Those who research relentlessly and cross-referrence facts are often discredited by means of charactor assassination, and when that doesn't work, a barrage of worthless questions designed to keep the topic running in circles is employed.
There no 9/11 truth website that relentlessly cross-referrences fact.
It's something that the 9/11 truth community just doesn't do.
If you really believe in the cross-referencing thing start a Wiki and kick out everybody who prefers arguing based on youtube videos over people who value cross-referencing.
If you do a good job you might develop a decent theory that's worth discussing in the mainstream.
At the moment the 9/11 just don't play by the rules of a decent debate.
When you (plural you, the community) speak about "historic facts" you should mention it when you differ with the academic historical community and argue for your position.
Having people argue positions that differ significantly from the one of academic historians while being either oblivious of the fact or purposefully ignoring it doesn't help being heard.