No theories, no controversy, no references to opinion, no conspiricizing....just cold, hard science and reason.

Gravity:
....The first shows that, "...the explanations of the collapse that have been given by the 9/11 Commission Report and NIST are not physically possible."
Impossible must be taken in its most literal sense here:

From the rooftop of WTC1, drop one dark blue billiard ball over the edge. As it falls, it accelerates. If it were in a vacuum, it would hit the pavement, 1368 feet below, in 9.22 seconds, shown by the blue curve in the figure 1, below. It will take longer if air resistance is considered, but for simplicity, we'll neglect air resistance. This means that the calculated collapse times are more generous to the official story than they need to be.

Figure 1. Minimum Time for a Billiard Ball dropped from the roof of WTC1 to hit the pavement below, assuming no air resistance:
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/911/WTC-A5-75.jpg
Notice that the billiard ball begins to drop very slowly, then accelerates with the pull of gravity. If in a vacuum, the blue ball will hit the pavement, 1368 ft. below, 9.22 seconds after it is dropped. That is, unless it is propelled by explosives, it will take at least 9.22 seconds to reach the ground (assuming no air resistance).

According to the pancake theory, one floor fails and falls onto the floor below, causing it to fail and fall on the floor below that one, and so forth. The "pancake theory" implies that this continues all the way to the ground floor. In the case of both WTC towers, we didn't see the floors piled up when the event was all over, but rather a pulverization of the floors throughout the event. (see pictures below) So, clearly we cannot assume that the floors stacked up like pancakes. Looking at the data, we take the conservative approach that a falling floor initiates the fall of the one below, while itself becoming pulverized. In other words, when one floor impacts another, the small amount of kinetic energy from the falling floor is consumed (a) by pulverizing the the floor and (b) by breaking free the next floor. In reality, there isn't enough kinetic energy to do either.
[Trumpman][Hoffman]
http://911research.wtc7.net/papers/trumpman/CoreAnalysisFinal.htm
http://911research.wtc7.net/papers/dustvolume/index.html
But, for the sake of evaluating the "collapse" time, we'll assume there was. After all, millions of people believe they saw the buildings "collapse."

Figure 2. Possibilities to consider for modeling the collapse.
Model A: The floors remain intact and pile up like a stack of pancakes.
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/present/ModelA.jpg
Model B: The floors blow up like an erupting volcano from the top down.
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/present/ModelB.jpg

Which of the two models, above, best matches the images below?
Figure 3. Images from the "collapse."
(a) WTC2, demonstrating there is little to no free-fall debris ahead of the "collapse wave," and (b) layer of uniform dust left by the "collapse."
a. http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/.site1106.jpg
b. http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/img_1479.jpg

If there was enough kinetic energy for pulverization, there will be pancaking or pulverization, but not both. For one thing, that energy can only be spent once. If the potential energy is used to pulverize a floor upward and outward, it can't also be used to accelerate the building downward. In order to have pancaking, a force is required to trigger the failure of the next floor. If the building above that floor has been pulverized, there can be no force pushing down. As observed in the pictures below, much of the material has been ejected upward and outward.
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/.site1106.jpg
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/present/bwMushroom.jpg
Any pulverized material remaining over the footprint of the building will be suspended in the air and can't contribute to a downward force slamming onto the next floor. With pulverization, the small particles have a much larger surface-area-to-mass ratio and air resistance becomes significant. As we can recall, the dust took many days to settle out of the air, not hours or minutes. So, even though the mechanism to trigger the "pancaking" of each floor seems to elude us, let's consider the time we would expect for such a collapse.

To illustrate the timing for this domino effect, we will use a sequence of falling billiard balls, where each billiard ball triggers the release of the next billiard ball in the sequence. This is analogous to assuming pulverization is instantaneous and does not slow down the process. In reality, this pulverization would slow down the "pancake" progression, so longer times would be expected. Thus, if anything, this means the calculated collapse times are more generous to the official story than they need to be.

‘Progressive Collapse’ in ten-floor intervals
To account for the damaged zone, let’s simulate the floor beams collapsing every 10th floor, as if something has destroyed 9 out of every 10 floors for the entire height of the building. This assumes there is no resistance within each 10-floor interval. i.e. We use the conservative approach that there is no resistance between floor impacts. In reality there is, which would slow the collapse time further. Also, there was only damage in one 10-floor interval, not the entire height of the building. Thus, if anything, this means the calculated collapse times are more generous to the official story than they need to be. Refer to the figure below.
The clock starts when the blue ball is dropped from the roof (110th floor). Just as the blue ball passes the 100th floor, the red ball drops from the 100th floor. When the red ball passes the 90th floor, the orange ball drops from the 90th floor, ... etc. Notice that the red ball (at floor 100) cannot begin moving until the blue ball reaches that level, which is 2.8 seconds after the blue ball begins to drop.

