9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out (4-minute trailer)

    9/11: Explosive Evidence -
    Experts Speak Out - Trailer
    Duration: 4:09

    9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out (58 minute free version)

    9/11: Explosive Evidence
    Experts Speak Out
    Free 1-hour version

    Read it at AE911Truth.org


    Print E-mail

    What Scientists, Engineers, Architects and Media Professionals Are Saying:
    "9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out"

    Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth headed by architect Richard Gage, AIA, has driven the final nail in the coffin of Washington’s concocted conspiracy theory with its new film: “9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out,” and they do speak out. Demolition experts, physicists, chemists, and experts on the design, engineering, and construction of high-rise steel structures provide the scientific, architectural, and engineering reasons that the three World Trade Center buildings could have came down the way they did only with the assistance of explosives. As the buildings were engineered and constructed according to known and tested principles that absolutely prevent rapid collapse, the fire and structural damage that two of the three skyscrapers suffered from airliners could not possibly have caused the sudden disintegration of the three buildings.

    Paul Craig Roberts

    Institute for Political Economy

    Former Assistant Secretary, US Treasury

    Former Associate Editor, Wall Street Journal


    We hear a lot about the opponents of global warming not respecting science or the scientific method. Now with ‘9-11:Explosive Evidence Experts Speak Out’ viewers can see and hear for themselves how the application of the laws of physics and chemistry described by prominent physicists, architects, engineers and scientists in the video provides a very different explanation as to how the WTC towers fell compared to the official story.  I believe that this presentation of scientific evidence and scientific principles regarding the 9/11 attacks deserves to be heard by the American public.

    Andrew Mills Ph.D., PE

    Soil Chemistry/Water Resources Engineering

    My sleeping mind was jolted awake by Griffin’s The New Pearl Harbor. Now Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth have given the world the gift of Truth, so compelling in its display of what must wake all of us who were duped ‘til now. So many men and women of science, that any mature mind must now receive and be grateful to know the truth about this historic, evil calamity.

    Stanley A. Beattie, PE

    Thanks for showing this documentary. It is an eye-opener and a wake-up call. It is great to see that some factual information on the subject is being presented to the public. I appreciate CPT12's ground-breaking effort in airing this material.

    Hamid Mumin Ph.D., P.Eng., P.Geo.

    Brandon University, Manitoba, Canada

    Contrary to the claims of some politicians and pundits that questioning the official account of 9/11 is hurtful to the family members of those who died that day, there are in fact many 9/11 family members who have spent countless hours studying the facts and have come to the conclusion that further investigation is warranted. These family members wholeheartedly support objective scientific analysis of what happened at the World Trade Center—for no other reason than because they want the truth. Several of them were interviewed in this groundbreaking film, so if you’re like me and you cringe when you hear some talking head use “the 9/11 families” to push his or her agenda, I urge you to watch this film and listen to some 9/11 family members speak for themselves about the need for a new investigation.

    Ted Walter

    Founder, NYC Coalition for Accountability Now



    As physicians we are scientists who are trained to listen to patients and ask questions of patients.  We look at data.  We analyze data, which often leads us to more questions.  When we encounter a situation of confusing or conflicting data it behooves us to ask as many questions as are necessary.  In response to the '9-11: Explosive Evidence-Experts Speak Out' documentary it’s imperative that we review and discuss the data and questions presented, from a medical standpoint in particular, pertaining to 9-11 exposure; with it's subsequent lung damage and illness. Upon studying this intriguing documentary, it is obvious that evidence and questions continue to arise leading us to further questions and a need for more concrete data in this case. 

    Len Horovitz, MD

    Lenox Hill Hospital in NYC

    Attending Physician Internist and Pulmonologist

    (Treated many severe lung cases resulting from 9-11 exposure and has turned them over to Mount Sinai where over 8,000 are currently under investigation.)

