In yet a further twist, challenges to scholars' credibility arise from within the ranks of those working on 9 I u truth. In late November 2oo6, Jones and others split from Scholars for 9 I 11 Truth. The following month, they formed a new group, Scholars for 9 / 11 Truth and Justice. Some lamented the infighting among the Scholars, recognizing the link between this fighting and the larger struggle for credibility even as they displaced the fundamental problem. In the. words of "Livdlarry": "I've been somewhat 'torn' o.n this infighting issue for quite some time and can see some truth in at least two positions with regard to what information is 'credible: It comes as no surprise that disinformation agents .are busy sowing confusion anywhere that they can when such a horrible reality is at stake:'26 Aware of the problem of credibility, Lividlarry subsumes it under conviction and suspicion. A horrible reality is at stake, a certain horror and a certain reality. Confusion is thus a matter not of this reality but of disinformation, of those who want to cast doubt on what he and others already know for certain. In fact, Lividlarry is particularly skeptical regarding eforts to establish credibility. He continues, '\1lhen those interested in accumulating whatever information and/ or insights are out there fall into the trap of determining 'credibility' based on their interpretation of plausibility there is a danger that a piece of the puzzle might go unnoticed:' What happened on September 11 was incredible, implausible. Limiting oneself to plausibility avoids encountering what is already certain.
Factions among the Scholars ofer diferent explanations for the split. Fetzer claims Jones was blocking people from posting on the Scholars' website and trying to take over the group.27 He also charges Jones with attempting to keep controversial theories about 9 I 11 out of the public eye. The theories in question were proposed by Judy Wood, a former assistant professor at Clemson University with a Ph.D. in materials engineering science, and Morgan Reynolds, emeritus professor of economics at Texas A & M. Reynolds and Wood had posted a number of critiques of Jones's work on the Internet.28 Challenging Jones's claim that "nano-enhanced thermite or thermate" was used to bring down the WT c in a controlled demolition, they point out that Jones does not establish that therrnite or therrnate has ever been used to bring down large buildings much less pulverize them. They note as well that Jones doesn't account for how much thermite or thermate would need to have been used, where it would need to have been placed, and how it would have been ignited.29
160
S IX