EFI/911

EFI·Evidence Fusion Initiative

Fact or Fiction

Fact or Fiction

Ask any question, including odd ones. You get a percentage, a clear call of more or less than 50%, the working, and the sources that produced it. If nothing matches, the score stays at 50% — nothing is invented.

Likelihood

H019 Published hijacker identities are substantially wrong (some named men were not aboard)

Less than 50%

48%

Equal to 50% — the sources do not tip either way

0% — fully contradicted50%100% — fully supported

The score is 48% — less than 50%. Contradicting sources currently outweigh supporting sources after quality and confidence are applied.

How 48% was calculated

Start at 50%. Move by half of the net source score after uncertainty. Net source score is -0.27 (from −1 contradict to +1 support). Uncertainty is 88%. So 50% + 50% × -0.27 × 12% remaining certainty = 48%.

Supporting sources

4

Weighted strength 0.60

Contradicting sources

4

Weighted strength 1.04

No stance yet

39

Pulls the score toward 50% · 12.14

Uncertainty

88%

Share of the file that is unlabelled or missing

Working

start at 50% + half of (net source score × remaining certainty)

0.5 + 0.5 × -0.27 × (1 − 0.88) = 0.484

This percentage is calculated from the sources listed below — it is a score, not a court finding. Official origin does not add extra weight. Independent origin does not subtract weight. Two papers from the same group are one cluster, not two independent confirmations.

Reasoning

  1. Step 1 · Match the question

    Closest stored question: H019 — Published hijacker identities are substantially wrong (some named men were not aboard). Yes/no labels are taken from sources already linked to that question. Also close: H011, H016, H014.

  2. Step 2 · Find matching sources

    40 source(s) matched the wording. 4 further source(s) already linked to the stored question were included even if they did not contain the search words. 3 matching claim(s) contributed inherited stances.

  3. Step 3 · Assign support or contradiction without inventing

    4 labelled from stored question links, 6 from claims, 0 labelled automatically (capped, marked, not saved as human review), 37 left with no stance.

  4. Step 4 · Weight each source

    Each source contributes strength = (quality / 5) × confidence × how strongly it agrees or disagrees. Support strength 0.6, contradict strength 1.04, no-stance strength 12.14. A zero on chain of custody still lowers the mean and stays visible.

  5. Step 5 · Turn that into a percentage

    Start at 50%. Move up if support outweighs contradiction, down if the reverse. Unlabelled sources shrink the movement, so a thin file stays near 50%. Working: 0.5 + 0.5 × -0.27 × (1 − 0.88) = 0.484.

  6. Step 6 · What this number is not

    This percentage is calculated from the sources listed below — it is a score, not a court finding. Official origin does not add extra weight. Independent origin does not subtract weight. Two papers from the same group are one cluster, not two independent confirmations.

What is still missing

  • 9 source(s) score zero on at least one quality check (shown on each card). Those zeros are kept visible and are not averaged away.
  • 6 source(s) are unverified, inactive, or recorded as not retrieved. A missing file is a gap, not a finding against the question.
  • 39 relevant source(s) have no stance yet. They increase uncertainty and pull the percentage toward 50%; they are not counted as support or contradiction.
  • A second stored question (H011) also matches this wording. The percentage below is for H019 only — open the other question to compare. Do not average the two numbers.

Closest stored question

H019 · Published hijacker identities are substantially wrong (some named men were not aboard)

perpetrators · match 47.4

Related questions

Same wording can map to more than one stored question. Each has its own percentage — do not average them.

Matching claims

  • contradictedCLM-025

    Some of the named 19 hijackers were not aboard the aircraft / were still alive.

  • unverifiedCLM-034

    Reported 9/11 aircraft manoeuvres were not flyable manually by the named hijacker-pilots (automation/remote guidance).

  • unsupportedCLM-023

    The twin towers were destroyed by directed energy, not by impact, fire, or conventional explosives.

Sources that support this

4

Sources that contradict this

4

Sources with no stance yet

39

Topics

Day-of events, engineering questions, process failures, and foreknowledge leads.

Developed by British researcher Moneypenny

@nic_moneypenny · Subscribe on X from $2 a month for other investigations, and to support this work.

Built with Grok by xAI. EFI / 911 is an independent research project. Neither Moneypenny nor xAI, X, or Grok accepts any liability for errors, omissions, or inaccuracies. Scores are not court or government findings. Privacy and terms.