Architect Richard Gage has made a bold claim regarding the events of September 11, 2001, suggesting that the Twin Towers and Building 7 were brought down in controlled demolitions. Gage argues that fires alone could not have caused the collapse of these steel-framed high-rise buildings, emphasizing that such a phenomenon has never occurred in history. He points to what he considers to be compelling evidence supporting his theory, highlighting ten key features that he believes are indicative of controlled demolitions.

Gage’s assertions have sparked controversy and debate among experts and the general public alike. While some dismiss his claims as conspiracy theories, others find his arguments persuasive and raise important questions about the official narrative of 9/11. The idea that the collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7 was orchestrated as part of a larger conspiracy has gained traction in certain circles, challenging the conventional understanding of the tragic events that unfolded on that fateful day.

The controlled demolition theory posited by Gage and others hinges on the notion that the collapse of the buildings exhibited characteristics consistent with a deliberate, planned demolition rather than the result of structural damage caused by the impact of the airplanes and subsequent fires. Gage’s expertise in architecture lends credibility to his assertions, as he is able to provide technical analysis and insights that support his claims.

Critics of the controlled demolition theory argue that it is far-fetched and lacks substantial evidence to back it up. They contend that the collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7 can be adequately explained by the intense heat generated by the fires, which weakened the steel support structures and ultimately led to their failure. The official reports from the 9/11 Commission and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) support this explanation, attributing the collapses to the impact of the planes and the subsequent fires.

Despite the controversy surrounding Gage’s claims, the controlled demolition theory continues to be a topic of interest and speculation for many individuals seeking to uncover the truth behind the events of 9/11. The idea that the collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7 was a carefully orchestrated plan rather than a tragic accident raises important questions about the nature of power, secrecy, and accountability in modern society.

As the debate rages on, it is crucial to approach the issue with an open mind and a critical eye, weighing the evidence on both sides before drawing any conclusions. Whether one subscribes to the controlled demolition theory or not, the discussion surrounding the events of 9/11 serves as a reminder of the enduring impact of that fateful day and the importance of seeking the truth, no matter how uncomfortable or controversial it may be.

Architect Richard Gage claims the Twin Towers and Building 7 were all brought down in controlled demolitions.

“Fires have never brought down a steel-framed high-rise building… ever.”

“And what we have, unfortunately, is the evidence… of the ten key features of controlled… pic.twitter.com/WqorZxxvH4

— Red Pill Dispenser (@redpilldispensr) May 21, 2025

Architect Richard Gage has sparked controversy with his claims that the Twin Towers and Building 7 were brought down in controlled demolitions, rather than by the fires that ensued after the 9/11 attacks. Gage boldly states, “Fires have never brought down a steel-framed high-rise building… ever.” This assertion challenges the widely accepted narrative surrounding the events of that fateful day.

Gage’s argument is built on the premise that the collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7 exhibited key features consistent with controlled demolitions. He points to evidence such as the rapid and symmetrical nature of the collapses, as well as the presence of molten metal in the debris pile. These characteristics, according to Gage, are indicative of a controlled demolition rather than a fire-induced collapse.

The implications of Gage’s claims are significant, as they call into question the official explanation provided by the 9/11 Commission Report. If the buildings were indeed brought down in controlled demolitions, it would suggest a level of premeditation and planning that goes beyond the scope of a terrorist attack. This raises important questions about who may have been involved in such a plan and what their motivations might have been.

It is important to note that Gage is not alone in his skepticism. Many architects, engineers, and researchers have raised concerns about the official narrative surrounding the events of 9/11. Organizations such as Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth have called for a new investigation into the collapses, citing inconsistencies in the official explanation.

Critics of Gage’s claims argue that the evidence does not support the theory of controlled demolitions. They point to the extensive investigations conducted by experts in the field, which have concluded that the collapses were indeed caused by the impact of the planes and the ensuing fires. These experts argue that the collapse of the buildings can be explained through the principles of structural engineering, without the need to invoke the idea of a controlled demolition.

The debate surrounding the events of 9/11 is complex and multifaceted. It involves questions of engineering, physics, geopolitics, and ethics. It is a topic that continues to generate interest and controversy, as new evidence and perspectives come to light.

As we grapple with the implications of Gage’s claims, it is important to approach the issue with an open mind and a critical eye. It is essential to consider all the available evidence and to engage in constructive dialogue with those who hold differing views. Only through honest and rigorous investigation can we hope to uncover the truth behind the events of 9/11.

In conclusion, the claims made by Architect Richard Gage regarding the controlled demolitions of the Twin Towers and Building 7 are provocative and controversial. They challenge the official narrative of the events of 9/11 and raise important questions about the nature of the collapses. While there is much debate and disagreement surrounding this issue, it is crucial that we approach it with an open mind and a commitment to seeking the truth. Only through a thorough and unbiased examination of the evidence can we hope to arrive at a clearer understanding of what truly happened on that tragic day.