And leave a central core column of 47 steel structures after the trusses supposedly pancake onto each other.
Try again because that explanation really holds no water, at all.
Immagine dropping your house from a few stories high, what do you suspect would happen to it? It can be calculated that the force that needs to be applied to stop the falling top part of the tower is far above the strength of the structure. I happen to know of a few videos that show how silly thisconspiracy theory is. I will link you to them in a bit.
Let's use some real common sense here.
You are championing the top section (undamaged) falling into the damaged section and causing a pancake collapse in roughly 10 seconds.
Ok then, a few issues.
In many videos - one tower (the top section you say falls into the rest of the building) leans ready to topple over at about 23 degrees before somehow falling back into the building again to collapse to the ground.
In another video, you see the undamaged top section supposedly fall into the rest of the building. When I say "supposedly" it's because when you actually observe it all, you clearly see the top section "disintegrate" as the rest of the building falls.
More to the point. You're not stupid and you also know that you can't walk through a closed door faster than you can walk through an open one.
You also know that 110 storey's at around 12 feet each in height are not going to collapse from the top, crushing steel core columns and snapping every truss on every floor with each floor taking about 0.1 second to crush due to encountering no resistance at all.
110 storey's in around 10 seconds. seriously?
Now, if you want to argue about the time taken for collapse and want to add a few more seconds to it...be my guest but you still have the same problem that you people go to pains about in harping on about this 9.8m/s/s, fall rate.
That building and your math would not compute, right and I'm actually giving you the benefit of zero resistance to each floor, as if each floor simply fell in free fall.
So what's wrong?
Clearly there's a lot wrong. Not just in the free fall stuff but in the actual speed of fall in the footage, even if it was controlled demolition.
It means that the video footage is not telling the real story.
Any sensible person can guess why. What do you think, Mike?