Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts (Paperback)

by The Editors of Popular Mechanics (Author), David Dunbar (Editor), Brad Reagan (Editor), John McCain (Foreword)

Editorial Reviews

From Booklist
Expanding on an article published in Popular Mechanics in March 2005, the staff of the highly regarded magazine painstakingly deconstructs many of the myths surrounding the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Drawing on interviews with engineers, aviation experts, military officials, eyewitnesses, and investigators, this book addresses only those questions raised by conspiracy theorists, mostly that somehow the U.S. government was behind the attacks, and puts forth no theory of its own. Each section announces a theory, discloses the major proponents behind the theory, and deconstructs the theories specifically surrounding the World Trade Center (the fires could not have melted the steel in the structure), the Pentagon (the holes in the building were too small to have been made by a Boeing 757), and United Flight 93 (that it was actually shot down by an air force plane). The afterword details how Popular Mechanicsitself was accused of being part of the conspiracy to support the administration. Although it isn't likely to stop conspiracy theorists, this book offers sound information for readers to ponder. Vanessa Bush
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

Review

“There is no time to waste. You must purchase Debunking 9/11 Myths.” —Rocky Mountain News

“Certainly one of the most original—and potentially controversial—titles on the topic.”  —Publishers Weekly

“Do you have a friend who emails you the most recent documentary ‘proving’ that a missile impacted the Pentagon or that timed explosions brought down WTC-7? Buy him a copy of this book. He’ll thank you later.”—Weekly Standard

See all Editorial Reviews

---

Product Details Paperback: 192 pages Publisher: Hearst (August 15, 2006) Language: English ISBN-10: 158816635X ISBN-13: 978-1588166357 Product Dimensions: 8.2 x 5.4 x 0.7 inches Shipping Weight: 8.8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies) Average Customer Review: 3.1 out of 5 stars See all reviews (143 customer reviews) Amazon.com Sales Rank: #159,172 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books) Popular in these categories: (What's this?) #77 in  Books > History > World > 21st Century #77 in  Books > Nonfiction > Current Events > September 11

---

What Do Customers Ultimately Buy After Viewing This Item?

	86% buy the item featured on this page: Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts 3.1 out of 5 stars (143) $10.17
	5% buy Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory 4.1 out of 5 stars (79) $13.60
	4% buy The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé 4.4 out of 5 stars (30) $13.60
	3% buy 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press 4.7 out of 5 stars (25) $15.00

Explore similar items

---

Tags Customers Associate with This Product  (What's this?) Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people. Check the boxes next to the tags you consider relevant or enter your own tags in the field below. 911(19) conspiracy theories(14) 911 truth(12) popular mechanics(11) debunking(10) conspiracy(9) liberal moonbats exposed(8) leftards(4) liberalism is a mental disorder(2) propaganda(2) transparent disinfo(2) See all 68 tags... Your tags: Add your first tag

Search Products Tagged with   See most popular tags

Help others find this product — tag it for Amazon search

No one has tagged this product for Amazon search yet. Why not be the first to suggest a search for which it should appear?

---

Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store

If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store. Learn more

---

 

