Or not. The weight of the Titanic was 52,310 tons. 47,454 metric tons. Gross register tonnage is not a weight, it's a measure of volume. Either way, MORE weight only reinforces the argument.

And yet strangely not wrong. Not what you want to or have been conditioned to believe perhaps, but not wrong. This video is far from perfect - not even the best Twin Towers collapse video put out in 2023 (I prefer this one: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/mpmWlMKG35vYook.html&ab_channel=cjnewson88 ) and in a couple of spots is even a bit cringe, still: The *collapse mechanisms - the sequence of failures - described here by Lesics are substantially correct* and this is true *no matter who planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks or why* . That may go against 20+ years of entrenched dogma and conditioning, but it’s not wrong. That also means (in case you did not get the hint) this video can be (and IS) absolutely correct in its description of Twin Towers collapse mechanisms AND the 9/11 attacks could still have been some sort of inside job. The two things are in no way mutually exclusive. The mechanisms described here have broad professional support around the world. There are no professional engineering organizations (for example: ASCE, ASEE, ICE, etc) that disagree with them or have offered any formal dissenting opinions or alternative hypothesis. The mechanisms described here are not new. They have been well understood since at least November 2001 and most can be easily confirmed by simple observation. You can literally see just about everything they are talking about if you just bother to look. So either the overwhelming majority of the worlds structural engineers and simple observation are wrong,… … or you are. Which seems more likely? IF you *still -think- **_believe_** this explanation is wrong then produce a better one* . Good luck with that. No one _ever_ has and I don’t see you moving that needle today. No one _ever_ does.

Are you sure? Did you measure that yourself? I did. The entire collapse took 33 seconds +/- 1 second.