This approximates the "pancaking" theory, assuming that each floor within the "pancaking" (collapsing) interval provides no resistance at all. With this theory, no floor below the "pancake" can begin to move until the progressive collapse has reached that level. For example, there is no reason for the 20th floor to suddenly collapse before it is damaged.

With this model, a minimum of 30.6 seconds is required for the roof to hit the ground. Of course it would take longer if accounting for air resistance. It would take longer if accounting for the structure's resistance that allows pulverization. The columns at each level would be expected to absorb a great deal of the energy of the falling floors. Thus, if anything, this means the calculated collapse times are more generous to the official story than they need to be.

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/911/WTC-A3-75.jpg

‘Progressive Collapse’ in one-floor intervals
Similar to Case 2, above, let's consider a floor-by-floor progressive collapse.
Refer to the figure below:
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/911/WTC-A4-75.jpg
Total time: 87.9 to 96.7 seconds.

Now, let's consider momentum.
Assume that the top floor stays intact as a solid block weight, Block-A. Start the collapse timer when the 109th floor fails. At that instant, assume floor 108 miraculously turns to dust and disappears. So, Block-A can drop at free-fall speed until it reaches the 108th floor. After Block-A travels one floor, it now has momentum. If all of the momentum is transferred from Block-A to Block-B, the next floor, Block-A will stop moving momentarily, even if there is no resistance for the next block to start moving. If Block-A stops moving, after triggering the next sequence, the mass of Block-A will not arrive in time to transfer momentum to the next "pancaking" between Block-B and Block-C. In other words, the momentum will not be increased as the "collapse" progresses.
Now, recall the physics demonstration shown below. (I believe everyone who has finished high school has seen one of these momentum demonstrations at some point in their life.)
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/911/momentum.jpg

Note, if some part must stop and then restart its descent every floor, the total collapse time must be more than 10 seconds. Given that the building disintegrated from the top down, it is difficult to believe there could be much momentum to transfer, anyway. Also, consider the energy required to pulverize the floor between each "pancake." After being pulverized, the surface-area/mass is greatly increased and the air resistance becomes significant. I don't believe this pulverized material can contribute any momentum as it "hangs" in the air and floats down at a much-much slower rate than the "collapsing" floors.
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/present/pic1.jpg

Now, let's consider reality.
QUESTIONS:
(1) How likely is it that all supporting structures on a given floor will fail at exactly the same time?
(2) If all supporting structures on a given floor did not fail at the same time, would that portion of the building tip over or fall straight down into its own footprint?
(3) What is the likelihood that supporting structures on every floor would fail at exactly the same time, and that these failures would progress through every floor with perfect symmetry?

Let's say that we want to bring down the entire building in the time it takes for free-fall of the top floor of WTC1. (Use 9.22 seconds as the time it would take the blue ball to drop from the roof to the street below, in a vacuum.) So, If the entire building is to be on the ground in 9.22 seconds, the floors below the "pancaking" must start moving before the "progressive collapse” reaches that floor, below. To illustrate this, use the concept of the billiard balls. If the red ball (dropped from the 100th floor) is to reach the ground at the same time as the blue ball (dropped from the 110th floor), the red ball must be dropped 0.429 seconds after the blue ball is dropped. But, the blue ball will take 2.8 seconds after it is dropped, just to reach the 100th floor in free fall. So, the red ball needs to begin moving 2.4 seconds before the blue ball arrives to "trigger" the red ball's motion. I.e., each of these floors will need a 2.4 second head start. But this creates yet another problem. How can the upper floor be destroyed by slamming into a lower floor if the lower floor has already moved out of the way?
Case 2, above, shows the red ball being dropped just as the blue ball passes that point.

Remember, I'm assuming the building was turning to dust as the collapse progressed, which is essentially what happened.

So, for the building to be collapsed in about 10 seconds, the lower floors would have to start moving before the upper floors could reach them by gravity alone.
Did we see this? I believe it's pretty clear in some of the videos. The "wave" of collapse, progressing down the building, is moving faster than free-fall speed. This would require something like a detonation sequence.

Realizing that, for example, the 40th floor needs to start moving before any of the upper floors have "free-fallen" to that point, why would it start moving? There was no fire there. And, if anything, there is less load on that floor as the upper floors turn to dust.

