I started debunking the alternative explanations, like the cylinders on the bottom of the aircraft that hit the Towers and the flare-like flame shooting from the front alleged as a means of insuring the jet fuel ignited.  My experience at Omnigon Technologies on automated object recognition helped with that (specular and lighting effects).

I explained to people that the fire insulation sprayed on the floor trusses was changed during construction to be more environmentally benign (not asbestos and less fluorocarbons), but the adhesive properties of the new insulation was relatively poor (as evidenced by the chunks falling from the main fuel tank of the shuttle after its insulation formulation was similarly changed; one chunk penetrated a composite slat, and caused one shuttle to burn-up on re-entry).  The shock of the aircraft collision likely caused some of the insulation to fall from the steel.

I further explained that the steel trusses need not melt to fail.  We aeronautical/aerospace engineers work very close to the yield strength of materials to get the material performance needed for safety factors of 1.2 to 1.5, whereas civil engineers use safety factors of 6 or greater.  The trusses needed only to be heated enough for the steel to yield for the floor to sag enough to put the wall fasteners primarily designed for shear resistance into tension as well as shear.  I could not explain how both ends consistently failed at the same time.

I debunked the ejecta from the windows many floor below the collapse as dust escaping windows blown-out by the air compressed by the floors collapsing together.  I could not explain the window consistency as anything but a construction artifact.  I could not explain the consistent number of floors between the jets.

Then I was sent a close-up of one of the jets.  It included large chunks of concrete that could only come from that around the core columns.  I postulated ejecta from compressive concrete failure, but even if the failure consistently occurred at the ceiling, there was not enough energy to propel it to the window before it would strike partitions, furniture or the floor.  More energy, like that from an explosion was required.

That led me to examine the structure of the Towers more closely.  Even if the floors collapsed as the government alleged, the core should have remained erect, yet close examination of the videos indicated the core collapsed first.  That led me to examine the construction history, which led me to learn that the Towers were not profitable, and were to be disassembled by 2007, because the fasteners connecting the aluminum exterior to the steel structure were corroding in the salt air.  It was estimated that the sheathing would start falling from the Towers as early as 2007.  The EPA would not permit demolition, because of the dust and old asbestos insulation.  Disassembly was prohibitively expensive.

I examined the subject on the NIST web site, and found the analysis to be poor, and the conclusions to be a severe stretch to avoid explosive demolition.  In order for the core columns to fail, NIST postulated a specific sequence of core heating and cooling to generate enough structurally conflicting expansion and contraction to cause the steel to fail, but their own simulations could not demonstrate the temperatures required much less the sequence.

Flight 93 completely disintegrated in a hole in the ground, yet its Black Box was found, while the black boxes of the Tower aircraft were not found, yet the passport of one of the alleged terrorists is allegedly found at the base of a Tower.  While it was not odd to explicitly insure the buildings for terrorist attack after the 1993 bombing in which the FBI supplied the explosives, it was odd for Larry Silverstein to buy such problematic buildings.  The annomalies just go on and on.

Then I learned about "False Flags," and delineated the major ones conducted by the U.S.

Four months later I accumulated most of the filtered material you now see at VoluntarySociety.org/conditioning/conspiracy/911/.  Unfortunately, I failed to capture the excellent analysis by German engineers who concluded that 95% of the jet fuel was burned in the initial fireball before the analysis disappeared from the Web.  I also failed to capture a detailed stock analysis that made profiteering from the 9-11 event obvious.

Even before the iron spheres, thermate residue and unburned thermate were found in the dust of buildings 1 and 2, I was convinced the buildings were explosively demolished.


Who did it and why?  I don't know.

It may be that all high-rise buildings are wired for demolition in case they suffer asymmetric damage due to a gas explosion, earth quake or terrorist attack, so they can be made to collapse in their own basement rather than topple onto other structures, creating a domino effect, but ...

While thermite is widely available, thermate was developed at a national lab (Los Alamos if I correctly recollect) for the military.  Its very fine granules provide more surface area for the chemical reaction, so it burns hotter and faster than thermite, so less is needed for the same effect, making each commando more effective.

The company responsible for WTC security and the security of one of the airports involved employed two of G. W. Bush's brothers as top managers.

Mossad agents were arrested cheering while taking photos of the WTC fires and collapse.

The Taliban wanted more money to protect a pipeline than Unical et all was willing to pay.

Saddam Hussein had nationalized oil production and was considering accepting payment for Iraq oil in Euros rather than Federal Reserve Notes.

Congress approved a policy to remake the Middle East map before 9-11.

The only significant result of the Iraq invasion is that the U.S. and English oil companies regained their pumping/drilling contracts.

Your guess is as good as mine.