Reply #31: Confirmation bias...

[JackRiddler]

Works for nearly everyone, as you regularly demonstrate. People who are predisposed to support the OCT are more likely to look at LC with "a critical mind," while skipping cooperativeresearch.org or the works of Nafeez Ahmed - or, for that matter, Jim Hoffman on the demolitions side.

I submit LC would not have achieved its relative hegemony without the media coverage confirming its "importance." While it was still at a fraction of its current hit total, it was already adopted as the target of choice for the debunkers, who spread it far and wide. ("So this is what PM wishes to attack? Good, I'll take a look at it.")

Where's the major media outcry (or coverage) against 9/11 Press for Truth - a broadcast-quality, original documentary made by established journalists with the support and participation of the Jersey widows who otherwise garner major media? This is the dog that did not bark.

The majority of those who call themselves 9/11 truth movement members do not subscribe to LC, and a survey of the many sites will show a plurality in its favor at best.

But isn't the popularity of a given idea ultimately irrelevant to a true skeptic? One has to deal with the totality of available facts and possibilities, not the preferred strawman.