Mr. Creighton’s hypothesis, authored over many articles, argues that the Towers were destroyed “via conventional demolition, and that during the design stages of the process, the conspirators relied too heavily on the use of detonation cord in the floor systems, which led to the vaporization of most of the truss systems. This was accidentally revealed (the “iron microspheres”) when the RJ Lee Group did their Composition and Morphology study of the Ground Zero dust samples for Deutsche Bank.”

PETN/RDX is a good candidate because these are the most commonly used hi-explosives in the industry. They have a long, studied history and are generally reliable. It’s sensible to start with the most plausible hypothesis (conventional hi-explosives) first, and failing that, move onto testing more exotic hypotheses.

Primaline 85 detonator cord would be used to pulverize the concrete, and also to remove the building’s lateral support supplied by the double-bridged long trusses. RDX cutter and kicker charges would be used to cut columns down to a specific length (every three floors is a common estimate from what I’ve read), and then ‘kick’ those columns out of the way from the proceeding downward collapse. Refer to article three, “Demolition Hypothesis”, for further details on the demolition sequence.

Background Reading if interested (Chronological Order):

Main Conventional Explosives Hypothesis

Post-Collapse Logistics

BBC Piece Post Mortem: Mark Loizeaux and the Special Engineer This article offers an explanation for the publicly acknowledged presence of demolition crews at the Trade Center site.

Proposed Tests to Detect Conventional Explosives

Dust to Dust This article proposes a test for detecting the residue of post-explosion by-products in the Trade Center dust.

Proposed Testing Procedure for Hi-Explosive Residues in Ground Zero Dust This article details possible specific procedures for testing for hi-explosives in chain of custody Trade Center samples.

There’s informative discussion in the comment threads of these articles as well!

PETN detonation is still a strong candidate (better than thermite) for many of the apparent combustion byproducts that were discovered…

Key innovations of this hypothesis:

The iron microspheres are byproducts of (likely Primaline 85) detonation cord explosion. The source of these spheres are primarily the 6000 metal floor pans and 40,000 double-bridged long trusses, the majority of which apparently were not found in the rubble. This also reveals a key feature of how the Tower destruction was engineered (re removal of floor systems).

This also explains the great abundance of spheres; the floor systems were a major structural element of the Towers, so their destruction, via detonator cord, would lead to hundreds of tons of spheres.

The microscopic “red-gray chips” in the dust, which were found alongside (often attached to) these spherical particles, can be explained as the primer paint which coated the trusses. The intense heat from the detonation cord (meant to pulverize the concrete) would’ve also flash melted the trusses, and the resultant molten metal cooled off whilst suspended in space…which formed via surface tension into these particles. That’s partly RJ Lee’s account for how these spheres formed:

Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC Event, producing spherical metallic particles. Exposure of phases to high heat results in the formation of spherical particles due to surface tension.

Different sorts of paint ignite at different temperatures, and we know that Jones & Harrit only focused on the primer paint from the columns. Therefore, paint from the trusses as a source for these red-gray chips cannot be ruled out. Mr. Creighton’s hypothesis provides a good accounting – as with the microspheres – for their presence in the WTC dust.

as with the microspheres for their presence in the WTC dust. The pyroclastic collapse dust cloud can be explained as the molten microspheres generated from the detonator cord, travelling within the pulverized concrete cloud at rapid speed. Recall the firefighter testimony on the Tower collapses as documented (see Citation #1 in his article) by Kevin Ryan and others. The “Neither Gravity nor Thermite” article and the firefighter testimony refute the common claim that the collapse was “cold”, whereas its initiation was “hot”.

The smoke and dust clouds are linked again to the pulverized concrete floor systems. Not unique to Mr. Creighton’s hypothesis, but still accounts for it well in terms of the demolition design.

Would PETN/RDX Detonation Be “Too Loud”?

That regular cutter charges would be “too loud”, therefore we can exclude their use, is not a supported claim. This is the same argument NIST offered for not performing the explosive residue tests. We know NIST both artificially rose the minimum decibel level required for a ‘blast scenario’, and ignored reports of very high decibel levels – using unsupported and unstated assumptions – which indicate hi-explosive charges like RDX. When use of hi-explosives is suspected, we run the appropriate tests for known probable compounds. That’s the only way to exclude compounds like PETN, RDX, TNT and HMX from consideration. Then, if those results fail, we can move on testing more exotic hypotheses, like “nanothermite”.

Stated Assumptions of NIST “Plausible Blast Scenario”:

Unstated Assumptions:

No efforts at noise abatement

Complete transmission of sound to outside air

No absorption or blockage of sound along the path

Unknown if assumed use of efficient cutter charge

The goal of a controlled demolition is to use the minimum required for the design, and this involves strategic placement in particular installation vectors (floors, columns) and pre-weakening. Drilling of explosives deep within structural supports could also limit the sound level. Explosives could’ve also broken multiple important connections, rather than sever major columns outright.

Could the numerous explosions heard by several hundreds of witnesses, considering these above factors, fit the known PETN/RDX detonation sound profiles? I have sufficient confidence to (tentatively) say…yes!

Conventional Explosives Would Be Too Easy to Test For?

No major government agency has ran the standard tests for conventional hi-explosive residue on the Trade Center steel! Not NIST, FEMA, USGS, or the FBI.

Strength of Nanothermite Hypothesis

How does the latter hypothesis compare to PETN/RDX? The use of nanothermite can explain some bizarre features of post-collapse conditions (e.g. the molten Tower rubble pile).

However, criticisms and weaknesses have been pointed out:

Were Conventional Explosives Combined with Thermite?

Speaking for myself, in regards to particular evidence of the Tower’s destruction…no, I don’t think so. I accept that thermite can be combined with standard high-explosives, if one wishes to manufacture a genuine explosive variant of thermite (which is traditionally an incendiary). However, in the case of the Twin Towers, one hypothesis negates the other. The evidence doesn’t support a combination of thermite with standard explosives in any conceivable way. This is because the evidence for thermite is better explained as the byproduct of PETN/RDX usage.

Further, the conventional hypothesis explains features of the post-collapse conditions which thermite can’t, such as the missing trusses and floor pans, and ties it back to how the demolition was engineered in the design stages.

The two claimed pieces of evidence for thermite are primarily the “red-gray” chips, and the iron microspheres. The spherical particles, according to the thermite hypothesis, are the partially-reacted byproduct of the thermitic red-gray chips. No strong evidence of a thermitic reaction was shown in the 2009 Bentham paper, such as a 4kJ/g energy release or an alum-redux reaction (see “Criticisms” subsection).

With the standard hi-explosives hypothesis, thermite as a source for these two pieces of evidence is ruled out. Creighton provides a plausible explanation for the close relation between these two pieces of evidence: The “red-gray” chips are primer paint (either from the trusses or the columns), and the microspheres are the trusses which were flash melted following the detonator cord explosions. We also know that primer paint was coated on the trusses and the columns. Further, we know that different sorts of paint ignite at different temperatures, which is why Jones reported a range of ignition temperatures for his alleged thermitic chips.

If we assume the chips are evidence for thermite, you have to ask why so much was used. Why would demolition planners use so much of an exotic, untested material which apparently reacts so inefficiently that hundreds of tons of unreacted thermite are left in the dust? Does that make sense? Wouldn’t it also be prohibitively expensive, considering the experimental nature of the “explosive”? Even black operations have a budget.

The same result can be accomplished with 4 tons of detonator cord. I’ve lost track of the article which did the calculation, but the author stated to me it was less than 4 tons. I’ll retain this figure as a ballpark estimate.