This thread has now evolved to the point where I can contribute to it.
Over thirty years ago, I was principal counsel for one of the defendants in the case involving large numbers of glass panels in the curtain wall of the 60 story John Hancock tower in Boston, that were breaking and falling from the building.
One morning, I was talking at breakfast about the case with a young lady whom I had found the previous evening at a dating bar (and whom I had decided was not the brightest of bulbs), and she asked me what was causing the failures.
I explained that part of the cause was negative windloads, and that the Hancock Tower, which has a footprint somewhat like a parallelogram, acted like a gigantic airplane wing when there was a strong wind from the Northwest, creating negative pressures (partial vacuums) on certain parts of the curtain wall.
That much was true, but I couldn't resist elaborating a bit. I explained that on very windy days, the amount of "lift" exerted on the building was so immense that it was slightly increasing the angle of the earth's axis, which might eventually change the climate everywhere, increasing the extent of the polar regions and narrowing the tropics.
The young lady was most indignant; she said "that's terrible, they shouldn't be allowed to build buildings like that!"
....perhaps it is only co-incidence, but that did not turn out to be a lasting relationship. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif