There is a growing number of scientists¹ who believe in conspiracy theories regarding 9/11. They often call the well researched² background of the terror attacks the "official conspiracy theory" and they tend to euphemistically call themselves "skeptics"³ of this theory.

This article presents a promising experiment to use interviews with physics professors to effectively fight the further rise of conspiracy theories among scientists. Additionally, it makes a proposal to derive a professional survey from the initial experiment that would be useful to reach the proposed goals on a broad level of the scientific society.

In a recent blog, a highly placed truther (Griffin?) suggests ignoring the specific disinformation agents, and focusing on the historical record of disinformation tactics.

This may be more of an academic exercise than a public relations strategy, however.

I would suggest rather that we instead frame the issue on our terms (in places where a mainstream audience dwells). This would render the "theories" moot and irrelevant.

1. Validating the need for truth.

How many lies can you find uttered by high ranking government officials? We should start a web page with just that debunking of official statements. My own favorite is Ari Fleischer aboard air force one on 9/11: "No warnings."

2. Similarly, we have the omissions, the substantial facts that were never investigated. Another page could list exhaustively all the omissions we can find. Griffin's work is excellent in this regard.

3. The synthesis: They lie, so we want the truth.

If we can prove dishonesty, omission, and worse, we are vindicated. We retain the high ground, as well as a solid grounding not based on flights of fancy, opinion, or deception.