Scientist Lambastes Radio Gatekeeper

[petgoat]

A friend in California forwarded this to me:

by Dana Carson

Dear Mr. Bensky:

As a long-time listener to your Sunday Salon program
(I try to catch at least the first hour most Sundays),
and previously to your Living Room program, I'm
writing this missive in the hopes that you will read
it before air time on Sunday.

My degrees are in Geology (BS & MS), and I've always
been accustomed to questioning and sifting large
amounts of data and reading papers whose conclusions
turn out to be wrong. Of necessity, geology requires
a healthy combination of the "scientific method" with
an active imagination. Everyone familiar with geology
has heard of the tragic story of meteorologist Alfred
Weggener, who first postulated that the continents
"drifted" about on the face of the planet. His
opinion was derived from matching shapes of the
continents, as well as a highly improbable age,
fossil, and lithologic correlation: mountains, rock
types, and evidence of glaciation that seemed to match
quite well when the continents were lined up the way
they appeared to match.

When Weggener presented his theory, he was universally
condemned and ridiculed by the geological and
geophysical establishment. In particular, geophysists
said there could be no possible mechanical mechanism
to explain the apparent drift He died an early death
while on a polar expedition. The eulogy for him
praised his accomplishments as a meteorologist, but
completely ignored his ideas about continental drift
(largely out of collective embarassment).

Fast forward several decades, when magnetic ocean
stripes, deep trenches and high mountain ranges were
discovered in the oceans; when the fluid nature of the
uppermost earth's mantle was revealed, and virtually
100 percent of earth scientists accept continental
drift (now referred to as "Plate Tectonics"). Mr.
Weggener is now revered as the father of plate
tectonics. Mr. Weggener based his theory (and I use
that word advisedly) on observations he could easily
prove, and which had obvious relevance to the subject
matter. But his establishment peers insisted that he
should "stick to his own field".

Those who call themselves “9/11 Truth activists” are
in many ways in an analogous position: they are
personally disparaged by people (often remarkably
uneducated on the actual issues) who will not listen
to their arguments, but instead prefer to dismiss them
as “Conspiracy Theorists”. As a long time student and
practitioner of science, I submit that the term
conspiracy theorist is an utterly meaningless
pejorative. It only tells me that the name caller
does not know the meaning of either word (conspiracy
or theory). A much better term would be
“Paranoid-Nut-Case-With-Too-Much-Time-on-his-Hands.”
While this term is no more accurate than conspiracy
theorist, at least it accurately conveys the intent of
the name caller: to belittle the person rather than
deal with the information he wishes to present.

So as an unapologetic critic of the official 9/11
story (based on what I perceive to be logical,
evidenced-based arguments), I ask you, Larry Bensky,
to please be respectful of both listeners and callers.
By all means refute their arguments if you think it’s
appropriate. But remember there are many of us out
here who are not Paranoid-Nut-Cases, who know that
governments (EVEN THIS GOVERNMENT!!!) do lie, and that
many of the facts JUST DON’T ADD UP.

One final note: I believe I want the same things as
you: an America that practices a sane foreign and
domestic policy and that cares about its citizens and
its environment. But the saddest and most dreadful
future I can think of is this: If the government is
lying and covering up the truth about those attacks,
it is an unspeakable horror to think of the entire
future history of mankind suffocating under that lie.

Thank you sincerely,

Dana Carson