As Seen in Vanity Fair's August 2006 Issue!
As Seen in US News & World Report's September 11 Fifth Anniversary Issue!
As Seen in Time Magazine's September 11, 2006 Issue!
As Seen in Phoenix New Times' August 9, 2007 Issue!
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Quick Bits
There's a claim out there that the real identity of Troofer moron Killtown is going to be exposed tomorrow. Although I don't know his name myself, I know that his identity has been revealed to certain people (including Do-Over Dylan). Retards like Jenny Sparks have accused me of association with Killclown and somehow being involved in the WQ2RX crap, but this is silly. BTW, Boron Epstein griped in the last post that my blogger profile is private; this movement sure has some crack (pipe) investigators if there's anybody out there that doesn't know who I am and where I live.
Speaking of identities revealed, there's an absolutely crazy person posting at JREF for the last two and a half years called Galileo. He claims to be the original Galileo, which should give you an idea of the level of insanity we're talking about here. And he mentions quite casually in a post over there that he's Rolf Lindgren, Kevin "the Holocaust is a hideously destructive myth" Barrett's former campaign manager.
Which of these famed 9-11 researchers was mentioned in both David Ray Griffin's The New Pearl Harbor and Webster Tarpley's Synthetic Terror?
A. Steven Earl Jones B. Richard Gage C. Nico Haupt
The answer, of course is C, Nico Haupt. Haupt is credited with coining the most famous acronyms in 9-11 theories, LIHOP and MIHOP. Haupt is what we call around here a 0-Day "Truther" (that is to say that he suspected 9-11 was an inside job the day it happened), but unlike many others he immediately started organizing and researching.
There are not five people in the 9-11 "Truth" Movement who have been more significant than Nico Haupt. You can make an argument for David Ray Griffin, but Griffin is not a researcher. He synthesizes the work of others. Maybe Thierry Meyssan, who was the man who showed the Troofers a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Certainly not Eric Hufschmid, even though Hufschmid was the first to market a book and a movie on the conspiracy theory in the United States.
For the record, in my opinion, Nico Haupt is neither a flake, nor a neo-phyte, simply a stark raving madman and idiot savant researcher extraordinaire.
This is not exceptional in a movement that includes Uncle Fetzer as an elder statesman, Alex Jones as its most prominent face, Charlie Sheen as its big celebrity and Luke Rudkowski as a young superstar.
So why is Haupt on the outs with much of the movement he helped to found? Well, as I have pointed out in the past, it is the nature of the 9-11 "Truth" movement that it dissolves into factions over time. Haupt has come to represent what many feel is the most extreme faction of the 9-11 Truth Movement: The No-Planers.
The No-Planers are dedicated to the proposition that planes were not used on 9-11. It's a ludicrous position, but as I have pointed out in the past, almost all flavors of 9-11 "Truth" boil down to denying the planes in one fashion or another. The No-Planers in this regard are at least more honest about it.
Anyway, the No-Planers make up a significant portion of many of the more famous and early researchers in the 9-11 "Truth" Movement:
Nico Haupt Gerard Holmgren Rosalee Grable aka the Web Fairy Killtown
All of those names were prominent in the 9-11 "Truth" movement in its early years. One of the more amusing parts of watching the "Truthers" over the last few years is seeing what happens when a prominent person in the movement like Jim Fetzer or Judy Wood or Morgan Reynolds or David Shayler has suddenly gone "No-Planer". At first the assumption is that they just suddenly went insane (nope, they were marked as insane the moment they became "Truthers"). But then the more interesting and paranoid explanation emerged; that they were cointelpro operatives, hired by the government and seeking to discredit the movement.
Of course, this is absurd; if Nico Haupt is a government agent, then I'm a Playboy bunny. Haupt and his fellow no-planers are just like every other segment of the "Truth" movement, convinced that they and they alone have the evidence to prove 9-11 was an inside job, and that every other group is leading the movement astray. As we shall see when we talk about the CIT guys, or the Directed Energy Weapons folks.
