So if for example we removed C79 an it's supporting elements completely over say, 8 storeys and the main beef of the building just stood there, that would be cause to state that a lack of lateral bracing and the buckling of C79 led to the collapse is reasonably proven not to be the proximate cause of the collapse?
We agree so far ?
Fire and debris damage was the cause of the collapse. C79 buckling was the initiating event. So you'd need the same fire damage and debris damage - both of which are inexactly known.
It would be an interesting experiment though. NIST did it and the building collapsed in their model.