reply to post by benoni
In which manner, and in what way, did anyone ever imply that the investigation of the recovered engine debris parts and fragments was merely
That seems to be your
allegation, and is unsupported. By continuing to focus on a certain minutae, it deflects from the bigger picture, and
thoroughly distracts, and leaves incorrect impressions in some reader's minds.
THAT is the tried-and-true tactic in use, still today, by the 9/11 deniers.
Here, in a nutshell, is how most deniers see things, when discussing events of 9/11 -- let's stay at the Pentagon (NOT your barbaric, and I assume
intentional, bastardization spelling "pentac
Despite testimony, expert and otherwise, from dozens, or even hundreds of people, on various aspects of the event, IE
, eyewitnesses, expert
analysts of aircraft parts an debris, DNA analysis, etc...a faction devoted to "9/11 denying" will IGNORE the vast quantity of evidence contrary to
a pet "belief", in favor of a handful of articles, comments, or even sketchy 'eyewitnesses' who happen to 'buck the trend', and include THOSE as
their only lifeline of support, in order to maintain this 'denier' mindset.
Following on with their "logic" is a tendency to cherry-pick, as well. Out-of-context quotes are a favorite, as well as heavily edited (or even
annotated) REAL evidence, that is thusly skewed in favor of the 'deniers' viewpoint. It is evident, in these discussioons, time and again.
THIS thread is an excellent example of how a casual, off-hand comment, in passing, regarding ONE photo of a turbine engine rotor has spawned a frenzy
of miscommunication and misunderstandings.
What is LEFT OUT is the fact that these parts were collected, taken somewhere for study, and COMPARED to known parts, and found to be a match. Just
because the "denier" hounds can't find (or don't bother to dig deeply enough to find) this information does not mean it doesn't exist! No, the
"deniers" scratch only deep enough until they think they have found some 'flaw' in the much-maligned "official story" (there's a whole topic,
and needs a staff of psychiatrists to unravel...). Once they sniff out their "amazing 'new' information", they breathlessly announce it, as if
they are Moses with fifteen tablets...like, he found five that were misplaced....
What is intimated, here, is merely "looking" at ONE photo, then jumping to the conclusion that ALL of it is some massive "lie"? The logic of that
escapes me, frankly. And, it is hardly "scientific".