The Demise of the Twin Towers on 9/11 & the Beam Weapon Theory


By: Veronica Chapman

November, 2006



The Beam Weapon Theory is the proposed hypothesis to explain the 'demise' of WTC1 & WTC2 on 9/11.


Transcript of a discussion about this hypothesis, relative to Prof. Steven Jones’ thermite/thermate’ hypothesis, here.


It is the only theory that has been put forward which attempts to explain all the verifiable forensic evidence, including:


1)     Demise of the Towers at speeds mathematically calculated to approach - very closely - the time for Free-Fall in a vacuum (9 - 10 seconds, approximately), even though the Towers stood in air of course, and therefore should have taken 12 – 13 seconds at the barest minimum,


2) Large 'bites' taken out of surrounding buildings (some almost completely circular),


3) Holes 'bitten' into the streets,


4) 'Toasted' cars,


5) Pulverisation to fine (toxic) dust of the concrete, steel, asbestos, filing cabinets, computer desk & equipment, and much of the organic material (i.e. people) - of (what is probably) roughly 75% of each Tower,


6) BUT - following on from (5), above - PAPER is left undamaged, so as to flutter all over Manhattan.


7) Retained protection of the WTC Complex Bathtub.


The theory starts from observations & data based the 7th aspect, above.


Manhattan is a island in the Hudson River, which flows either side of it. The WTC Complex is quite close to the waterfront, opposite New Jersey. So close, in fact, that it needs to be protected by what is known as the Bathtub. This acts like an underground 'levee' or 'dyke', to keep the sub terra parts (7 levels of Sub-Basements) of the Complex 'dry'.


There is also a system of underground trains that connect Manhattan with New Jersey. These are known as PATH Trains (Port Authority Trans-Hudson Trains). Rupturing these would also flood Manhattan. (They surface inside the Bathtub).


The point is that 9/11 was, indeed, a Psy-op, but only to bring down the WTC Complex (which was, by the way, condemned in 1989, because of the asbestos, and the galvanic erosion problems. It was given 12 more years of existence, and would have cost over $5 million to repair. In 1989 the WTC Complex became a White Elephant. The only safe method was to dismantle the Towers piece by piece, which would have cost more than building them in the first place … because now the asbestos would have had to have been considered).


The 9/11 perps needed to bring down the complex, but not to flood ManhattanNew Orleans was the target for the 'flooding' Psy-op.


If the Towers had been brought down by 'standard' Controlled Demolitions, then (it has been calculated that) the result would have registered 3.8 on the Richter Scale per Tower (based on the height and mass, etc. of each Tower). Even one collapse, at this level, would have decimated the Bathtub, and flooded Manhattan Island.


How, then, to destroy the buildings (blaming Arabs) without damaging the Bathtub?


The next stage of the argument moves to Seattle. Where data is available in respect of the Controlled Demolition of the Seattle Kingdome.


The Kingdome was ONE QUARTER the mass of each Tower. It was circular, and had a WIDER FOOTPRINT than each Tower (so the weight was spread over a larger area), and was only about as high as the 20th Floor of the Towers. The Towers sat on bedrock, whereas the Kingdome sat on a much softer, less rigid, foundation.


Furthermore the 'Centre of Mass' of each Tower was roughly 7˝ times higher than that of the Kingdome. The 'Centre of Mass' can be looked as 'the average height from which the entire mass of the building has been dropped'. Everyone knows that the higher something is dropped, the harder it hits, when it reaches the ground.


When the Kingdome was demolished, it registered 2.3 on the Richter Scale.


When WTC1 'disappeared of the face of Planet Earth' it registered 2.3 on the Richter Scale.


A few minutes before that, WTC2 'disappeared', registering 2.1.




How did they manage to minimise the demise of each Tower such that it registered such small ground shakes (relatively speaking, of course)? A ground shake equal - in one case - to that of the Seattle Kingdome … of ONE QUARTER the size & mass?


The answer is 'by dissolving the top THREE QUARTERS of each building'. Yes - DISSOLVING. Into the fine toxic dust that anyone who has looked at the pictures, or seen the videos (e.g. 911Eyewitness) can see only too well.


The lower 20 (or so) floors were more or less equivalent to the Kingdome. They were demolished by 'conventional' means (could even be Steven Jones' 'thermate' … who knows?) in order to provide sufficient 'debris' … such that no-one would 'notice' that there was nothing to show for the upper 70+ floors.


It was these lower floors that created the seismic readings.


So that explains the way the Towers were brought down, in accordance with the known (and verified) data measurements.


Now … you explain how to DISSOLVE (so that it simply blows away on the wind), THREE QUARTERS of a steel-framed high rise.


Your explanation needs to take into account the circular holes in the buildings & streets, and the 'toasted' cars … some up to ˝ mile away.


WTC1 & WTC2 were not 'demolished'. They were 'destroyed' … basically they were 'dissolved'.


Profs. Judy Wood & Morgan Reynolds have made an attempt to explain this 'destruction' here.


Maybe you can do better?


Feel free to Google "directed energy weapon", and see how many hits you get.


The top one will probably be this.


Direct-energy Weapons are basically high-power Microwaves.


The PAPER? Well, consider what happens to paper (and card, and plastic) when you put it into a Microwave Oven. The FOOD warms up (equivalent to 'people'), but the paper, card or plastic container is unaffected..


Maybe this also explains the 'jumpers'. Were they being cooked …from the inside (just like a Microwave Oven works)?


The theory is that energy was directed at the Towers. This was chosen to 'resonate' on a molecular level with steel, concrete, and all the major materials (there is plenty of evidence for more than one beam … one for each major material).


Don't bother to ask "How much energy would that take". The answer is "Are the Towers still standing?"


Don't bother to ask (as Prof. Steven Jones does) "Where did the energy come from?" . Steven Jones knows full well where it comes from. Read up on Nikola Tesla. It is possible he worked on the very device that was used, during his time at Los Alamos. YOU CAN REST ASSURED THAT THE *MANHATTAN* PROJECT HAS COME A LONG WAY SINCE THE 1940s.