Here at AE911Truth, we are excited to be producing a new DVD that will present hard-hitting analysis and testimony from more than 45 experts in several fields of study directly related to the destruction of the three WTC skyscrapers on 9/11. The upcoming documentary entitled “9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out” will contain cutting-edge 9/11 evidence from high-rise architects, structural engineers, physicists, chemical engineers, firefighters, metallurgists, explosives experts, controlled demolition technicians, and others. Richard Gage, AIA, will briefly introduce the evidence sections and the experts will provide the details from their individual areas of expertise. All are degreed. Many are licensed. Several have Ph.D’s – including eminent scientist Lynn Margulis, who exposes the fraud of NIST and explains how the scientific method should have been applied.

We also interviewed a half-dozen psychologists who will help us to understand why 9/11 Truth is so difficult for the public to even touch, much less grasp – and what we as activists can do better to reach them. And we will hear from several family members of the 9/11 victims who support AE911Truth in our call for a new investigation.

One of the experts featured in this documentary is Robert McCoy, high-rise architect, who has been licensed in California since 1964 and has worked on the design of many large steel-framed high-rise buildings. He has even corresponded directly with the builders of the WTC complex during its construction. Like many experts, McCoy’s suspicions about the events of 9/11 started almost immediately following the events of that day.

High-Rise Architect Robert McCoy

Robert McCoy

McCoy questioned many aspects of the mechanics involved in the “collapse” of the Twin Towers and Building 7. He discusses in detail the robustness of the buildings’ design, and how sagging of the upper floors would not be sufficient to initiate collapse and bring the buildings down. He also explains the discrepancies between what we might expect to see in a fire-induced gravitational collapse (though more than one hundred fires have never caused the collapse of a skyscraper) and what actually occurred. McCoy explains that in a pancake collapse scenario, “…it’s going to come down in a staccato kind of way … it’s not going to come as a smooth fall … I saw billowing clouds of dust…”

McCoy talks about another critical aspect of the Twin Towers’ design, the massive core columns: “Those columns were probably four times as strong as they needed to be … Now you have this building coming down, and [it was as if] the columns below were simply not there … The buildings accelerated as they were coming down – not getting resistance from these massive columns in the center of the core of [these buildings].”

Turning to Building 7, McCoy notes that a key point surrounding the destruction of Building 7 revolves around NIST’s claim that the building was fully involved in fire, yet photos and video reveal only isolated pockets of fire. McCoy also wonders how the building fell without encountering any resistance until about halfway into its descent “just like a house of cards – I find that a little hard to believe… There’s something about the way those buildings came down that doesn’t add up in my mind.”

Finally, McCoy calmly notes “What I’m looking for is a new investigation, where all of the original information and tests and hypotheses are re-examined, as well as the ones that have surfaced since, including the allegations of controlled demolition.” Referring to his ongoing association with AE911Truth, he states that “I signed the petition for AE911Truth because I felt it was an organization trying to get at the truth of what actually brought those buildings down.”

Chemical Engineer Mark Basile

Mark Basile

Additional forensic evidence is brought to light in the interview with chemical engineer Mark Basile. With 25 years of industry experience in material science, Basile started having serious question about 9/11 right from the beginning. After hearing Dr. Steven Jones speak in 2007, Basile obtained a sample of WTC dust from Janette MacKinlay in order to conduct his own independent set of tests. He began working with the material in January of 2008, and found both the iron-based microspheres and the red/gray chips that Jones and his team had discovered earlier. After considering what experiments to conduct, he created an apparatus to control the energy input to the chips in order to heat them to ignition temperature and analyze the resulting products. Based on his independent analysis of two separate samples of WTC dust, Basile was able to confirm that the red layer of the chips is thermitic in nature, and does indeed produce molten iron spheres. “Others can do the same thing,” he states. “We need a lot more people involved in this work. These chips really shouldn’t be there; they are not a naturally formed agglomeration of aluminum from the aircraft or materials from the building.”

Iron-rich spheres found in WTC dust

Active thermitic materials found in WTC dust

Basile goes on to explain that the material is made up of nano-sized particles, which are very uniform and symmetrical, held together in a silica-based matrix. “If you take these chips and section them before you ignite them, there are no iron microspheres, no iron particles, no iron films contained within these chips. It is only after you bring them up to their ignition point and they go through their thermitic reaction that liquid iron is produced and the energy is released.” Basile explains that these materials do not occur naturally. “I did this because I had questions, and I said the only way I’m ever going to really know is if I get a sample and I do it myself … and I would confirm that this material is thermitic, and it shouldn’t be there.” The other thing to understand here is that this material contains nano-aluminum, a controlled substance. “It’s very difficult to produce in these sizes and keep [it] from reacting … it’s a very difficult-to-make material.”

Red/Gray Chips

“This demands a new investigation,” says Basile. “This is evidence that can’t be refuted by anybody that goes out and gets a sample of the dust and looks for this material – it’s very, very simple.” Of further interest, especially to those who wonder how this type of material could be used for controlled demolition purposes is Basile’s discussion of existing patents. “If you do a Google search for ‘thermite’ and ‘building demolition’, you can find all sorts of devices that have been invented to use thermite for building demolition.” For example, a 1984 patent was issued for thermite cutter charges that could shoot molten iron through structural steel in a fraction of a second.

Eroded wide-flange beam

Basile discusses a FEMA metallurgical study that describes beam fragments found in the debris pile that clearly showed that melting and even evaporation of the steel had taken place. Scientists found that the steel had been attacked by a eutectic mixture of iron oxide and iron sulfide. “No steel should have been melted whatsoever … all the characteristics tell me that thermite was involved in melting those steel beams.”

The startling facts discussed here and many more will be included in the documentary to be released by AE911Truth next September. Never before has there been such a comprehensive documentary, detailing the technical analysis of so many experts who question the official story of 9/11, and who have taken the time to make the results of their painstaking work available to the public.