Difference between revisions of "2011/07/30/1606/link"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(to -> on (oops))
m (topic)
 
Line 6: Line 6:
 
* '''when''': [[when posted::2005/02/15]]
 
* '''when''': [[when posted::2005/02/15]]
 
* '''responds to''': [[comments on::2011/07/30/0948/link]]
 
* '''responds to''': [[comments on::2011/07/30/0948/link]]
 +
* '''topics''': [[topic::9-11/anomalies/straw men]]
 
* '''summary''': [[summary::lead paragraph::The March 2005 issue of ''Popular Mechanics'' magazine contains a 14-full-page cover article which attacks skepticism about the government and media explanation of the 9/11/01 attack. The primary method of the piece is to build and attack a straw man of myths it claims are "at the root of virtually every 9/11 alternative scenario" embraced by the "growing army of conspiracy theorists." PM selects a combination of 16 valid, erroneous, and inconsequential claims found on websites, implying that they are all endorsed by the "army" of skeptics.]]
 
* '''summary''': [[summary::lead paragraph::The March 2005 issue of ''Popular Mechanics'' magazine contains a 14-full-page cover article which attacks skepticism about the government and media explanation of the 9/11/01 attack. The primary method of the piece is to build and attack a straw man of myths it claims are "at the root of virtually every 9/11 alternative scenario" embraced by the "growing army of conspiracy theorists." PM selects a combination of 16 valid, erroneous, and inconsequential claims found on websites, implying that they are all endorsed by the "army" of skeptics.]]
 
{{page/link/footer}}
 
{{page/link/footer}}

Latest revision as of 15:37, 20 March 2013


  • link: http://911review.com/pm/markup/
  • title: Popular Mechanics' Deceptive Smear Against 9/11 Truth
  • source: 911review.com
  • author: Jim Hoffman
  • when: 2005/02/15
  • responds to: 2011/07/30/0948/link
  • topics: 9-11/anomalies/straw men
  • summary: lead paragraph::The March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics magazine contains a 14-full-page cover article which attacks skepticism about the government and media explanation of the 9/11/01 attack. The primary method of the piece is to build and attack a straw man of myths it claims are "at the root of virtually every 9/11 alternative scenario" embraced by the "growing army of conspiracy theorists." PM selects a combination of 16 valid, erroneous, and inconsequential claims found on websites, implying that they are all endorsed by the "army" of skeptics.