I'm starting to get strong intuition as to who you are now... :-)

"did the top of WTC2 break away and start falling sideways, before the collapse of the building?"

Well, you have made it clear what you 'know'.

I personally wasn't there. I only know what I saw on the TV live, replayed several times over the next few hours, on the other side of the world.

Unlike you, I don't have X-ray eyes, or 'messages from God or aliens or other tin foil hatter conspiracy nuts' about what happened.

From distant memory, at the distance, and perspective of the shots I saw, and in complete accord with what I expected, was a very slight rotation of a few degrees of the top segments, which then slammed into the lower segments, overloading everything successively, but the whole thing basically overall mostly fell straight down - the top segment was at a very slight angle as it rode the collapsing bottom segment to the ground, then it continued to break up as it smashed into the rubble pile beneath it. If you look at the 'radio masts', you can clearly see this.

The top segment was at absolutely NOTHING like the angle in those, what appear to be doctored, photos. I saw nothing like any 'blasts', merely the expected pressure wave shattering windows, and expelling dust and some flames.

"break away and start falling sideways"

You and your fellow tinfoil hatters are pretty hopeless with the words and the semantics, which is why you and your mad uneducated mates keep confusing/distracting yourselves: you all keep on using words with multiple vague meanings, and mungling up the differing concepts due to wrongly using words with vague, ambiguous meanings, wrongly equating incompatible things.

You wrongly use 'break away' - as if some magic aliens lifted the damn thing up - it only fell (Blame Newton and his 'gravity' thing!) because the supports underneath it 'lost integrity'. (And we have already thrashed out all that BS you keep spouting about how and why that occurred in other threads elsewhere!)

To quote Stan Freburg
"When I was a youngster, my home ran away from me."
"You mean you ran away from home."
"No - we lived in a covered wagon and I fell out."

To topple a building with explosives, they usually start the sequentially time delayed charges at the bottom and ripple up, so that the upper floors collapse 'neatly' onto the rubble below - they 'blow' every floor: these 2 collapsed as a unit from above the impact points, to shatter the lower segment floors in descending order below, then the upper sections disintegrated. The 'puffs' are the expected pressure wave shattering windows and venting from top to bottom as expected from Newton.

The alleged 'extra plane bulges' match what is on the model planes you can buy at kit shops.


QUOTE
""his calculations showed this was a "very ordinary thing to happen" and that no other intervention, such as explosive charges laid inside the building, was needed to explain the behaviour of the buildings."

The author is a Cambridge University engineer, what are your qualifications?"
UNQUOTE

M.A. (B.S.)

Master of the Art of Bull Shit, or should that be M.A. (I.W.) Ignorant Wanking?
...