    If you have eyes to see and ears to hear, "9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out" presents overwhelming, hard evidence that World Trade Center Towers WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 were brought down by controlled demolition

    This excellent documentary clearly and concisely demonstrates that the government and media stories about the events of 9/11 are false and have badly misled the American people

    ESO also presents interviews with a dozen psychologists, providing wonderful insight into why so many Americans do not want to have eyes to see and ears to hear the Truth about the events of 9/11. This is Truth derived from scientific method, not the barrel-of-a-gun "truth" told by the US empire's government and media minions to justify endless war profits and murder for the criminal central bankers who plan and fund all wars

    Rich McCampbell, PE, BSChemE

    The keyword in the title of this documentary is not "experts." Everyone with relevant expertise who has studied the issues knows that the WTC skyscrapers were brought down in controlled demolitions. At least, no architect or engineer has ever presented and defended the official story before an assembly of peers

    Rather, the keyword in the title is "speak." The lies of 9/11 have had a poisoning effect on our societies and the first thing to go was free speech. But this documentary features 43 experts who still dare to speak. Listen to their testimonies. The truth will set you free

    Dr. Niels Harrit,

    Associate Professor of Chemistry, Nano-Science Center, University of Copenhagen

    Lead author of “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe,” published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal in 2009


    I am a registered professional engineer and I have not only watched "Experts Speak Out" several times, I have also previewed it with groups of people of various backgrounds. The overwhelming consensus is that it is a very compelling documentary with many experts talking frankly about the laws of physics and how they don't support the official story (of planes and fires completely destroying three skyscrapers all the way down to their basements)

    I especially like the inclusion of psychologists and therapists talking about why it is such a hard story to hear and accept. In my experience, showing this documentary helps explain to people why the world seems to have "gone off the rails." To many, it seems that way because the "blather" we have been told doesn't make any sense. It is refreshing to see expert opinion bringing us back to reality

    I recommend that everybody watch this and then share it

    Wayne Coste, PE

    Experts Speak Out issues a stunning challenge to the U.S. government’s account of 9/11. The experts interviewed in this film are serious people, and they speak on the basis of their scientific training and their professional experience. They make it clear that we have been very poorly served by those assigned the task of investigating "the crime of the century." If you care about what really happened on 9/11, please see this film

    Graeme MacQueen, Ph.D. (Harvard),

    Associate Professor, Religious Studies (Ret.)

    Member, Steering Committee of the (Toronto) International Hearings on the Events of September 11, 2001


    WTC 7 was (grudgingly) acknowledged by NIST as falling more than 100 feet with near-total symmetry at absolute freefall. Freefall of any object is impossible if there is any other object in its path. Freefall requires that any supporting structure be removed by some outside force. NIST acknowledged this as well

    No peer-reviewed paper addresses the collapse mechanism WTC 7 and supports the official conspiracy theory. All papers on the subject support the controlled demolition hypothesis. Less than 20 papers have been found (so far) that support the official theory – all focused on WTC 1 and 2; however, a core subset of these depends on a physically implausible one-dimensional model; others admit inconsistencies with basic observations

    The only peer-reviewed papers that provide a physically plausible mechanism for collapse of WTC 1, 2, or 7 are papers that conclude with controlled demolition – a result consistent with the fact that in over 100 years, no high-rise steel frame building has ever collapsed from fire alone

    I strongly recommend that Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth be allowed to share their evidence-based results in every relevant forum

    Timothy E. Eastman, Ph.D., Physics

    Group Manager for Space Science Support

    Heliospheric Physics Laboratory

    NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

    In 2009 I retired from the California Highway Patrol as a sergeant after serving thirty years as a public servant. I attained a Bachelor of Science degree in criminal justice from California State University at Los Angeles. I received many accolades for serving bravely including a medal of valor from past California Governor George Deukmejian. 

    I don’t possess any supernatural deductive reasoning skills due to my long career in law enforcement, but I have honed my degree of common sense to a sharp edge. I signed the AE911Truth’s petition while still actively protecting and serving the people of California because I intuitively recognized the falsity of the claims that a real investigation was conducted using all the evidence available.