In the picture (at right), notice that WTC2 is less than half of its original height, yet has no debris that has fallen ahead of the demolition wave.
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/.site1106.jpg

This part of the building surely took a lot longer to hit the ground as dust than it would have if it came down as larger pieces of material.
We know that sheets of paper have a very high surface-area-to-mass ratio and will stay aloft for long periods of time, which is why paper is an excellent material for making toy airplanes. The alert observer will notice that much of the paper is covered with dust, indicating that this dust reached the ground after the paper did.

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/img_1479.jpg
In the above picture, there are a few tire tracks through the dust, but not many, so it was probably taken shortly after one (or both) of the towers were down. Also, the people in the picture look like they've just come out of hiding, curious to see what just happened and to take pictures. If there had been a strong wind blowing the dust around, it would blow the paper away before it would have blown the dust onto the paper. So, the fact that much of the randomly-oriented paper is covered with dust indicates the relative aerodynamic properties of this dust.
Also, notice the dark sky as well as the haze in the distance. This was a clear day with no clouds in the sky... except for the dust clouds. This overcast appearance as well as the distant haze can only be explained by dust from the "collapse" that is still suspended in the air.

So, how could the ground rumble for only 8 seconds while WTC1 "disappeared?"
I don't think this part of the building made a thud when it hit the ground.

In conclusion, the explanations of the collapse that have been given by the 9/11 Commission Report and NIST are not physically possible. A new investigation is needed to determine the true cause of what happened to these buildings on September 11, 2001. The "collapse" of all three WTC buildings may be considered the greatest engineering disaster in the history of the world and deserves a thorough investigation.

http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/BilliardBalls.html

Gravity; Part II

It is an absolute fact that WTC7 fell at the speed of freefall in a vaccuum.
There is NO "official" explanation as to WHY WTC7 fell. This particular book on gravity was the inspiration for an educational presentation that leaves no room for any alternatives:
Go here and click "play" and see for yourselves :::: WTC7 collapsing at the rate of freefall in a vaccuum:
http://www.v911t.org/911Clips.php

Further video which gives an expert explanation.....since we have no "official" explanation:
Mr Jowenko is a controlled demolition expert with years of experience in this area. He didn't know WTC7 had also come down on 9/11. Here he sees it for the first time and is asked how it fell BEFORE he is told it was WTC7 on 9/11:
The opinion of an Expert Without an Agenda
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_z8VMKL1ww

The clip is from a nationally televised program aired in the Netherlands. Jowenko is in no doubt even after being told the circumstances.
"This is professional work without any doubt."

This understanding of gravity renders all the explanations offered by the administration's propaganda machine IMPOSSIBLE.

Structural Mechanics and Hydraulics

Physics is a funny thing...it contains immutable laws.
These laws are used all the time in definitive proofs. One of these laws is conservation of energy. In the case of the towers it can be applied to the known mass of a tower and its known average height. These two numbers, along with the force due to gravity at sea level yield the total potential energy available in a gravity driven collapse. The value is not debatable...it's fact.
Certain effects of the collapse are also facts. The physics has been done and the values show that just 2 of these known effects required over 12 times the energy available in a gravity-only collapse.

The amount of energy required to expand the North Tower's dust cloud (the observed pyroclastic flow after collapse) was many times the entire potential energy of the tower's elevated mass due to gravity. The over 10-fold disparity between the most conservative estimate and the gravitational energy is not easily dismissed as reflecting uncertainties in quantitative assessments.

The official explanation that the Twin Tower collapses were gravity-driven events appears insufficient to account for the documented energy flows.
http://911research.wtc7.net/papers/dustvolume/volumev3.html

So...just the expansion of all the material that was reduced to 30 micron-sized dust particals was more than can possibly be accounted for by the government fable.

On top of the expansion of the dust clouds there was the required energy to create the dust in the first place:

The energy required to convert a tower's 600,000 tons of concrete into dust of 60 micron particle diameter is about 900,000 KWH.
http://www.911-strike.com/powder.htm
http://911research.wtc7.net/papers/dustvolume/volumev1.html

Gravitational potential energy is the energy released in a structural collapse, which may typically be dissipated by concrete crushing in a "pile driver" effect.

This energy is calculated by the equation U=mgh, with mass in kg, gravitational force constant g=9.8m/s/s, and h in meters. The energy units in this equation are joules (watt-seconds) but large energies are more commonly expressed in kilowatt hours (1kwh=3.6e6 joules).

Because the WTC towers are both massive and tall, the gravitational potential energy of each tower is enormous.

