An Hypothesis for Understanding Noam Chomsky: Fear of the Extraordinary?

I was first introduced to Noam Chomsky way back in the early 80s.  I had to write a paper for a philosophy of language class, and I was having a heck of hard time understanding why "Snow is white" and "Schnee ist weiss" (or whatever the correct spelling for "snow is white" in German is supposed to be) is philosophically interesting.  I told my professor I couldn't think of anything to write about.  He recommended reading Noam Chomsky's views on language.  I found a collection of essays on the philosophy of language (edited by John Searle) that included one by Chomsky.  He argued that we had an innate knowledge of grammar that enabled us to learn language.  What an absolutely fascinating idea!   So I took an incomplete and spent the next year reading Chomsky's books on language and also what his critics had to say about them.  I thought Chomsky's arguments were the stronger and wrote up a paper on the topic and passed with a "B."

The one thing that I was curious about was how Chomsky thought we came to have this innate knowledge.  I learned later that he was skeptical that a Darwinian account of our innate language learning ability could be provided.  So did he think this innate "universal grammar" had been purposely designed?  Heavens no!  So what did he think the historical account was?  Apparently he was willing to remain agnostic about it, though I read something recently where he seemed to think that eventually a Darwinian account might be found for it.

Fast forward to the last couple of years, where Chomsky has said some rather interesting things about the 9/11 Truth movement.  Perhaps the most interesting thing he said is that even if it were proven that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition, then the most likely culprit would still be al Qaeda.

Now there seems to be a similarity of some sort between these two disparate topics.  In the first case, Chomsky discovered something seemingly extraordinary about human beings - an innate universal grammar - but was unwilling to hypothesize an extraordinary explanation for it, such as intelligent design.  In the second case, he has said that even if an extraordinary explanation - controlled demolition - for the collapses of the WTC buildings is discovered, there is no reason to think there was an extraordinary explanation for the controlled demolitions.

It's almost as if Chomsky is willing to draw a line in the sand and say, "This far and no further.  I may have discovered something extraordinary, but that is no reason to think it needs an extraordinary explanation.  There may be something extraordinary about the collapses of the WTC towers, but that is no reason to think there is an extraordinary explanation for that."

I should add that the fact that we have an innate universal grammar fit very well into Chomsky's political philosophy.  To him this proved that we were not just tabula rasa, blank slates, that could be molded however the state wanted to mold us.  We were somehow incorrigibly made in a certain way that guaranteed individual dignity.

However, it is not as clear to me that 9/11 "Truth" would fit as well into Chomsky's views.  But then, I haven't studied his political philosophy.

How it was done: 9/11 and the "science" of Building Demolition

Interesting article which offers some of the details of how the WTC Towers could have been brought down by controlled demolition.

Here

I put scare quotes around "science," since all that is presented is a hypothesis with some supporting data.  Before we call it "science" in the usual sense, I think we would want quite a few more experiments and peer-review.  True, most of the physical evidence was destroyed before it could be examined, but we do have some of the dust from the WTC Towers.  One peer-reviewed paper examining the dust has been done, suggesting that thermitic material was present in the buildings. And a second paper hypothesizes the presence of energetic materials in the dust.  Further, Kevin Ryan has indicated that he has done further tests on the dust, which  is awaiting peer-review.

What 9/11 researchers are ignoring is the preliminary work done by FEMA on samples of corroded steel found at both WTC1 or 2 and WTC7.  Civil engineer Jonathan Cole did what I think was an excellent experiment testing the hypothesis that the steel was corroded by gypsum wallboard and fires.  At the macroscopic level, it certainly looks like he falsified that hypothesis.  But what would have made the experiment more convincing would be to do the same metallurgical analysis that FEMA had carried out.  Cole also did some  excellent experiments showing that thermate could have cut steel columnns. At the end of the experiments Cole ended up with a piece of steel that looked very similar to the corroded steel that FEMA found. Unfortunately, once again Cole did not perform a metallurgical analysis to see how closely it resembled the corroded steel at the microscopic level, or what the chemical content was.  So here we have FEMA having done some very important scientific work that 9/11 researchers are largely ignoring.  Why?  And why not try to get the experiments they have done peer-reviewed?

Turkey's False Flag Plot to Invade Syria Exposed. Solution: Shut Down Youtube

Interesting piece by that lunatic 9/11 conspiracy theorist, Abby Martin:

Turkey's Insane False Flag Plot to Start a War with Syria

So if our media won't even mention a false flag plot of another country, why should we think they would be willing to report a false flag plot by our country?

UPDATE:  JDB provided a link to an article by journalist Seymour Hersh, which relayed intelligence information that showed the sarin gas attack in Syria last year was probably carried out by the rebels (with technical aid from Turkey), not the Syrian government.  Late in the article it also included this paragraph:

Turkey’s willingness to manipulate events in Syria to its own purposes seemed to be demonstrated late last month, a few days before a round of local elections, when a recording, allegedly of a government national security meeting, was posted to YouTube. It included discussion of a false-flag operation that would justify an incursion by the Turkish military in Syria. The operation centred on the tomb of Suleyman Shah, the grandfather of the revered Osman I, founder of the Ottoman Empire, which is near Aleppo and was ceded to Turkey in 1921, when Syria was under French rule. One of the Islamist rebel factions was threatening to destroy the tomb as a site of idolatry, and the Erdoğan administration was publicly threatening retaliation if harm came to it. According to a Reuters report of the leaked conversation, a voice alleged to be Fidan’s spoke of creating a provocation: ‘Now look, my commander, if there is to be justification, the justification is I send four men to the other side. I get them to fire eight missiles into empty land [in the vicinity of the tomb]. That’s not a problem. Justification can be created.’ The Turkish government acknowledged that there had been a national security meeting about threats emanating from Syria, but said the recording had been manipulated. The government subsequently blocked public access to YouTube.

