/11.Moreover, I don't know a single person who questions 9/11 who is a creationist (and I know a lot of people in the 9/11 truth movement).Many 9/11 skeptics are atheists. For example, Michael Rivero regularly rails against religious dogma. These folks certainly don't believe in creationism.Many 9/11 skeptics would label themselves "spiritual, but not religious". These folks aren't fundamentalists in any sense of the word, let alone creationists.Quite a few 9/11 skeptics are people of traditional faiths, either Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist or Mulsim. But I don't think a single one of these people is a creationist.The "creationist" label is just another in a long line of false attacks on those who question 9/11. It is another example of government apologists' never-ending attempt to move the goalposts.
George Washington's BlogWednesday, May 21, 2008
The newest attack strategy against those who question 9/11 is to say that we are creationists. If you regularly read social networking sites, newsgroups, or bulletin boards, you will see this slur being used regularly.Is it true?Well, initially, everyone who believes in creationism started with a religious belief, and then tried to make arguments which fit that belief.On the other hand, every single person I know who questions 9/11 initially believed the government's version of events.* However, once we looked at the evidence of what happened - the documentary, audiovisual, physical, chemical, and historical record - we began to realize that the government's story has more holes than swiss cheese.There are numerous accounts of people who set out to defend the official version but, after meticulous study, were shocked to learn that that version is impossible.
In other words, they followed the scientific method, which is the opposite of creationism. Indeed, many scientists followed this exact route in reaching their conclusion that high-level people within the U.S. government aided and abetted the 9/11 attacks.Similarly, legal scholars are trained to weigh conflicting evidence, and determine which side's story is believable. Many legal scholars followed this route before concluding that elements within the U.S. government are guilty for 9/11.Moreover, I don't know a single person who questions 9/11 who is a creationist (and I know a lot of people in the 9/11 truth movement).Many 9/11 skeptics are atheists. For example, Michael Rivero regularly rails against religious dogma. These folks certainly don't believe in creationism.Many 9/11 skeptics would label themselves "spiritual, but not religious". These folks aren't fundamentalists in any sense of the word, let alone creationists.Quite a few 9/11 skeptics are people of traditional faiths, either Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist or Mulsim. But I don't think a single one of these people is a creationist.The "creationist" label is just another in a long line of false attacks on those who question 9/11. It is another example of government apologists' never-ending attempt to move the goalposts.
1 comment:
We are only asking questions!!!!
That cry seems to be the mantra of the 9/11 truth movement. It’s also extreme intellectual cowardice, rather then develop thoughtful fact based conceptions that need to be defended they take the easy road. Often these question are asked with a large dose of personal incredulity, Just because a truther can’t understand why the towers fell in the fashion they fell, does not mean everyone has the same stunted understanding of a simple scientific concept, very massive structures are by their very nature going to behave differently then smaller structures. If you can’t understand that then the fault is not with what happened but with your lack of education or your ability to comprehend ideas.
Implied questions are a popular tactic with another fringe groups, creationist. Intelligent Design I.D. is no different then Inside Job I.J. Evolution also has unanswered questions but it has the basic fact of natural selection right, same way the 9/11 Report got the basics of 19 Al Qieda terrorist attacking the US right, same as the NIST Reports getting the fact impact damage and fire alone bringing the towers down was right. A tactic called “God of the Gaps”, is also used, find a small hole in a explanation, no matter how small and then try and force your I.D. I.J. God into it and pound away hoping you can make it fit.
Both groups practice an extreme form of anti-science.
Inside Job is only the agenda driven thinking of people with an ax to grind or people who buy all the conspiracy theorist folklore. The former simple hate Bush (and with good reason I think) they desperately want him to be guilty of this crime. The later, sad to say have a far to common mental illness of the “moron” class, who by default buy into any conspiracy theory from JFK to UFOs so they also buy the I.J legend. Truthers know their audience and so don’t aim the I.J. theories at the sophisticated educated public, but at the young impressionable (stupid) people. People who have supplanted reading the National Enquirer for the equally suspect YouTube video. You will note this pop culture way of getting info is way popular with truthers, it requires no knowledge, no facts, just questions done to the fast MTV video editing and trendy music. Dude! What they said has to be true cause I love the soundtrack.
Post a Comment