2 Strange Hoaxes. Or Not.

A couple of extremely weird hoaxes have been exposed recently. Or maybe they haven't. One might have been was a 9/11 Truther pseudocide, the other isn't really a hoax but might be a hoax by way of its non-hoaxiness.

Update: The Truther, Ace Baker, is alive and "well". Scroll down for info.

On January 6, California sound technician and 9/11 Truther Ace Baker was a guest on Jim Fetzer's radio show. (I'm not sure what show this is, as Kevin Barrett quit co-hosting GCN's "The Dynamic Duo" with Fetzer last year.)
Fetzer is the University of Minnesota-Duluth philosophy prof who insists the Zapruder film is fake, and has embraced no-plane, space-laser theories about the destruction of the World Trade Center. Ace Baker is also a no-plane theorist, and a proponent of the idea that most (or all) of the TV footage on September 11 was altered and/or faked. You can see lots of his "research" on YouTube.
As you may know, no-planers and TV-fakery people are at the very bottom of the Truther food chain. Other Truthers will cross an entire continent just to avoid walking on the same side of the street with one of them.

Perhaps this ostracism was one reason that Baker seemed so depressed on the air. He complained bitterly about criticism he has received from other Truthers. Then, tearfully, he apologized to his wife and daughters for being away from them so often due to his 9/11 work. "I hope you will forgive me someday." He told his parents he missed them. All the while, Fetzer tried to cut in with comforting words and assurances that Ace's troubles will pass; haven't all great thinkers been persecuted in their time?

"We need you, Ace."

Seconds later, Ace blurted, "I'm comin' home!" This was followed by a percussive sound that could have been a gunshot. Then silence.

Horrified listeners waited as Fetzer called for help and tried to reconnect with Ace. The show was abruptly cut short.

Ace Baker Suicide (?) on Fetzer's Show

According to numerous 9/11 Truther forums, Fetzer phoned in to Jack Blood's Freedom Underground radio program later the same day to announce that Baker hadn't really killed himself. He had pulled a stunt. However, there is no confirmation that Baker is alive. Even if he is, it's possible he attempted suicide on the air. Time will tell.

On January 7, Baker confessed on his blog that he had faked his suicide and provided a lengthy explanation of why he resorted to "performance art" to get attention. In short, he was tired of the way in which individual Truthers militantly defend their versions of the truth without leaving any room for other interpretations. He even criticized Jim Fetzer for this, though Fetzer has been wholly supportive of Baker's "research" and invited him on his radio show numerous times to discuss it. He accused others of being disinformers, with subheadings like "Steven Jones Lied to Me" and "Morgan Reynolds lost his case on purpose."

The thing is, Baker is one of the Truthers he denounces. Here's what he had to say about his research: "I have authored the definitive scientific treatise on the video compositing used to create the 9/11 airplane videos...It has not, will not, and cannot be debunked. In fact, it is the solution to 9/11."

What Baker is really saying is something I've heard from other "fringe" Truthers: You guys aren't giving me the attention I deserve. He believes his invaluable information is being suppressed by other Truthers. There is some validity to this: As I mentioned, no-planers are treated very poorly by other Truthers, who fear (justifiably) that their own credibility will be diminished if they ally themselves with those who have embraced untenable theories about directed energy weapons, holographic airplanes, and TV fakery.

Also, like most conspiracy theory-based movements, 9/11 Truth is dominated by non-scientific, non-rational people trying to "sell" their own particular spin on the theory/theories at hand. They're in continual battle with those who offer competing versions of the theory/theories. Therefore, long-term, collaborative research efforts just don't happen.
Also, there's the paranoia factor. Many Truthers are always on the lookout for enemies: "COINTELPRO" agents, "shills", "disrupters", "perps", "alphabet agency" agents, etc. It's not easy to work with others when you suspect everyone you meet of trying to undermine your work.
There are some serious and relatively unparanoid Truthers out there, but you won't be hearing much about them. Why not? Because they don't shamelessly promote themselves and their pet theories at every opportunity, they don't engage in drama, and they feel they have more important things to do than preach to the choir on Patriot radio programs.

But none of this rationalizes what Baker did. If he really thinks his research is The Solution, it shouldn't matter what other Truthers say about it. He can continue presenting it to the public for appraisal, critics be damned. 9/11 Truth is supposed to be all about getting the Truth out to the masses, is it not? I find it very interesting, as does Baker, that Dr. Judy Wood will not discuss details of her no-plane theories with other Truthers. Watch her weirdly evasive, even defensive, behaviour in this interview with Dr. Greg Jenkins to see what I mean. She outright refuses to get specific, for fear her ideas will be challenged. Is this true science? Is this the spirit of free discourse and scientific inquiry? Sure, real scientists often withhold their findings until they have been confirmed, but what real scientist won't show his/her findings at all, after publicly declaring that his/her work is flawless?
And what real scientist declares their work cannot be debunked, when (by their own admission) it has never been adequately peer-reviewed? This is the position Ace Baker has taken in regards to his own research. He charges that everyone who has not embraced his work isn't interested in the truth.

In my opinion, Baker's pseudocide was the Truther equivalent of a 4-year-old's Wal-Mart toy aisle tantrum. Pretending to kill yourself solely to embarrass your enemies and amuse your friends is about the lowest a person can sink, ethically speaking. If this man had any credibility, it's officially gone. Perhaps he can start his own 9/11 Fraud movement.


[Thanks to Edmund Standing for the update.]

- - - - - - - - - - - -

The other "hoax" involves one of last year's most popular viral videos, "Where the Hell is Matt?".

Matt Harding was a computer game designer who quit his job to travel the world, and in each of the 42 countries he visited he had his friend film him doing a goofy little dance with the locals. A dozen or more people would gather around him and try to imitate his funny dance, proving that people in just about any part of the world will do really stupid sh** in front of a camera.

He danced on mountains, on beaches, in streets and markets. He danced with children. He danced alone. He danced in the rain. He danced in a NASA zero-gravity chamber. Despite its goofiness, his video montage of the dances is genuinely touching. To see so many people in so many different places taking time out of their day to be joyful with a stranger from a far-off country brings a lump to the throat.

Where the Hell is Matt?

So it came as a rather nasty shock when Matt revealed to an audience at the December '08 Entertainment Gathering that the whole thing had been staged. Calmly and humourously, he explained that the YouTube commenters who had been pointing out suspicious flaws in his film were right all along: Matt was an actor hired to do his jig in front of a blue screen. The exotic locales were added in later, along with animatronic mannequins made to look like dancing natives.

Wait, what? And did he just say this was all done with Photoshop?

You've been punk'd, ladies and gentleman. And so have all the news outlets who soberly reported the non-hoax hoax. Matt Harding may or may not be an actor, but those dancing kids are certainly real. Harding was having some fun with all the cynical, nitpicky armchair video analysts who said it was all fake. See for yourself...

Matt "Confesses"

The question is, does Matt's hoaxily confessing to a hoax that wasn't a hoax constitute a hoax?