Reply #288: This and that

[Kevin Fenton]

You make two statements:
(1) "The only way the WTC can collapse is into its own footprint."
(2) "And, by the way, all the buildings surrounding the WTC towers *were* severely damaged by the towers' collapse."
They can't both be true. Or, more precisely, to the degree one is true, the other can't be.
It is often claimed by CTers that the fact that the WTC collapsed into its owwn footprint is proof of controlled demolition. However, this fact is not actually a fact. The Twin Towers didn't collapse into their own footprint, they threw debris all over the place, so your statement (1) is false.

"The shock wave itself crushed support columns in neighboring buildings, including WTC 7 which, at 57 stories, was uniquely exposed to a significant portion of the both the ejecta and the shock wave."
"It was near enough to both towers that it received a double whammy on 9/11."
(1) Show me a picture (or even a report) of a support column in WTC 7 crushed by the shockwave;
(2) You added 10 stories on WTC 7;
(3) The North Tower's collapse caused visible damage to WTC 7 - I'm certainly not going to argue about that, but show me damage attributable to the South Tower's fall. There's no double whammy. The damage to seven is no worse than the damage to any surrounding building. Actually, it suffered less damage than several other surrounding buildings that didn't collapse that day. The damage and the fires are not enough.