If all the floors pancaked, shouldn't the core have remained standing?

Question

Something i dont get about 9/11 wtc collapse.

Of course a plane impacted, but the whole building shouldnt have crumbled like it did due to a plane. The floors obviously pancaked, but why did the core collapse also? The core was the strongest part of the building, it should have remained standing, or at least part if it.

And i doubt that the core was all that seriously damaged, since the impact of the plane to the side of the building caused the most damage, inside was basically a spray of debris, since the plane is made of alluminuim, not steel. Not to mention most of the planes fuel was burned up on impact.

Answer 1

pancakes yummmmm !

Answer 2

You guys are pathetic. I bet you also think AIDS was created by the US government to wipe out blacks in the US, that there's no global warming, that intelligent design is science, and that we were never in the moon.

Why are so many American so freaking paranoid like this? Go easy on the marihuana and see if you feel better, buddy.

Answer 3

Apples and toilet paper have cores...didn't know about

buildings having them...thanks I've learned something,

maybe.

Answer 4

Like the skeleton in a fish, the core of the World Trade Center was stronger than the outside, but not enough to hold up to a severe crunching. The building was designed to collapse fairly easily in a straight stack when it eventually became necessary to demolish it decades in the future. Until then, it was designed to resist an impact by a jetliner which would be almost empty of fuel, since it was presumed that this would only happen accidentally in a fog by a plane that took off far away where there was no fog. The only thing not taken into account when the buildings were built in the 1970s was that workers would now be trained to be acquiescent in whatever occurred around them, like the passengers on the plane allowing it to be taken over because someone was holding a box cutter with a half-inch blade to a stewardess and wanting to fly the plane. The thought now is that "we" should go along with "whatever" until the crisis is "over" and things can be restored to normal. Overlooked is that sometimes "over"  results in everybody's death. We in Texas, of course, know better because every schoolchild is taught about the surrender at Goliad and resultant massacre of the prisoners. The wonder isn't that some passengers fought back in the plane over Pennsylvania; it's that they allowed the bad guys to go on too long to save themselves.

NEVER SURRENDER!

It's not your job to make the bad guys job easier.

Answer 5

The "pulverizing" of the concrete core is one of the odd things which happened which point to a controlled demolition, but even in photos I've seen from actual contolled domolitions, there were big chunks of concrete everywhere. There would have to be much more than the normal amount of explosives which demolishers use to turn that concrete to dust.  

Explaining the concrete dust has not been accomplished by either side of the controversy.

Answer 6

name one building like it that has collapsed and the core stayed in place would you. There was even a building collapse do not as tall in Cairo in January. I raised that point with another of these conspiracy theory questions and it was reported. Really you don't want to hear the true facts on buildings at all. Has Alex Jones got a degree in construction or is he an architect? No he is not so stop believing everything he says.

Answer 7

i know many people think the government set the whole thing up and blew up the buildings  for money and publicity what a sick world we live in  and they think the bomb is the only thing that could do that damage..............ONE of the wtc fell without a plane even hitting them common

!   DID you watch that weird dvd?

Answer 8

no. you are wrong. dont bother thinking about it anymore. your logic is flawed.