Those photos are really unconvincing. You have heard of 'perspective' have you not?

From an extremely low perspective, the smoke rolling OVER the building would appear to be on the same level or lower than the impacting plane... but the proof it IS rolling over the building (and hence, not from under the plane) is very clear.

Look at the series of frames. Does smoke ever diminish the quality of the plane as it rolls through the building?


Hence the smoke is OVER the plane.

Do I think that the buildings were assisted down with explosives after the fact: hell yes.


The Steel used in the building was capable of supporting at least 420 MPa or 60,916 psi.

Under extreme heat (even presuming the fire was burning at its hottest possible, and found a huge source of oxygen, both very, very unlikely - for the reasons that most of the fuel in the 2nd building was consumed in the initial fireball, the black smoke from the building indicated a low temp flame, and the floors are hermetically sealed to prevent fires from spreading between floors - thus minimizing air routes to the fuel) the steel would have lost at MOST only 50% of its load capacity.

In combustion science, there are three basic types of flames, namely, a jet burner, a pre-mixed flame, and a diffuse flame.

In a diffuse flame, the fuel and the oxidant are not mixed before ignition, but flow together in an uncontrolled manner and combust when the fuel/oxidant ratios reach values within the flammable range. A fireplace flame is a diffuse flame burning in air, as was the WTC fire.

Diffuse flames generate the lowest heat intensities of the three flame types.

The heat capacity of the steel alone would have prevented a sufficiently hot 'hot spot' from developing to warrant structural failure...

CTE, linear 20ºC, µm/m-°C 11.6 steels generally range between 9.5-12.6 µm/m°C 6.4 µin/in-°F the heat would have radiated out along the entire length of the bars, and indeed into other bars, requiring several trillion joules of energy to put enough heat into the bars to become sufficiently 'plastic' to cause structural failure.

The frame comprised inner and outer rectangular box tubes consisting of closely spaced steel box columns connected by steel spandrel members or truss beams that supported 40,000-square-foot cross-braced floors, each nearly an acre in area, the empaneled engineers said. This configuration created a complete exterior tube around the building and a center tube down the middle.

The 90-foot-long central core, formed of massive vertical steel columns that held most of the building's weight, contained elevator shafts, stairways and utility spaces, they said. The core's columns were thicker toward the base to support huge accumulated gravity loads. The outer perimeter tube, a tight prefabricated latticework with 61 14-inch steel box columns (spaced 39 inches on center) on each building face, provided all the bracing resistance against lateral and twisting forces from wind and seismic action. This exterior grid served as a moment frame, providing a large moment arm (of torque) against overturning and deflection forces. The outer tube bore part of the gravity-induced downward load as well. The huge inner and outer rectangular tubes needed to be protected to maintain their structural integrity, so the floors acted as reinforcing diaphragms or bulkheads. The office floors, which each comprised a 35- to 60-foot clear span from the core to the exterior grid, were panelized structural members supported by open web joists with steel decks above them. The horizontal truss struts, bolted and welded to the exterior grid and the core column structures, included viscoelastic stringers that provided increased damping to help make the structure less lively in the wind.

The lateral truss systems redistributed the load when other critical members were lost. A credit to the designer, who placed a multitude of redundant connections and supports throughout the structures.

It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C.4 This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse. The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.

In a computer reenactment of 911, Eduardo Kausel modeled a simplified WTC, and determined some computer simulations... indicate the building material fell almost unrestricted at nearly the speed of free-falling objects. "The towers' resistive systems played no role. Otherwise the elapsed time of the fall would have been extended," he noted. As it was, the debris took about nine seconds to reach the ground from the top.”

Even if the upper floors had been completely weakened by the fires, the lower floors integrity would have acted as a braking mechanism to the collapse. Remember - they were much more reinforced that those above them.

Yet according to the expert: The towers' resistive systems played no role. Again - unthinkable, UNLESS - those very structures had been compromised.

According to one witness on 911, present at the time of the collapse... “There was an explosion, a great sucking sound, and down the building came.”

Is this consistent with a controlled demolition, or as the press released stories would have you believe, the result of pancaking?

Remember. The buildings fell 'unrestricted' at the rate of gravity. Does this sound plausible at all???

The concrete in the building would have, if nothing else, acted as a brake - as the downward stresses of the floors above came crashing into them, the concrete slabs would have converted this energy into deformational energy, crumbling them as they fell, but also acting as a brake.

Some say there was no concrete in the construction of WTC... this is clearly a lie...

Each steel floor deck was covered with four inches of concrete. With almost an acre of area for each floor and figuring about 100 pounds per square foot of area, each floor system weighed about 3,200,000 pounds.

The fact that these concrete slabs did not hit the ground intact (and in fact together, as they would have in the pancake scenario) is evident from two facts:

One - the profusion of airborne dust and lack of stacks of concrete on the ground level. If the pancake theory had been the case, there would have been a stack of concrete slabs almost 40 feet high. This was not the case. In fact, the majority of the concrete was converted into dust and particulates.

Two - the impact of the concrete slabs would have been sufficient to cause a sudden impact of approximately 352 million pounds of concrete alone (which should have produced a measurable earth tremor equivalent to at least 4 on the Richter scale) - when in fact, each WTC event created a (modest-sized) magnitude 2 earthquake, as monitored at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Observatory, which is located about 30 kilometers away from New York City.

The only way to explain this is to presume the concrete slabs were pulverized in rapid succession before they hit the ground, meaning they would have been braking the fall.

Ooops - but the fall was not braked.

This inconsistency can only be explained by the use of explosives to bring down the building. In the 'explosives used' scenario, charges destroy the infrastructure in rapid succession, bringing the buildings down with no resistance to gravity, since the supporting mechanisms and concrete floors are destroyed before they strike the ground. The signature of this kind of event would be minimal - perhaps 2 on the Richter scale, which is supported by the observed facts.

Do we need cheap photos to sniff out a conspiracy? Hardly... most of these facts were pulled from none other than Scientific American magazine.

All you have to do is to learn to read between the lines.

By anonymous contributor

Above is a comment to a post by Merle entitled, “Could It Be - Explosion in Tower II BEFORE the Plane Hit?” Web Address given:

Posted on the Independent Newswire on 26 December 2001

To next article in Covering Up the Cover-Up

Phase 1 “Know” Menu
Looking for Justice in All the Wrong Places Menu
Insights-Reflections-Analysis Menu
Covering Up the Cover Up Menu
The Reality of Israeli Zionist Infiltration Menu
Are We On the Path of Expanding Liberty or Tyranny?
Declaring Independence and A State of Global Rebellion Menu
A Picture of the Stars and A Voice from the Ethers Menu
Interim Addendums During Phase 1