Building 7’s Collapse: Implausibility of the Official Theory

Toronto Ad Campaign: Subway Riders Get to See Video of Building 7’s Collapse

On March 18, 2014 the ReThink911 campaign launched its newest wave of ads in the Toronto subway system. For two weeks, 1.2 million Toronto residents will see the video of Building 7’s collapse and be directed to to learn more. According to Pattison Outdoor, daily subway riders will see the ad an average of five times during the two-week period.

WTC 7 collapse shows on 300 screens throughout Toronto subway. Watch the ad below. 


 The ad blitz coincides with Richard Gage’s 3-week Canadian speaking tour, which brings him to Toronto on March 20 at Toronto University’s Innis Town Hall. To learn more and purchase tickets to an event in your city, visit

rethink911-ottawa-bus-ad_small Building 7's Collapse:  Implausibility of the Official Theory

 The decision to go digital and show riders the collapse of Building 7 was inspired by a scientific poll commissioned by the campaign last September, which found that 51% of Canadians who are shown video of Building 7’s collapse suspect it was a controlled demolition, compared to just 18% who suspect it was caused by fires. When asked who they are more inclined to believe—the U.S. government, which says fires brought it down, or the critics who contend it was controlled demolition—49% side with the critics, while only 20% are inclined to believe the government. 44% support opening a new investigation, with only 14% opposed.

“The poll shows quite clearly what we already knew. Most people who see Building 7’s collapse have trouble believing that fires brought it down,” said Mr. Gage. “It simply doesn’t look like a natural building collapse, and that’s because all the columns have been removed at once to allow it to come down symmetrically in free-fall. When everyone in Canada and everyone in the U.S. sees this footage, there will be widespread outcry for a new investigation.”

The official theory of Building 7’s collapse is shown to be implausible by the inability of the official theory’s authors to generate a computer model of the collapse that even remotely resembles the observed collapse.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology issued its final report on Building 7 in November 2008, more than six years after starting its investigation. Because almost all of the physical evidence had been destroyed, NIST’s theory depended largely on its ability to reproduce the collapse through modeling. Despite being able to adjust inputs in order to achieve the desired result, NIST’s model does not come close to reproducing the observed collapse, as shown in the picture below:1

NIST-collapse-model-building-7 Building 7's Collapse:  Implausibility of the Official Theory


The discrepancy between NIST’s model and the observed collapse is also apparent by watching the two video animations of NIST’s collapse model and comparing them to video footage of the observed collapse.

The clearest discrepancy is the deformation of the external structure in the model, which does not occur in the observed collapse. The second obvious failure of the model is that it never shows the period of 2.25 seconds of free-fall that NIST finally acknowledged in its final report.

Had NIST attempted to model a controlled demolition of Building 7, it undoubtedly would have been very easy to replicate the observed collapse. NIST’s inability to come close to replicating Building 7’s collapse through modeling demonstrates the implausibility of NIST’s theory.

A detailed, technical critique of NIST’s theory by structural engineer Ronald H. Brookman can be found at the Journal of 9/11 Studies.