missing twin towers chart card

"[...] Some beliefs are rigid, like the body of death, impotent in a changing world [...]"

 —Sophia Lyon Fahs

Welcome to the recapitulation of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth's demonstration of the technical plausibility of the twin towers' demolition.

This recapitulation encompasses the ten previous steps of the demonstration of the twin towers' demolition. They used a well-honed version of the scientific method:

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 its slide show.

Our findings so far can be fairly summarized as follows:

AE911Truth's next logical step is to review the assumption that has underlined the official "aircraft and fire" theory throughout the now-complete demonstration of the demolition's technical plausibility.

Accordingly, whenever you are comfortable with this page's conclusions, consider pursuing AE911Truth's exploration of the twin towers' destruction by reviewing the technical plausibility of the idea, implied in the official theory, that the high speed impact of large aircraft and the ensuing fires could actually cause catastrophic structural damage to the twin towers. 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 epistemological question.