It's quite natural for people to react to the idea of building timber high-rises in wood. It's quite natural to react this way, because wood is a combustible material. The distinction that we've been making as designers is that there's a difference between combustibility, or combustible construction, and fire-resistant construction. Steel melts, and for that reason has to be protected in buildings, but it's not combustible. Timber is combustible, but it doesn't melt. It retains its structural integrity through hours and hours of very intense fire exposure.
It's a matter of education. Fire professionals—for lack of a better word—who see a fire test ongoing with, say, mass timber, develop a certain level of comfort. They understand that there's a difference between light-frame construction, as an example, and mass timber construction. You don't light a fire with a log. You light a fire with a small stick. Likewise, mass timber construction behaves differently in fire from light-frame construction. It's not to say that light-frame construction is unsafe, but it's appropriate in certain types of construction, whereas mass timber, which behaves quite differently, has to be dealt with in the codes by using different rules.