    Any American can attain the needed reasoning skills to come to a conclusion that differs from that proffered by NIST after just one viewing of "9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out."

    John Meaders, CHP Sergeant, Ret

    Scientists for 9/11 Truth fully endorses Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth's latest film, "9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out." This film presents the main scientific evidence that three New York World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11 were destroyed by some form of controlled demolition. Scientists for 9/11 Truth is a group of highly qualified international scientists whose members have contributed to the science underlying the film's presentations. See our website, www.scientistsfor911truth.org, for scientific papers and videos that support Architects & Engineers' excellent documentary film

    John Wyndham, PhD Physics (Radio Astronomy),

    Cambridge University

    Organizing Member and Coordinator, Scientists for 9/11 Truth


    It is a shame when credible scientists, architects, and engineers are banned from presenting evidence just because it is deemed “too controversial.” Open the dialogue, stop the censorship. Let the chips fall where they may

    Abby Martin

    Founder of Media Roots

    Anchor and Journalist at RT TV


    With the release of Experts Speak Out, it's no longer be possible to keep portraying those who question the official account of 9/11 as being "on the fringe." Scientists, engineers, architects and demolition engineers present the evidence regarding the horrific and lethal destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7 with a clarity that enables any person of normal intelligence to understand it. Now we just need to get enough of the people in power to understand it – and do something about it

    Kevin Ryan

    Underwriters Laboratories Whistleblower

    Co-editor of the Journal of 9/11 Studies,


    I'm a police officer (now retired) from New Jersey. I volunteered in the World Trade Center triage center during the horrific 9/11 tragedy. I think the entire series of events that transpired on 9/11/2001 has come into great question. These questions demand honest answers and true investigation. To this date, these questions have yet to be adequately addressed by the government, Popular Mechanics, or NOVA. Much of what we have come to publicly accept was put out even before the final official government reports were published – and didn't even include WTC 7.

    In addition, the final government reports present a different theory than these programs. The official 9/11 reports' conclusions defy the laws of physics

    and their rhetoric insults the intelligence of law enforcement officers.

    In contrast, the testimonies included in the documentary Experts Speak Out are overwhelmingly accurate and must be recognized.  Please consider airing this excellent documentary in the interest of truth, fairness, and journalistic integrity

    Police Officer Anthony Mercadante (Ret.)

    "9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out" is a highly credible joint statement by scores of expert witnesses supporting the fact that the collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7 on 9/11 could not have been the result of natural causes. We were not told the truth about 9/11 and we need a true, fully empowered, independent investigation. This video needs to be seen by everyone. It is not "just another" 9/11 video. It is a courageous act of whistleblowing by people who have put their professional credibility on the line for Truth

    David Chandler, Physics Instructor


    First, thank you for doing this. On our present foreign policy trajectory, the natural conclusion will be WWIII! The enabling event for the present sorry state of our beloved nation was 9/11

    We must begin to walk back from the precipice of continuous and escalating war

    We can do this best by following a cheesy "one-liner":


    You are helping to do this..... BRAVO

    John Mizzi, PE

    911 Explosive Evidence: Experts Speak Out Documentary

    "The scientifically puerile Government Commission Report on 911 has all the intellectual heft of a four year old's fib. Not wanting to be punished for taking all the cookies out of a locked cookie jar, whose key he had stolen, he obstinately contends that a monster came, reached through the glass of the cookie jar without braking it, took the cookies, brought them out through the glass of the jar, again without breaking it, and flew off in a space ship that could go faster than light

    The childish Government fibs about the 911 are not fibs, but the lies about mass murderer. To call this scientifically impossible and absurd presentation that is the 911 Government Report the truth of the matter is to stand with the murderers. Watch 911 Explosive Evidence: Experts Speak Out. Then discern the truth for yourself and  decide with whom you will stand

    If you find 911 Explosive Evidence:Experts Speak Out to be a presentation of truth, then please respectfully request that PBS and any Peace and Justice organization to which you belong show it. People cannot chose what they do not know. Keeping people in the dark only assures further darkness To suppress truth in this matter is, again, to stand with the murderers."