Assuming a mass of 750,000 tons (6.8e8 kg) falling from an average height of 207 meters (half of the overall height of 1365 feet), the gravitational potential energy is about 1.4e12 joules or 400,000 kwh.

The energy required to crush rock is roughly proportional to 1/sqrt(powder diameter), so the exact amount of energy required is critically dependent on the fineness of the powder. The energy required to reduce solid rock to 60 micron powder is about 20 kwh/ton:
http://www.elorantaassoc.com/eob97.htm

However, concrete is softer than rock, and a round number for the energy required to crush concrete is around 1.5 kwh/ton:
http://www.b-i-m.de/public/ibac/mueller.htm

With roughly 600,000 tons of concrete in each WTC tower, the available energy from gravitational potential energy was only about 0.7 kwh per ton of concrete.
http://www.911-strike.com/powder.htm

"This was the South Tower. This was 104, 106 stories, all of it - this is what is left. Up there was the North Tower. And you look and you see - there's no concrete. There's very little concrete. All you see is aluminum and steel.
--George Pataki
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5kF9ldtgrc

The "official" story is impossible on so many levels. How many times does something have to be impossible to truly be impossible? ONCE.

Seismology

Before the planes struck
The times of the seismic spikes is undeniable proof that more than just airliners impacted the towers.
The particular seismic facts discussed here have added weight. It is independently corroborated by eyewitness accounts. Independent corroboration is significant because it makes the whole greater than the sum of its parts because both pieces of evidence corroborate each other...it's a two-way connection.

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Article911SeismicProof.html

On 9/11 the seismic stations grouped around New York City recorded seismic events from the WTC site, two of which occurred immediately prior to the aircraft impacts upon the Twin Towers. Because these seismic events preceded the collisions, it is clear they were not associated with the impacts and must therefore be associated with some other occurrence. None of the authorities charged with the responsibility for the investigation of the events of 9/11 have proposed a source for these seismic events, nor have they given a valid reason for the difference in times between the seismic events and the aircraft impacts. Only by consideration of the evidence of basement explosions before the aircraft impacts, as experienced by William Rodriquez and 36 others, can an explanation be found for the fact that the seismic stations recorded seismic events originating from the WTC sites prior to the aircraft impacts. It seems unlikely that Middle Eastern terrorists could have overcome the WTC security and managed this kind of high level technological coordination. The facts presented here, simple and few, raise the possibility of inside help and involvement in 9/11/01, both before and after the attack.

OVERVIEW
This paper is concerned only with the factual data surrounding the exact impact times of the two aircraft that hit WTC1 and WTC2. Everything else about 9/11 is outside the scope of this paper.

This is not a theory or hypothesis, but a statement of publicized facts regarding the timing of the aircraft impacts. There exist two separate precision data time sets that address when the aircraft crashed into the Towers. Both data time sets are based on UTC (Coordinated Universal Time, the world’s atomic clock system) and the sources that determined these times were prestigious, reliable and credible.

There is no question regarding the precision and accuracy of the instruments used to record both data time sets, since their entire function depends and relies upon temporal accuracy, and therefore there can be no doubt that both data time sets are correct. The time data sets represent objective scientific data recorded by two separate, independent entities.

The problem is the data sets have different impact times.

These times were given out years ago but at different times. Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University (LDEO) gave its findings around the time of the actual event with what it thought were impact times based upon the seismic data recorded, while the 9/11 Commission published its impact times, based upon FAA radar data and air traffic control software logic, years later in its Final Report. The Commission no longer exists.

Here are the impact times for each source:
...............................AA Flt 11.....UA Flt 175
LDEO:......................8:46:26.....9:02:54
9/11 Commission: ....8:46:40.....9:03:11
Differentials: ...........14 secs.....17 secs

SEISMIC DATA AND TIMES
LDEO Published Findings

Link: http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20010911_wtc.html

(all times plus or minus 1 to 2 seconds)
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Article911SeismicProof-image002.gif
LDEO confirmed its data as accurate:
http://www.mgs.md.gov/esic/publications/download/911pentagon.pdf

9/11 COMMISSION DATA AND TIMES
Commission Timeline

Link: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html
The Commission’s times are based upon: "We have determined that the impact time was 9:03:11 based on our analysis of FAA radar data and air traffic control software logic." [9/11 Commission Report, pg 460, Note 130]:
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Article911SeismicProof-image003.gif

http://www.insightful.com/infact/911/corpus/report_470_460.html
(Note 130 is the basis for WTC1 & WTC2 precision impact times to the second)
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Article911SeismicProof-image004.gif

It is known that the FAA followed the aircraft using four different radar tracking stations utilizing primary radar return with all times to the second. Radar is based upon microwaves that travel at the speed of light, and therefore an error variance (which is in microseconds) need not be stated.

