"[...] Other beliefs are expansive and lead the way
into wider and deeper sympathies [...]"
—Sophia Lyon Fahs
Welcome to the second step of
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth's progressive demonstration of
the twin towers' 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 second criterion has established that if
the twin towers were demolished,
then their destruction
progress straight down, would
throw debris far away from their footprint, and would
- conversely, a finding that the twin towers' destruction did not
progress straight down, did not throw
debris far away from their footprint, or was not
symmetrical, 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 progress straight down, would
not throw debris far away from their footprint,
not be symmetrical
- conversely, a finding that the twin towers' destruction
did progress straight down,
did throw debris far away from their footprint,
or was symmetrical, would undermine the plausibility of
this official theory
- you are welcome to
explore the segment of AE911Truth's online slide show that discusses this particular
- 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
- the slides in question happen to yield objective evidence
suggesting that the twin towers' destruction
did indeed progress straight down,
did indeed throw debris far away from their
footprint, and was indeed symmetrical
- 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 second 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' 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 wondering whether it exhibited
squibs. 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