Dr. Wood's area of engineering expertise is BIO-mechanics, not steel or building mechanics. They are two completely different areas of study and really do not intersect. She is talking about something outside of her actual field of expertise... or really on the fringes of her field, challenging people whose life work is in that field. Sorry, I do not give her opinions much weight.
She's a proponent of the non-reproducible "Hutchison Effect." While it is entirely possible that there is something to what Hutchison tapped into (I am a proponent of the Plasma/Electric Universe), he ruined himself and others by faking some of his evidence. That fakery redounds onto Dr. Wood's credibility since she has never admitted his culpability in that fakery, even when Hutchison admitted it. It is particularly egregious because much of her claims about the WTC failure is based on the use of the Hutchison Effect.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. She fails. It is why Wood is a former assistant Professor, and has so few peer-reviewed papers to her name, all from 2004 or before.
She is the very definition of a tin-foil hat brigade member, Jocko, and in my opinion could be their poster child.
I understand about the Hutchinson effect. Nevertheless, it appears that SOMETHING atypical occurred on 9/11.
You asserted that there were no steel columns in the center of the towers. This misdirection would support the false notion of pancaking the floors, but too bad for your assertions there were massive central columns in addition to the many exterior columns. THE STEEL OF THESE CENTER COLUMNS were not found in the debris. Do you assert that they were vaporized? Are you aware that pancaking 1oo floors at the speed the towers came down would make a pyroclastic cloud, which was not present in the collapse?
The main question Dr Woods seeks to have us consider is WHAT happened to the towers. All other questions are secondary to understanding what ... then the who, how, etc can be addressed.