>>512958926
>However the plane alone wouldn't have taken the building down in a freefall directly into its own footprint like a planned demolition.

>The buildings withstood the plane impacts
>it wasnt "freefall"
>it wasnt "directly into its own footprint"

The collapsed started right at the point of impact which is not consisent with a CD. The building fell down not over but no where into its own footprint with 50+ other bldngs damaged

How did the planted demo charges survive the plane impacts and resulting fires?

>>512891494
>they fell into their footprint.
>memetake

>>508603021
>collapsed in the same perfect pattern as the other two
this is a memetake. not factual. the collapses of WTC1&2 were very different from WTC7. Both 1&2 collapses started right at the spots of impacts and fell down but the facades sheered off and fell far outside the footprints of the buildings ,damaging 47 others buildings in the process. WTC looked much for like a controlled demo and fell in on top of itself.