{"id":4530,"date":"2016-09-20T13:33:20","date_gmt":"2016-09-20T12:33:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.gspellchecker.com\/?p=4530"},"modified":"2016-10-07T10:40:46","modified_gmt":"2016-10-07T09:40:46","slug":"the-european-scientific-journal-didnt-conclude-911-controlled-demolition","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.gspellchecker.com\/2016\/09\/the-european-scientific-journal-didnt-conclude-911-controlled-demolition\/","title":{"rendered":"The European Scientific Journal Did Not Conclude 9\/11 Was A \u2018Controlled Demolition\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"image\"<\/a><\/p>\n

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\u00a0the memo. As Alberto Brandolini said: “The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.”<\/p>\n

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 \u2018controlled demolition\u2019. This information arrived just in time for the 15th anniversary of the terror attacks, conveniently:<\/p>\n

\"image\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\"image\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\"image\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

And on and on it went.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

First thing to clear up would be that these claims were not actually published in The European Scientific Journal<\/a> at all, or any scientific journal for that matter\u00a0\u2013 rather they came via a feature article titled ’15 years later: on the physics of high-rise building collapses’ in \u2018Euro Physics News\u2019<\/a> magazine, which is not a scientific journal. It\u2019s a news magazine, as the title suggests.<\/p>\n

The mysterious reclassification of\u00a0online news rag to credible scientific journal appears to have been made by many media outlets including ‘Anonymous’ and this now deleted source:<\/p>\n

\"image\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The European Scientific Journal had to release\u00a0the below statement<\/a> to\u00a0categorically deny they had any involvement in publishing 9\/11 conspiracy theories:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"image\"<\/a><\/p>\n

They are also not affiliated with ‘Europhysics News’ in any way.<\/p>\n

So, what are we left with then?<\/p>\n

Firstly, the editors of \u2018European Physics News\u2019 even concede the\u00a0\u2018conclusions\u2019 in their featured article are \u2018speculation\u2019. So far, not particularly scientific:<\/p>\n

\"image\"<\/a><\/p>\n

And\u00a0who exactly are the authors of this featured article?<\/p>\n

\"image\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\"image\"<\/a><\/p>\n

What do all these individuals have in common? Well, unsurprisingly they are all members of, or affiliated with 9\/11 \u2018truther\u2019 movements.<\/p>\n

This is essentially the equivalent of asking a group\u00a0of creationists, who also happen to be scientists, whether there is any evidence for intelligent design. A qualification a good scientist does not make. The ‘evidence’ these authors\u00a0presented\u00a0is\u00a0the usual collection of debunked tropes which didn’t take long to\u00a0be debunked<\/a>\u00a0yet again (again again).<\/p>\n

There is nothing new here whatsoever. Europhysics News have published\u00a0a pseudoscientific article of previously debunked 9\/11 tropes\u00a0to\u00a0coincide with the 15th anniversary of the atrocity\u00a0in a cynical attempt to\u00a0maximise their publication’s\u00a0exposure. This has then been miss-sold as a scientific journal by media and commentators alike.<\/p>\n

Although not a scientific journal, Europhysics News magazine is a reputable publication\u00a0owned by the European Physical Society<\/a> and associated with EDP Sciences.<\/a>\u00a0I will be contacting the various affiliates in the coming days to ask for a statement.<\/p>\n

Shame on\u00a0Europhysics News for lending a semblance of credibility to disrespectful, conspiratorial nonsense.<\/p>\n

Bonus:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

Mo Ansar, also shared the below tweet before it was deleted:<\/p>\n

\"image\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Ansar also had this to say<\/a> about 9\/11:<\/p>\n

\"image\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Help spread some actual truth about this atrocity. It\u2019s too important not to. Click here<\/a> for some resources on 9\/11 conspiracy theories.<\/p>\n

UPDATE 22 Sep 2016<\/strong><\/span> – EDP Sciences, the organisation who owns ‘Europhysics News’ has released a statement in response to this\u00a0article. You can read it here<\/a>. In short, they have confirmed this magazine is not peer-reviewed and contains ‘speculative’ claims. They have announced they will publish a counter-argument in the next issue (Nov). Please join my mailing list to be informed of any follow-up posts on this.<\/p>\n

Stephen Knight is host of The #GSPodcast. You can listen to The Godless Spellchecker Podcast <\/em><\/strong>here<\/em><\/strong><\/a>, and support it by becoming a patron <\/em><\/strong>here<\/em><\/strong><\/a>.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Share This<\/h3>
  • Tweet<\/a><\/li>
  • <\/div><\/li>
  • Email<\/span><\/a><\/li>
  • Share on Tumblr<\/a><\/li>