The Commission Report has the impact times.

Their data set is based upon actual flight data that ended when the Towers were struck.

There is no question: AA Flight 11 died exactly at 8:46:40 and UA Flight 175 at 9:03:11 [UTC – 4 hrs].

Since the planes crashed at those times, the question is: What caused the LDEO times 14 and 17 seconds earlier? What caused those seismic spikes?

On the face, it seems tenuous that the spikes were "impact times". How does an aircraft impacting the WTC near the 90th floor result in energy transference that travels all the way down to the earth, even through the massive multi-level, 6-story sub-basement structure, and be picked up by LDEO as a seismic spike? Energy from the crash should have mostly been absorbed by the building’s immense structure and mass.

The following is an excerpt about an eyewitness at WTC1 by the name of William Rodriguez (he worked at the WTC complex for 20 years, was acknowledged a hero for the many lives he saved that day, and he was the last person out of the building before it came down):

http://www.newswithviews.com/Spingola/deanna17.htm

Arriving at 8:30 on the morning of 9-11 he went to the maintenance office located on the first sublevel, one of six sub-basements beneath ground level. There were a total of fourteen people in the office at that same time. As he was discussing the day’s tasks with others, there was a very loud massive explosion which seemed to emanate from between sub-basement B2 and B3. There were an additional twenty-two people on B2 sub-basement who also felt and heard that first explosion.

At first he thought it was a generator that had exploded. But the cement walls in the office cracked from the explosion. "When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and everything started shaking." said Rodriguez, who was crowded together with fourteen other people in the office including Anthony Saltamachia, his supervisor for the American Building Maintenance Company.

Just seconds later there was another explosion way above which made the building oscillate momentarily. This, he was later told, was a plane hitting the Tower at about the 90th floor. Upon hearing about the plane, he immediately thought of the people up in the restaurant. Then there were other explosions just above B1 and individuals started heading for the loading dock to escape the explosion’s resulting rampant fire. When asked later about those first explosions he said: "I would know if an explosion was from the bottom or the top of the building." He heard explosions both before and after the plane hit the Tower.

The number of witnesses who presented evidence of explosion and explosion damage, and particularly the injuries that some witnesses received, again leaves no room for doubt that there were explosions in the basement of WTC1. The following video link of the powerful testimony of William Rodriguez is evidence that corroborates the facts of this paper; and these facts corroborate these 37 eyewitnesses:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4380137365762802294

CONCLUSION

Several seismic stations recorded seismic signals originating from two events which occurred at the WTC site, immediately prior to both aircraft impacts. Because these signals preceded the impacts there can be no doubt that the seismic signals recorded were not those associated with the aircraft impacts on the Towers.

These signals were, in fact, the seismic spikes associated with the huge basement explosions reported by witnesses.

Geometry

The slope coming off the road at the Pentagon where the lamp poles were:
http://perso.orange.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/geometrie/survolRoute.jpg

The path taken by what struck the Pentagon as dictated by the first two Pentagon videos released:
http://perso.orange.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/geometrie/analyse4.gif

To strike the Pentagon the trajectory that MUST have been taken does not match up with what the Pentagon videos purportedly show:
http://perso.orange.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/geometrie/analyse1.jpg

The "Pentagon videos" are frauds.

http://perso.orange.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/im-2ndlev.html

Remember, by definition, the impossible cannot occur.

Bonus book as a reward for making it this far through this diary...Videography
http://perso.orange.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/im-1stlev.html

Chemistry

If you haven't heard of Professor Steven jones yet...where have you been? His findings from tests conducted on 2 samples of WTC steel is said to show that an incendiary compound called thermate was at work on 9/11.
The chemical signature left by a thermate reaction is like a fingerprint. Specific ratios of specific compounds are what make up this fingerprint. This fingerprint cannot be caused by the random introduction of the ingredients necessary to produce a thermate reaction...it can only come specifically from thermate itself.

Dr. Jones' slide presentation on high-powered chemical and other physical analyses done on WTC steel and residues and dust which appears quite conclusive.
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/link.asp?ID=5175&URL=http://worldtradecentertruth.com/volume/200609/DrJonesTalksatISUPhysi...

There's also some verification in the FEMA report which puzzles over the observed sulfidation of the steel. It puzzles over this because it has no explanation that can be taken from the narrow context within which it seeks to explain the phenomenon.
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

From http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/steel.html
There is no indication that any of the fires in the World Trade Center buildings were hot enough to melt the steel framework. Jonathan Barnett, professor of fire protection engineering, has repeatedly reminded the public that steel--which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit--may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies on WTC steel brought back to WPI (Worcester Polytechnic Institute) reveal that a novel phenomenon--called a eutectic reaction--occurred at the surface, causing intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.

Materials science professors Ronald R. Biederman and Richard D. Sisson Jr. confirmed the presence of eutectic formations by examining steel samples under optical and scanning electron microscopes. A preliminary report was published in JOM, the journal of the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society. A more detailed analysis comprises Appendix C of the FEMA report. The New York Times called these findings "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." The significance of the work on a sample from Building 7 and a structural column from one of the twin towers becomes apparent only when one sees these heavy chunks of damaged metal.

A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges--which are curled like a paper scroll--have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes--some larger than a silver dollar--let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes.

A eutectic compound is a mixture of two or more substances that melts at the lowest temperature of any mixture of its components. Blacksmiths took advantage of this property by welding over fires of sulfur-rich charcoal, which lowers the melting point of iron. In the World Trade Center fire, the presence of oxygen, sulfur and heat caused iron oxide and iron sulfide to form at the surface of structural steel members. This liquid slag corroded through intergranular channels into the body of the metal, causing severe erosion and a loss of structural integrity.

A piece of possible photographic evidence is an often pointed to pic:
http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=5821
There is substantial evidence that thermite was used to cut the central support columns, which caused the towers to fall.
Evidence can be seen on photographs of the columns from the rubble of the World Trade Center.
In this photo, for example, the column directly above the fireman's helmet shows that it was cut with thermite. There is a substantial amount of hardened molten iron which can be seen on both the inside and outside of the box column. This is precisely what one would expect to find on a column which had been cut with thermite.
Experts who have viewed this photograph say that this column was not cut with a torch.

NIST, Underwriters laboratories and Kevin Ryan
In the following audio interview Kevin Ryan details about a dozen fatal problems with the NIST report and tears NIST into little tiny pieces:

http://gunsandbutter.net/archives.php?si=141 [Audio file]

David Ray Griffin's deconstruction of "the NORAD Tapes".A masterpiece of logic and reason.
http://www.gunsandbutter.net/archives.php?si=138 [Audio file]

Phonecalls From the Planes
Barbara Olson: "She [Barbara Olson] had trouble getting through, because she wasn't using her cell phone - she was using the phone in the passengers' seats," said Mr Olson. "I guess she didn't have her purse, because she was calling collect, and she was trying to get through to the Department of Justice, which is never very easy." ... "She wanted to know `What can I tell the pilot? What can I do? How can I stop this?' "
But it is at this juncture that we finally have the terminal error. Though the American Airlines Boeing 757 is fitted with individual telephones at each seat position, they are not of the variety where you can simply pick up the handset and ask for an operator. On many aircraft you can talk from one seat to another in the aircraft free of charge, but if you wish to access the outside world you must first swipe your credit card through the telephone. By Ted Olson's own admission, Barbara did not have a credit card with her.
It gets worse. On American Airlines there is a telephone "setup" charge of US$2.50 which can only be paid by credit card, then a US$2.50 (sometimes US$5.00) charge per minute of speech thereafter. The setup charge is the crucial element. Without paying it in advance by swiping your credit card you cannot access the external telephone network. Under these circumstances the passengers' seat phone on a Boeing 757 is a much use as a plastic toy.
Perhaps Ted Olson made a mistake and Barbara managed to borrow a credit card from a fellow passenger? Not a chance. If Barbara had done so, once swiped through the phone, the credit card would have enabled her to call whoever she wanted to for as long as she liked, negating any requirement to call collect.
Sadly perhaps, the Olson telephone call claim is proved untrue. Any American official wishing to challenge this has only to subpoena the telephone company and Justice Department records. There will be no charge originating from American Airlines 77 to the US Solicitor General.
This is a story about a little white lie that bred dozens of other little white lies, then hundreds of bigger white lies and so on, to the point where the first little white lie must be credited as the "Mother of All Lies" about events on 11 September 2001. For this was the little white lie that first activated the American psyche, generated mass loathing, and enabled media manipulation of the global population.
Without this little white lie there would have been no Arab Hijackers, no Osama Bin Laden directing operations from afar, and no "War on Terror"...[...]Think about it, people! If you knew or suspected your spouse's aircraft had just fireballed inside the Pentagon building, how would you spend the rest of the day? Initially you would certainly be in deep shock and unwilling to believe the reports. Then you would start to gather your wits together, a slow process in itself. After that and depending on individual personality, you might drive over to the Pentagon on the off chance your spouse survived the horrific crash, or you might go home and wait for emergency services to bring you the inevitable bad news. As a matter of record, Ted Olson did not return to work until six days later.
About the last thing on your mind [especially if you happened to be the US Solicitor General], would be to pick up a telephone and call the CNN Atlanta news desk in order to give them a "scoop". As a seasoned politician you would already know that all matters involving national security must first be vetted by the National Security Council. Under the extraordinary circumstances and security overkill existing on September 11, this vetting process would have taken a minimum of two days, and more likely three.
The timing of the CNN news release about Barbara Olson, is therefore...impossible.
http://www.fourwinds10.com/NewsServer/ArticleFunctions/ArticleDetails.php?ArticleID=10794
Theodore Olson: Lying to the public is all right, says Washington's chief lawyer
By Mark Helm, in Washington Sydney Morning Herald, AUMarch 20, 2002
The United States Government's top lawyer has said that officials have the right to lie to American citizens, telling the US Supreme Court that misleading statements are sometimes needed to protect foreign policy interests.
"It's easy to imagine an infinite number of situations where the government might legitimately give out false information," the Solicitor-General, Theodore Olson, told the court on Monday.
"It's an unfortunate reality that the issuance of incomplete information and even misinformation by government may sometimes be perceived as necessary to protect vital interests."
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/mar_2002/lying_to_the_public_okay.htm

Cellphone calls

MIRACLES AND WONDERS 7/28/2004 -Alan Cabal- New York Press
Last week, USA Today reported a joint effort between Qualcomm and American Airlines' to allow passengers to make cellphone calls from aircraft in flight. According to the story, the satellite-based system employs a "Pico cell" to act as a small cellular tower.
"It worked great," gushed Monte Ford, American Airline's chief information officer. "I called the office. I called my wife. I called a friend in Paris. They all heard me great, and I could hear them loud and clear."
Before this new "Pico cell," it was nigh on impossible to make a call from a passenger aircraft in flight. Connection is impossible at altitudes over 8000 feet or speeds in excess of 230 mph.
Yet despite this, passengers Todd Beamer, Mark Bingham, Jeremy Glick and Edward Felt all managed to place calls from Flight 93 on the morning of September 11.
http://www.nypress.com/17/30/news&columns/AlanCabal.cfm

When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing
By William M. ArkinSpecial to washingtonpost.com Monday, Feb. 1, 1999
"Gentlemen! We have called you together to inform you that we are going to overthrow the United States government." So begins a statement being delivered by Gen. Carl W. Steiner, former Commander-in-chief, U.S. Special Operations Command.
At least the voice sounds amazingly like him.
But it is not Steiner. It is the result of voice "morphing" technology developed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.
By taking just a 10-minute digital recording of Steiner's voice, scientist George Papcun is able, in near real time, to clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile. Steiner was so impressed, he asked for a copy of the tape.
Steiner was hardly the first or last victim to be spoofed by Papcun's team members. To refine their method, they took various high quality recordings of generals and experimented with creating fake statements. One of the most memorable is Colin Powell stating "I am being treated well by my captors."
"They chose to have him say something he would never otherwise have said," chuckled one of Papcun's colleagues.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm

Further Indications of Demolition
If you look at videos of the demise of the towers you will notice that as the destruction progressed down the towers there was a "mushrooming" of debris being thrown out beyond the buildings' perimeters. Examine that mushrooming and you will then see that massive quantities of debris are not just being thrown horizontally. There is an upward trajectory to it that could not possibly result from a gravity-only collapse. If the buildings are crumbling downward, what's throwing all that debris up and out?
In the following documentary that trajectory is analyzed. Go 1:19:15 in.http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3498980438587461603

Also in the documentary you can hear explosions prior to the towers collapsing....starting at 44:27 minutes in. The sounds are also analyzed to fix their time relative to collapse and other characterisitics.

