Some things just don't scale. You can't expect your blocks to behave like a half million ton building raised one quarter mile tall in the air.

A fly can walk on water because the surface tension of water at the fly's size and weight is stronger than steel. However, anything larger or heavier than a fly breaks through the surface tension, thus you can't build a large scale model of a fly (out of plywood or rubber) and expect it to be able to skim the surface of water like a fly. (You might be able to build something that FLOATS, but this is not the same thing. Floating breaks through the surface tension, a fly actually walks on the surface.)

By all evidence of our sight, the upper stories of the WTC towers ground through the floors below without encountering any significant resistance. That is to say, the building ground itself to smithereens from the top down, just we can clearly see on the videos. This is true whether you think the supports simply failed, as in the pancake collapse theory, or whether you think the supports were taken out by explosives. In either case, we can see that it was the weight of the falling floors that ground the building to pieces, NOT any putative explosives.

To make the point absolutely clear: what you're really talking about is a THIRD theory, that the building was BLOWN UP. This is not the demolition theory, which only requires that the supports be knocked out by explosives. To blow up and pulverize each floor in turn requires MASSIVELY more explosives than does the demolition theory, and thus is even more impossible to believe than the demolition theory.

In short, it was the fall and nothing else that pulverized the building. Your 'evidence' is crap.

...is what pulverized the towers. Explosives are not needed to explain what happened.

Straw accelerated to 300 mph by tornadoes can embed itself into trees. This is a consequence of Newton's law: force = mass * acceleration. The straw is light, but when thrown at high enough speeds, it has enough force to penetrate solid trees.

Here we have a half million tons accelerated to 125 mph. You think maybe this mass might NOT pulverize itself to powder when it hits the ground? What do you think would happen to your mere one or two ton car if it smashed into a solid wall at 125 mph?

If explosives were used, they were only used to knock out the building supports, not to pulverize the building. The pulverization occurred when the building hit the ground and thus cannot be evidence of explosives.

However, I find it impossible to beleive that explosives were used, thus I can only conclude that the towers collapsed through structural failure.

...applies to when it finally hit the ground.

Halfway up the tower, it would have been something like a quarter million tons crashing through the floors below at something like 50 mph. I'd say that's probably enough to pulverize the floors and thus no explosives are needed to explain what happened.

Really, if you think about it, explosives that could have pulverized each floor in turn would have likely created very visible and continuous blasts of fire, and the ejected debris would have shot out at high velocities at practically right angles for a considerable distance over Manhattan. Explosives go 'boom,' remember? But that's not what we saw. What we saw were buildings crumbling from the top down.

...as to my intelligence.

The towers began pulverizing immediately because the collapses started with the weight of several stories above: about 33 stories for the South Tower and about 17 for the North. Why wouldn't they start grinding up right away? Any ten or 30 story building that starts to collapse is going to start pulverizing at the bottom.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:World_Trade_Center_9-11_Att.png

More generally, look at it this way: the towers collapsed in something like ten to 15 seconds. Take ten because the math is easy. That means that, on average, something like ten floors collapsed in one second. It was slower at the beginning and faster at the end, but the average was ten floors per second.

Ten floors! And those were huge floors. I was in the WTC observation area years ago and I recall what a vast space it was. Just intuitively think of ten floors of those towers collapsing in one second. Just say, "One thousand and one"--that makes a second, and now ten floors have crashed through each other. Dude, it's going to pulverize itself. You don't need a bomb to pulverize the floors. Ten floors smashing together in one second is like a bomb right there.

I think that disposes of the massively exploding floors theory. All that remains now is the question of whether the floors collapsed because the supports failed or because the supports were blown out by explosives. I believe that because of the light construction of the WTC towers, there's every reason to believe that the supports failed. Simply put, the floors were only engineered to hold their own weight and nothing more. Once the floors failed, then the supporting columns failed as well, because it was the floors that held the whole structure rigid.

If there's any conspiracy, it's a conspiracy of engineers and builders to not admit that the WTC towers may not have been built in the safest possible manner.

...doesn't answer the case.

What needs to be dropped is a half million ton block from one quarter mile high. Oh, and make that block 95 percent air. This should pulverize pretty good, I'll bet.