When dismissing or ignoring the key scientific evidence that proves the 911 attacks upon the World Trade Centre involved inside help most 'Debunkers' rest their case upon a few central fallacies - that the key evidence is not adequately proven or that the conspiracy material being raised are side-issue anomalies.
The fact that many leading 'debunkers' maintain this obviously false position, in the face of hard evidence and heavy rebuttals grounded in basic scientific principles - such that either the scientific principle is wrong or the 'debunker' is wrong- strongly implies that these individuals are being disingenuous and are acting as cover-up artists for the criminals involved.
For Example: When faced with the overwhelming evidence of Melted Steel, a clear sign of incendiary (chemically induced heat) action upon the buildings - something that is not possible with normal fires, but is possible with pre-planted devices- the debunkers revert to two tactics. They claim that there was no evidence of Melted Steel or they will say that it is possible for such melting to occur inside the rubble pile. In regards to the latter, the melting that was recorded was extensive and lasted many weeks. It would have required impossible blast furnace or impossible 'naturally occurring' chemical-incendiary-forming conditions. In the former instance, where they say there is no evidence of melted steel, we can see this is patently absurd in the following 2 minute video:
Furthermore, the 'debunkers', in making their case, often tout their experience and scientific expertise. However, in place of a substantiated argument they use their knowledge to mislead and nitpick AROUND the obvious facts. Delivered with authoritative rhetoric the leading debunkers cast 'doubt' upon the veracity of the melted steel evidence - that, in their 'expert opinion', perhaps all we saw was melted lead or aluminium and therefore the fires were not so hot, that there was never melted steel, that there have been no adequate scientific studies, that elements of the 'truther' studies have errors etc. Their arguments, however elaborate, remain baseless, and tend to mislead or obfuscate the direct evidence that can be seen in the above clip.
A favourite debunker tactic is to use FALSE ANALOGIES, that do not actually correlate to the WTC fire evidence, in order to provide an 'explanation'. This is something that will fool some of the people some of the time.
An example of a false analogy in relation to our particular example is to claim 'the rubble pile fires might have acted like a furnance and melted steel beams'. In this case we can recognise that a furnace utilises a lot of fuel (a sea of coals) plus air in order to achieve such melting -something that ordinary fires cannot do. There was not enough fuel, and no sea of coals, inside the pile in which to generate such high temperatures. An experiment that placed a steel beam in a huge bonfire caused no melting at all. One must be careful to consider what these propagandists are saying and whether they are really providing a rational explanation for what was observed.
Regardless of the Debunker tactics, often delivered with ridicule, ANYONE with eyes, ears and half a brain should be able to see that the official story is false and see that the evidence for the inside job is strong - provided such people can think for themselves and do a bit of comparative research like matching claims with real world evidence and experience. It does not matter what level of expertise these people claim - if documented experiments and observation refute their claims, then they are wrong.
____________________________________________________
Please remember that both 911 truth researchers and debunkers, in looking at the points of evidence, do not always disagree and do come to some points of agreement. In a complex case such as this it would be unlikely if both sides did not have some areas of agreement. It is only in reference to damning material that basically proves the inside job hypothesis that the propagandists come out in force- hoping to use psychological techniques of ridicule and authority to convince people that what you see ain't so.
Here is an example of where there is agreement in regards to photographic 'molten steel evidence' not being valid. This photo that reportedly shows evidence of furnace-like glowing metal in the rubble pile was generated from a work light low in the pile:
On the other hand, other reports and images are more conclusive in terms of showing the melting of steel beams:
At the end of the day we can see that the leading debunkers are just clever propagandists - this is despite coming to an agreement on some aspects of the case. We can make this determination from how they have treated, or rather tried to obfuscate, very basic FACTS that run counter to the official story. Melted steel was documented in relation to the destruction of the WTC buildings. Any debunker who says otherwise is pushing lies - whether consciously (likely the leading scientifically trained ones) or unconsciously (the hoodwinked public acolytes of the debunkers).
Other key points that massively undermine the official WTC collapse story, that the 'debunkers' commonly deny or downplay, in relation to high temperature incendiaries and explosives, are:
The melted concrete encased firearms recovered from the WTC site:
The many reports of explosions, in the basement and lower levels of the Towers far away from the aircraft impact zones and fires:
The Thermite incendiary signature:
The nano-thermite high tech explosive materials - evidence that remains unrefuted:
The symmetrical Freefall collapse of World Trade Centre 7
All of these are not fringe anomalies. Each presents independently damning and converging lines of evidence to show there were explosives and incendiary materials used upon the WTC buildings. It is important to note that the official narrative states that only NORMAL FIRES, fuelled by furniture and ignited by the aircraft impacts, took down these huge structures. In the case of WTC7 there was just ordinary fire.
The truth movement claims are solid refutations of the government account that the debunkers try to defend. That they continue to do so, when any sane person would realise the futility of their position, makes them suspect propagandists who are helping in the cover-up.
When prosecutions of the lead NIST investigators begin, investigations into the leading debunkers must also be initiated. Treason was committed against the people of the United States on 911 and those involved in any capacity, MUST be held to account.
Related Info:
National Geographic Thermite 'Debunking' Debunked via Experiment: