*I don't know what 'consensus' you're referring to.  Giving "equal weight" to scientific investigation supported by evidence and hysterical conjecture supported by paranoia is obviously beyond consideration.   
 **There are legitimate sources besides the 9/11 Commission report (journalists had the basic account figured out within hours of the attacks, long before the 9/11 Commission was even established).  No-one is forced to choose between that one report and the conspiracy theory nonsense.  For example, if I wanted to understand the dynamics of how the twin towers collapsed, I'd refer to the professional opinion of the engineer who designed the building and analyzed its failure, not a report by a bunch of politicians.