I know that there is already a thread covering these materials, nevertheless, I wanted to start fresh.
Apparently, a man calling himself Simon Shack has decided to tackle the events of 9/11 from a different perspective than most people. He is challenging the basic assumption of most people:
that the News reels from the morning of 9/11 are describing actual events. According to the film series, September Clues, news events of the day have been tampered with, and the feed from live tv was altered using computer graphics. Some scenes from the morning may actually be real, but the content has been altered. In other cases, he argues for a total CGI environment. Needless to say, these claims are very extreme. So where's the evidence?
I have watched the video series September Clues, and read most of the articles on his website. I Have also come across two documents claiming to debunk the series:
The "definitive series," (apparently, Mr. Shack can revise his theories in response to criticism):
From 9/11 truth website truthaction.org:
So that the discussion can really focus on taking these claims to task, you should probably also know how Shack responds to some basic gut level criticism of his thesis:
-There were many witnesses that morning and they saw the plane."
Not so according to Mr. Shack. Lower Manhattan was evacuated pretty quickly that morning. Also witness give conflicting reports. Some claim to have seen a small plane, a very few to have seen a missile, some claim to have seen nothing, and some to have seen a large jet aircraft.
-What about the many armature videos that have come forth since.
According to Mr. Shack, they were put out by the government. According to Mr. Shack, The videos themselves show evidence of being produced professionally, and there are "CGI mistakes."
-How about the many documentaries that came after the event and interviewed more witnesses.
Mr. Shack points out what he sees as "acting" and contradictions between the various stories and scripts of what happened according to the documentaries.
This is one of my first posts. I realize the severity of the claims this man is making, and what a pile I am potentially stepping in. Never the less, I would like to take the video series apart piece by piece, analyzing the claims and the debunking. This is a serious issue. If it only means that one more false theory of what happened that day is put to rest, my mission will be accomplished, and my time not wasted.
Finally, I have a question for SKEPCOP. What do you make of Mr. Shack's claims that people like Alex Jones, and AE9/11 truth, are part of the lie ( ie. paid by the government to mislead)? I know you have pointed out in past posting your suspicions about David Icke, because of the potential contradictions in his Conspiracy System, so I thought that you might also have an opinion on this.
PS. I apologize, ProfWag, as I know you don't like to watch YouTube videos. The first debunking article has a summary of each basic claim made by the Clues series. You can use that as a reference if you want.