" wrote in message
...


The question remains the same. How would you get one floor to go
straight down to initiate a straight-down collapse of the building? Is
it likely that would happen?

You won't find that out by studying the twin towers as they didn't collapse
straight down.
The tops tilted a good few degrees before they fell onto the lower floors
causing the whole lot to drop down within a smallish area.

Once there was enough weight to collapse the undamaged floors the whole
thing was contained inside the tube formed by the outer frame as the floor
trusses pulled the sides in. Thus it is very likely that the bottom of the
building will collapse straight down the tube. If you look at the videos you
can see each floor drop onto the lower ones and the sides pull in.

It won't make any difference to you of course as you have already decided
what happened and will ignore the truth.


What gets me is how many people in a burning building continued to work.
The first rule in the UK is to get out of a burning building and this cut
the death toll amongst the British companies in the trade centre as they
just left the building. Its also the reason why British skyscrapers are not
as high, you have to be able to exit a burning building by law. There is no
way the trade centre towers could have been built in the UK as they were
inherently unsafe in a fire.