Customer Reviews

143 Reviews 5 star:  (56) 4 star:  (20) 3 star:  (9) 2 star:  (5) 1 star:  (53)           Average Customer Review 3.1 out of 5 stars (143 customer reviews)		Share your thoughts with other customers:
Most Helpful Customer Reviews 285 of 422 people found the following review helpful: 5.0 out of 5 stars The Facts Prove 911 was NOT an "inside job", September 1, 2006 By  A. Daniels Jr. "artscholar" (Los Altos, CA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)    It is absolutely amazing the kind of reviews people will dare to give. As one prior reviewer astutely noticed, many "reviews" were done by people with an agenda to sell who obviously did not read the book. In fact, even before the book was published you had 911 conspiracy folks writing negative assertions about the book before it was even published. This tells you the mindset of such people and the prejudice they have. There is simply no way you can be objective by trying to trash something before you've even read it. But such is the folly of some. And let me say that I am particularly disappointed with Ed Haas, who appears to be just using this forum to promote his conspiracy agenda instead of reviewing the book honestly. As someone who came to this issue trying to objectively ascertain what the truth is regarding 911, and as a former native New Yorker for over 30 years, I will now try to render an honest review of this book as one who has actually read it and also has verified many of its points from my own research. I will also point out some of the facts which prove that most of the negative reviewers did NOT read the book. First, let's dispense with the most obvious nonsense arguments. It is a fallacy of logic to argue that because the book was done by folks at Popular Mechanics (PM), which is owned by Hearst Communications, that this automatically dismisses the evidence from the many independent scientists, engineers, physicists, and other experts. This is known as the genetic "consider the source" fallacy. Such reasoning is flawed and is just a way of avoiding the facts presented by PM. Second, it has not been conclusively proven that the Ben Chertoff who used to be the head of the magazine's research department at PM is in any way related to Michael Chertoff, the head of Homeland Security. Now, according to Ben's mom, Michael MIGHT be a distant cousin (p. 102). Yet conspiracy theorists unwisely take a MIGHT and turn it into a conclusive fact. Nonsense. If that is the case, then I can argue that the Bush administration is using Bush's baked beans to poison us all in a worldwide conspiracy to dominate the world...LOL. And do I even need to point out that people having the same last name does not necessarily mean they must be related. That fallacy is called the non sequitur. But let's move on. One argument has been made that the people at PM are not scientists and engineers. Fair enough. But that's a red herring designed to divert our attention from the facts. They CONSULTED many scientists and engineers and reported what THEY said. That is the point. But since we are on the topic of "scientists and engineers," perhaps we are to believe that David Ray Griffin, who doesn't have the first degree in relevant scientific or engineering fields, is a credible source of information about what happened on 911? Mr. Griffin has been shown to be an author with an agenda who cannot see that he has been duped by the likes of French author Thierry Meyssan, who "...never visited the United States for his research" (p.59). So the work of Griffin is highly suspect and lacks real credibility. It is easy for some reviewers to talk big talk about PM committing "straw man fallacies" while committing their own fallacies, but the facts are otherwise. This book is excellent in its presentation of the facts and documentation. The only problem I had is that it didn't use the standard numerical reference techniques most scholarly books use. I would have also liked it if they made it easier to contact the many experts consulted by providing contact information such as email addresses. That way, it would be easier to verify that these experts really said what it is claimed they said. However, I have found in my research that if you really want to contact someone, all you need is some basic information and you can usually follow-up and make contact. Other than that, the book does a great job of answering (with credible sources from those expert in the relevant fields) most of the major wild 911 "inside job" conspiracy theories. The book is divided up into 4 major sections: The Planes, The World Trade Center, The Pentagon, and Flight 93, with an afterward by James Meiggs, editor-in-chief of PM, 3 appendices (Appendix A: Experts Consulted, Appendix B: World Trade Center Report, Appendix C: Pentagon Building Report), notes and an index. I will now highlight points from each major section: The Planes: The book nicely puts the issue in a conspiracy "claim" vs. "fact" format, which makes things easier to follow. Some claim that the 19 "amateur" hijackers with box cutters taking over planes and flying them and hitting "75 percent" of their targets raises a lot of questions. Perhaps. But you don't need to be an expert flyer to crash a big plane into a big building. That's common sense. But "Debunking 911 myths" points out that "The hijacker pilots...may not have been have been highly skilled, but they were not complete amateurs" (p. 4). Some have tried to argue that there was a "missile" or "pod" underneath the planes that hit the Towers. However, this assumption was based on an inaccurate interpretation of bad photography. "Debunking" consulted Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. His findings? "After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a `pod'...In fact, Greeley confirms the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear" (pp. 9, 10). So, conspiracy theorists have mistaken lighting angles and pixel distortion on digital images for some kind of "pod" or missile. Another false claim debunked by "Debunking" is the idea that there was a "stand down" order given to the military so that the hijacked planes could reach their targets. "Debunking" catalogs all the confusion on 911 and shows that even though the hijackers had turned off the transponders, fighter planes were ordered to battle stations. But with over 4,000 planes in the air, and an inadequate ATC system, it is not hard to see why intercepts were delayed (pp.14-19). It was also pointed out the NORAD's more sophisticated radar focused outside the continental US for threats, not inward. No need for wild conspiracy theories. The World Trade Center: One claim is that the Towers were not brought down by the combination of large planes full of jet fuel slamming into them and the subsequent damage, but they collapsed due to intentially placed bombs or controlled demolition charges. However, "Debunking" provides evidence from credible independent sources that this was not the case (pp. 28-58). I have personally watched video of authentic controlled demolitions and the Towers and building 7 do NOT precisely match them. In real demo, the puffs of smoke from the charges going off, sometimes called "squibs," always come first and then the building comes down. With