"Some beliefs are like walled gardens. They
encourage exclusiveness, and the feeling of being especially privileged [...]"
—Sophia Lyon Fahs
Welcome to the first step of
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth's progressive demonstration of
the twin towers' controlled demolition.
The demonstration uses a well-honed version of the
- AE911Truth has formulated the hypothesis that
the twin towers were demolished, explosively and starting in the zone of
earlier terror attacks
- AE911Truth has brainstormed the technically
recognizable consequences of this hypothesis and grouped them into
- the first criterion has established that if
the twin towers were demolished,
then their destruction
start suddenly and would start in the zone
of the earlier terror attacks
- conversely, a finding that the twin towers' destruction did not
start suddenly or did not start in the
zone of the earlier terror attacks would undermine the plausibility of their
- if, on the contrary, the twin towers'
destruction was due, per the official theory,
to the high speed impact of large aircraft and the ensuing fires,
even assuming that such fires could
cause catastrophic structural damage, then
their destruction would not start suddenly and would start in the zone
of the earlier terror attacks
- conversely, a finding that the twin towers' destruction
did start suddenly or did not start in
the zone of the earlier terror attacks would undermine the plausibility of
this official theory
- the objective evidence
that the twin towers' destruction did indeed
start suddenly and did indeed start in the
zone of the earlier terror attacks is trivial, as the mass media
have widely spread video clips that support this contention
- for more detailed information, you may want to
review AE911Truth's "Blueprint for Truth"
DVD, where AE911Truth's founder and CEO Richard Gage, AIA, presents and
comments on the slide show
- this evidence:
- undermines the
plausibility of the official theory that
blames the twin towers' destruction on the high speed impact of large
aircraft and the ensuing fires
- challenges the latest
U.S. technical report that supports
this official theory to credibly account for it
- meets the
above-mentioned first criterion of the twin towers'
This exercise in observation and reason is offered by engineering professionals, but people
with average mental abilities and a modest education can sustain it. As such,
the mass media and the major scientific and technical outfits
could have effortlessly published it.
Yet they have not.
The U.S. government operates under the scrutiny of numerous highly variegated watchdogs,
many of whom would ostensibly benefit from denouncing any 9/11 foul play. Yet very
few of them have brought this information to the public's attention.
Kindly note that this page does not prove the twin towers' controlled demolition, the
impossibility of the official "aircraft and fire" theory, the fraudulent nature
of the latest U.S. technical report on this matter, or the global and persisting
cross-disciplinary censorship thereof. It merely contributes
to this proof.
Accordingly, whenever you are comfortable with this page's conclusions,
consider pursuing AE911Truth's exploration of
the twin towers' destruction by reviewing their trajectory.
Or click on a specific box or phrase in the
block-diagram on top of this page to visit some
other aspect of it. Or
return to its