National Geographic program on 9/11

Renaissance

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Well, looks like as the eighth anniversery of 9/11 approaches MSM is still doing damage control:

Official Version or Cover-Up Conspiracy? The Truth Behind 9/11 Put to the Test in New National Geographic Channel Program

_http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/08-19-2009/0005079986&EDATE=
Forensic Experiments, CGI Technology and Expert Analysis Meticulously Reconstruct Events and Address Persistent Questions Raised by "9/11 Truth Movement"

9/11: Science and Conspiracy Premieres Monday, August 31, 2009, at 9 p.m. ET/PT

WASHINGTON, Aug. 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- America watched in horror as September 11, 2001, unfolded before our eyes. Eight years have passed and no stone has been left unturned in the painstaking process of piecing together what happened that fateful day. Yet according to a 2006 poll, 33 percent of us still do not accept the U.S. government's account. Were the attacks really the work of al-Qaida terrorists, or is it possible something even more sinister was at work?

On Monday, August 31, 2009, National Geographic Channel's 9/11: Science and Conspiracy conducts a forensic investigation to test tenets of some of the most common conspiracy theories. Did the Twin Towers really collapse from fires, or did explosives inside cause the buildings to implode? Was the Pentagon hit by a missile, and not a commercial airliner? And why do so many people believe theories like these?

The government's official version of events has been consistent: Hijackers commandeered commercial jetliners in a coordinated attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon that killed some 3,000 Americans. Now we hear from a group of theorists, dubbed the "9/11 Truth Movement," who believe the official version is inconsistent with reality, and impossible. Some even go so far as to suggest that the U.S. military plotted a colossal scheme to replace hijacked planes with remotely piloted rogue planes. And their seeds of doubt have spread widely around the world and across the Internet.

Using high-tech forensic experiments, CGI re-creations, eyewitness footage and in-depth analysis by experts and theorists on all sides of the story, 9/11: Science and Conspiracy examines the alleged conspiracies and available evidence. Then we take a fascinating fly-on-the-wall position as the theorists observe the scientific results and debate the conclusions.

Featured interviewees include "Truthers" Dr. David Ray Griffin, Dylan Avery, and Richard Gage; David Aaronovitch, journalist/author; Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone journalist; Patrick Smith, pilot and Salon columnist; David Baldacci, conspiracy novelist; and Brent Blanchard, demolition expert; among others.

9/11: Science and Conspiracy is produced by Creative Differences Productions for NGC.

For more information, visit _natgeotv.com/conspiracies.
 
LOL, you just know right now that anything about 9/11 presented by the mainstream media, and *especially* by National Geographic, will be nothing more than "damage control"!!! The info about the show gives one the false impression that it will be "unbiased" and will come to reasonable conclusions after "scientific debate". Don't you just love how they always do that?
 
Too bad they can't interview some of the eye witnesses because they 'committed suicide' or show multiple angles of cctv footage from the pentagon because the authorities took them for 'analysis'.
I doubt I'll watch this, an hour of frustration I could do without.
The agenda is clearly posted on the top of the page on their website _http://www.channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/9-11-science-and-conspiracy-4067/conspiracy-vs-science

CONSPIRACY VS. SCIENCE

Conspiracy theories are put to the test. How well do they stand up against the visual simulations of professional engineers? See how science supports official stories and debunks the conspiracies below.

How come conspiracies are suddenly contrasted against science? The conspiracy IS observable facts and anomalies, yet the 'science' is visual SIMULATIONS?
 
Diplodocus said:
How come conspiracies are suddenly contrasted against science? The conspiracy IS observable facts and anomalies, yet the 'science' is visual SIMULATIONS?

And that's why the science of conspiracy, Political Ponerology, is so needed to be spread and understood.
 
Diplodocus said:
Too bad they can't interview some of the eye witnesses because they 'committed suicide' or show multiple angles of cctv footage from the pentagon because the authorities took them for 'analysis'.
I doubt I'll watch this, an hour of frustration I could do without.
The agenda is clearly posted on the top of the page on their website _http://www.channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/9-11-science-and-conspiracy-4067/conspiracy-vs-science

CONSPIRACY VS. SCIENCE

Conspiracy theories are put to the test. How well do they stand up against the visual simulations of professional engineers? See how science supports official stories and debunks the conspiracies below.

How come conspiracies are suddenly contrasted against science? The conspiracy IS observable facts and anomalies, yet the 'science' is visual SIMULATIONS?

You bring up a very good point there. It is typical the way they deliberately infuse the idea into the public's mind that "science" and "conspiracy" are polar opposites; that conspiracies are by their very nature "irrational" and "unscientific". Never mind that the mainstream conspiracy that 9/11 was committed by a bunch of Arabs with box-cutters is just *so* unscientific as to take the perspicacious person's breath away! It's amazing, though deliberate of course, how a single term, "conspiracy theorist", has become so negatively loaded that the instant anyone is branded as such, few people are willing to actually do the research for themselves to see whether the "conspiracy theorist's" ideas hold any merit.
 
Back
Top Bottom