By Victoria N. Alexander
Jan 24, 2013

wtc exploding

Last Tuesday, Salon magazine published an article expressing sympathy for the 9/11 truth movement: “Give Truthers a Chance: Not all conspiracy theorists are as crazy and absurd as Alex Jones and the Sandy Hook truthers would have you think.”

In the article, the author Greg Olear, who was actually writing for a Salon partner publication The Weeklings, opines,“unlike with Sandy Hook, 9/11 conspiracy theories flow from a scientific fact: whatever the 9/11 Commission Report might claim, fire generated by burning jet fuel is not hot enough to melt steel,”

Salon immediately removed the article (rather than simply publishing a correction) and later published a retraction.

“On Jan. 22, Salon republished an article from one of our content partners, the Weeklings, that was sympathetic to unfounded 9/11 conspiracies. The article slipped through our usual review process, and was clearly not up to our standards; we removed it as soon as it was brought to our attention by readers. Salon has a long history of debunking fringe conspiracists — around Sept. 11, and more recently, Sandy Hook — and are proud of those efforts. We regret this oversight.”

Jeremy Stahl of Slate magazine picked up the story, describing the debacle and adding that
“In 2011, I wrote a history of the 9/11 conspiracy movement for Slate, and I can tell you that, no, this is not scientific fact, nor any other kind of fact. Salon feels the same way and has since pulled the article from its site ….”

A couple of facts need to be reviewed here:

Burning jet fuel does not generate enough heat to melt steel. Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F. Steel melts at about 2750°F. No government report has ever made the claim that jet fuel can melt steel.

Read more