Talk:Debunking 9/11 Myths

message: Alex and Sheen is mentioned at the 50th minute of the podcast. --Striver 16:47, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool. ZimZalaBim (talk) 16:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: September 2006

message: Removed the entire section. While the NYTimes article discusses certification, it does not establish the WTC construction was indeed certified to those standards prior to 9/11. Morever, it does not (as far as can be seen from the NYTimes abstract) establish the issue of fireproofing integrity on 9/11. Fine Underwriters Laboratories did the testing for the NIST after 9/11; there needs to be solid evidence they did it prior to 9/11; and that ASTM E119 was applicable to real world conditions after commercial jetliners crashed into the towers; and their sprayed on fireproofing withstood planes crashes at full speed. The previous references provided do not address these issues. What they seem to say is, ASTM E119 in ideal conditions should have withstood the fires, assuming intact fireproofing. This cannot be assumed on 9/11. - RoyBoy 800 04:18, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism

message: I have undone another attempt by user "Knarly" to add (previously deleted) references to a pro-conspiracy theorist book.  A review of this user's edits indicate at this point a singular interest in promoting 9/11 conspiracy theories, and has continued to add to this article references to a book promoting such theories.  As those prior edits have been deleted, I have undone the addition of more references just now.
User: "Knarly" has a long history with this page -- repeated attempts to add discussion of the conspiracy theorist book (so much so that his edits actually outnumbered and overtook discussion of the subject of this article), and at least one attempt to flag this entire page for deletion, once his edits were undone.
149.101.1.118 20:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Attempts by user: "Knarly" to insert references to conspiracy theorist book

message: The link is here:
http://www.history.com/shows.do?action=detail&episodeId=240087
I'm not sure how to add it in as a footnote to the new addition, but I thought I'd place the link here so someone more Wiki-adept can do so.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.101.1.118 (talk) 20:43, August 27, 2007 (UTC) 
I'm not sure how useful that will be to anyone, but if you want to BUY the program, due to ship September 13, 2007, look here:
http://store.aetv.com/html/search/searchindex.jhtml?search=9%2F11+conspiracy&itemType=All&x=14&y=6&key=|9/11%20conspiracy|&_requestid=20895
Wowest 04:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Source for the History Channel documentary that referenced the book

message: The reference to Debunking 9/11 Debunking was again deleted by an unknown vandal, and has been restored.
Wowest 06:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism corrected.

message: :File:Debunking 911 Myths.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for File:Debunking 911 Myths.jpg

message: Hopefully it is not undue, but I think it is important to mention this. One of the main arguments used against this book is that "Benjamin Chertoff is the couson/son/brother of Michael Chertoff". There is no basis for it, and we have reliable sources both establishing this claim and refuting it. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 18:27, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: My apologies for adding the  without reading the full article.  You're absolutely correct.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 18:30, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Benjamin Chertoff section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Debunking 9/11 Myths. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:52, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Debunking 9/11 Myths. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110228104436/http://www.america.gov/st/pubs-english/2006/September/20060828133846esnamfuaK0.2676355.html to http://www.america.gov/st/pubs-english/2006/September/20060828133846esnamfuaK0.2676355.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080608192307/http://www.popularmechanics.com:80/technology/military_law/4199607.html?page=1 to http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4199607.html?page=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050210033600/http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html to http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061024062122/http://www.popularmechanics.com:80/science/research/4199607.html to http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4199607.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110228104436/http://www.america.gov/st/pubs-english/2006/September/20060828133846esnamfuaK0.2676355.html to http://www.america.gov/st/pubs-english/2006/September/20060828133846esnamfuaK0.2676355.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:10, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified