I really wish I could link to xkcd and leave. I really do.

*deep breath*

Okay. Let me take it point by point.

Point 0 - Three may keep a Secret, if two of them are dead.

In order for your claims to be true, hundreds of people would have to be involved. First, everyone involved in setting up the controlled demolition (no easy task) has to plan, prepare, and execute the task. Second, every witness has to be found and suppressed. Third, everyone in the chain of command to plan, order, and fund the project has to keep mum. Fourth, everyone whose job it is to monitor activities like this has to be kept quiet.

Now, all of this is supposed to be accomplished by the schlobs who couldn't even hide the faking of evidence that Saddam Hussein had WMDs?

Point 1 - Building implosions don't look like that

You argue that they could.

Sure. And computers could be built using balanced ternary notation. But to do so with the skill that is brought to the standard method would require a tremendous amount of work to avoid error - work which plays again into Point 0.

Besides, several groups have analyzed the collapses after the event and found them consistent with the mainstream narrative. Requiring that these analyses be false means either inducting them into the conspiracy (Point 0), designing the collapse so effectively that it appears to be due to the obvious factors (see Point 2), or - probably - both.

Point 2 - How could you plan in advance the exact point of impact?

You say that they intentionally detonated the explosives near the point of impact. This implies that there are explosives near the point of impact. This implies - unless you think they knew the point of impact - there are explosives throughout the building. Besides immensely complicating the task of setting these explosives (see Point 0), this would either require that the explosives be left over at the crash site and need quiet disposal (see Point 0) or that they all be detonated during the collapse (which would be very loud - and the sound of these explosions are not reported by witnesses*).

* Thank you, NIST, for pointing out this argument in the video review of your WTC 7 analysis.

I don't expect to convince you. You have your opinion, and opinions are never wrong. But engineering is done with numbers - and every human being who has brought numbers to the table has confirmed the simple, obvious story of events.