When Al-Qaeda themselves claimed responsibility, even with overwhelming evidence aside? Why were so many people still reluctant, I was researching about this stuff and was shocked to see people who I respect a lot believe in this

  • remotelove@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    10 months ago

    It takes precious little to weaken them and bring them down.

    I would argue that an airliner filled with tons of fuel is not “little”. That was a lot of mass moving really fast into the towers. Even then, it took a while for the structures to become weak enough to collapse. Given the circumstances, it was amazing the towers lasted as long as they did after they were hit.

    Your core description is correct though: There really isn’t much to skyscrapers.

      • remotelove@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I think that is generally for the floor of each level and for the actual foundation of the structure itself.

        The bulk of the primary structure core is just steel, I think. Skyscrapers need to bend and flex with the wind or during earthquakes. (I am not an architect, but I have watched a few TV shows about this stuff in the past. I think.)