As Anonymous Physicist and I have written about extensively (AP should be given credit for the key insights), the best explanation for what happened at the WTC on 9/11 is a nuclear demolition.There's no question that the official collapse mechanism is complete bunk-- which clearly means there was some sort of demolition of the towers.
Conventional explosives are ruled out, due to the simple fact that the destruction was too extreme for normally placed demolition explosives, and it is very unlikely that enough conventional charges could be placed in the towers without detection. Thermite, or nano-thermite, suffers from the same flaw-- actually even more so, since thermitic agents have even less explosive power than conventional demolition. Beam weapons have some appeal as being able to explain the WTC destruction phenomenon, but only because beam weapons propose an unknown technology. The major problem with beam weapons being used at the WTC is the fact that so much energy was required for the demolition, and it is nearly impossible to imagine this energy being transmitted through the air, all in a matter of seconds. Further, the towers looked to be blowing up from WITHIN, not from without-- particularly given how the sequences started for both towers. Small nuclear bombs fits the scenario extremely well-- the extreme efficiency and power of the destruction, the apparent vaporization of the building contents and people, as well as the phenomenon of the extremely hot rubble pile for months.
But still... even nuclear demolition has a problem. The problem is this: for much of the WTC demolition, there are no obvious fireballs or extremely large, bright flashes that would be expected for the detonation of many small nukes. Generally I have said the nukes went off deep in the center of the towers, and the flashes were shielded by the resulting debris. The problem however, I think, is that any nuke or set of nukes that were powerful enough to vaporize so much inside the towers-- and we know there was vaporization-- would have been large enough to produce a significant large flash.
What we do see is:
1) large clouds of debris/dust ejected ahead of the demolition waves and then thick volcanic clouds subsequent to the tower coming apart
2) a very large fireball at the onset of the WTC1 demolition, at the "collapse" point
3) a few small bright flashes in the tower just prior to the WTC2 demolition, near subsequent breakpoints
4) a significant amount of dripping molten material in the tower just prior to the WTC2 demolition, near subsequent breakpoints
5) many many very small bright flashes in the dust clouds during WTC1 demolition
My feeling has long been that some sort of mechanism essentially turned the insides of the towers to complete mush before the "collapse" phase. Essentially, we see the top of the towers plowing down, as if through water, driving up the lower portions of the tower in massive waves.
How to explain this?
I have no friggin' idea! All I can do is invoke an unknown technology. But I don't think a "beam weapon" can account for the destruction at all.
One possibility is that there were some medium and small and micro nukes, associated with the bright flashes described-- that account for some of the destruction and the then the China Syndrome-- but that there was some other key mechanism involved in disintegrating the towers. What could this other mechanism be? A special type of nuclear explosive device that doesn't produce visible light, perhaps? One that also produces relatively