    Emmanuel Charles McCarthy

    Rev. Emmanuel Charles McCarthy is a priest of the Eastern Rite (Byzantine-Melkite) of the Catholic Church in communion with the Bishop of Rome, the Pope. He was ordained on August 9, 1981, in Damascus, Syria, by Patriarch Maximos V. He has served as Spiritual Director and Rector of St. Gregory the Theologian Byzantine Melkite Catholic Seminary and is presently a Retreat Director. Formerly a lawyer and a university educator, he is the founder and the original director of The Program for the Study and Practice of Nonviolent Conflict Resolution at the University of Notre Dame in South Bend, Indiana, USA. He is also co-founder, along with Dorothy Day, Gordon Zahn and others of Pax Christi-USA.

    Praise for the work of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth:

    • Harry Robinson III

      Harry Robinson III

      FAIA, Architect

      The collapse was too symmetrical to have been eccentrically generated. The destruction was symmetrically initiated to cause the buildings to implode as they did.
    • Dan Barnum

      Dan Barnum

      FAIA, High-Rise Architect

      The tops of the buildings were basically disintegrated. I have ‘known’ from day-one that the buildings were imploded and that they could not and would not have collapsed from the damage caused by the airplanes that ran into them.
    • Paul Stevenson Oles, FAIA

      Paul Stevenson Oles, FAIA

      FAIA, High-Rise Architect

      There appear too many unexplained events and unverified circumstances to be satisfied with the official version of the New York building collapses… a thorough and impartial investigation by an independent, well-funded commission is fully merited.
    • Kevin A. Kelly, FAIA

      Kevin A. Kelly, FAIA

      FAIA, High-Rise Architect

      The presentation made by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth at the AIA convention in San Francisco made a sufficient case that a new investigation into the collapses of the 3 high rise buildings on 9/11/01 would be worthwhile.
    • Steven Dusterwald

      Steven Dusterwald

      37-Year S.E. Structural Engineer

      What caught my attention was the rapid failure of connections that had to happen in order for Building 7 to come down at the rate that it did.
    • Rick Fowlkes

      Rick Fowlkes

      P.E., 40-Year Civil/Structural Engineer

      On Sept. 11 when I saw the Twin Towers coming down, I knew that it had to be controlled demolitions we were witnessing.
    • Robert McCoy

      Robert McCoy

      High-Rise Architect

      I signed the petition for AE911Truth because I felt it was an organization that was trying to get at the truth of what actually brought those buildings down on 9/11.
    • Roland Angle

      Roland Angle

      P.E., Civil/Structural Engineer

      What really concerns me is we're beginning to live in a society that is rebellious against science. It's important that all of us with the technical expertise speak out on the 9/11 issue.
    • Alfred Lopez

      Alfred Lopez

      S.E. Structural Engineer

      In Building 7, we have a total collapse against 40,000 tons of structural steel at free-fall acceleration, and that doesn't make sense.
    • Kamal Obeid

      Kamal Obeid

      S.E. Structural Engineer

      Structural engineers and other building professionals need to understand that these buildings did not fail the way they are claimed to have failed.
    • William Brinnier

      William Brinnier

      25-Year Architect

      Not hit by a plane, with small fires and little damage from debris, there was just no logical explanation for Building 7 to come straight down through what was the path of greatest resistance in under 7 seconds.
    • Tom Sullivan

      Tom Sullivan

      Explosives Technician Former Controlled Demolitions, Inc. Employee

      I knew from day one this was a controlled event. What I saw was a classic implosion. The center of the core; the penthouse area starts to move first, and then the rest of the building follows along with it.
    • Jody Gibbs