Here's Dylan and Nico arguing at Ground Zero on the Sixth Anniversary:
There are a couple of "No-Planer" videos that I will be discussing over the next couple of weeks:
1. September Clues 2. 9/11 Octopus 3. 9-11 Taboo
If anybody knows of any more of these films, please let me know in the comments. Also, any other researchers whose work I should be aware of. I know about Morgan Reynolds and Rick Rajter.
In Case You're Wondering Why Everybody Despises Killtown
Get his explanation of why he got banned over at WTC Demolition.
Ok, so by reading all that, you may walk away thinking I'm just being some kind of attention whore who just wants to stir trouble at forums and it's my fault that I got banned at wtcdemolition.com for not obeying one of the admin's wishes about me not posting about my grievances with some in the truth movement. Well that's all fine and dandy, but then why are the admins allowed to keep posting blogs about the people they have grievances in the movement?
Um, because they are admins? And yes, I walked away thinking you're just some kind of attention whore who just wants to stir trouble at forums and it's your fault that you got banned at wtcdemolition.com for not obeying one of the admin's wishes about you not posting about your grievances with some in the truth movement.
Yes, he has a point about the way the site seems to be doing a lot of 9-11 Blogger bashing. But Killtown seems to think that everybody should treat him just like everybody else. It's like Ricky Williams signing to play football somewhere and saying, "Now, no drug-testing, because after all, I'm no more likely to light up a joint than Tom Brady."
A new contribution to analysis of 9-11 conspiracy claims by JREF Forum member RMackey.
In evaluating alternate theories, and conspiracy theories in particular, one often desires to distinguish whether a theory is plausible, if unlikely, or whether a theory is absurd. This distinction is important to a skeptic, because a skeptic should always respond logically and rationally to a plausible theory, even if it contradicts previous theories and especially if it contradicts poorly supported belief and conjecture. An absurd theory, on the other hand, may and in many cases should be simply dismissed. No amount of logical analysis can salvage an inherently illogical proposition.
Unfortunately, the question of how to identify an absurd theory remains open. The problem of evaluation is in many respects parallel to determining the burden of proof, in the sense that the more plausible theories have a lower burden of proof, or conversely that an argument partially or wholly satisfying its burden of proof is inherently more plausible. This consideration, however, does not give us any actionable formula, since burden of proof is also subjective. While some attempts to quantify burden of proof exist, primarily in the field of trial law, this standard is not directly applicable to philosophy or science.
I think all debunkers have an internal "Gravy Line" sensor built in. For example, Killtown often pleads with debunkers to take on his claim that Val McClatchey's photo was faked. But I think we can all see using RMackey's technique that this claim, even if true, amounts to:
3. Anomaly or Artifact (Score = 0.25): An argument that criticizes an existing theory while proposing no competing hypothesis of its own, such that if the argument is accepted, uncertainty actually increases.
Negative Adjustments? Clearly there are several negatives to Killtown's theory. First, you have to explain how she managed to fake this within a very short period of time while huge attention was being focused on the Shanksville site. That's a major negative. Also, you have to acknowledge that if Killtown's measurements are off by a small amount, the entire conclusion may be invalid. Major negative adjustment. Killtown has never explained a reason for Val McClatchey to fake the photograph; profit is assumed to be a motive, but there was no immediate reason to assume that there would be significant demand for the photograph. Major negative.
We could go further, but there is no real need. Multiplying the factors together: .25 X .5 X .5 X .5 = .03125, below the Gravy Line. Obviously there is some subjectivity to this analysis in determining what values to place on the adjustments, and the .05 Gravy Line may be too high or too low. But this certainly represents an interesting attempt to quantify why some theories just aren't worth debunking.
He's become the guru of the Flight 93 nuttiness, and this film exemplifies it.
Ooooh, they propped up the Flight Data recorder to photograph it? Oooh, they threw in some wires to make it look real? But they screwed up in a way that Killtown could solve the mystery? Am I the only person who thinks that KT looks up not to Sherlock Holmes as his role model, but to these folks:
Update: Nico has a tribute to Killtown here. I think we can see why KT did not provide voiceover in his silly little movie.
