National Geographic's 9/11 Conspiracy Program

[NinjaPuppy]

Gee ProfWag, we are supposed to pick a side? I'll take a side of fries, thank you.

I don't 'pick a side'. I prefer to nitpick my preferences one issue at a time. I love a good point/counterpoint issue myself. I find it hard to form an opinion of any kind from a laundry list of claims and counter claims. It's like watching an eternal game of ping-pong. While one claim may be spot on correct, the next might be dead wrong in the same sentence by the same person. I don't feel that I have to agree with every point of a subject to be pro or con.

[ProfWag]

[WhiteTiger]

[ProfWag]

[WhiteTiger]

Ah, I intentionally didn't address the "super thermite" question since it wasn't what was in the show in question, other than verbal mention. I'll say that if they are making crap up, they aren't at all original about it, because I was hearing rumbles about something similar back in the 80's, but only circuitous and passing references, and not going by any specific label.

I was attempting to keep my remarks relevant to the show itself and the putative science demonstrations in it.



Tiger

[ProfWag]

[NinjaPuppy]

[ProfWag]

[brett]

well i finally got to see this Nat Geo presentation - and was NOT overly surprised by the tone and content - after all i guess it is a reasonable question to ask as to WHO owns and runs that franchise - and what connections do they have to the establishment ( vis US government ?? ) - and weather Nat Geo would go against the "official" line - or are they in fact part of the smokescreen ??