911 was a magic trick

From the film "the Prestige"
quote from The Prestige

First, there is the setup, or the "pledge," where the magician shows the audience something that appears ordinary but is probably not, making use of misdirection. Then there is the performance, or the "turn," where the magician makes the ordinary act extraordinary. Lastly, there is the "prestige," where the effect of the illusion is produced. There are "twists and turns, where lives hang in the balance and you see something shocking you've never seen before."

The Pledge in this case is planes hitting the buildings

The Turn is the fire that burned to convince you later of what was about to happen.

The Prestige is the failing of the buildings and the collapse.

The secret to this trick is:
In order to bring down the buildings in a way that would not show the tell tail signs of detonations, they needed to use the metal melting chemical thermate.
The best place to position the thermate packs would be on the central structure which consists of 47 steel beams which can be accesed from the area around the elevator shafts. The length of the buildings was just under 1400 feet. So to ensure a fast even colapse, the thermate would need to be place on key support beams every 30 feet. A thermate pack weighing about 2 lbs per beam placed on a angle to allow the weight of the building to cause it to slip off would be placed on each of the 47 beams.
This equals about 2115 2 lb packs of thermate. The ignition of the thermate would cause the building to be sliced into 45 equal length sections.

The only way to use thermate with out getting caught, would be to start a fire in the buildings hot enough to convince the general public it would have been able to weaken the steel.
Since an office fire would not get that hot and the building had already had a longer burning fire earlier in its life the only way to create the misdirection was by using airplane fuel.
Once the fire had burned long enough for it to have been caught on camera by the media, the thermate which had been pre positioned on every load bearing beam every 30 feet or so the length of the building would be remotely ignighted to burn the support beams enough to score and or cut through so that the building would fall fairly straight down and not take out Tower 1 too early or other buildings in the area not targeted for destruction.

The thermate provides a unmanned cutting torch to do 3 things.
First it helps prevent people from seeing the familiar Controlled Demolition charges. Second it assists in the timed steel cutting to direct the building to fall in a particulat fashion. Finally it makes clean up work less when the beams are all pre cut to be hauled away later.

I wrote this as a different way of looking at the events in NY. Not to make a factual statement of what really happened, but to offer a theory which makes some sense to me.
Let me know what you think. My feelings will not be hurt if I have made errors in my theory.
Thanks

The only problem with thermate use is the steel if later axamined will show residue of sulfer as well as drips of melted steel. So to complete the illusion the magician would need to hide these things quickly.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 4/4/2007 by Mirthful Me]

I believe without a doubt the towers were demolished & there certainly seems to be sufficient evidence to suggest thermite was involved, both in video evidence prior to their collapse & in view of the molten steel found under WTC 1, 2 & 7.

The theory that thermite or thermite alone caused the collapse creates a few problems however.

The first is how did they manage to get sufficient quantities of thermite into the buildings without detection? It surely would have taken weeks or months?

Secondly, thermite does not turn concrete to dust. I mean these buildings were pulverised. I just cant get my head around how anything could have caused that, yet something obviously did, & it wasnt a result of the towers simply collapsing. Any time a building collapses a huge amount of rubble & intact or partly intact furniture etc is left in a pile about 30% the height of the buildings original height. Yet clearly from video these towers, or at least 1 & 2, were pulverised from the top down. In my opinion they didnt even 'collapse' in the true sense of the word. They were more or less 'eaten' from the top down though there was obviously some explosive force coming from the main core of the building as the destruction worked its way down.

Im tending to lean toward the use of thermite BUT this only played a 'minor' part. There was the use of some new technology involved in my view, something we have never heard of, hence the reason we cant understand or explain it. Yet this technology, whatever it was, must also have been around for while & well tested, for it to be used in probably the greatest coverup of all time.

