Scootermuze

Me again!

In a recent reply to me you say, "Saying the beams would even slow things down goes to show your total misunderstanding of the forces involved. This explains why alot of people out there think the way they do."

Then you link to a site where the guy said that the building lunges forward and falls; ....giving way first on the damaged side... which is what I said I thought should have happened when I said it should have given way at the weakest point and toppled a bit before falling..

So which do you choose to stick with?
The building fell straight down because the forces involved were too great to prevent any resistance from the undamaged side...?

Or the building gave way first on the damaged side, lunged forward and fell... where the opposing wall did offer resistance for a short time...?

THAT's why alot of people out there think the way they do..

If their findings are kinda the same as what I said should have happened.. my, "total misunderstand of the forces involved" would also apply to those that you bring as your reference.

Now that we've established that you seem to want it both ways...

It didn't happen the way they said it did.. If you watch the video again, and this one, you'll see that it started falling first, then toppled.. not lunge forward and fall... 2 quite different scenarios..

So you've linked to a site as your reference where their comments were a bit inaccurate..

This ought be good..