Like others, I'm confused.
For one thing, not to be uncharitable, but coming to a forum and presenting ideas you don't believe (but pretend to believe) yourself, in order to observe the reactions they provoke -- isn't that pretty much the definition of trolling?
As for the theory itself... what's the connection to the iron sphericles? Are we to conjecture that the perchlorate reaction reached sufficiently high temperatures to melt the steel, which then atomized into fine droplets during the collapse? If so, given that the perchlorate covered large a large surface area of the steel, why were vastly greater amounts of sphericles not produced?
(I'm interested in the actual iron sphericle concentration and size distribution in the dust near ground zero because it also is part of falsifying demolition-by-thermite. Large amounts of thermite would have been required, most of which would have already been converted to its reaction products, molten iron and solidified aluminum oxide spray, by the time collapse reached a given thermite charge. That's because if a thermite reaction is still going on when collapse occurs at that location, you've used more thermite than needed, increasing the risk of detection as many tons more material must be brought in and placed beforehand. A 25% excess might be reasonable to allow for unexpected factors, but not more than that. Therefore, at collapse, at least 75% of the iron from thermite must already exist, either as solidified droplets (where the molten iron was able to free-fall, such as down elevator shafts), already-solidified puddles or streams, or still in molten form. Any iron that was molten when collapse reached it would be atomized into fine droplets which would then solidify extremely rapidly, before the collapse was complete, creating iron sphericles of a certain distribution of sizes. Any of these iron products would have been easy to recognize in the debris after collapse.)
----------
Finally, in the spirit of alternative theories, I have an alternative theory of my own, which I do not believe in, but which makes more sense than the usual CD theory (CD used to assure collapse in case the plane impacts alone weren't enough). That is to say, it fixes some (but not all) of the main flaws in the CD theory, while adding a smaller number of new flaws of its own.
Call it the "deadweight projectile" theory: the towers were brought down by inert (that is, non-explosive) smart bombs, of about 100 tons each, either launched ballistically or dropped from high-flying aircraft. The deadweights struck the towers dead center, penetrating and damaging the cores from the upper floors downward for 20-30 floors to initiate collapse. (If there's doubt that enough damage could be caused that way, the damage wrought on WTC7 by falling deadweight debris from the towers, with smaller and less compact masses at slower speeds, should dispel it. In fact it was the "gouge" in WTC7 that inspired this theory.)
The terminal velocity that such projectiles would reach would make them very difficult to see from the ground, especially with the smoke. The noise of the impacts, while considerable, would be less than required for explosive detonations, and would be intepreted as part of the noise of the collapse itself.
Since rocket launches are difficult to hide from snooping foreign powers, dirigibles large enough would attract attention even when flying high, and the largest artillery shells ever fired were only about 7 tons, the most likely deployment scenario for large deadweight projectiles is dropping them from 747s.
The problem of disposing of the projectile afterward is solved by making the projectile a hollow shell filled with thermite, rather than a solid mass. This would have only a small effect on the projectile's effectiveness. Its density would be less than that of a solid iron mass, but its total mass is what matters most for the job, and that's determined by the payload capacity of the deployment aircraft in any case. So, after being buried in the rubble, each deadweight can conveniently melt itself down, creating the observed hot spots.
The advantage over CD is primarily in the lowered risk. You don't have to risk getting caught rigging the towers. Also, if you rig the towers for demolition and then the planes miss the towers, you've got no good alternatives for either using or getting rid of the explosives. But if your collapse-trigger is deadweight projectiles instead, you simply don't launch them unless, and until, the airplane impacts and fires have occurred. Another risk, that a tower won't collapse even after a deadweight is used, is partly offset by the deadweight's self-destruct mechanism. If it lodges in the 80th floor and melts itself down there because the tower doesn't collapse, it's likely to iginte more fires on the floors below, possibly causing collapse that way, and whether than does or doesn't happen, the presence of the melted metal afterward is likely to be blamed on the effects of the fire. Plus, you might have contingency plans in place for dropping another one, if needed (though it would have to be right away; even high-flying aircraft would start attracting attention once all air traffic is grounded later in the morning).
(The use of such a contingency plan might have been involved in the damage and collapse of WTC7. If the gouge were due to one projectile malfunctioning and hitting WTC7 during the bombardment to collapse the North Tower -- perhaps several synchronized smaller deadweights instead of just one large one were used -- that might have necessitated another use of the weapon, arranged hours later perhaps under the partial cover of evening twilight conditions, to bring WTC7 down. However, as noted before, as the air traffic shutdown was fully in effect by then, this scenario presents severe difficulties.)
It also makes for a much smaller consipracy. It requires only the organizers, the hijackers (as the conspirators' patsies), the pilots and bombardiers, and a few technicians. The designer of the smart bomb's guidance system doesn't have to be in on it; he's told he's designing the guidance system for an ultra top secret super-bunker-buster bomb of the required size and mass. The manufacturer of the projectiles doesn't have to be in on it -- they get the same cover story of a top secret giant conventional bomb, and they make only the casings, expecting them to be filled with explosive later. The actual consiprators instead fill the casings with the right mix of inert ballast and thermite. Because there's no explosion, none of the people who helped manufacture the deadweights recognize that their work was used on 9/11.
(Keeping all the world's structural engineers silent about the airline collisions and fires not being sufficient to cause the collapses is still a problem, of course -- but no worse a problem than for explosive CD.)
Respectfully,
Myriad
