WTC 7 Was An Asymmetric Shape . . . So Why Did it Collapse Symmetrically?

World Trade Center building 7 was not a square or a rectangle, but a trapezoid:


As such, the larger side of the building would be heavier and more massive.

NIST claims that column 79 collapsed, leading to the collapse of the whole building.

Column 79 was located towards the larger end of the building (towards the bottom of the following diagram):


Because NIST claims that only column 79 was destroyed in the beginning of the collapse sequence, and because the same side of the building in which 79 was located was the bigger, heavier side of the building, two different influences should have ensured that the building tilted toward the bigger end.

If column 79 had collapsed and explosives did not take out all of the other support columns at once, building 7 should have tipped towards one side.

At the very least, since the building was asymmetric, it should have collapsed in an asymmetric fashion.

If the collapse had started at the base of the building, then perhaps the wider base on the larger side of the building might have compensated for the greater weight. However, NIST states that the collapse started at the thirteenth floor. The wider base should not have offset the greater weight and failure so high up - from the 13th floor upwards - at least not entirely. In the absence of explosives, we still should have seen substantial deformities, buckling and/or tipping.

Even if the larger side of the building was so reinforced that it was stronger than the smaller side, it should have collapsed asymmetrically.

In other words, under any scenario, it should not have fallen down in a perfectly straight-down, symmetric fashion.