WTCs 1,2, 7 the "squibs" show up only AFTER the building begins to collapse. But conspiracy theorists ignore that little fact to their detriment. Conspiracy theorists are fond of making mention of the work of professor Steven Jones of BYU. It is claimed that he found something in a sample of the WTC rubble which indicates to him that explosives were used. However, the credibility of Mr. Jones is in question on many counts. First, his own colleagues at BYU, who are civil engineers while he is NOT, do not find his work credible. Second, "Debunking" consulted metallurgy professors (specialists in metals analysis) who "...found flaws with the evidence Jones uses to support his arguments...Alan Pense, professor emeritus of metallurgical engineering at Lehigh University, said: `The photographs shown to support melting steel are, to me, either unconvincing ...or show materials that appear to be other than steel'" (p. 41). Third, what really caught my eye was this info regarding the "thermite" allegedly found by Mr. Jones. "Richard Furehan, professor of metallurgical engineering at Carnegie Mellon University, says that Jones does not provide adequate evidence to show that thermite reactions did take place...even if they did, that would not necessarily indicate the presence of explosives. THE THERMITE REACTION COULD HAVE OCCURRED WITH ALUMINUM METAL AND ANY OXIDE THAT HAPPENS TO BE NEAR IT (p. 42, emphasis added.). So, a thermite reaction can take place in other ways. Interesting that we don't hear that from the conspiracy folks. And finally, "Debunking" provides more information from various experts showing that Mr. Jones' work is "naïve and unscientific" (as Dr. Thomas Eagar of MIT personally told me in a private email), but space won't permit me to go into further detail. When it comes to building 7, most conspiracy theorists always mention the words of Larry Silverstein on a nationally televised show using the words "pull it." These words are interpreted to mean that Silverstein was admitting he told a "fire commander" (note not a demolition specialist) to "pull it" (misread to mean demolish building 7). However, "Debunking" points out from 4 different demolition experts that "pull it" is "not slang for controlled demolition" (p. 57). Even after Silverstein clarified his words, saying that his concern was to "pull" the squadron of firefighters from the building, conspiracy theorists still cling to their misinterpretation and misapplication of Silverstein's words. What's more, with all the fuss over the collapse of Towers 1, 2 and building 7, people forget that other buildings and structures either fully or partially collapsed that day (such as the St. Nicholas Church, the North Bridge - wonder if Silverstein owns those too, or if demolition charges were placed in those too). And yes, despite false claims to the contrary, "Debunking" did address in detail the Empire State Building and the B-25 that crashed into it and listed the vital differences between that incident and the collapse of the Towers (pp. 29-32). The Pentagon: One conspiracy theory about the Pentagon, circulated mainly by a French writer who never visited the United States, is that flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. Some say it was a missile (although no credible witnesses say they saw one) and other say it was a "Global Hawk" (a smaller, unmanned plane, although no one saw that either and no GH parts were found). Pentagon Video - Some people argue that if flight 77 hit the Pentagon, then the security camera should clearly show it. Yet "Debunking" points out that the Philips LTC 1261 camera filmed at one frame per second, while the plane was traveling at about 780 feet per second. Now, anyone who knows anything about photography can understand what that means; you will not get a clear image of a plane (p. 61). Small Debris - Although most conspiracy theorists claim that the debris of the Pentagon was too little to be from flight 77, they also do not investigate the fact that most airplane crashes do NOT leave great remains. "Debunking" gives several examples of this fact. So this does not prove flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. Intact Windows - Now the idea that regular windows could remain intact after a commercial jet hits a building would seem rather incredible, but not when you know all the facts. "Debunking" explains that the Pentagon windows were blast resistant and weighed "1,600" pounds each (p. 71). Wow! My first reaction was `What the heck kind of window weighs that much?' It seems they wanted them to withstand a powerful missile or bomb. But these were not household windows, and therefore any conspiracy argument from intact windows after the plane crash appear to be based on ignorance. Flight 93: "Debunking" deals a death blow to the main conspiracy theories surrounding this flight. Instead of the flight crashing due to the heroics of the brave passengers, the flight is said to have either been shot down by an F16 or a mysterious white jet. But the facts show that the Army Colonel Donn de Grand-Pre lied on the Alex Jones show about knowing the pilot who allegedly shot down flight 93. Mr. Grand-Pre also lied about contacting General Hugh Shelton, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time (pp. 77-80). "Debunking" also proves, from a credible source, that the white jet that was seen around the wreckage of flight 93 was not a military plane but "a Dassault Falcon 20 business jet owned by the VF Corporation" (p. 82). Cell phones - Conspiracy theorists are fond of saying that all those calls were somehow faked because cell phones can't work above 8,000 feet. However, "Debunking" proves from cell phone company sources that this is not true: "While not exactly reliable, cell-phone calls from airplanes were possible in 2001...because cell sites have a range of several miles, even at 35,000 feet...says Rick Kemper, director of technology and security at the CTIA - The Wireless Association" (pp. 83,84). When it comes to the small amount of wreckage found at the flight 93 crash site, "Debunking" also documents, from experts in air crash analysis, the fact that most plane crashes routinely leave little wreckage (pp. 86-90). The problem, then, is that while conspiracy believers ask many questions, they seem to rarely find credible answers from proper authorities. So despite what you hear from some fake reviewers of the book, the book does address most of the wild conspiracy claims they tried to say the book did not address (which shows they didn't read the book). In conclusion, it seems to me that the fake reviews by people with an agenda to push shows the dishonesty and disingenuousness of those in the 911 conspiracy movement. The facts show from this book, and other sources available online, that if the "official story" has holes in it the size of a "hundred pound block of Swiss cheese" (as one reviewer opined), then that goes hundreds of times more for these wild "inside job" theories which have no credible, factual support. I applaud the people at PM for doing a fine job of putting together a masterful work disproving these nonsensical theories that ultimately dishonor the memory of the lives we lost on 911 and their surviving families. Remember, Remember, the FACTS about the 11th of September...because the Master Himself said it best: "and you shall know the truth, and the truth will make you free" (John 8:32). 