« New paper online: "Escape from the Humean Predicament" | Main | New paper online: "From Folk Psychology to Folk Epistemology: The Status of Radical Simulation" »
October 08, 2006
Book review of "Debunking 9/11 myths"
I teach a section in my Logic class about the pitfalls of conspiracy theories. A new book out does a good job poking holes in recent popular 9/11 conspiracy theories, but doesn't go far enough in attacking their biggest logical howlers. Here's my brief review, posted to the Barnes and Noble web site:
This book gives solid factual evidence needed to explain away various anomalies often cited as evidence for a U.S. government-supported conspiracy to stage the 9/11 attacks. Towards the end, the authors correctly note that there is something wrong with a theory based entirely on the anomalies of a rival theory, rather than on independent evidence of its own.
I think, however, that the book is too kind. There are far bigger problems with the conspiracy theories in question than the fact that the anomalies can be given simple, alternative explanations, or that they are lacking evidence of their own in crucial places.
Many of the theories are simply manifestly incoherent. Just one example: Why would the government go to the trouble of crashing planes into the WTC *and* planting bombs, when it could simply plant the bombs, and blame the bombs on the terrorists (who actually did try a bombing in 1993). Or, even assuming that planes alone couldn't bring the towers down, why not just settle for coordinated plane crashes? Many would still die and the public would still be outraged.
There are many other similar contradictions between the motives of the alleged conspirators, and the actions the real plotters undertook. Most of the conspiracy theorists ignore them. Given these contradictions, there is almost no obligation to appease the demand to explain anomalies. We should not consider it within our dignity to go the extra mile to refute incoherencies.
Posted by Ben at October 8, 2006 02:41 AM