I think it is a great post, and that most likely thermite was directly involved in bringing down the towers. Anyone who has looked at Professor Jones's paper can understand this!! However, I do agree that there was some other major force of energy that day that assisted in the towers falling. I fail how people who believe that it was a natural collapse can still buy into this theory. Those towers were basically turned to dust!!! Massive steel was being thrusted outwards during it's collapse!!! I know that fire and gravity alone can't cause that type of destruction!!!!

Originally posted by Vinadetta
I think it is a great post, and that most likely thermite was directly involved in bringing down the towers. Anyone who has looked at Professor Jones's paper can understand this!! However, I do agree that there was some other major force of energy that day that assisted in the towers falling. I fail how people who believe that it was a natural collapse can still buy into this theory. Those towers were basically turned to dust!!! Massive steel was being thrusted outwards during it's collapse!!! I know that fire and gravity alone can't cause that type of destruction!!!!

Its got to fall somewhere, if something is below you, you might as well fall to the right or left.

The concrete is a big problem. The problem is, there has never been a controlled demolition of a building that size. So we have no reference to work from. I was in Vegas in 95 and watched a demo of a hotel. I think it was the sands. It was no where near the size of the wtc. But the dust was huge.

What happens when over 100 2 acre square slabs of concrete fall on each other? We may never know. If the beams were cut and the concrete fell at free fall speed, then it stands to reason that the amount of energy created and then suddenly transfered on impact would be huge.
Maybe the concrete was weak. It was there since the late 60's. The buildings did sway back and fourth every day since it was built. Wouldn't wind sway flex the concrete to the point it could easily crumble when its metal foundation of trusses where removed? More answers always bring more questions.

I cant see how the floors could have collapsed on top of one another at freefall speed without the timing of cutting the trusses being perfectly synchronised.

Besides that, the concrete from the floors didnt turn to dust as they impacted on one anohter, with the greatest force being toward the bottom as they fell, as one would expect, but they 'crumbled' from the top, as seen in video evidence. The only way I could explain that is if explosives were placed in EACH concrete floor then computer detonated in sequence, with thermite being used to weaken the steel frame or trusses.

Again though, how could explosives be drilled into each floor without detection?

I like the approach of this thread. I do also second that thermate has its difficulties however it seems to be the most logical solution at this point. My thinking on the concrete and the dust is this.

If the building became dust due to the collapse, then the falling mass wouldn't be sufficient enough to produce the pulverization of the mass below, since the mass above would be pulverized.

But it is true that we have no real reference point, since these were very large buildings and nothing like it happened before or since.

yes some good points, two of the largest buildings in the world - it would of been a record breaker for the demolition team had it been an official demolition and thus it would of required a whole lot of extra work and research taking much longer to prep than a building half its size, much more extra care would of been taken. Just pulling one tower would be a pretty big task, and there were two of them!

So we would expect it to take a really long time to prep and rig with demo charges unless they used something else slightly more convenient rather than conventional.

Concrete takes many decades to harden out and fully dry, it remains in a slightly maluable state which is why the building is able to flex in the wind without the concrete crumbling, if the concrete was bone dry (all of it) then it probably would of started crumbling in strong winds, but still wouldn't expect a complete collapse, rather something far more gradual! An example being the hoover dam concrete still isn't set at the base, if it were though its thought it would crack and leak.

There's no doubt that the collapse of the towers was extremely unusual. I read somewhere that the debris pile after the collapse was not as high as the pile for the 47 story tall WTC7. That, if true, is a fact in the same category as the near "free fall" speed of the collapse itself. It's impossible in an "unassisted" collapse. One hundred and ten pancakes are taller than forty-seven pancakes. (I'm just amazed at people who believe the official story.)

At jandoe0911.tripod.com... some of the stranger technical ideas are talked about in an intelligent way, including possible vaporization of quantities of the steel in the explosions. Wouldn't it have been embarassing if the pile of steel had been weighed after the collapse and a few hundred tons of steel were determined to have gone up in smoke?