3 of 4 people found the following review helpful: 4.0 out of 5 stars Solid, June 4, 2009 By  Irishgal (Arizona, USA) - See all my reviews On September 11, 2001, the world as we knew it changed. America was thrown into a tailspin of emotion as we tried to sort out the events that had occurred. It is only natural, then, for citizens to want to find out what happened on that day, why it happened, and what can be done to prevent it from happening again. However, there are always those in a society for whom the truth is not enough. And when some questions, such as "why", can't be answered to their satisfaction, they begin to look for alternate theories to fit their preconcieved notions of reality. 9/11 featured previously unheard-of events, hijackings in which the safety of the passengers or hijackers was a non-issue, civilian planes being used as missiles into buildings, and the very centers of our economic and defense systems being hit. It could not compare to any previous event, and it caused emotional trauma to many Americans, some more so than others. Investigations were launched, and we sat glued to our televisions as reports unfoled in the aftermath of the event, hoping to learn the truth. But though the truth may be learned, it is not always satisfying; this is where conspiracy theories come in. Over the seven and a half years since 9/11, many conspiracy theories have developed, and with the help of the internet, have spread across the world. In "Debunking 9/11 Myths", the authors of Popular Mechanics set out to explain why the theories are wrong. They tackle four areas of myth: the planes, the collapse of the World Trade Center, the attack on the Pentagon, and United 93. Among the issues explained are the prevalence of cell phone calls from the doomed flights; the impact craters left at the Pentagon and in Shanksville, PA; why the WTC towers collapsed (including the collapse of WTC7 several hours later, despite its not being hit by a plane); and the "appearance" of a controlled demolition at the site. To help answer these qustions, the editors of the magazine consulted over 300 experts in everything from demolitions to aeronautics. Some of them, especially those whose field of expertise is in defense, work for the government, but others are independent contractors and academics. And their work is solid. As one of millions of Americans who watched the tragic events of 9/11 unfold on live television, I've wondered what went wrong and have searched for an explanation of events. How could this have happened on US soil? The truth isn't always emotionally satisfying, but this book helps to solidify it. 4 of 6 people found the following review helpful: 4.0 out of 5 stars Debunks the Hype, March 18, 2009 By  Will Jerom (Florida, USA) - See all my reviews The editors at Popular Mechanics have done a good job in collecting and responding to the conspiracy theories that have unfortunately flourished after 9/11. Facing the facts and the claims of the conspiracy theorists, I believe they have done a good job in refuting those theories responsibly. Of course conspiracy theorists will not agree, and will likely continue repeating their claims in spite of the paucity of evidence or logic they offer for their theories. This book points out that most conspiracy theorists look to the smallest anomaly and out of that argue for an even more grandiose theory, for which they furnish no proof, only their zealously decided opinions. Most crimes involve a suspect, a murder weapon, and motive, yet I would venture to state that most conspiracy theorists only look at one of those three elements, and fill in the details of the rest with whatever they wish to believe. We have a suspect - Al Qaeda, we have a motivation - Al Qaeda's openly hostile condemnation of our policies (since 1998 and before), and we all saw the murder weapon fly into those buildings, with tragic effect until 9/11. Conspiracy theorists wishing to refute the ideas presented in this book must be willing to fact the facts as the real experts have relayed them, and if they have a viable alternative that involves a real suspect, a real motive and a real alternative murder weapon, to put that in as concise and compelling terms as possible. This is what conspiracy theorists have not been able to do. If you wish to debunk their hype, or simply begin to become familiar with it, this book is not a bad place to start. . .there is only one error I clearly found on this book. In the color photos following page 42, the pictures of Hani Hanjour and Ziad Jarrah are mixed up. Does this mean the rest of book is wrong? I don't think so.		Most Recent Customer Reviews 1.0 out of 5 stars I'm glad I did not vote for John McCain in 2008 This short book is written by the editors of the US periodical Popular Mechanics, and includes a forward by US Senator John McCain from the state of Arizona. Read more Published 1 day ago by Newton Ooi 1.0 out of 5 stars Very Disappointed I cannot believe that popular mechanics would betray its readers and its history with such fabricated "Hollywood" style book. Read more Published 2 months ago by A.R 2.0 out of 5 stars Scum in the pipeline First, I'd like to point out that there are 475 arch and eng's who disbelieve the government's conspiracy theory. Read more Published 4 months ago by K. Mitchell 1.0 out of 5 stars This book is evidence that we are getting to them... As you start to read this book, it appears to be a reasonable, well thought-out book. If you are not aware of the real issues that the 9/11 truth community has with the official... Read more Published 4 months ago by Tony Tolbert 1.0 out of 5 stars Got Truth? On a certain level, books like this one (and also the article in Popular Mechanics that lead to it), seem to make a lot of sense. Read more Published 5 months ago by My two-cents worth... 1.0 out of 5 stars The Emperor Has No Clothes The establishment press has been been lying to us for seven years telling us that the Emperor is wearing clothes. Read more Published 6 months ago by Ralph Pino 3.0 out of 5 stars Pretty "ok" book This book wasn't the best I've ever read, but it also wasn't the worst. It had some parts I liked and some parts I didn't like. Overall, (in my opinion) I think it's just "ok". Published 6 months ago by Fryfat 1.0 out of 5 stars Expected More; Very Disappointing I researched the topic of 9/11 Conspiracies for months, collecting all sorts of information. There was something about 9/11 that never sat well with me, so I decided to read up on... Read more Published 7 months ago by D. Cadena 3.0 out of 5 stars Pretty "ok" book This book wasn't the best I've ever read, but it also wasn't the worst. It had some parts I liked and some parts I didn't like. Overall, (in my opinion) I think it's just "ok". Published 7 months ago by Fryfat 4.0 out of 5 stars Not a volume but collection of articles This book addresses most of the popular theories which do not stand up very long to empircal study. It really is a straightforward explanation but you can see how committed... Read more Published 7 months ago by sp500chris Search Customer Reviews Only search this product's reviews

