Isn't the
term Scholars for 9/11 Truth a bit of an oxymoron?
The group whom believes the U.S. government led the attack
on 9/11 can hardly be called scholarly.
Aren't scholars supposed to
rely on the scientific method?
Honestly, at least 50% of
America hates the Bush administration. Many reporters, for
example the entire staff of the New York Times, would love
to prove that Bush orchestrated 9/11. It would be the
biggest story ever, far bigger than Watergate or the Kennedy
assassination.
Professors, such as
Barrett, whom specialize in liberal arts, suddenly are
better experts on metallurgy and materials sciences than
actual scientists whom specialize in those fields.
If 9/11 was orchestrated by
New World Order neo conservatives, that story must and will
come out - if it's true. Unfortunately, the evidence - hard
core, reliable facts - just doesn't support the claims
of so-called scholars, such as Barrett.
Rate my professor, Barrett.
Or, rate your professor. Do you have a bad professor? Do you
have a professor that is even wackier than Barrett?
