Someone named Tom Murphy wrote an "article" for OpEdNews.com titled "9/11 - Living in the Problem".

link: (text included below for analysis and critique)
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_tom_murp_080118_9_2f11___living_in_the.htm

The Submit Content page for that site says, "We love to see well written, creative, penetrating, insightful, humorous, information, commentary, investigation, and reporting on OpEdNews."

For his piece, I will give Tom points only for 'creative' and 'commentary', and just a few points for each, out of, let's say... 100. (I would give him points for 'humorous', but that's supposed to him being funny, not us laughing at him and his writing and ideas and such)

In his piece, Tom is inappropriately and erroneously using a well-known phrase from motivational and "addiction recovery" circles: "Don't live in the problem, live in the solution"; "You are living in the problem, not the solution". (and variations on that theme — I do not know where Tom got the idea to use this concept as the basis for his piece, and I refuse to speculate on it, as well)

The 'article' is replete with the usual logical fallacies, lack of critical thinking, authorial self-delusion, and other problems inherent in the thinking and writing of most anti-9/11 Truth skepters. What Tom really needs is a 12-step program on how to think and write clearly and logically. (if you want to be paranoid about it, you could suggest that Tom knew exactly what he was doing and that there is a method to his madness, etc., but I think that's probably giving him way too much credit)

Learning to write from a truth-based position is another thing entirely, and something that is difficult to teach, but it can be learned. Of course, you have to want to be that kind of a person, and choose to be that kind of a person, and you have to try really hard to be objective, unbiased, and not live in denial, and those sorts of things, which, unfortunately, seems to be beyond too many people these days. Tom is failing rather dramatically in most of these areas. We should think good thoughts for him and hope he is able to do better in the future.

I could point out all of Tom's failings in his 'article', but I do not have that much free time. Suffice to say that, most people who read it (okay, some) will be able to see the many problems throughout. And, no, the feelings you have as you read it are not just because you disagree with what he is saying. It really is that poorly written, really does not make that much sense, and is just simply lacking in so many ways.

A few hints:

Early on, to set up his premise, Tom writes (admits), "... Mr. Gage recently challenged NIST to produce a portion of that solution.", and then produces a quote from Mr. Gage, and then, contrary to what he (Tom) said earlier, attempts to change not only what he (Tom) said earlier, but re-interpret the meaning of the quote by writing, "this is not a solution but a mandate". And then Tom goes off the deep end and throws logic to the wind by stating, "Mr. Gage has abandoned any notion of appealing to the scientific method in arriving at a solution."

And the 'article' goes downhill rather abruptly and unfortunately from there. I think you will see what I mean.

I encourage people to read the following eVile Wiki article on fallacies and then see how many you can find in Tom's 'article'. It will then become very clear what a Where's Waldo of a logical fallacy playland his 'article' is, and, yes, you will have to sometimes mix and match in the same paragraph, if not sentence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

9/11 - Living in the Problem
by Tom Murphy

When you live in the problem, you only know the problem. When you live in the solution, you start to free yourself from the problem.

911Truthers have the problem being lied to by a government that committed murder most foul. And they know this problem intimately - 9/11 Google Search . But what they seem to avoid most earnestly is the solution, which results in their continued entrapment in the 9/11 problem and inability to free themselves.

I believe many Truthers would claim they know what "is" the solution. In fact, Mr. Gage recently challenged NIST to produce a portion of that solution. In his recent comments to the NIST Committee, Mr. Gage requests the following of its members:

"How much longer must we endure NIST's cover-up of how Building 7 was actually destroyed? Millions of Americans, including the 230+ architects and engineers and 600 others of AE911Truth.org, demand that NIST come clean with a full-throttle, fully resourced and transparent forensic investigation of the evidence of the controlled demolition of Building 7," - http://www.ae911truth.org/info/24 .

If Mr. Gage is being honest to himself and the Movement, then he must surely realize that this is not a solution but a mandate. By his wording alone, Mr. Gage has abandoned any notion of appealing to the scientific method in arriving at a solution. Instead, he's formed the solution and requires that the NIST Committee warp the available evidence and data to match his solution.

Ironically, these are the same acts Mr. Gage accuses the members of doing with respect to the "Official Conspiracy Theory". Mr. Gage postulates in regard to the alleged presence of molten steel at the bottom of the WTC debris piles, "NIST left all of this crucial forensic evidence out of its report. Why? Because it didn't fit in with the official conspiracy theory." To further admonish but "instruct" (a/k/a mandate) the NIST Committee, he chides, "Because NIST seems to have forgotten or neglected to apply key features of the scientific method, I am including as an attachment to this submission Steven E. Jones, 'Revisiting 9/11/2001 -- Applying the Scientific Method'..."

Truly, Mr. Gage is a magnanimous architect. And this is an honest appraisal of him on my part. I have no doubt of the sincerity of Mr. Gage's convictions. And yet, "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies," - Friedrich Nietzsche .

Here's how it appears, though, that Truthers avoid the solution and are far more comfortable living in the problem. By applying the mandate that the WTC 7 collapse was due solely to a controlled demolition, Mr. Gage establishes a wholly unrealistic expectation that NIST (in all likelihood) will not be able to meet. Therefore, regardless of whatever the NIST Committee publishes on WTC 7, it's almost certain that it will be unacceptable to the Truthers and only serve as further "proof" that the problem of being lied to continues to exist unabated.

The true solution that would permit the Truthers to free themselves of the problem is to ensure that NIST does follow the scientific method and that its conclusions incorporate the same approach. If competing theories remain between NIST and the Truthers, then an honest approach by both parties that adheres to the Law of Parsimony should be agreed upon for resolution. Prior to the approach, both parties must also agree to honor the outcome of the comparison. Once committed, the problem may be left behind and work on the solution commence.

Until this occurs and Truthers begin to focus more on probabilities rather than mandates, the Movement will remain in the problem that seems, now-a-days anyway, to only result in divisions and in-fighting - click here .

Note: For the record, I believe the NIST NCSTAR 1 on WTC 1 and 2 was well-thought and organized. With this in mind, I may be construted as someone who supports the "Official Conspiracy Theory".