---

Customer Discussions

 Beta (What's this?)

New! See all customer communities, and bookmark your communities to keep track of them.

This product's forum (21 discussions)   Discussion Replies Latest Post We know this book is a lie! BYU Physics Dept. find Controlled Demolition of WTCs, "thermate" traces! 21 5 days ago What desperation looks like 25 21 days ago WTC7 1 September 2008 Exposing the 911 Lies Movement 24 August 2008 How does that affect the demolition industry? 0 July 2008 Scientific Fallacies in Popular Mechanics 9/11 Book 41 May 2008 › See all 21 discussions...   [Start the discussion] Start a new discussion Topic: First post: Receive e-mail when new posts are made Prompts for sign-in   [Cancel] Guidelines Active discussions in related forums   Discussion Replies Latest Post religion Hey, Theists, why do you find the notion(s) of "evidence" and of "proof" so troubling? 1837 2 minutes ago 911 The smoking gun: thermite found in WTC dust 14 9 minutes ago religion I don't believe my children were born guilty for something their grandparents did. 16 9 minutes ago history Roman vs. Greek "Empires" 10 21 minutes ago conspiracy theories The Financial Meltdown 0 5 days ago current events Rights and Freedoms vs, Security 12 5 days ago

The 9/11 community Latest activity 11 hours ago 1,469 customers have contributed 741 products, 73 lists & guides and more... › Explore the community The Conspiracy Theories community Latest activity 11 hours ago 792 customers have contributed 562 products, 41 lists & guides and more... › Explore the community The Conspiracy community Latest activity 10 hours ago 2,535 customers have contributed 1,487 products, 140 lists & guides and more... › Explore the community Related forums 911 (6 discussions) conspiracy (3 discussions) conspiracy... (5 discussions) current events (18 discussions) history (666 discussions) religion (1023 discussions) religious... (9 discussions) Explore more › See all Customer Communities › Your communities

---

Product Information from the Amapedia Community

Beta (What's this?)

Be the first person to add an article about this item at Amapedia.com.

› See featured Amapedia.com articles

---

Listmania!

Best Books about 9-11 and Terrorism!: A list by Richard D. Cappetto "RickDC"   9/11 & War On Iraq: Convenient Demons & The Oil Police: A list by R. Hutchinson "autonomeus"   Essential 9/11 Truth: A list by Nick Shelton "Author of The Angel Letters and American Truth" Create a Listmania! list

Search Listmania!

---

So You'd Like to...

... be loved by everyone and admired for your wisdom: A guide by u2r2h   Get ramped up to go to war. One Man's Reading List.: A guide by M. Swinney "Marc My Words"   understand 9/11 truth.: A guide by Nick Shelton "Author of The Angel Letters and American Truth" Create a guide

Search Guides

---

Look for Similar Items by Category

• Books > History > Americas > United States > 21st Century
• Books > History > World > 21st Century
• Books > Nonfiction > Current Events > Conspiracy Theories
• Books > Nonfiction > Current Events > September 11
• Books > Nonfiction > Current Events > Terrorism
• Books > Nonfiction > Social Sciences > Political Science
• Books > Religion & Spirituality > Religious Studies > Controversial Knowledge

---

Value Center Deals Let spectacular savings of up to 50% in the Home Improvement Value Center help motivate you to organize the closet, garage, and everything else. ›Shop the Value Center

Big Savings in Books Find great titles at fantastic prices in our Bargain Books Store.

Buy Three Books, Get a Fourth Free Order any four eligible books under $10 and get the lowest-price book free in our 4-for-3 Books Store. See more details.

A Cut Above the Rest Make those final touches that make the yard perfect and take charge of your outdoor maintenance needs with a hedge trimmer. ›Shop hedge trimmers

 

Feedback If you need help or have a question for Customer Service, contact us.  Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? Is there any other feedback you would like to provide? Your comments can help make our site better for everyone. Please note that we are unable to respond directly to all feedback submitted via this form, but we'll ask you to sign in so we can contact you if needed.

Where's My Stuff? Track your recent orders. View or change your orders in Your Account. Shipping & Returns See our shipping rates & policies. See FREE shipping information. Return an item (here's our Returns Policy). Need Help? Forgot your password? Buy gift cards. Visit our Help department.

Your Recent History

  (What's this?)

You have no recently viewed items or searches. After viewing product detail pages or search results, look here to find an easy way to navigate back to pages you are interested in. Look to the right column to find helpful suggestions for your shopping session.	Continue shopping: Top Sellers Free by Chris Anderson 3.5 out of 5 stars (15)$0.00 Paranoia by Joseph Finder 4.1 out of 5 stars (202)$0.00 My Soul to Lose by Rachel Vincent 3.6 out of 5 stars (5)$0.00 Glenn Beck's Common Sense by Glenn Beck 3.7 out of 5 stars (290)$6.59

Amazon.com Home  |   Directory of All Stores

International Sites:  Canada  |  United Kingdom  |  Germany  |  Japan  |  France  |  China

Business Programs: Sell on Amazon  |  Build an eCommerce Site  |  Advertise With Us  |  Developer Services  |  Self-Publish with Us

Help  |  View Cart  |  Your Account  |  1-Click Settings  |  Join Associates  |  Join Advantage

