Phantasypublishing LLC

 Introduction This study arose from a search for a comparative overview of the different ways that evidence may be distorted. The purpose is to find a means of positioning the evidence used in current efforts by western countries to justify curtailing civil liberties and due process in response to terrorism. The three approaches to comparing evidence envisaged here are: kinds of evidence that may be distorted and the fallacies to which this may give rise examples from different historical and socio-political contexts as case studies, and notably by extending the coverage to include legal, scientific and other concerns with evidence The conclusion was initially foreseen in the form of a table of case studies from a variety of sectors and times with an indication of the incidence of particular forms of distortion in the face of dissent. Such a table would help to give a sense of the diversity of forms of evidence to which appeal is made. Following inability to locate such a comparative t

  I will assume by conspiracy the Bush administration was behind the attack. For those that do not know it is a popular theory in the US that the Bush administration was behind the 9/11 attacks. They used them as justification to start the wars they wanted. And on the surface the evidence is super compelling- that is until you really look into it. Let’s go through the big pieces of evidence 1 by 1 and debunk them. #1: Jet fuel cannot melt steel beams The theory is laid out pretty clearly in the meme. Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel so it couldn’t have been the cause of the collapse. The big problem with this theory is that it was never claimed that jet fuel fires causing the beams to melt was to blame. The Twin Towers were built with a few long building tall beams connected by multiple cross beams. What happens when you heat steel to a lower temp than it’s melting temp? It turns red and weakens. Putting steel into a heat of 1500F is more than enough to cause structural