Thanks for taking the time for your extensive reply, Simon.
I do, however, still find it impossible to believe that post-event photography in front of the eyes of the world could have been that controlled. Your suggestion:
Perhaps, EMP/HERF devices ensured that no photography was possible (during the notoriously rapid timeframe of the rubble disposal).
needs to be re-thought because frankly it sounds pretty feeble. Maybe you'd like to elaborate on how this technology works on the mixture of digital and film recording devices in use at that time.
The clearly fabricated pictures of the rubble were interesting but not a propos
. My argument was that no rubble existed because no rubble existed, not that someone had f*kd up a composite picture showing rubble and firemen.
I would apologize to others for apparently being in breach of protocol and mentioning off-site research. I would... but I won't because I really don't believe that such research and perspectives have been given their proper due, neither here nor elsewhere. What's worse, I find it deplorable that criticism of this particular scientist's work is attacked both in this thread and in a second one in this forum ad hominem
. You don't know how poorly this all makes you look.
Furthermore, and getting directly back to the topic, the taking down of all three skyscrapers in the WTC would have presented a MAJOR problem for the owners. As detailed in this thread, they were, by all appearances, enormous white elephants.
But not just that. They needed to be cleaned off this prime real estate and the job had to be done without damaging costly surrounding buildings. This is an absolutely essential consideration.
How, in fact, do you take down 110 story skyscrapers in the middle of Manhattan? How do you ensure that they fall into their footprint? The risk of their toppling over in a controlled demolision, especially after initial explosions on the upper floors, is inconceivably great.
I find the idea of destructive energy technology compelling as it is simply the type of weaponry one would think that the US quite capable of developing under the trillion dollars plus that had been poured into Star Wars research over the previous decades.
Finally, I find it ironic that so-called proof is given in this forum via photographic evidence (e.g., shots showing interiors of WTC suites, which really could be taken anywhere). An outsider could well question why he or she should believe your (i.e., the forum members') photos when the same techniques for photoshopping that you rightly draw attention to in faked images are also available to any contributor here.
The bottom line, it seems to me, is an assessment of whether people are acting in good faith. Ad hominem attacks, straw man arguments, and an immediate threat to ban me from this forum for only speaking what I believe to be possible and not possible, have left me to wonder whether I am, indeed, wasting my time here.
... and that despite my also believing that you have come up with some of the most interesting research on 9-11 to date.