My point is that the Church itself does not say the earth is 7,220 years old.  

Which is wrong, because for at least four centuries they (I forget exactly when it started) the Church used to chant the age of the earth every year at Christmas. So you can say the Church was wrong in her teaching, but not that she never taught it. Getting rid of this was one of the many changes they made because it embarrassed the evolutionists.

And? Does the Church infallibly teach the earth was created 7,220 years ago? If so, I need a citation.

I don't know if it rises to the level of infallibility. But it was the universal belief for at least eighteen hundred years. And it was taught in her liturgy for centuries at   Christmas Midnight Mass.
You said:My point is that the Church itself does not say the earth is 7,220 years old.

So I showed where the Church said exactly that for centuries in her liturgy .

The Church has never infallibly defined whether the world was created only a few thousand years ago or several billion years ago.  The Church has infallibly determined that the Universe is of finite age (i.e., that it has not existed from all eternity).  And that Universe was created out of nothing.

 As for Dinasours or other creatures, the Church does not have an official position on where different life forms developed over time. It says if they did, it was done under the **guidance of God***.

I have read articles from the Kolbe center and consider them a  good source. And unlike Bergolio and the Vatican II sect,  I take Genesis literally.

Jr, you need a re-education in the traditional Catholic faith if you believe that the church does not teach that the earth is younger than 8,000 years.

I suggest to you to get hold of Special Creation Rediscovered by Gerard J Keane - very cheap in 3 forms CD, book and PDF. It should open your eyes to Truth, and you can be free of the fairytales that you have been taught

https://www.kolbecenter.org/?s=Keane&post_type=product

So you are saying then that the Church **infallibility** has taught that the earth is younger than 8,000 years? If so, please cite the church docuмent that says so, not what the Kolbe Center has to say.

I am not saying that the Church **infallibility** has taught that the earth is younger than 8,000 years.

I am saying that you need to learn what the Church has to say about Creation through the docuмents which She has promulgated, and a good place to find those is to read the books which I suggested, especially Special Creation Rediscovered.

If you study the issue deeply enough, even from a secular, scientific viewpoint, you will completely reject the notion of an earth millions of years old, as the Church and Holy Scripture does.

Gerry Keane was writing about the creation/evolution debate before Kolbe Centre came to be, I believe, though they were essentially in agreement.

When you have a building that needs repairs, why wouldn't you start on the lower stories and work your way up, especially if there is structural damage on those lower stories?  I'm not an architect, but don't the lower stories bear the load of the higher ones?

That "reporting" is done by news people that know nothing about construction and need to quickly get something out there as "news". You are right, the roof has nothing to do with the building collapsing, neither does the sinking of the pool have anything to do with the collapsing of the building. Those buildings are built on concrete and rebar pilings that are driven down into the ground in the quantities required to take the weight of the building. It is not built on a concrete slab, or concrete footers like a single family home might be built. The problem with concrete and rebar near the ocean is salt water corrosion, it can get through cracks in the concrete and destroy the steel rebar. Concrete without rebar is like chalk.  The solution today is fiberglass rebar, but scarcely anyone uses it because steel is cheaper, and who knows what will happen with fiberglass rebar in the future, time will tell. Steel rebar has been used this way for well over 100 years. 

Just as I expected: sinkholes played a significant part in the collapse.

https://www.engineering.com/story/the-champlain-tower-collapse-in-florida-what-do-we-know

That's a plausible explanation, the close up image showing the cars below, and the "Navy demolition exercise".

Just as I expected: sinkholes played a significant part in the collapse.

https://www.engineering.com/story/the-champlain-tower-collapse-in-florida-what-do-we-know

I read the entire article, it is from 6 days ago, it has all the speculations possible (see some below) , not just sinkholes. Sinkholes are unheard of in Miami Beach. Sinkholes are very common in Central Florida, and they swallow up houses and cars in an instant. If it was a sinkhole, it will be easy to see and find. The part about the gradual sinking of the ground (1+ mm per year. would take like 20 years to sink 1 inch if the rate continues)  would not affect the building because the building is built on pilings, like a house on stilts, the surface ground could sink 3 feet and then just more stilt is exposed.
The article also says: 

The collapse is compared to a planned demolition, one engineer saying “You could not get it to pancake like that if you tried to demolish it.”
As the collapsed section faces the ocean, structural damage from long term corrosion should be looked at as a possible cause.
The area had suffered a magnitude 3.9 tremor off the coast earlier in the week (June 21), the result of Navy demolition exercise.