      Jody Gibbs

      35-Year Architect

      The Twin Towers fell at a speed which can only occur if the vertical structure has been removed.
    • Richard Humenn

      Richard Humenn

      P.E., Original WTC Chief Electrical Design Engineer

      Knowing the strength of the structures, it was unbelievable to me that plane impacts and fuel burning would be the only reason for the Twin Towers to collapse. The only way they could have collapsed was if the core columns were compromised.
    • Frank Cullinan

      Frank Cullinan

      P.E., Civil Engineer

      It was shocking how fast the buildings collapsed. Tens of thousands of structural connections had to fail not only nearly simultaneously, but in sequential order.
    • Anthony Szamboti

      Anthony Szamboti

      B.S.M.E., Mechanical Engineer

      The tons of molten metal under just the three WTC buildings that collapsed made me realize that what we're being told about how they collapsed is false.
    • Gery Warner

      Gery Warner

      P.E. Mechanical Engineer

      Molten aluminum is silver. It looks like mercury. The molten metal pouring out of the South Tower is indicative of molten iron, not aluminum.
    • William Rice

      William Rice

      P.E., Civil/Structural Engineer

      Watching Building 7 collapse in under 7 seconds, after watching the Twin Towers collapse, I think most anyone would recognize these as controlled demolitions.
    • Scott Grainger

      Scott Grainger

      P.E., Forensic Fire Protection Engineer

      Structural steel frame high-rise buildings simply do not collapse due to fire.
    • Ed Munyak

      Ed Munyak

      P.E., 25-Year Fire Protection and Mechanical Engineer

      Even one global collapse would have been extraordinary, but to have 3 occur in one day was just beyond comprehension.
    • David Chandler

      David Chandler

      B.S Physics, M.S. Mathematics

      People with scientific and engineering backgrounds are looking at the 3 WTC collapses, and what they see is very definite evidence of explosive demolition, as opposed to a "natural" catastrophe.
    • Jerry Lobdill

      Jerry Lobdill

      B.S.Ch.E., Physicist/Chemical Engineer

      All the eyewitness testimony and video evidence supports only controlled demolition as the cause of destruction for all 3 WTC buildings.
    • Robert Podolsky

      Robert Podolsky

      M.S., Physicist/Engineer

      All 3 WTC buildings fell way faster than they would have had there been any resistance from the lower part of the building.
    • Niels Harrit

      Niels Harrit

      Ph.D., Chemistry

      A new investigation is needed that includes looking for remaining explosives and thermitic materials in the WTC dust.
    • Robert Kim Ireland

      Robert Kim Ireland

      B.S.Ch.E., Chemical Engineer

      3 buildings collapsed on 9/11 but there were only 2 planes, that means the third building, WTC 7, had to collapse for some other reason.
    • Jason Cheshire

      Jason Cheshire

      B.S.Ch.E., Chemical Engineer/Metallurgist

      1400º hot spots at the WTC for over a week indicates that there was something very hot going on below the surface.
    • Kathy McGrade

      Kathy McGrade

      B.S., Materials Engineering

      In an office fire, you cannot generate enough heat to melt steel.
    • Mark Basile

      Mark Basile

      B.S.Ch.E., 25 Years in Materials Analysis

      I've independently seen thermitic activity within 2 separate independent samples of world trade center dust. All of the characteristics of the micro-spheres tell me that thermite was used in melting those steel beams.
    • Adam Parrott

      Adam Parrott

      B.S.Ch.E., Chemical Engineering

      When the USGS collected samples of the World Trade Center dust, they found the presence of these microspheres of iron in all of the samples. The USGS does not have a valid explanation for the presence of these iron microspheres.
    • Jeffrey Farrer

      Jeffrey Farrer

      Ph.D., Materials Science Engineer / M.S. Physics

      Our conclusions were that the red/gray chips were some form of thermite or nano thermite. The finding of aluminum in the steel samples also supports the theory that thermite was used to melt the steel.
    • Steven Jones