Careers at Amazon  |  Investor Relations  |  Press Releases  |  Corporate Responsibility

Conditions of Use | Privacy Notice © 1996-2009, Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates

Product Details

• Paperback: 192 pages
• Publisher: Hearst (August 15, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 158816635X
• ISBN-13: 978-1588166357
• Product Dimensions: 8.2 x 5.4 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 8.8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.1 out of 5 stars See all reviews (143 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #159,172 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #77 in	Books > History > World > 21st Century
  #77 in	Books > Nonfiction > Current Events > September 11

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

285 of 422 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The Facts Prove 911 was NOT an "inside job", September 1, 2006

By	A. Daniels Jr. "artscholar" (Los Altos, CA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

It is absolutely amazing the kind of reviews people will dare to give. As one prior reviewer astutely noticed, many "reviews" were done by people with an agenda to sell who obviously did not read the book. In fact, even before the book was published you had 911 conspiracy folks writing negative assertions about the book before it was even published. This tells you the mindset of such people and the prejudice they have. There is simply no way you can be objective by trying to trash something before you've even read it. But such is the folly of some. And let me say that I am particularly disappointed with Ed Haas, who appears to be just using this forum to promote his conspiracy agenda instead of reviewing the book honestly.

As someone who came to this issue trying to objectively ascertain what the truth is regarding 911, and as a former native New Yorker for over 30 years, I will now try to render an honest review of this book as one who has actually read it and also has verified many of its points from my own research. I will also point out some of the facts which prove that most of the negative reviewers did NOT read the book.

First, let's dispense with the most obvious nonsense arguments. It is a fallacy of logic to argue that because the book was done by folks at Popular Mechanics (PM), which is owned by Hearst Communications, that this automatically dismisses the evidence from the many independent scientists, engineers, physicists, and other experts. This is known as the genetic "consider the source" fallacy. Such reasoning is flawed and is just a way of avoiding the facts presented by PM.

Second, it has not been conclusively proven that the Ben Chertoff who used to be the head of the magazine's research department at PM is in any way related to Michael Chertoff, the head of Homeland Security. Now, according to Ben's mom, Michael MIGHT be a distant cousin (p. 102). Yet conspiracy theorists unwisely take a MIGHT and turn it into a conclusive fact. Nonsense. If that is the case, then I can argue that the Bush administration is using Bush's baked beans to poison us all in a worldwide conspiracy to dominate the world...LOL. And do I even need to point out that people having the same last name does not necessarily mean they must be related. That fallacy is called the non sequitur. But let's move on.

One argument has been made that the people at PM are not scientists and engineers. Fair enough. But that's a red herring designed to divert our attention from the facts. They CONSULTED many scientists and engineers and reported what THEY said. That is the point. But since we are on the topic of "scientists and engineers," perhaps we are to believe that David Ray Griffin, who doesn't have the first degree in relevant scientific or engineering fields, is a credible source of information about what happened on 911? Mr. Griffin has been shown to be an author with an agenda who cannot see that he has been duped by the likes of French author Thierry Meyssan, who "...never visited the United States for his research" (p.59). So the work of Griffin is highly suspect and lacks real credibility.

It is easy for some reviewers to talk big talk about PM committing "straw man fallacies" while committing their own fallacies, but the facts are otherwise. This book is excellent in its presentation of the facts and documentation. The only problem I had is that it didn't use the standard numerical reference techniques most scholarly books use. I would have also liked it if they made it easier to contact the many experts consulted by providing contact information such as email addresses. That way, it would be easier to verify that these experts really said what it is claimed they said.

However, I have found in my research that if you really want to contact someone, all you need is some basic information and you can usually follow-up and make contact. Other than that, the book does a great job of answering (with credible sources from those expert in the relevant fields) most of the major wild 911 "inside job" conspiracy theories.

The book is divided up into 4 major sections: The Planes, The World Trade Center, The Pentagon, and Flight 93, with an afterward by James Meiggs, editor-in-chief of PM, 3 appendices (Appendix A: Experts Consulted, Appendix B: World Trade Center Report, Appendix C: Pentagon Building Report), notes and an index. I will now highlight points from each major section:

The Planes:

The book nicely puts the issue in a conspiracy "claim" vs. "fact" format, which makes things easier to follow. Some claim that the 19 "amateur" hijackers with box cutters taking over planes and flying them and hitting "75 percent" of their targets raises a lot of questions. Perhaps. But you don't need to be an expert flyer to crash a big plane into a big building. That's common sense. But "Debunking 911 myths" points out that "The hijacker pilots...may not have been have been highly skilled, but they were not complete amateurs" (p. 4).

Some have tried to argue that there was a "missile" or "pod" underneath the planes that hit the Towers. However, this assumption was based on an inaccurate interpretation of bad photography. "Debunking" consulted Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. His findings? "After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a `pod'...In fact, Greeley confirms the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear" (pp. 9, 10). So, conspiracy theorists have mistaken lighting angles and pixel distortion on digital images for some kind of "pod" or missile.

Another false claim debunked by "Debunking" is the idea that there was a "stand down" order given to the military so that the hijacked planes could reach their targets. "Debunking" catalogs all the confusion on 911 and shows that even though the hijackers had turned off the transponders, fighter planes were ordered to battle stations. But with over 4,000 planes in the air, and an inadequate ATC system, it is not hard to see why intercepts were delayed (pp.14-19). It was also pointed out the NORAD's more sophisticated radar focused outside the continental US for threats, not inward. No need for wild conspiracy theories.

