What is wrong is, number one, it is not a "fact",<quoted text>
More nonsense devoid of any tangible evidence or common sense. What's wrong with the fact the buildings fell because of catastrophic damage caused by fully fueled airplanes crashed into them at full speed? Kind of obvious isn't it?
and number 2, the Towers did not "fall" - they were blown apart violently, as is obvious in the news footage
and number 3, the airplanes were not "fully fueled"
and number 4, the Towers were designed to sustain airplane impacts, as they obviously did
The fires in the impact zones were burning out. However, there were explosives detonating on other floors of the Towers, as we could hear on the fireman radios and as we learned from testimony of firefighters who survived blasts that had nothing to do with the plane impacts. It is quite obvious from the way the Towers were being blown very quickly apart that these were not structural failures from fire and impact!