      Steven Jones

      Ph,D., Physicist, Former Brigham Young Univ. Professor

      Molten metal in the basements of all three buildings. What is this molten metal? Direct evidence of the use of thermite.
    • David Gregg

      David Gregg

      Ph.D., Chemical Engineer 30 years at Livermore Laboratories

      The only way that's known that a carbonaceous material can cause steel, or iron oxide to turn into a molten metal is in a blast furnace. And that's very different than what we had.
    • Kevin Ryan

      Kevin Ryan

      B.S. Chemistry, Former Mgr. Underwriters Laboratories

      Thermite -if it was present at the World Trade Center, and created this molten metal that so many witnesses and photographic evidence shows would also explain potentially the fact that fires could not be put out at Ground Zero.
    • Bob Bowman

      Bob Bowman

      Ph.D., Lt. Col. USAF Ret.

      When I saw the Twin towers fall down I knew this could not happen, those airplanes and those fires could not cause the buildings to come down the way they did.
    • Lynn Margulis

      Lynn Margulis

      Ph.D, Professor, University of MA

      The WTC buildings came down because they were very carefully controlled demolitions with high-explosives that had to be planted many weeks, if not months, in advance.
    • Steve Luce

      Steve Luce

      Former US Army Combat Engineer

      The ejection of building materials out of the sides of the buildings, and the manner and speed at which they fell, exhibited all the signs of controlled demolition.
    • Les Young

      Les Young

      High-Rise Architect

      Building 7 had not been hit by a plane. The fact that it fell in on itself in just six seconds in a classic controlled-demolition fashion left no doubt in my mind that something was wrong.
    • Steve Barasch

      Steve Barasch

      High-Rise Architect

      Buildings just don't behave like that. If floors fall, they tend to fall and are braced by the floor directly beneath it. And there is some delay there.
    • Ronald Brookman

      Ronald Brookman

      S.E. Structural Engineer

      As a structural engineer I don't believe that the failure of one column would normally bring down an entire building in the way we saw World Trade Center 7 come down because of redundancy, because of all the other columns in the building that were not affected.
    • Joel Miller

      Joel Miller


      It appears to me that there's compelling evidence that all three of the world trade center buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. There is not only video evidence, but there is physical evidence as well.
    • Erik Lawyer

      Erik Lawyer


      There were all kinds of firefighters and civilians that were reporting explosions. Just the fact that there were explosions means they need to be investigated.
    • Michael Donly

      Michael Donly

      P.E. 14-year Structural Engineer

      There's not enough time for the building to collapse in the way NIST tells us it collapsed.
    • Jonathan Smolens

      Jonathan Smolens

      S.E. Structural Engineer

      A building cannot do free fall with a huge steel structural system in place to support it without being blown up.
    • David Topete

      David Topete

      S.E. Structural Engineer

      For World Trade Center 7 to collapse straight down upon itself as the video indicates, as everything that we've witnessed, the supports at the center essentially all had to be taken out at once.
    • Casey Pfeiffer

      Casey Pfeiffer

      S.E. Structural Engineer

      Even if a floor were to collapse it still wouldn't be able to collapse all of the connections simultaneously at the rate that it did without secondary explosions.
    • William Cundiff

      William Cundiff

      P.E., Structural Engineer

      The speed at which the buildings fell should be the most obvious and least technical indication that explosives were used. Most engineers as well as non-technical people should be able to grasp this.
    • Kevin Kelly

      Kevin Kelly

      FAIA, Architect

      The presentation made by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth at the AIA Convention in San Francisco made a sufficient case that a new investigation into the destruction of the 3 skyscrapers on 9/11/01 would be worthwhile.
    • Pedro Buccellato

      Pedro Buccellato

      High-Rise Architect

      I believe that all the evidence made available by AE911Truth proves beyond any doubt that explosives were used to bring down the towers as many people concluded from the outset, simply from visual evidence and knowledge of basic physics.