A complete and total fraud. He completely disregarded everything you said about whistle-blowers. Good job with that Nick. Amazing how he's "not aware" of Sibel Edmonds. The script he was given to "debunk" 9/11 Truth seems to have missed things like Sibel Edmonds.

"You could be right young man...I don't know about that..on the other hand you're probably a holocaust denier...oh I'm sorry did I call you a holocaust denier??? Well that would kinda make you a Nazi wouldn't it??...But again I'm a simple man with simple common sense not a Nazi or traitor..."

I can see through him I just wonder if the general public can? I mean is this the best they've got??

on clowns like Michael Shermer. He is obviously a NWO shill.

It's people like Shermer who do a major disservice to science by cherrypicking the subjects that are, in his mind, "worthy of being skeptical about". In the case of controversial events like the assassination of JFK, or 9/11, for example, this "skepticism" is directed not on the basis of hard evidence and rigorous inquiry, but instead, on (a) what is convenient and easily digestible, (b) doesn't challenge our comfort zones, (c) what doesn't upset the powers-that-be, and (d) what is less likely to cause controversy or prompt the people to question corrupt motives of our leaders. Shermer is yet another shill for the status quo, a stunning example of "applied intellectual cowardice."

As an apparent (alleged) skeptic, Shermer should follow the advice given by the late great Dr. Carl Sagan, who reminded us all that "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence", (or "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"). In the case of 9/11, the US Government's claim that "19 flight-school flunk-outs under the direction of a guy in a cave 12,000 miles away managed to run rings around the multi-trillion dollar military/security/intelligence/law-enforcement network, the most extensive and powerful ever assembled on Earth, without any prior knowledge, and without any attempt to use our defenses", is a claim that falls into the "beyond the extraordinary" category. And as of yet, virtually zero hard evidence or proof (with verifiable chains of custody that would stand up in a US court of law), has been presented to the US public by government agencies or the Bush Administration to confirm their allegations. There is a huge and growing body of material, from circumstantial to hard evidence, however, that the agencies responsible for preventing such attacks (as well as senior politicians and military personnel) at the very least, knew about the attacks well in advance, and deliberately allowed them to happen.

Shermer appears to be another "fairweather skeptic".

The inflection in his voice alone gives him away. He doesn't even sound like he believes anything he's saying. This guy is as sleazy as the "Harley" guy who explained away the collapses of the twin towers about an hour after it happened on fox. I can't believe these people are able to digest food.

"I will not withdraw from this war even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me." -George W. Bush

Thanks for confronting this rat.

He calls himself a skeptic and yet buys the most implausible govt. 9/11 myth ever concocted hook, line and sinker.

This man has been PLACED in this position to be a shill to confuse people who fancy themselves skeptics.

SKEPTICS MAG. if that's what it really was, would have been leading the charge for 9/11 truth.

Former CIA Director, William Colby, said, "There is no media of any consequence not controlled by the CIA."

This man must be investigated when the 9/11 truth breaks mainstream and the trials begin.

When 9/11 Truthers Infiltrate(d) Bill Maher Show in Oct http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5BJzEshMes CNN's Glenn Beck (9/11 Truth = Tim McVeigh) brought Michael Shermer of Skeptics Society and James Meigs, Editor of Popular Mechanics, out of the woodwork to respond! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnKppff5yQ8

Shermer is a total shill. His magazine should be called The Gullible. Zan of the LA area has spoken with Shermer before. I'm sure he will be there. (Some of these dates are the same as the Repuke and Dem debates here.)

If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.