Out of interest, what would have been an acceptable way for the building to collapse that would signify aircraft impact and out of control fuel enhanced fire?

should it have toppled over like a tree? if so, why?

So why didn’t it follow the path of least resistance?

500,000,000 kgs is being pulled by the acceleration due to gravity. It would take something equal to the attraction of gravity to make it go sideways.
It tipped because one side failed first, thats where the damage was, the tipping made the other side fail and then gravity took over.

So why didn’t it follow the path of least resistance?

Ley lines & magnets. Obvz…..

I’m not convinced many people have seen a tower block collapse without it being a controlled demolition. You’d be showing them a video of a building falling down. “yes, that looks just like a building falling down”

I think you’ve cracked it.
It’s a fundamental lack of imagination that “these people” share. Flat Earthers can’t see the Earth is round so don’t believe it.

keep WT7 in mind.

The only ever hi-rise building to ever collapse at near free fall speed, straight down, from minor damage and office fires.

Keep in mind yourself that WTC7 had 91,000 litres of diesel in the basement. 91,000 litres of diesel. Probably good stuff for creating more than an office fire. In addition to the diesel tanks in the basement it had pumps and fuel lines throughout the first nine floors.

Under normal circumstances you’d imagine fire fighters might have been able to do something to prevent the building burning for five or six hours but maybe, just maybe they were busy on September 11th.

In your first shot the CofG of the upper section is obviously still well within the tower’s footprint. Because of the angle of the shot I can’t tell from the second shot where the CofG would be.

Looking at video of the south tower falling the upper section does lean and increases to lean as the tower collapses. In the later stages of the collapse it’s hard to discern what’s happening to the upper section but it looks as if with about 30 floors left to drop it finally falls outside the footprint of the tower.

Do you understand the physics of Jenga and how they apply to the twin towers?

(Rhetorical question, of course you don’t)

What’s a Jenga tower got to do with the WTC towers? Entirely different construction techniques as has been pointed out many times.

In which case why did the demolition guys rig it to collapse in a way that is obviously demolition? Wouldn’t they have rigged it to collapse in a way that is not obviously demolition? (Which I’m assuming you consider to be half a million tons of tower falling sideways like a tree?)

Well, being as jenga (and the dominoes used earlier) aren’t the most stable of structures, there’s probably minimal comparison given the twin towers were designed to withstand aircraft impacts exceeding the forces encountered

I wonder whether Jivehoneyjive believes the earth is round or flat… ❓

Earth is round, flat earthers are nucking futz

That’s a lot of words, none of which explain this:

Yet they had enough time to evaluate the structure, to foretell of its collapse…. there is plenty of video prior to collapse of people walking around in there,….this building was not seriously on fire…

curiously a CIA guy was walking around in there, just making sure no one was in there, just before they blew it up.

So why didn’t it follow the path of least resistance?

It did, that has been explained many times.

here’s another explanation.

The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t.

As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.1 It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.

homework question: which bits do you disagree with and why? show reasoning

+1 Jonnyboi

yeah plus 500,000,000 jonnyboi, super succinct

Explain? How do things follow the path of least resistance? What path were you expecting?