William Rodriguez witnesses basement level explosions in the North Tower.
His account:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4380137365762802294

Phillip Morelli witnesses basement level explosions in both towers. Two in Tower 1. He crossed underground to Tower 2 and was met there by another explosion.
http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/underground/morelli.jpg

Joe Shearin on the 38th floor heard a loud explosion and was thrown through the air then witnesses effects of explosions on the 43rd floor and at the lobby level:
"On the 38th floor, Joe Shearin exited the elevator and began his walk down the hallway to meet with the tenant who had requested to see him. About 50 feet down the hallway, he heard a loud explosion and was lifted into the air. "I can't even tell you how far I traveled," he recalled. When he landed, people were already coming out of their offices into the hallway. "They were screaming, hollering," he said. "They were asking what they should do and where they should go". Joe directed them down the stairwells and out of the building.
What Joe first believed was that an equipment room on the 43rd floor, which had an electrical substation, had blown up. He proceeded up the 5 floors to that level. Upon reaching the 43rd floor, "there were patches of ceiling that was just down on the floor, water pipes were broken, water was gushing like a brook or river that was just running down the corridor of the machine room". He began yelling to see if anyone was in the room and received no reply.He made his way to one of the tower's stairways and began the walk down to the lobby. "When I came down the stairwell (to the lobby level) and I looked toward West Street, I just couldn't believe what I saw," he recalled. "There was glass and people cut, covered in blood"."
http://www.chiefengineer.org/article.cfm?seqnum1=1029

Further audio evidence is found on this page which has links to high quality audio files:http://www.mediumrecords.com/wtc/audio01.html

Hearing this audio is VERY intense:
http://www.mediumrecords.com/wtc/southtower-tinity1.aif

This is the audio recording simultaneously matched to 2 different video angles of the tower's collapse:http://www.mediumrecords.com/wtc/southtower.woolworth-trinity.comp.02.mov (quicktime video file)

Frank Cruthers -- Chief (F.D.N.Y.) [Citywide Tour Commander] .. there was what appeared to be at first an explosion. It appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides, materials shot out horizontally. And then there seemed to be a momentary delay before you could see the beginning of the collapse.

From:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_full_01.html

12,000 pages of oral histories rendered in the voices of 503 firefighters, paramedics, and emergency medical technicians, were made public on Aug. 12. The New York Times has published all of them.
The oral histories of dispatch transmissions are transcribed verbatim. They have have not been edited to omit coarse language.
Some examples:

Rich Banaciski -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 22] ... and then I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.(Perimeter columns being blown floor by floor)
Ed Cachia -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 53] we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down. (explosions PRIOR to collapse)

Craig Carlsen -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 8] ... you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions. At the time I didn't realize what it was.

Kevin Darnowski -- Paramedic (E.M.S.) I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and tower two started to come down.

Joseph Meola--Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 91] As we are looking up at the building, what I saw was, it looked like the building was blowing out on all four sides. We actually heard the pops. Didn't realize it was the falling -- you know, you heard the pops of the building. You thought it was just blowing out.

Jay Swithers -- Captain (E.M.S.) I took a quick glance at the building and while I didn't see it falling, I saw a large section of it blasting out, which led me to believe it was just an explosion. I thought it was a secondary device, but I knew that we had to go.

Albert Turi -- Deputy Assistant Chief (F.D.N.Y.) And as my eyes traveled up the building, and I was looking at the south tower, somewhere about halfway up, my initial reaction was there was a secondary explosion, and the entire floor area, a ring right around the building blew out.

Brian Becker -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 28] The collapse hadn't begun, but it was not a fire any more up there. It was like -- it was like that -- like smoke explosion on a tremendous scale going on up there.

Kevin Gorman--Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 22] ... I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes.

Frank Campagna -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Ladder 11] You see three explosions and then the whole thing coming down.

Timothy Burke -- Firefigter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 202] But it seemed like I was going oh, my god, there is a secondary device because the way the building popped. I thought it was an explosion.

Dominick Derubbio -- Battalion Chief (F.D.N.Y.) [Division 8] It was weird how it started to come down. It looked like it was a timed explosion ...

Brian Dixon -- Battalion Chief (F.D.N.Y.) ... the lowest floor of fire in the south tower actually looked like someone had planted explosives around it because the whole bottom I could see -- I could see two sides of it and the other side -- it just looked like that floor blew out. I looked up and you could actually see everything blew out on the one floor. I thought, geez, this looks like an explosion up there, it blew out.
Daniel Rivera -- Paramedic (E.M.S.) [Battalion 31] At first I thought it was -- do you ever see professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear "Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop"? That's exactly what -- because I thought it was that.
Kennith Rogers -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) I figured it was a bomb, because it looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing. I was there in '93.

The recognition by the administration that these facts are getting through to more and more people has prompted an interesting statement by bush that amounts to a trial balloon for how they might spin the explosive implications.
"...Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of planned attacks of buildings inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out.... He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high -- a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping."

This was a scripted statement...not just one of his extemporaneous inanities.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060915-2.html