Life Imitates the OnionErrr, that is, some form of life known as the 9-11 Denier. About a month ago, the Onion posted a gag about how Oliver Stone's World Trade Center movie posited the
"single plane" theory for September 11, with the same plane responsible for all four crashes that terrible day.
Well, believe it or not, Morgan Reynolds, who gets pushed forward in the 9-11 Denial Movement because he's a former Bush Administration staffer (Economist with the Department of Labor), has
endorsed this theory, along with something about a chameleon plane that went invisible so we wouldn't realize they hadn't actually crashed into the second tower.
Even more bizarre, he acknowledges the Onion story!
Here is more food for thought: the same chameleon plane could have appeared at all three events: 9:03a at WTC 2, 9:32-9:37a at the Pentagon, and 10:06a at Shanksville, PA. In truth, the perps only needed the disappearing plane trick at WTC 2 but it is a promising possibility for Shanksville too. The Pentagon event did not really need an airliner but the single plane theory proposed this month as a parody of the JFK single-bullet theory actually might make sense! The same disappearing act by the same secret plane could have been used at all three locations! We shall see if future work bears any of this out.
But it gets better. Steven Jones, who's sort of the rock star of the 9-11 Denial Movement right now, if one can describe a physicist and Mormon as a rock star,
has invited Reynolds (DOC file) to post a paper at his "scholarly" Journal of Nine-Eleven Studies (aka JONES), which he has already announced will be both peer reviewed and published!
I could go on, but the fact is that as editor of the Journalof911Studies.com, I have invited Morgan Reynolds and whoever he wishes to join him, and another author to write papers on BOTH sides of this issue – did REAL planes hit the Twin WTC Towers, or not? Both sides agreed. In this way, readers will have two peer-reviewed scholarly papers side by side, both confronting the evidences presented above and whatever other evidences they wish to bring in – and then the reader can judge for himself or herself.Uh, you know, I can already tell that the peer review process at the Journal of Nine-Eleven Studies is a joke.
