What do Jesse Ventura and Lynn Margulis have in common?

Ex-governor Jesse Ventura formally apologized, this month, for not knowing what he should have known six and a half years ago: that 9/11 was an inside job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQdlBAp-24g
Below is a link to a video in which Jesse Ventura discusses 9/11. The show's hosts believe in the Official Conspiracy Theory -- the "boxcutter" theory :) -- so the discussion gets heated almost immediately:
http://www.foundrymusic.com/media/displaymedia.cfm/id/17907/page/show_video_num
There are no people leaving the 9/11 Truth Movement, only people joining it. Lynn Margulis, distinguished evolutionary biologist and recipient of the National Medal of Science -- America's highest honor for scientific achievement -- is one of the latest converts:
http://www.mujca.com/margulis.htm
Who's next?
Sincerely,
Jock Doubleday
9-11 factualist
Director
Natural Woman, Natural Man, Inc.
A California 501(c)3 Nonprofit Corporation
http://www.SpontaneousCreation.org
http://www.SpontaneousCreation.org/SC/links.htm


Comments (5)
The notion that Jesse Ventura is a reliable guide to the meaning of complex events is obviously ludicrous. Lynn Margulis, however, is a respected biologist. Although she has no credentials in the fields of politics or conspiracy theories, her endorsement of the idea that 9/11 was some kind of inside job cannot be dismissed out of hand.
So I went to some of the websites listed in this post to get a flavor for their "evidence." Some of it is laughable, such as that Bush and Cheney refused to let their testimony be recorded -- obviously those two criminals were just covering their asses for their failure to anticipate what occurred. But the one point that seemed interesting is that a third building, 7 World Trade Center, also collapsed without being hit by any plane, several hours after the collapse of the first two buildings. The website suggests that no explanation for this third building collapse has ever been offered.
So then I went to Wikipedia to get a more balanced view. It turns out 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged by debris from the collapse of the first two buildings, and had a fire burning in it all afternoon. So the idea that no explanation has ever been offered for why it collapsed later that afternoon is patently false. Below is the link to the Wikipedia article.
It is really sad when there are so many serious issues requiring our attention that people get distracted by these very far-fetched conspiracy theories.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center
Comment #1 Posted by: david | April 15, 2008 12:42 PM
Been down this road quite a few times before. Good luck, David.
Comment #2 Posted by: LTOR | April 15, 2008 12:57 PM
do you want the red pill or the blue pill?
Comment #3 Posted by: neo | April 15, 2008 01:17 PM
I'll take the combo...
...make that a double...
Comment #4 Posted by: El A | April 15, 2008 01:47 PM
David,
Anybody who does any kind of research is okay by me. Most people dismiss 9/11 truth out of hand. You put in time at the keyboard, and that earns my respect -- not that you asked for that.
FYI, Building 7 fell in its own footprint at freefall speed. The damage to one side of the building would have necessitated an asymmetrical collapse . . .
My four months of research last year (four hours a day, no weekends, no holidays), allowed me to view several hundred videos and read a number of books and articles on the subject of 9/11.
The key videos and articles from my research on 9/11 have been gathered here:
http://www.SpontaneousCreation.org/SC/links.htm
Sincerely,
Jock Doubleday
9/11 Researcher
Comment #5 Posted by: Jock Doubleday | April 16, 2008 01:51 PM