Comment: The point being Ira, you left readers to assume the upper

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: 3/8 to 1/4 inch??? The people (see in situ)

fireant's picture

The point being Ira, you left readers to assume the upper

columns were as thick as the lower columns. The thickness tapers to thin going up; less load requirement; less weight. It's been a while since I read it, so I may be off precisely, but the very upper floors were that thin. And you ignored the hammer and chisel analogy. The cores could very well have been kinked or sheared.

Undo what Wilson did