The World Trade Center:

One claim is that the Towers were not brought down by the combination of large planes full of jet fuel slamming into them and the subsequent damage, but they collapsed due to intentially placed bombs or controlled demolition charges.

However, "Debunking" provides evidence from credible independent sources that this was not the case (pp. 28-58). I have personally watched video of authentic controlled demolitions and the Towers and building 7 do NOT precisely match them. In real demo, the puffs of smoke from the charges going off, sometimes called "squibs," always come first and then the building comes down. With WTCs 1,2, 7 the "squibs" show up only AFTER the building begins to collapse. But conspiracy theorists ignore that little fact to their detriment.

Conspiracy theorists are fond of making mention of the work of professor Steven Jones of BYU. It is claimed that he found something in a sample of the WTC rubble which indicates to him that explosives were used. However, the credibility of Mr. Jones is in question on many counts.

First, his own colleagues at BYU, who are civil engineers while he is NOT, do not find his work credible. Second, "Debunking" consulted metallurgy professors (specialists in metals analysis) who "...found flaws with the evidence Jones uses to support his arguments...Alan Pense, professor emeritus of metallurgical engineering at Lehigh University, said: `The photographs shown to support melting steel are, to me, either unconvincing ...or show materials that appear to be other than steel'" (p. 41).

Third, what really caught my eye was this info regarding the "thermite" allegedly found by Mr. Jones. "Richard Furehan, professor of metallurgical engineering at Carnegie Mellon University, says that Jones does not provide adequate evidence to show that thermite reactions did take place...even if they did, that would not necessarily indicate the presence of explosives. THE THERMITE REACTION COULD HAVE OCCURRED WITH ALUMINUM METAL AND ANY OXIDE THAT HAPPENS TO BE NEAR IT (p. 42, emphasis added.). So, a thermite reaction can take place in other ways. Interesting that we don't hear that from the conspiracy folks.

And finally, "Debunking" provides more information from various experts showing that Mr. Jones' work is "naïve and unscientific" (as Dr. Thomas Eagar of MIT personally told me in a private email), but space won't permit me to go into further detail.

When it comes to building 7, most conspiracy theorists always mention the words of Larry Silverstein on a nationally televised show using the words "pull it." These words are interpreted to mean that Silverstein was admitting he told a "fire commander" (note not a demolition specialist) to "pull it" (misread to mean demolish building 7). However, "Debunking" points out from 4 different demolition experts that "pull it" is "not slang for controlled demolition" (p. 57). Even after Silverstein clarified his words, saying that his concern was to "pull" the squadron of firefighters from the building, conspiracy theorists still cling to their misinterpretation and misapplication of Silverstein's words. What's more, with all the fuss over the collapse of Towers 1, 2 and building 7, people forget that other buildings and structures either fully or partially collapsed that day (such as the St. Nicholas Church, the North Bridge - wonder if Silverstein owns those too, or if demolition charges were placed in those too).

And yes, despite false claims to the contrary, "Debunking" did address in detail the Empire State Building and the B-25 that crashed into it and listed the vital differences between that incident and the collapse of the Towers (pp. 29-32).

The Pentagon:

One conspiracy theory about the Pentagon, circulated mainly by a French writer who never visited the United States, is that flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. Some say it was a missile (although no credible witnesses say they saw one) and other say it was a "Global Hawk" (a smaller, unmanned plane, although no one saw that either and no GH parts were found).

Pentagon Video - Some people argue that if flight 77 hit the Pentagon, then the security camera should clearly show it. Yet "Debunking" points out that the Philips LTC 1261 camera filmed at one frame per second, while the plane was traveling at about 780 feet per second. Now, anyone who knows anything about photography can understand what that means; you will not get a clear image of a plane (p. 61).

Small Debris - Although most conspiracy theorists claim that the debris of the Pentagon was too little to be from flight 77, they also do not investigate the fact that most airplane crashes do NOT leave great remains. "Debunking" gives several examples of this fact. So this does not prove flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon.

Intact Windows - Now the idea that regular windows could remain intact after a commercial jet hits a building would seem rather incredible, but not when you know all the facts. "Debunking" explains that the Pentagon windows were blast resistant and weighed "1,600" pounds each (p. 71). Wow! My first reaction was `What the heck kind of window weighs that much?' It seems they wanted them to withstand a powerful missile or bomb. But these were not household windows, and therefore any conspiracy argument from intact windows after the plane crash appear to be based on ignorance.

Flight 93:

"Debunking" deals a death blow to the main conspiracy theories surrounding this flight. Instead of the flight crashing due to the heroics of the brave passengers, the flight is said to have either been shot down by an F16 or a mysterious white jet. But the facts show that the Army Colonel Donn de Grand-Pre lied on the Alex Jones show about knowing the pilot who allegedly shot down flight 93. Mr. Grand-Pre also lied about contacting General Hugh Shelton, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time (pp. 77-80).

"Debunking" also proves, from a credible source, that the white jet that was seen around the wreckage of flight 93 was not a military plane but "a Dassault Falcon 20 business jet owned by the VF Corporation" (p. 82).

Cell phones - Conspiracy theorists are fond of saying that all those calls were somehow faked because cell phones can't work above 8,000 feet. However, "Debunking" proves from cell phone company sources that this is not true: "While not exactly reliable, cell-phone calls from airplanes were possible in 2001...because cell sites have a range of several miles, even at 35,000 feet...says Rick Kemper, director of technology and security at the CTIA - The Wireless Association" (pp. 83,84).

When it comes to the small amount of wreckage found at the flight 93 crash site, "Debunking" also documents, from experts in air crash analysis, the fact that most plane crashes routinely leave little wreckage (pp. 86-90). The problem, then, is that while conspiracy believers ask many questions, they seem to rarely find credible answers from proper authorities.

So despite what you hear from some fake reviewers of the book, the book does address most of the wild conspiracy claims they tried to say the book did not address (which shows they didn't read the book).

In conclusion, it seems to me that the fake reviews by people with an agenda to push shows the dishonesty and disingenuousness of those in the 911 conspiracy movement. The facts show from this book, and other sources available online, that if the "official story" has holes in it the size of a "hundred pound block of Swiss cheese" (as one reviewer opined), then that goes hundreds of times more for these wild "inside job" theories which have no credible, factual support.

I applaud the people at PM for doing a fine job of putting together a masterful work disproving these nonsensical theories that ultimately dishonor the memory of the lives we lost on 911 and their surviving families. Remember, Remember, the FACTS about the 11th of September...because the Master Himself said it best: "and you shall know the truth, and the truth will make you free" (John 8:32).

3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Solid, June 4, 2009

By	Irishgal (Arizona, USA) - See all my reviews

On September 11, 2001, the world as we knew it changed. America was thrown into a tailspin of emotion as we tried to sort out the events that had occurred. It is only natural, then, for citizens to want to find out what happened on that day, why it happened, and what can be done to prevent it from happening again.

However, there are always those in a society for whom the truth is not enough. And when some questions, such as "why", can't be answered to their satisfaction, they begin to look for alternate theories to fit their preconcieved notions of reality. 9/11 featured previously unheard-of events, hijackings in which the safety of the passengers or hijackers was a non-issue, civilian planes being used as missiles into buildings, and the very centers of our economic and defense systems being hit. It could not compare to any previous event, and it caused emotional trauma to many Americans, some more so than others. Investigations were launched, and we sat glued to our televisions as reports unfoled in the aftermath of the event, hoping to learn the truth. But though the truth may be learned, it is not always satisfying; this is where conspiracy theories come in.

Over the seven and a half years since 9/11, many conspiracy theories have developed, and with the help of the internet, have spread across the world. In "Debunking 9/11 Myths", the authors of Popular Mechanics set out to explain why the theories are wrong. They tackle four areas of myth: the planes, the collapse of the World Trade Center, the attack on the Pentagon, and United 93. Among the issues explained are the prevalence of cell phone calls from the doomed flights; the impact craters left at the Pentagon and in Shanksville, PA; why the WTC towers collapsed (including the collapse of WTC7 several hours later, despite its not being hit by a plane); and the "appearance" of a controlled demolition at the site. To help answer these qustions, the editors of the magazine consulted over 300 experts in everything from demolitions to aeronautics. Some of them, especially those whose field of expertise is in defense, work for the government, but others are independent contractors and academics. And their work is solid.

As one of millions of Americans who watched the tragic events of 9/11 unfold on live television, I've wondered what went wrong and have searched for an explanation of events. How could this have happened on US soil? The truth isn't always emotionally satisfying, but this book helps to solidify it.

4 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Debunks the Hype, March 18, 2009

By	Will Jerom (Florida, USA) - See all my reviews

The editors at Popular Mechanics have done a good job in collecting and responding to the conspiracy theories that have unfortunately flourished after 9/11. Facing the facts and the claims of the conspiracy theorists, I believe they have done a good job in refuting those theories responsibly. Of course conspiracy theorists will not agree, and will likely continue repeating their claims in spite of the paucity of evidence or logic they offer for their theories. This book points out that most conspiracy theorists look to the smallest anomaly and out of that argue for an even more grandiose theory, for which they furnish no proof, only their zealously decided opinions. Most crimes involve a suspect, a murder weapon, and motive, yet I would venture to state that most conspiracy theorists only look at one of those three elements, and fill in the details of the rest with whatever they wish to believe. We have a suspect - Al Qaeda, we have a motivation - Al Qaeda's openly hostile condemnation of our policies (since 1998 and before), and we all saw the murder weapon fly into those buildings, with tragic effect until 9/11. Conspiracy theorists wishing to refute the ideas presented in this book must be willing to fact the facts as the real experts have relayed them, and if they have a viable alternative that involves a real suspect, a real motive and a real alternative murder weapon, to put that in as concise and compelling terms as possible. This is what conspiracy theorists have not been able to do. If you wish to debunk their hype, or simply begin to become familiar with it, this book is not a bad place to start. . .there is only one error I clearly found on this book. In the color photos following page 42, the pictures of Hani Hanjour and Ziad Jarrah are mixed up. Does this mean the rest of book is wrong? I don't think so.