Skeptic Project

While reading the source guide for the first movie, I was wondering if anything they say has been peer reviewed, or backed up by actual scientists.

I know one that was peer reviewed which was done by Steven E.Jones in 2006, but I have not heard of anything since.

I find it strange that apperantly the 'thousands' of papers that have been sent by CTer's, none have been peer reviewed, so there is a conspiracy behind that, but since that one was peer reviewed, but was a small but personal victory for CTer's.

Also, CTer's usually say celebrities are part of the NWO, because they deny the claims of CT's, but somehow when a celebrity actually endorses that 9/11 was a inside job etc. it somehow makes the CT more credible, (this happened greatly in 2007/2008 when Charlie Sheen said he had highly suspected that 9/11 was a inside job), it just boggles my mind.

^ Not true Fresco peer-reviewed it and he is a scientist but he doesn't have any credentials, or a high school diploma for that matter but that doesn't mean he does not know anything cause he can train raccoons to crap on command. Can you train raccoons to take a dump on command? I think not...

Steven Jones's paper about exploding paint chips (yes, that's really what he believes in) was not peer-reviewed. He submitted it to an on-line open source journal which projects the illusion of peer review. It costs $850 to have something "peer reviewed" at the journal. When the editor of that not-so-professional journal found out that a Twoofer paper was appearing there, she resigned in protest.

No conspiracy theorist "evidence" has ever survived peer review, to my knowledge.

I am sure Acharaya S's stuff has never been published by any respected relevant journal, assuming she has even tried at all. But I know that absolutely nothing on 911 conspiracies has been published in any legitmate journal despite there being over a hundred about various aspects. There's even been real critics of the NIST report with legitimate points against it, but they are small and minor and ultimately utterly insignificant when compared with truthers. Some are even further away from what truthers believe like Dr Quintiere who truthers like to quote mine. They have the Journal of 911 Studies which is as fake and dishonest as the Answers Research Journal run by Creationists.

The journal Muertos mentioned is Bentham and several editors in chief's have quit following various scandals, not just the 911 one. They are also well known to spam scientists to become editors, not only that, they even ask them to become editors of journals that have nothing to do with their field! There's nothing inherently wrong about an open access journal, but Bentham is a great poster child for where it can go so wrong.