Back in September I wrote how Europhysics News magazine marked the 15 year anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks by publishing ‘controlled demolition’ conspiracy theories – completely unchallenged.
This inevitably led to a whole host of online cranks and crackpots spreading the false idea that their conspiracy theories had finally been validated in a proper scientific journal. Snopes even had to create an article featuring some of my research into this.
When I let my frustration be known to the owner of the magazine, EDP Sciences, they released the following statement to me:
Although I find the excuse about ‘open discussion’ to be particularly weak (would they be keen to publish ‘open discussion’ on faith healers and moon landing hoaxes?) I at least took some satisfaction in the promise of a ‘counter article’ in the next issue.
I recently wrote in utter disgust that Europhysics News magazine would publish ‘controlled demolition’ 9/11 conspiracy theories to coincide with the 15th anniversary of the terror attacks. These unfounded claims are not uncommon of course, but you’d expect them to be beneath a reputable ‘scientific’ publication produced by EDP Sciences.
In an attempt to hold someone accountable for creating a semblance of credibility for debunked conspiracy theories, I reached out to EDP Sciences:
It takes a moment to invent or spread a conspiracy theory, yet it can take years, even decades to debunk one. And even then, not everyone will have received the memo. As Alberto Brandolini said: “The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.”
There was quite a lot of excitement online from the tinfoil hat wearing brigade early September. Apparently, a proper, peer-reviewed scientific journal had concluded that the Twin Towers were in fact brought down by a ‘controlled demolition’. This information arrived just in time for the 15th anniversary of the terror attacks, conveniently:
And on and on it went.