If SETI is Science, then so is ID.

The argument:

I.  SETI (the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) is founded on the following premises: 

A.  If we discovered a narrow-band radio emission from outer space, this would be evidence of an Intelligence.  

1. There is no known natural (non-intelligent) process that produces narrow-band radio emissions. 

2. There is a known intelligent process that produces narrow-band radio emissions:  human beings who have produced radio transmitters. 

3.  We understand why intelligent beings would produce narrow-band radio emissions:  the narrower the band signal, the less power is needed to transmit it, and there would be more room on the radio-band for other signals.  We transmit radio signals as a means of communicating.  

4. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that if we found a narrow-band radio emission from outer space, it was produced by an extraterrestrial being for the purposes of communicating. 

B.  Finding a complex mathematical patterns (such as the prime number sequence from 2 to 101) would provide further grounds for believing the narrow-band radio emission was produced by an intelligent being. 

1. There is no known natural (non-intelligent) process that produces long complex mathematical patterns. 

2.  Intelligent beings can produce long complex mathematical patterns. 

3.  An intelligent being that can produce a radio transmitter would most likely be able to recognize a long complex mathematical pattern, and recognize that it was probably produced by an intelligent being.  Thus it would serve as a universal language, a way of communicating, "This was produced by an intelligent being."  

4.  Therefore, if we found a narrow-band radio emission with a long, complex mathematical pattern, we would have further grounds for believing it was produced by an intelligent being. 

C.  It is generally assumed that discovering such radio emission would most likely be produced by an Extraterrestrial Intelligence (as opposed say to a Supernatural Intelligence, though it is not clear that we can definitely rule out a Supernatural source for such a radio emission).  

II.  Applying Similar Premises to the Biochemistry of Life Yields a Similar Belief that the Origin of Life was Intelligently Produced. 

A.  Finding Proteins or Nucleotides would be evidence of an intelligence. 

1.  There is no known natural (non-intelligent, non-biological) process that produces Proteins or Nucleotides (the material that DNA and RNA are composed of). 

2.  Living cells are composed of Proteins and Nucleotides, and are able to produce Proteins and Nucleotides.  However, given that there would have been no living cells prior to the origin of life, this would not explain how the original Proteins and Nucleotides came into existence. 

3.  Intelligent (human) beings are able to produce (synthesize) Proteins and Nucleotides. 

4.  We understand why we produce Proteins and Nucleotides:  To better understand how living organisms function, and with the hope of someday being able to create living cells ourselves. 

5.  Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that the original Proteins and Nucleotides were produced by an Intelligence. 

B.  Finding long strands of RNA would provide further grounds for believing that it was produced by an intelligence. 

1. There is no known natural (non-intelligent, non-biological) process for producing a long strand (say, 100 nucleotides) of RNA. 

2.  Most origin of life researchers think that life began with a long strand of RNA that could replicate and evolve. 

3.  There is a known intelligent process for producing long strands of RNA:  we can. 

4.  Therefore, if we have found long strands of RNA, we have further grounds for thinking the origin of life was intelligently produced. 

C.   It is generally assumed that if the origin of life was intelligently produced, that it was by a Supernatural Intelligence (as opposed to a Natural Intelligence, though it is not clear that we can definitely rule out a Natural Intelligent Source for the origin of life). 

III.  Therefore, If SETI is science, then so is ID (Intelligent Design). 

A.  The grounds for believing ID are the same as the grounds for believing that ETI exists, should a narrow-band radio emission from outer space be discovered. 

B.  If people believe that SETI is a scientific enterprise, then they should believe that ID is a scientific enterprise. 

IV.   IF SETI is founded on reasonable premises, then so is ID. 

A.  Even if we reject SETI as a scientific enterprise, most people think it is founded on reasonable premises.  

B.  Those same premises would result in belief in ID.  

C.  Therefore, even if it is not Science, ID is a reasonable belief. 

Happy Passover

It was a time when the God of the Universe showed that he cared more about the poor and oppressed than he did about the rich and powerful.

May His kingdom come soon and His will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven.

God Save the People

List of Peer-reviewed Papers supporting 9/11 Truther Position

I think this would be most of them.

UPDATE:  What I just noticed was the earliest one dates to 2006, which happens to be the year that there was over a 500% increase in funding from the defense department for research at universities and colleges.  Mere coincidence?

Well, actually more like a 470% increase, from 2005 to 2006.

This paper from the Journal of 9/11 Studies provides what is probably a comprehensive list of peer-reviewed papers both for and against the official explanations of the collapses of the WTC buildings.  It includes papers from the Journal of 9/11 Studies claiming that they also are peer-reviewed, which I suggest that one take with a grain of salt...or two, and also from the Journal of Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, which journal also claims that its papers are peer-reviewed, which I also suggest taking with a couple of grains of salt.

Good Reference Book on Holocaust Denial

There in my public library was Denying History:  Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why do They Say It?, by professional skeptic Michael Shermer and historian Alex Grobman.  It was published in 2000, but from what I can tell, it's still up to date.  Depressing but necessary reading, at least for me.